Agenda — Jurupa Valley City Council, September 7, 2023 (part 5 of 9)

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

EXHIBIT “D”

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

1. PROJECT PERMITTED. MA121269 (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) is for an approval of the following:
a) GPA21010:
• Change the underlying General Plan land use designations of Commercial Retail, Very High Density Residential, High Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Medium High Density Residential associated with the Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan land use designations to Commercial Neighborhood, Commercial Retail, Commercial Tourist, Light Industrial, Highest Density Residential, Public Facilities, and Open Space- Recreation consistent with the proposed The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan l and use designations. The Specific Plan Overlay remains on the project site;
• Establish the Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay on the 67.3 acre Industrial/Logistics (I- L) Land Use Area of the proposed Specific Plan;
• Create a new General Plan Overlay, the "Commercial Retail -Integrated Use” Overlay and establish the Commercial Retail - Integrated Use Overlay on a 52.4-acre portion of the Commercial Retail Land Use Area of the proposed Specific Plan.
b) SP121001: Adopt The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan and repeal the Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan (SP-337) on the project site c) DA21001: Development Agreement for project site
d) TTM338318: Subdivision of the project site into the 38 parcels.

2. INDEMNIFY CITY. The applicant, the property owner or other holder of the right to the development entitlement(s) or permit(s) approved by the City for the project, if different from the applicant (herein, collectively, the “Indemnitor”), shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Jurupa Valley and its elected city council, its appointed boards, commissions, and committees, and its officials, employees, and agents (herein, collectively, the “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, liab ilities, losses, fines, penalties, and expenses, including without limitation litigation expenses and attorney’s fees, arising out of either (i) the City’s approval of the project, including without limitation any judicial or administrative proceeding initiated or maintained by any person or entity challenging the validity or enforceability of any City permit or approval relating to the project, any condition of approval imposed by City on such permit or approval, and any finding or determination made and any other action taken by any of the Indemnitees in conjunction with such permit or approval, including without limitation any action taken pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), or (ii) the acts, omissions, MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 2 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

or operations of the Indemnitor and the directors, officers, members, partners, employees, agents, contractors, and subcontractors of each person or entity comprising the Indemnitor with respect to the ownership, planning, design, construction, and maintenance of the project and the property for which the project is being approved. The City shall notify the Indemnitor of any claim, lawsuit, or other judicial or administrative proceeding (herein, an “Action”) within the scope of this indemnity obligation and request that the Indemnitor defend such Action with legal counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City. If the Indemnitor fails to so defend the Action, the City shall have the right but not the obligation to do so and, if it does, the Indemnitor shall promptly pay the City’s full cost thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the indemnity obligation under clause (ii) of the first sentence of this condition shall not apply to the extent the claim arises out of the willful misconduct or the sole active negligence the City.

3. CONSENT TO CONDITIONS. Within thirty (30) days after project approval, the owner or designee shall submit written consent to the required conditions of approval to the Community Development Director or designee.

4. MITIGATION MEASURES. This project shall be subject to, and comply with, all of the mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted by the City Council Resolution No. 2023- in connection with the certification of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the project.

5. FEES. The approval of MA21269 (GPA21010, , SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) shall not become effective until all planning fees associated with the entitlements have been paid in full.

6. CONFORMANCE TO APPROVED EXHIBITS. The project shall be in conformance to the approved plans (listed below) with changes in accordance to these conditions of approval:
• Specific Plan dated August 2023
• Tentative Tract Map 38318 dated August 7, 2023

7. INCORPORATE CONDITIONS . Prior to the issuance of any building permit , the owner or designee shall include within the first four pages of the working drawings a list of all conditions of approval imposed by the project’s final approval.

8. PLANNING REVIEW OF GRADING PLANS. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the aesthetic impact of slopes and grade differences where the project adjoins streets or other properties shall be approved by the Community Development Director or designee.

9. CONSTRUCTION PHASING. The developer shall be under substantial construction on a minimum 60,000 square feet of building that is located in the Project’s Commercial Neighborhood Planning Area prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for a building within the “Industrial/Logistics (I-L)” Planning Area. Substantial construction means the foundation for all buildings have been completed and the vertical construction of buildings have commenced. The Community Development Director shall make the final determination of substantial construction.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 3 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

10. JURUPA AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT (JARPD). Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for a residential unit of the development project, the applicant shall annex into the existing Jurupa Area Recreation and Park District (JARPD) District-Wide Community Facilities District (CFD) or form a new Community Facilities District (CFD) to contribute to the cost of park maintenance.

11. IMPACT FEES. Notwithstanding the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), the applicant shall the pay the following impact fees (unless exempt) in accordance to the Municipal Code.
• Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program . The applicant shall pay any owed DIFs by the required deadline pursuant to Chapter 3.75 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code.
• Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Mitigation (MSHCP) Fee. The applicant shall pay any owed MSHCP fees by the required deadline pursuant to Chapter 3.80 of the Municipal Code.
• Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program . The applicant shall pay any owed TUMFs by the required deadline pursuant to Chapter 3.70 of the Municipal Code.

12. COMPLIANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66300 - THE HOUSING CRISIS ACT. There are currently three single family residences within the Project site [3180.5 Wallace Street, 3170.5 Wallace Street, and 3166.5 Wallace Street, Riverside, California 92509] (“Rental Properties”) that qualify as “protected units” pursuant to Government Code section 66300. As such, developer shall replace the three “protected units” by restricting three units within the Project to units affordable to persons that qualify as very low income, or extremely low-income households, as specified in Sections 50052.5, 50053, 50105 and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code. The payment of an in-lieu fee under the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Chapter 9.267 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, will not satisfy this requirement. Developer shall record a restrictive covenant on the tentative tract maps that pertain to the residential portion of the Project, in compliance with Chapter

9.267.

Developer agrees that any real estate contract it enters into (or has entered into) for the Rental Properties will provide that (1) any existing occupants will be allowed to occupy their units until six months before the start of construction activities wi th proper notice, subject to Government Code section 7260 et seq., and (2) any existing occupants that are required to leave their units shall be allowed to return at their prior rental rate if the demolition does not proceed and the property is returned to the rental market.

Developer further agrees to provide relocation benefits to the occupants of the Rental Properties pursuant to Government Code section 7260 et seq. Specifically, Developer’s real estate contract for the Rental Properties provides that the occupants will be relocated to three new properties that Developer will be constructing off the Project site, and the Developer will be paying for all moving and relocation costs pursuant to Government Code section 7260 et seq. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer fur ther agrees to provide a right of first refusal for a comparable unit in the new housing development affordable to the household at an affordable rent or an affordable housing cost once the residential units MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 4 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

within the Project site are constructed. For purposes of complying with this requirement, “comparable unit” means either of the following, as applicable: (i) A unit containing the same number of bedrooms if the single-family home contains three or fewer bedrooms; (ii) A unit containing three bedrooms if the single-family home contains four or more bedrooms. A comparable unit is not required to have the same or similar square footage or the same number of total rooms.

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (ENGINEERING)

1.1. The use hereby conditioned is for a Conditional Use Permit No. 21010, Site Development Permit No. 21098, General Plan Amendment No. 21010, Change of Zone No. 21014, and Tentative Tract Map No. 38318; being a subdivision of various parcels ; consisting of 242.60 acres, 27 numbered lots and 10 lettered lots. The following exhibits are hereby referenced: Tentative Tract Map No. 38318, prepared by Kimley-Horn, dated August 7, 2023, and Conceptual Grading Plans, prepared by Kimley -Horn, dated February 17, 2023.

1.2. The Tract Map preparation shall comply with the State of California Subdivision Map Act, the City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, the provisions of Development Agreement No. 21001 and the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan (SP 21001), unless otherwise modified by the conditions listed herein.

1.3. It is assumed that any easements shown on the referenced exhibits are shown correctly and include all the easements that encumber the subject property. The Applicant shall secure approval from all (if any) easement holders for all grading and improvements which are proposed over the respective easement or provide evidence that the easement has been relocated, quitclaimed, vacated, abandoned, easement holder cannot be found, or is otherwise of no affect. Should such approvals or alternate action regarding th e easements not be provided, the Applicant may be required to amend or revise the tentative map as may be necessary to allow a finding that the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the tentative map.

1.4. It is understood that the tentative map exhibit correctly shows acceptable centerline elevations, traveled ways and drainage courses with appropriate Q’s and that the omission or unacceptability may require that the Applicant amend or revise the tentative map as may be necessary to allow a finding that the Final Map is in substantial conformance with the tentative map.

1.5. Electrical power, telephone, communication, street lighting, and cable television lines shall be placed underground in accordance with the City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Section 7.50.

1.6. A traffic impact analysis and supplement memorandum was prepared for the District at Jurupa Valley project by Kimley Horn, dated May 2023. This analysis and report were accepted only for preliminary planning purposes for the referenced specific plan (District at Jurupa Valley). Prior to approval of any phased final map for any subdivisions within this specific plan, a focused traffic assessment shall be submitted for the City’s review and approval.

1.7. If the Applicant is constructing a “TUMF” facility as a condition of approval for this project and will be seeking “TUMF” credits and/or reimbursements for the “TUMF” improvements built with this project, the Applicant shall enter into a “TUMF Improvement and Credit MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 5 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

Agreement” with the City prior to soliciting construction bids. All work shall be preapproved by and comply with the requirements of the City engineer and the Public Contracts Code to be eligible for fee credit or reimbursement.

1.8. All stormwater and water quality management facilities and features (BMPs) in the public right-of-way will require maintenance by a public agency or Property Owner’s Association (POA). To ensure that the general public is not unduly burdened with future costs, the Applicant shall develop a community facilities assessment district or other appropriate financing mechanism (i.e., CC&Rs, POA) to provide for maintenance of water quality treatment BMPs in perpetuity subject to the approval of the City Engineer.

1.9. Grading, improvements, and technical studies shall be consistent with the approved Tentative Tract Map No. 38318.

2. PRIOR TO GRADING PERMIT (ENGINEERING)

2.1. In compliance with Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, Chapter 8.70, no grading permit shall be issued until the Tentative Tract Map (TTM) and all other pertinent Planning permits are approved and are in effect.

2.2. All grading shall conform to the California Building Code, as adopted by the City of Jurupa Valley, the City’s Municipal Code Title 8, and all other relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing grading in the City of Jurupa Valley and state of California, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.3. The site is subject to offsite storm flows northeast of the State Route 60. In existing condition, these storm flows are collected by a double box culvert under State Route 60 and directed to the Santa River via a 36-in storm drain line. The project is proposing to extend the box culvert to a proposed detention basin located at the southeasterly portion of the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”), which will capture the offsite flows and onsite flows originated in the eastern portion of the Specific Plan. Onsite flows originated in the western portion of the Specific Plan will be conveyed to the existing Rubidoux Channel along Mission Boulevard via a proposed 42-in storm drain between 34 th Street and 27th Street.

2.4. A mass grading plan for the entire site shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. Securities, in the form of a cash deposit (preferable), bond, or letter of credit shall be submitted as a guarantee of the completion of the grading operations for the project and the implementation and maintenance of erosion control measures.

2.4.1. The grading plan shall be prepared under the supervision of a civil engineer licensed in the state of California (Project Civil Engineer) and he/she must sign the plan. The printed name and contact information of the Project Civil Engineer shall be included on the face of the grading plan. The grading plan shall be approved by the City Engineer.

2.4.2. The grading plan shall provide for acceptance and proper disposal of all offsite drainage flowing onto and through the site and shall provide for protection of downstream properties from damages caused by alteration of the drainage patterns, i.e., concentration or diversion of flow. Protection shall be provided by constructing adequate drainage facilities including enlarging existing fac ilities and/or by securing a drainage easement(s), if necessary, as approved by the City Engineer.

2.4.3. Temporary erosion control measures shall be implemented immediately following rough grading to prevent transport and deposition of earthen materials MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 6 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

onto downstream/downwind properties, public rights -of-way, or other drainage facilities. Erosion Control Plans showing these measures shall be submitted along with the grading plan for approval by the City Engineer.

2.4.4. For disturbance of one or more acres, the Applicant shall provide evidence that it has prepared and submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWRCB issued WDID number shall be included on the face of the grading plan.

2.5. If grading is required offsite, the Applicant shall obtain a written notarized letter of authorization from the property owner(s) to grade as necessary and provide a copy to the Engineering Department. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Applicant to obtain any and all proposed or required easements and/or authorizations necessary to perform the grading shown on the site plan and grading exhibits.

2.6. All applicable mitigations shall be satisfied in accordance with the Environmental Mitigation & Monitoring Reporting Program.

2.7. Prior to approval of the mass grading plan, a final geotechnical report for the proposed grading, infrastructure and post-construction water quality management features and facilities (BMPs) improvements shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. All recommendations of the report shall be incorporated in the grading plan.

2.8. Grading shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the approved project specific geotechnical report, approved conceptual grading plan, and preliminary studies. Grading plans shall be approved by the City Engineer and financial securities for grading, if applicable, shall be in place prior to permit issuance.

2.9. Proposed retaining walls will require a separate permit(s). Permits shall be obtained prior to the issuance of any grading permit unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer and Building Official.

2.10. Prior to approval of the mass grading plan, a final Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer in conformance with the requirements of RCFC&WCD.

2.10.1. The F-WQMP shall provide any changes in pervious/impervious areas and BMPs .

2.10.2. It is assumed that the conceptual grading and the provisions for water quality management shown on the tentative map exhibit can comply with all requirements for a Final Water Quality Management Plan (F-WQMP) without substantial change.

2.10.3. Any onsite and offsite BMPs shall be designed and sized per the findings of the F-WQMP. Any changes to the proposed BMP sizing, design, and type; and impacts to the referenced exhibit(s), may require additional approvals.

2.10.4. The Applicant shall enter into a Water Quality Management Plan and Stormwater BMP Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City. The agreement shall be recorded and a certified copy shall be provided to the City Engineer.

2.11. Prior to approval of the mass grading plan, a final hydrology and hydraulics report, corresponding with the proposed improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer and Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD). Hydraulic calculations are required for all drainage control devices, detention basin, and storm drain lines.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 7 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

2.11.1. A copy of the improvement plans, grading plans, BMP improvement plans and any other necessary documentation, along with supporting hydrologic and hydraulic calculations (drainage report), shall be submitted to RCFC&WCD as reference material for the review and approval of the drainage report and storm drain plans. The plans must receive RCFC&WCD approval prior to the issuance of precise grading permits. All submittals shall be date stamped by the engineer and include a completed Flood Control Deposit Based Fee Worksheet and the appropriate plan check fee deposit.

2.11.2. Written correspondence from the City of Jurupa Valley regarding the approval of the Project Specific WQMP and grading plan must be submitted to RCFC&WCD prior to issuance of the grading permit.

2.12. Prior to approval of the mass grading plan, Applicant shall obtain a permit from Riverside County Department of Environmental Health, for the construction of dry wells. Wells shall be designed in conformance with the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Chapter 15.20 (Water Wells).

2.13. Prior to approval of the mass grading plan, the Applicant shall provide a phasing plan ensuring that the necessary utilities, street, and other improvements needed for circulation, parking, access, or the welfare or safety of the public are continuously provided to the existing residents within the Specific Plan and the general public during construction and grading operations . The City Engineer may require the dedication and construction of necessary utility, street, and other improvements if such improvements are needed for circulation, parking, access, or the welfare or safety of the public. No modifications, removals, realignments, vacations of the existing streets and/or utilities shall be permitted until the completion of the improvements, identified in the phasing plan, are completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.14. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) shall be submitted to the City Engineer and Planning Director for approval. The CTMP shall include, but no limited to, approved routes for construction traffic to access the construction area, construction hours, staging areas, and appropriate points of ingress/egress to that area.

2.15. The 10-year storm flow shall be contained within the curb and the 100 -year storm flow shall be contained within the street right-of-way. When either of these criteria are exceeded, additional drainage facilities shall be installed. The property shall be graded to drain to the adjacent street or an adequate outlet.

2.16. Minimum street grades shall be 0.5%.

2.17. Prior to the initiation of the improvement plans for RCFC&WCD, the Applicant shall contact RFC&WCD to determine the terms and conditions of design, construction, inspection, transfer of rights-of-way, project credit in lieu of charges, and reimbursement schedules which may apply.

2.18. An encroachment permit may be required for any work that is to be performed within the RCFC&WCD right-of-way or involving RCFC&WCD facilities. The encroachment permit application shall be processed after the improvement plan approval.

2.19. A hauling permit shall be required for the import/export of material using City streets; the import/export location and the haul route shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department. If the import/export location is outside of City limits , the MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 8 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

Applicant shall provide evidence that the jurisdictional agency has provided all necessary approvals for import/export to/from the site.

2.20. Applicant shall obtain acceptance letters for applicable improvements from Riverside County Department of Environmental Health.

IMPROVEMENT PLANS

2.21. Improvements plans including, but not limited to, streets, traffic signals, signing and striping, street lighting, storm drain, sanitary sewer system, water system, landscape and irrigation system, and water quality BMPs, shall be submitted for review and approved.

All plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Riverside County Transportation Department “Improvement Plan Check Policies and Guidelines” as adopted by the City Engineer. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit all improvements plans shall be processed through the City and appropriate agencies and be substantially complete to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.21.1. Separate street improvement plans shall be submitted and for review and approval of the City Engineer. Street improvements shall include, but not limited to, pavement, base, curb and/or gutter, cross gutters, spandrel, sidewalks, driveway approaches, curb ramps, under sidewalk drains, medians, and pavement tapers/transitions as appropriate.

2.21.2. Separate traffic signal and interconnect plans shall be submitted per the latest Caltrans standards and City standards for the intersections of Rubidoux Boulevard/26
th Street and Rubidoux Boulevard/”A” Street. Any modifications for a Caltrans traffic signal shall be reviewed and approved by Caltrans. The Applicant is responsible for obtaining a Caltrans encroachment permit prior to performing any work within Caltrans right-of-way. (Note: Nothing in the project’s resolution, conditions of approval, conceptual and/or technical studies are intended to imply or convey any agreement or commitment by the City as to what improvements Caltrans will allow and approve at roadway segments or intersections mentioned herein.)

2.21.3. Separate signing and striping plans shall be prepared and shall extend a minimum of 300 feet beyond the project limits or the limits of striping removal necessary to join existing, as approved by the City Engineer. In addition to the signing and striping associated with the improvements conditioned herein, a Class III route shall be provided along Crestmore Road from 34 th Street to Mission Boulevard, Wallace Street from 34th Street to “A” Street, and 34th Street from Wallace Street to Crestmore Road.

2.21.4. Separate streetlight plans shall be prepared i n accordance with the City’s Municipal Code and Riverside County Ordinance 460. Streetlights shall be provided in all public streets within the project area in conformance with Riverside County Standard Plan No. 1000.

2.21.5. Separate plans for landscaping and irrigation within the public right-of-way and water quality BMPs shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed within a water quality basin that is compatible with the primary function of the BMP. The improvements shall comply with Riverside County Ordinance 461, as adopted by the City, “Comprehensive Landscaping Guidelines and Standards”, and Riverside MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 9 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

County Ordinance 859, as adopted by the City. Adequate sight distance shall be provided per Riverside County Standard Plan No. 821.

2.21.6. Separate storm drain plans be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer and RFC&WCD. Necessary easements for storm drain systems, as determined by RFC&WCD shall be shown on the final map “to be dedicated by separate instrument”. Flood control and drainage facilities shall be designed and constructed to RCFC&WCD engineering and maintenance standards including those pertaining to facility alignment and maintenance access to both, inlet and outlet, points.

2.21.7. Separate plans for water quality features and facilities shall be submitted in conformance with the City’s and RCFC&WCD requirements for the approval of the City Engineer.

2.21.8. Separate sanitary sewer and water system plans shall be submitted for review approval of the City Engineer and Rubidoux Community Service District (RCSD). Water improvement plans showing location of fire hydrants shall be approved by the Fire Department. N ecessary easements for sewer and water systems on-site, as determined by RCSD, shall be shown on the Final Tract Map “to be dedicated by separate instrument”.

2.21.9. Electrical power, telephone, communication, street lighting, cable television lines, and fiber broadband shall be designed to be placed underground in accordance with City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Title 7. The Applicant is responsible for coordinating the work with the serving utility company and City of Jurupa Valley. A disposition note describing the above shall be reflected on design improvement plans whenever those plans are required. Written proof confirming initiation of the design and/or application or the relocation, issued by the utility company, shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for verification purposes.

2.22. Public improvement plans shall be prepared based on a design plan and profile extending a minimum 300 feet beyond the project limits at grade and alignment as approved by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall be responsible for any match up asphalt concrete (AC) paving, reconstruction or resurfacing of existing paving as determined by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall be responsible for the design and construction of the recommended improvements identified in the TIA for this project and any other required improvements specified in these conditions of approval to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements identified in Condition of Approval 2.22 through 2.44 are required and shall be clearly shown on the improvement plans.

2.23. Rubidoux Boulevard shall be improved and additional right-of-way shall be dedicated to provide the following:

2.23.1. An ultimate right-of-way of various widths to provide the lane configuration required by Condition of Approval 2.32.

2.23.2. A striped median (various widths) shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer as an interim condition and shall accommodate the future raised median (various width) associated with Rubidoux Boulevard and State Route 60 Interchange Improvement Project.

2.23.3. A 12-ft southerly parkway to include a 5-ft sidewalk, curb adjacent landscaping, curb & gutter, and streetlights.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 10 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

2.24. “A” Street and “B” Street between Wallace Street and the northerly boundary of Lot 23 shall be dedicated and improved as Modified Arterials with a 94-foot right-of-way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. It shall be improved per Figure 12.

2.24.1. A 68-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.24.2. A paved 10-ft Class I trail shall be provided along the south side of Street “A” and “B” within the 15-ft parkway in accordance with Caltrans Highway Design Manual Chapter 1000 (Bicycle Transportation Design) . The parkway along the north side shall include a 6-ft sidewalk , 5-ft curb adjacent landscaping, curb & gutter, and streetlights.

2.24.3. A 12-ft landscaped raised median shall be designed and constructed as shown on the referenced Roadway Geometric Exhibit.

2.25. “B” Street between the northerly boundary of Lot 23 and cul-de-sac shall be dedicated and improved as an Industrial Collector with a 77-foot right-of-way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. It shall be improved per Figure 13 as shown on the TIA.

2.25.1. A 52-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.25.2. A 10-ft Class I trail shall be provided along the east side of Street “B” within a 15-ft parkway. The parkway along the north side shall include a 5 -ft sidewalk and 5-ft curb adjacent landscaping, curb & gutter, and streetlights.

2.25.3. A 12 -ft landscaped raised median shall be designed and constructed. Any future median openings proposed by future developments shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

2.25.4. Cul-de-sac shall be designed and constr ucted per Riverside County Standard Plan No. 800.

2.26. 30
th Street between Hall Avenue and “B” Street shall be dedicated and improved as an Industrial Collector with a 72-foot right-of-way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. It shall be improved per Figure 14 as shown on the TIA.

2.26.1. A 52-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.26.2. The 10-ft parkways shall include landscaping, curb & gutter, and streetlights.

2.26.3. The northerly 10-ft parkway shall include 5-ft sidewalk, 5-ft landscaping, curb & gutter, and streetlights.

2.26.4. A 12-ft landscaped raised median shall be designed and constructed . Median shall be designed to only permit westbound right turn movements at the intersection of 30 th Street and Hall Avenue .

2.27. 30th Street, from Hall Avenue to Frontage Road (30th Street), shall be improved as a Modified Frontage Road with two lanes and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. It shall be improved per Figure 15 as shown on the TIA. Appropriate signing and striping shall be installed to clearly convey direction of travel.

2.27.1. A 36-ft paved section shall be constructed, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.

2.27.2. Northbound traffic shall be restricted to right-turn movements only.

2.27.3. Parkway shall include appropriate traffic safety system , curb and gutter, and streetlights.

2.27.4. Road alignment shall be in conformance with County Standard Plan No. 114 and accommodate truck turning movements.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 11 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

2.28. Frontage Road ( 30th Street) between Rubidoux Boulevard and 30th Street, shall be improved as a two -lane road with a 58-foot right-of-way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. Appropriate signing and striping shall be installed to clearly convey direction of travel.

2.28.1. A 48-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.28.2. Parkway shall include appropriate traffic safety system, curb and gutter, and streetlights.

2.29. Hall Avenue shall be dedicated and improved as a Modified Collector Street with a 66-ft right-of-way and shall be designated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot.

2.29.1. A 44-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.29.2. 11-ft parkways shall include curb adjacent landscaping, 5-ft sidewalk, curb and gutter, and streetlights.

2.29.3. A traffic analysis shall be prepared to determine the appropriate traffic index.

Hall Avenue between 30
th Street and 26th Street shall be constructed to provide the ultimate structural section for the full-width paved section.

2.29.4. Infrastructure shall be designed to prohibit trucks from project site from traveling on 28th Street from Rubidoux Boulevard to Hall Avenue and Hall Avenue from 26th Street to Market Street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.30. Wallace Street shall be dedicated and improved as a Local Street with a 60-foot right-of- way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. Roadway shall be per County Standard Plan No. 105 and Figure 17 of the TIA.

2.30.1. Class II bike lanes shall be provided.

2.30.2. 10-ft parkways shall include 5-ft landscaping, 5-ft sidewalk, curb and gutter, and streetlights.

2.30.3. Wallace Street, north of 34th Street, shall align with Wallace Street, south of 34th Street.

2.30.4. Core test results confirming that existing pavement section is per County standards shall be required. Deficient structural section shall be improved.

2.31. 34th Street shall be dedicated and improved as a Local Street with a 60- foot right-of-way and shall be dedicated on the Final Tract Map as lettered lot. Roadway shall be per County Standard Plan No. 105 and Figure 17 of the TIA.

2.31.1. A cul -de-sac shall be designed and constructed at the east terminus of 34 th Street per Riverside County Standard Plan No. 800/800A.

2.31.2. Core test results confirming that existing pavement section is per County standards shall be required. Deficient structural section shall be improved.

2.31.3. A 5-ft sidewalk shall be constructed along 7800-ft of 34th Street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant shall make a good faith effort to acquire any necessary right-of-way to provide improvements.

2.32. “C” Street shall be improved a Modified Local Street within a 40-ft right-of-way.

2.32.1. A 24-ft paved section shall be constructed.

2.32.2. Parkways shall include curb and gutter and streetlights.

2.33. The following segments shall be designed and constructed to accommodate truck volumes and access. Any additional widening improvements required to facilitate truck movements shall be required. A traffic analysis shall be prepared to determine the appropriate traffic index for each roadway segment. Any structural section that is deficient shall be improved.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 12 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

2.33.1. Hall Avenue from 30th Street to 26th Street

2.33.2. Rubidoux Boulevard from 34th Street to State Route 60

2.33.3. Rubidoux Boulevard from State Route 60 to 26th Street

2.33.4. 26th Street from Rubidoux Boulevard to Hall Avenue

2.34. Intersection of Rubidoux Boulevard (NS) and “A” Street (EW)

2.34.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: Two through lane and one right turn lane. • Southbound: Two left turn lanes and two through lanes. • Eastbound: N/A.
• Westbound: One left turn lane, one right turn lane, and one shared left/right turn lane.

2.34.2. Intersection shall be signalized.

2.34.3. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.34.4. The Applicant shall be responsible for repairing any damages sustained to the existing infrastructure along Rubidoux Boulevard and for any utility relocations to accommodate the new intersection. Repairs shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.35. Intersection of Wallace Street (NS) and 34 th Street (EW)

2.35.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane • Southbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane • Eastbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane • Westbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane.

2.35.2. Intersection shall be an all way stop controlled intersection.

2.35.3. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.36. Intersection of Wallace Street (NS) and “A” Street (EW)

2.36.1. Intersection shall be improved as urban double-lane roundabout. Design and construction shall be consistent with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Guidelines, the referenced geometric exhibit, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

2.36.2. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane • Southbound: N/A
• Eastbound: One shared through/left turn lane and one shared through/right turn lane
• Westbound: One shared through/left turn lane and one through lane.

2.36.3. Crosswalk shall be provided on the south leg.

2.36.4. Bike ramps shall be designed to separate bicyclists from vehicular traffic.

2.37. Intersection “B” Street (NS) and “C” Street (EW)

2.37.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One left turn and one shared through/right-turn lane • Southbound: One left turn and one shared through/right-turn lane • Eastbound: One shared left turn/through/right turn lane MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 13 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

• Westbound: Future leg.

2.37.2. A stop sign shall be installed on the west leg for eastbound traffic.

2.37.3. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.38. Intersection “B” Street (NS) and 30 th Street (EW)

2.38.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One left turn and one through lane
• Southbound: One future left turn and one shared through/right-turn lane • Eastbound: One shared left turn/right turn lane
• Westbound: Future leg.

2.38.2. A stop sign shall be installed on the west leg for eastbound traffic.

2.38.3. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.39. Intersection Hall Avenue (NS) and 30 th Street (EW)

2.39.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: N/A
• Southbound: One left-turn lane
• Eastbound: One left turn lane and one through lane
• Westbound: One right-turn lane.

2.39.2. A stop sign shall be installed on the north leg for southbound traffic.

2.39.3. A yield sign shall be installed on the east leg for westbound traffic.

2.39.4. A raised median shall be designed and constructed on the east leg to only prohibit westbound through movements.

2.39.5. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.40. Intersection Rubidoux Boulevard (NS) and 30
th Street (EW)

2.40.1. Reconfigure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One right-turn lane and two through lanes • Southbound: One left-turn lane and two through lanes
• Eastbound: One left-turn lane, one shared left-turn/through lane, and one right turn lane
• Westbound: N/A.

2.40.2. Two eastbound lanes shall be provided on the east leg.

2.40.3. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.40.4. Any modification to the intersection requires approval of Caltrans.

2.41. 30th Street (NS) and Frontage Road ( 30th Street) (EW)

2.41.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: One right-turn lane.
• Southbound: N/A.
• Eastbound: One through lane and one right-turn lane.
• Westbound: N/A.

2.41.2. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 14 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

2.41.3. Intersection improvements will be deferred to the occupancy of the commercial and industrial sites, as identified the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan.

2.42. Intersection Proposed SR -60 Eastbound On- Ramp (NS) and Frontage Road ( 30th Street) (EW)

2.42.1. Configure lanes to provide:
• Northbound: N/A
• Southbound: N/A
• Eastbound: One through lane
• Westbound: N/A.

2.42.2. Property line corner cut-back and curb return radius shall be per Riverside County Standard No. 805.

2.42.3. Any modification to the intersection requires approval of Caltrans.

2.43. The intersection of 34th Street and Crestmore Road shall be designed as a three- legged intersection.

2.44. The construction of ADA compliant depressed curbs and access ramps shall be required at the following intersections, at a minimum:

2.44.1. Rubidoux Boulevard and “A” Street

2.44.2. Wallace Street and 34th Street

2.44.3. Wallace Street and “A” Street

2.44.4. “C” Street and Wallace Street

2.44.5. “B” Street and 30th Street

2.44.6. Hall Avenue and 30th Street

2.44.7. Rubidoux Boulevard and 30th Street

2.45. Improvements shall provide appropriate transition to adjacent existing and future infrastructure; design of transition shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

2.46. The Rubidoux and SR-60 interchange shall be improved to an interim condition to include additional lanes at each on/off ramp as identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis and as approved by the City Engineer and Caltrans.

2.46.1. Ultimate SR-60 interchange improvements are included as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project. If the City’s ultimate improvements are completed prior to interim improvement installations, then Applicant will be required to provide a cash-in-lieu of construction for all or a portion of the required interim improvements. The cash-in -lieu of construction fee shall be in the form and amount approved by the City Engineer. A cost estimate shall be prepared by a licensed engineer, submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer.

3. PRIOR TO TRACT MAP RECORDATION (ENGINEERING)

3.1. No Final Tract Map shall be recorded until all other related Planning cases are approved, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.

3.2. After the approval of the tentative map and prior the expiration of said map, the Applicant shall cause the real property included within the tentative map exhibit, or any part thereof, to be surveyed; and a Final Tract Map thereof shall be prepared in accordance to the City Engineer’s requirements, conditions of tentative map approval, and in accordance with the provisions of the City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Chapter 7.20. All processing shall be through the City of Jurupa Valley.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 15 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

3.3. No phased unit s of this subdivision have been proposed and none will be permitted without further consideration of the phase or unit designation and delineation. Any subsequent approval of phases or units is at the discretion of the City and if approved, may include additional conditions of approval. The City Engineer may require the dedication and construction of necessary utility, street or other improvements beyond the project boundary, if the improvements are needed for circulation, parking, access, or for the welfare or safety of the public.

3.4. All street and utility dedication shall be free of all encumbrances, irrevocably offered to the public and shall continue in force until the City accepts or abandons such offers, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Dedications shall be shown on the Final Map in accordance with these conditions of approval and Title 7 of the Municipal Code.

3.5. Lot access shall be restricted along Rubidoux Boulevard, except for “A” Street and 30 th
Street. The Applicant shall dedicate on the Final Tract Map abutter’s rights of access along the northwesterly property line abutting Rubidoux Boulevard.

3.6. The Applicant shall acquire portions of 30 th Street and Wallace Street, as shown on the tentative map and in a manner approved by the City Attorney, to provide the improvements conditioned herein. Applicant will be responsible for initiating the process and for any cost incurred.

3.7. Portions of 30
th Street, Wallace Street, Hall Avenue, and 34th Street shall be vacated, as shown on the tentative map, to provide the improvements conditioned herein. Applicant shall be responsible for initiating the process and for any cost incurred and shall protect the interests of all affected utility companies with their written consent.

3.8. The Applicant shall be responsible for the initiating the process of relinquishment of any portions State Route 60 ramps , as applicable, in conformance with Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual Chapter 25 (Relinquishments ) to the City of Jurupa Valley and any associated costs incurred by the City of Jurupa Valley and Caltrans.

3.9. A 20-ft access easement shall be dedicated in favor of property owners of parcel identified by APN 178-310-003. Applicant shall be responsible for paving and maintaining the 20-ft road, as stated in the Development Agreement.

3.10. A 40-ft drainage easement for the construction and maintenance of the double box culvert, as shown on the conceptual grading plan, shall be dedicated to RFC&WCD.

3.11. Drainage easement, when required, shall be shown on the final map and notes as follows:
“Drainage Easement – no buildings, obstructions, or encroachments by landfills are allowed.”

3.12. A copy of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be submitted for review and approved by the City Engineer. The CC&R's shall include, but not be limited to, access easements, reciprocal access, private and/or public utility easements as may be relevant to the project.

3.13. Prior to map approval, all improvement plans shall be approved by the City Engineer

3.14. Prior to map approval, Applicant shall prepare a fully executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement (on City approved format and forms) with accompanying security as required or complete all public improvements. Provide a monument bond (i.e. cash deposit) in an amount determined by the City or as specified in writing by the Applicant’s Engineer or Surveyor of Record and approved by the City Engineer

3.15. Prior to map recordation, all onsite and offsite improvements shall be completed and accepted by the City, Caltrans, RCFC&WCD. In the event improvements are not completed MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 16 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

prior to map recordation, securities shall be provided in conformance with the City’s Municipal Code and Riverside County Ordinance 460.

3.16. The Applicant shall submit cost estimates for the fair share improvements referenced in these conditions of approval for review and approval of the City Engineer.

3.17. All utility extensions within the site shall be placed underground unless otherwise specified or allowed by these conditions of approval.

3.17.1. Utility extensions from the mainline or other points of connection within the public right-of-way require that the Applicant obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Engineering Department. The City shall make a final inspection of work to verify that any impacts that the work might have had to other City owned infrastructure is restored or repaired to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

L&LMD, CFD, and Special Districts

3.18. Prior to final map recordation, Applicant shall annex into the community facilities district for entire Specific Plan boundary to provide the operation and maintenance of traffic signals, open space, landscaping and irrigation systems, BMPs features and facilities, trails, lighting, graffiti abatement and other improvements in the public right-of-way, as approved by the City Engineer. The annexation to the CFD shall be in a manner to be approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney.

3.19. Prior to final map recordation, Applicant shall annex into the community service district for public safety services. The agreement to annex to a CFD for Public Safety Services shall be in a manner to be approved by the City Engineer and City Attorney. Participation in a CFD is intended to fully mitigate the incremental impact of new development on City public safety costs and maintain such levels of service at the standards established in the City’s General Plan.

3.20. Should this project be within any assessment/benefit district, the Applicant shall make application for and pay any reapportionment of the assessments or pay the unit fees in the assessment/benefit district.

Traffic Impacts

3.21. Prior to approval of a final map for any subsequent subdivision within this specific plan area, except for Tract Map No. 38318, the Applicant shall submit a revised and updated traffic study for review and approval by the City Engineer.

3.21.1. Individual development permits processed in the future within the specific plan area shall pay its portion of the fair share of the cost of traffic improvements identified in the referenced Traffic Impact Analysis. Fair-share contributions will be determined on a building-by -building basis as a share of the impact of the Project as a whole as determined and will be due prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.

4. PRIOR TO ACEPTANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS (ENGINEERING)

4.1. All grading and construction of infrastructure improvements in accordance with the approved plans, the City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Chapter 8.70, and all other applicable requirements, shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.

4.2. The Project geotechnical/soils engineer shall provide a Final Grading Certification, certifying to the completion of the grading in conformance with the approved grading plans, the recommendation of the Geotechnical/Soils report approved for this project and the California Building Code.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 17 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

4.3. A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall certify to the completion of grading in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the approved grading plans.

4.4. The Applicant is responsible for completing construction of all post- construction water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) facilities and features. These facilities and features shall be operated and maintained under the City’s CFD.

4.5. The Applicant shall provide Record ("As-built") Drawings of grading and all infrastructure improvement.

4.6. The Applicant shall enter into a Cooperative Agreement with the City and RCFC&WCD establishing the terms and conditions covering the inspection, operation and maintenance of Master Drainage Plan facilities required to be constructed as part of the project.

4.7. Prior to completion and acceptance of improvements, assurance of maintenance is required by the completion of annexation into a community services district for all applicable improvements specified in these conditions of approval.

4.8. Prior to completion and acceptance of improvements , A pplicant shall e nsure that all streetlights within the public right of way, required from this project, a re energized.

4.9. Applicant shall obtain acceptance letters for applicable improvements from RCSD. Written proof shall be provided to the Engineering Department.

4.10. Applicant shall obtain acceptance letters for applicable improvements from RCFC&WCD.

Written proof shall be provided to the Engineering Department.

4.11. If applicable, Applicant shall obtain acceptance letters for applicable improvements from Caltrans. Written proof shall be provided to the Engineering Department.

5. PRIOR TO CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY (ENGINEERING)

5.1. The Applicant shall pay to the City of Jurupa Valley all fair share contributions for certain improvements as specified in the approved Traffic Impact Analysis and summarized on Table A of these conditions of approval.

5.2. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of Riverside County Ordinance No. 659 (Development Impact Fees, DIF), as adopted by the City, or later ordinance adopted by the City, which requires the payment of the appropriate fee set forth in the Ordinanc e in accordance with the fee schedule in effect at the time of the final inspection.

MA21269 THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (GPA21010, SP21001, DA21001, and TTM 38318) CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2023-XX
September 7, 2023

Page 18 of 18 ends

Conditions of Approval for MA21269
City Council Resolution No. 2023-XX

Table A

District at Jurupa Valley (TTM38257)
Fair Share Contribution Summary

Intersection/Segment Jurisdiction Description of
Improvements
Project Fair
Share
Percentage
Cedar Ave at Slover
Ave
San Bernardino
County
Add an additional eastbound
left turn lane and southbound
right turn lane

50.6%
Rubidoux Blvd &
Market St/ 20th St.

Jurupa Valley Add an additional southbound
left turn lane. Reconfigure the
westbound leg to 1 left turn, 2
thru, and 1 right turn lane.

Reconfigure the eastbound
leg to 2 left turn, 1 thru, and 1
right turn lane w/ a right turn
overlap. Modify the E/W split
phasing to left turn protected.

72.8%
Agua Mansa Rd at
Market St.

Jurupa Valley Reconfigure the eastbound
leg to 2 left turn, 1 thru, and 1
right turn lane. Reconfigure
the southbound leg to 1
shared thru-left and 1 right
turn lane

38.7%
Market St. at Hall Ave. Jurupa Valley New Traffic Signal 53.3% Market St at 24th
St/Via Cerro
Jurupa Valley Add a northbound thru lane
and southbound thru lane

48.0%
Riverview Dr at
Mission Blvd
Jurupa Valley Reconfigure the southbound
leg to 1 left and 1 shared
thru-right lane. Modify the N/S
split phasing to left turn
protected with a northbound
right turn overlap

37.9%
Rubidoux Blvd at
Mission Blvd
Jurupa Valley Add a southbound left turn
lane. Reconfigure the
northbound leg to 1 left and 1
shared thru-right lane. Modify
the N/S Split phasing to left
turn protected with a
southbound right turn overlap.

44.8%

ATTACHMENT NO. 3

Ordinance Approving Development Agreement No. 21001

Exhibit A: Development Agreement

8-28-23

-1-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 2023-14

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF JURUPA VALLEY , CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 21010 BETWEEN THE

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY AND EM RANCH OWNER,

LLC, FOR THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY PROJECT
ON AN APPROXIMATELY 248.3-ACRE PROJECT SITE
GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SR -60 TO THE NORTH, THE
SANTA ANA RIVER TO THE EAST, 34TH STREET TO THE

SOUTH, AND RUBIDOUX BOULEVARD TO THE WEST

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Procedural Findings. The City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley does hereby find, determine and declare that:
(a) EM Ranch Owner LLC (the “ Owner”) has applied for General Plan Amendment No. 21010, the adoption of a Specific Plan ( SP 21001), a Development Agreement between the O wner and the City , and Tentative Tract Map No. 38318, (collectively, Master Application No. 21269 or MA No. 21269) to permit the construction of up to 1,192 new residential units; approximately 3 million square feet of commercial and industrial land uses (including warehouse and logistic uses); a hotel with conference and hospitality area; and approximately 11 acres of parks and open space on an approximately 24 8.3-acre project site generally bounded by SR-60 to the north, the Santa Ana River to the east, 34th street to the south, and Rubidoux Boulevard to the west (the “Project”). The Project includes APNs: 175 -252-003, and 004; 178 - 261-001 and 002; 178 -262-001 through 008; 178 -290-005 and 009; 178 -300-001 through 008; 178-310-001 through 009, 011 through 015, 017, 018; 023 through 026; 028, 030 through 034, 039 through 047, 049, and 051; 179 -130-003, 004, 006 through 008; 179 -170-001, 003 through 005, 007, 008, 015, 016, 018, 020; 179 -230-010; 179-270-00, 011 through 018, 024, 033; 179 - 310-001, 004, 005; and 179-340-001, 002, 005 ). These applications were filed in a manner in accord with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan and the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. (b) The proposed Project was processed including, but not limited to, a public notice in the time and manner prescribed by State and local law, including the California Environmental Quality Act.
(c) The proposed Development Agreement between EM Ranch, LLC, (“Owner”) and the City of Jurupa Valley DA 21010 (“Development Agreement”) attached hereto as Exhibit “A” provides the Owner vested rights to proceed with the development of the Project Site in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement. By entering into the Development Agreement, the City is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare. The term of the Development Agreement is for twenty (20) years. The benefit of the Development Agreement for the Owner is the protection of the approvals. The Development Agreement allows for the app roval period of the Project to be extended to twenty -2-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
(20) years. The Development Agreement includes community benefits that would be provided.

The estimated total benefit amount, based on a 20 year projection (discounted at net present value), is $15,706,814.
(d) The City determined that an environmental impact report (“EIR”) would be required for the proposed Project and issued a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP") on April 12, 2022.

The NOP was sent to the State Clearinghouse (SCH # 2022040044), responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and interested parties and posted on the City's website on March 31, 2022. The thirty (30)-day public review period ran from March 31, 2022 to April 29, 2022 and its purpose was to receive comments and input from interested public agencies and private parties on issues to be addressed in the EIR for the proposed Project. The proposed Development Agreement was included in the Project Description for the EIR and its impacts analyzed therein. (e) On August 23, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2023 -18 recommending that the City Council approve the Development Agreement and the Project. (f) On September 7, 2023 , the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley considered the proposed Project, the Development Agreement, and the EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations, at a du ly noticed and conducted public hearing at which time all interested persons had an opportunity to and did testify either in support or in opposition to this matter. The City Council considered all the testimony and any comments received regarding the proposed Project, Development Agreement, EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Statement of Overriding Considerations prior to prior to adopting this Ordinance.
(g) Following the public hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-77, entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY

CERTIFYING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND ADOPTING FINDINGS, A

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY PROJE CT TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 1,19 2 NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS; APPROXIMATELY 3 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USES (INCLUDI NG WAREHOUSE AND LOGISTIC USES); A HOTEL WITH CONFERENCE AND HOSPITALITY AREA; AND APPROXIMATELY 11 ACR ES OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ON AN APPRO XIMATELY 248 .3-ACRE PROJECT SITE GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SR-60 TO THE NORTH, THE SANTA ANA RIVER TO THE EAST, 34TH STREET TO THE SOUTH, AND RUBIDOUX BOULEVARD TO THE WEST ,” that included the Development Agreement in the Project Description. (h) Following the public hearing, the Council also adopted Resolution No. 2023-78, entitled: “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY APPROV ING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 21010, SPECIFIC PLAN (SP21001), AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 38318 TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 1,19 2 NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS; APPROXIMATELY 3

MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND USES (INCLUDING WAREHOUSE AND LOGISTIC USES); A HOTEL WITH CONFERENCE AND -3-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
HOSPITALITY AREA; AND APPROXIMATELY 11 ACRES OF PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ON AN APPROXIMATELY 248.3-ACRE PROJECT SITE GENERALLY BOUNDED BY SR- 60 TO THE NORTH, THE SANTA ANA RIVER TO THE EAST, 34TH STREET TO THE

SOUTH, AND RUBIDOUX BOULEVARD TO THE WEST (THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY)” which approvals are vested by the Development Agreement. (i) All legal preconditions to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

Section 2. Legislative Findings. The City Council in approving the Development Agreement hereby makes the following findings:
(a) The Development Agreement complies with the requirements of California Government Code Sections 65865 through 65869.5 in that the Development Agreement specifies in detail and contains the following:
1) Provisions in Section 9 requiring periodic review at least every twelve months, at which time the Owner shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Development Agreement (California Government Code Section 65865.1). 2) Duration of the Development Agreement, as specified in Section 3.3 of the Agreement as being twenty (20) years (Government Code Section 65865.2). 3) The permitted uses of the property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of the proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes are set forth in the Specific Plan, Title 6, Subdivisions of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, and Title 9 , Planning and Zoning, of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code which is part of the Project Approvals incorporated into the Developm ent Agreement by Section 2.14 thereof and vested by the Development Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2).
4) Terms and conditions in the Specific Plan, Project Approvals and the Development Agreement, require the D eveloper to construct all necessary pu blic improvements necessary to access and improve the P roperty for the proposed use s (Government Code Section 65865.2).
(b) Pursuant to Section 65867.5, the provisions of the Development Agreement are consistent with the City’s General Plan , and each element t hereof, as amended, and the following goals and policies , in that the Development Agreement incorporates by reference and vests the Project Approvals, as defined therein, including but not limited to the Specific Plan 21001 and Tentative Tract Map 38318:
1) The Development Agreement will obligate the Owner, as consideration for the Development Agreement, to make Community Benefit Contributions of an estimated $15,706,814 based on a 20 year projection (discounted at net present value), for: (1) the enhancement or construction of public facilities; (2) maintenance of infrastructure; (3) supplement public safety; (4) support transitional living programs; (5) supplement arts, culture and community resources; (6) support commercial rehabilitation programs; (7) lease of a community room to the City for the residents’ enjoyment; and (8) provide payments for a planning study for the Rubidoux -4-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
Downtown Master Plan, that would establish goals, objectives, and policies designed to protect residential neighborhoods consistent with the General Plan. 2) The Project Approvals vested by the Development Agreement are consistent with the City’s General Plan and proposed Specific Plan upon the approval of the General Plan Amendment and Specific Plan, in that the proposed Project Approvals are intended to subdivide the Project site into thirty-eight (38) lots to accommodate the proposed land uses including five (5) lots for Commercial Neighborhood land uses, five (5) lots for Commercial Retail land uses, two (2) lots for Commercial Tourist land uses, three (3) lots for Business Park land uses, one (1) lot for Industrial land uses, ten (10) lots for High Density Residential land uses, four (4) lots for Public Park land uses, one (1) lot for Public Facility land uses, and seven (7) lots for Public Streets associated with the proposed Specific Plan and the subdivision will be consistent with the Land Use Objectives of the General Plan to provide sustainable prosperity by expanding appropriate housing, strengthening the empl oyment base, and promote a more balanced range of land uses that meets the needs and values of the wider community, and ensure that vacant land and resources are used wisely.
3) The Project Approvals vested by the Development Agreement are consistent with the following Land Use Element goals: LUE -1 Encourages attractive, safe, and well-maintained residential neighborhoods that offer a range of high quality housing opportunities that “fit” the community in which they are to be located; and LUE 2 Attract high quality commercial, office, and industrial areas offering a range of retail, service and employment uses that complement rather than compete with one another.
4) The design or improvement of the Project Approvals vested by the Development Agreement are consistent with the City’s General Plan and proposed Specific Plan in that the proposed subdivision would subdivide the project site into the 38 parcels consistent with the proposed General Plan Land Use designations to accommodate the land uses, p reliminary grading and utilities plan, street vacations, street improvements, and infrastructure improvements associated with the Specific Plan.
5) A more detailed finding of consistency between the General Plan and the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan vested by the Development Agreement can be found in Table 4.10-2 of the Environmental Impact Report, which is hereby incorporated herein by this reference.
(c) Pursuant to Section 65867.5(c), a Development Agreement that includes a subdivision shall not be approved unless the agreement provides that any tentative map prepared for the subdivision will comply with the provisions of Government Code section 66473.7. Section

4.10 of the Development Agreement provides that the Project includes a subdivision as defined in Government Code Section 66473.7. Any tentative map prepared for the subdivision shall comply with Government Code Section 66473.7 by imposing a condition that sufficient water supply be available to service the residential subdivisions.

Section 3. Approval of the Development Agreement. The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement between the City of Jurupa Valley and EM Ranch Owner, LLC , in substantially the form presented to the City Council and authorizes the Mayor to execute the -5-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
Development Agreement on behalf of the City in substantially the form submitted to the City Council. Upon execution by all parties, an original shall be kept on file in the Office of the City Clerk. City Clerk is directed to record this Development Agreement in the Official Records of the County of Riverside within ten (10) days of the effective date of this Ordinance.

Section 4. Severability. Of any portion, provision, section, paragraph, sentence, or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared to be invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining portions, provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect and shall be in terpreted by the court so as to give effect to such remaining portions of the Ordinance.

Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.

Section 6. Notice of Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Jurupa Valley on this 21st day of September, 2023.
______________________________
Chris Barajas
Mayor

ATTEST:

______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk

-6-
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY )

I, Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk of the City of Jurupa Valley, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 2023 -14 was regularly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of September, 2023 and thereafter at a regular meeting held on the 21st day of September, 2023, it was duly passed and adopted by the following vote of the City Council:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Jurupa Valley, California, this 21st day of September, 2023.

________________________________
Victoria Wasko, City Clerk
City of Jurupa Valley
8-28-23

A-1
12774-0179\2857945v1.doc
Exhibit A
Proposed Development Agreement

City Draft: 8-28-2023
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY

AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
City of Jurupa Valley
8930 Limonite Avenue
Jurupa Valley CA 92509
Attn: City Clerk

Exempt from recording fees pursuant to Govt. Code Section 27383 (Space above for recorder’s use)

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

BY AND BETWEEN

THE

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY

AND

EM RANCH OWNER, LLC., a California limited company

City Draft: 8-28-2023

2 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into and dated as of September 7, 2023, by and between the CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, a California municipal corporation and general law city existing under the Constitution of the State of the California (“City”), and EM RANCH OWNER, LLC., a California limited company (“OWNER”), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code (the “Development Agreement Legislation”) and Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution.

City and OWNER are occasionally referred to in this Agreement collectively as the “Parties.” Pursuant to the authority contained in the Development Agreement Legislation, as it applies to the City, pursuant to Article XI, Section 2 of the California Constitution, and in consideration of the recitals set forth in Section 1, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement, and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:

1. RECITALS. This Agreement is made for the following purposes and with respect to the following facts, which the Parties agree are true and correct:

1.1 The Development Agreement Legislation authorizes City to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property for the following purposes:

1.1.1 Ensuring high quality development in accordance with comprehensive plans;

1.1.2 Reducing uncertainty in the development approval process that might otherwise result in a waste of resources, discourage investment, and escalate the cost of development to the consumer;

1.1.3 Strengthening City’s comprehensive planning process to provide for the most efficient use of public and private resources by encouraging private participation in the comprehensive planning process;

1.1.4 Assuring Owners of land that upon approval, they may proceed with their development projects in accordance with defined policies, rules, regulations, and conditions of approval; and

1.1.5 Providing for the financing and/or construction of necessary public facilities and services.

1.2 The property that is the subject of this Agreement is approximately 248 acres in size, is generally bounded by Rubidoux Boulevard to the west, State Route 60 to the north, the Santa Ana River to the east and residential and 34th Street to the south and is described on Exhibit “A” and depicted on Exhibit “B” attached hereto (the “Property”).

City Draft: 8-28-2023

3 1.3 The Property is subject to the Project Approvals and Applicable Regulations defined in Sections 2.16 and 2.2, respectively, of this Agreement.

1.4 In addition to the general purposes stated above, the following are among the considerations supporting this Agreement:

1.4.1 This Agreement will provide for both Parties: (a) a high quality development on the Property subject to this Agreement; (b) certainty in the type of development to be undertaken on the Property; and (c) the assurance of adequate public facilities and services to ensure the good of the community regardless of City’s legal authority to impose such requirements under constitutional or statutory authority.

1.4.2 For City, this Agreement serves to provide for: (a) employment growth anticipated to result from the Development of the Property, both during construction and use; (b) an increase in tax revenues anticipated to result from the Development of the Property; (c) a stimulant to economic growth in the community surrounding the Property; and (d) the achievement of the goals and directives of its General Plan.

1.4.3 The development of new commercial, manufacturing, industrial buildings, associated office space and residential uses is an integral part of OWNER’s development plans for the Property. Such facilities are expected to bring employment and increased tax revenue for City.

1.5 The Parties desire to enter into a binding agreement for purposes of:
(i) identifying the terms, conditions, and regulations for the Development of the Property; (ii) identifying OWNER’s obligations to make certain Community Benefit Contribution, as defined in Section 2.8, and design, construct and install Public Improvements, on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

1.6 OWNER desires to develop the Property in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, the Applicable Regulations, and the regulations of those other agencies exercising jurisdiction over the Property.

1.7 OWNER has applied for, and City has approved, this Agreement in order to create beneficial development of the Property and a physical environment that will conform to and complement City’s goals, create development sensitive to human needs and values, facilitate efficient traffic circulation, and otherwise provide for the Development of the Property in accordance with City’s best interests.

1.8 The City Council has determined that this Agreement is consistent with City’s General Plan and each element thereof, including, without limitation, the goals and objectives thereof.

1.9 The following actions have been taken with respect to this Agreement and the Development:

City Draft: 8-28-2023

4 1.9.1 On ______________, 2023, following a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement and the Development.

1.9.2 On ______________, 2023, after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council adopted the following Resolutions approving certain land use entitlements for the Development: (1) Resolution No. 2023-___, Certifying the Environmental Impact Report, Making Findings, Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, (2) Resolution No. 2023-___, approving General Plan Amendment No. 21010 (GPA No. 21010), and Specific Plan No. 21001; copies of which all on file in the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall. The Resolutions contain findings pertaining thereto, including those relating to the CEQA documentation for the Development.

1.9.3 On ________________, 2023, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 2023-___ and on ______________, 2023, held the second reading and adopted Ordinance No. 2023-___, approving this Agreement, a copy of which is on file in the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, which Ordinance includes the findings pertaining thereto, including those relating to the CEQA documentation for the Development and this Agreement’s consistency with City’s General Plan and each element thereof and any specific plans relating to the Property.

1.10 All actions taken by City have been duly taken in accordance with all applicable legal requirements, including CEQA, and all other requirements for notice, public hearings, findings, votes and other procedural matters.

1.11 City has engaged in extensive studies and review of the potential impacts of the Development, as well as the various potential benefits to City by the Development, and has concluded that the Development is in City’s best interests. In consideration of the Public Improvements to be provided by OWNER to City, and in order to strengthen the planning process for the Property and to reduce the economic costs of Development of the Property, City intends to give OWNER assurance that OWNER can proceed with the Development of the Property in accordance with the Project Approvals and the City’s Applicable Regulations. In reliance on City’s covenants in this Agreement concerning the Development of the Property, OWNER has and will in the future incur substantial costs in site preparation and construction of infrastructure and facilities in order to develop the Property.

1.12 Pursuant to Section 65867.5 of the Development Agreement Legislation, the City Council has found and determined that: (i) this Agreement implements the goals and policies of City’s General Plan, including each element thereof,; (ii) provides balanced and diversified land uses, and imposes appropriate standards and requirements with respect to land development and usage in order to maintain the overall quality of life and the environment within City; (iii) this Agreement is in the best interests of and not detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare of City and its residents; (iv) adopting this Agreement is consistent with City’s General Plan, and each element thereof and any applicable specific plan, and constitutes a present exercise of City’s police power; and (v) this Agreement is being entered into pursuant to and in compliance with the requirements of Government Code Section 65867 of the Development Agreement Legislation.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

5 2. DEFINITIONS. This Agreement uses a number of terms having specific meanings, as defined below. These specially defined terms are distinguished by having the initial letter capitalized when used in this Agreement. The defined terms include the following:

2.1 “Agreement” means this Development Agreement.

2.2 “Applicable Regulations” is defined in Section 4.1.3 of this Agreement.

2.3 “Authorizing Ordinance” means Ordinance No. 2023-___ adopted by City on _______________, 2023 approving this Agreement.

2.4 “CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Pub.

Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.)

2.5 “City” means the City of Jurupa Valley, a California general law city and municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California, and all of its officials, employees, agencies, and departments.

2.6 “City Council” means the City Council of City.

2.7 “City Manager” mans the City Manager of City.

2.8 “Community Benefit Contribution” or “CBC” means the payments described in Section 5.6 of this Agreement.

2.9 “OWNER” means EM RANCH OWNER, LLC., a California limited company, a California limited liability company, and all successors in interest, in whole or part, to this entity with respect to the Property.

2.10 “Development” means the improvement of the Property for the purposes consistent with this Agreement and the Project Approvals, including, without limitation, demolition, remediation, grading, the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the on-site improvements, the construction of structures and buildings, and the installation of landscaping subject to the Project Approvals.

2.11 “Development Agreement Legislation” means Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code as it exists on the Effective Date.

2.12 “Effective Date” means the date that this Agreement becomes effective in accordance with Section 3.2 of this Agreement.

2.13 “MSHCP” means the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan and related amendments and approvals associated therewith.

2.14 “Net Square Footage” means the amount of enclosed building area of Development. For Commercial Retail Buildings means net leasable area.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

6 2.15 “Project” means Development of the Property for residential, commercial, business park and industrial uses in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement, inclusive of the permitted uses and Applicable Regulations set forth in this Agreement.

2.16 “Project Approvals” means all City approvals or entitlements, or both, pertaining to the Project, including, without limitation, the following resolutions and ordinances approving certain entitlements for the Project: (1) Resolution No. 2023-___, Certifying the Environmental Impact Report, Making Findings, Adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, (2) Resolution No. 2023- __, approving General Plan Amendment No. 21010 (GPA No. 21010), Specific Plan No. 21001, and Tentative Tract Map No. 39318; ; and (3) Ordinance No. 2023-___, approving this Agreement.

2.17 “Property” means the real property described in Exhibit “A” and depicted on Exhibit “B”.

2.18 “Public Improvements” means the improvements described in the Project Approvals.

2.19 “Reservation of Authority” means the rights and authority excepted from the assurances and rights provided to OWNER under this Agreement and reserved to City under Section 4.2 of this Agreement.

2.20 “Site Map” means the drawing of the site in its condition as of the Effective Date, attached to this Agreement as Exhibit “B”.

2.21 “Subsequent Project Approvals” means those Project Approvals issued subsequent to the Effective Date in connection with the Development of the Property.

2.22 “Subsequent Land Use Regulations” means all ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules, regulations, and official written policies of City adopted and effective after the Effective Date governing the Development and use of the Property.

2.23 “Transferee” means the person to whom OWNER sells, assigns, or otherwise transfers all or any portion of OWNER’s interests in the Property together with all its right, title, and interest in this Agreement in accordance with Section 12 of this Agreement.

3. GENERAL TERMS.

3.1 Binding Effect of Agreement. From and following the Effective Date, the Development, and City actions on applications for Subsequent Project Approvals affecting the Property, shall be subject to the terms and provisions of this Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement, to the extent permitted by law, constitute covenants that shall run with the Property for the benefit thereof, and the benefits and burdens of this Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the Parties and all successors in interest to the Parties.

3.2 Effective Date. This Agreement, and the obligations of the Parties to this Agreement, shall be effective on the date that Ordinance No. 2023-___ approving this City Draft: 8-28-2023

7 Agreement becomes effective (the “Effective Date”). The Parties shall approve an operating memorandum pursuant to Section 3.4.4 confirming the Effective Date of this Agreement.

3.3 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for Twenty (20) consecutive calendar years thereafter (the “Term”), unless Term is otherwise terminated, modified, or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the Parties after the satisfaction of all applicable public hearing and related procedural requirements. Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 3.3, the provisions of Section 5.6, shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.

3.4 Amendment of Agreement.

3.4.1 Initiation of Amendment. Any Party may propose an amendment to this Agreement and both Parties agree that it may be beneficial to enter into additional agreements or modifications of this Agreement in connection with the implementation of the separate components of the Development.

3.4.2 Procedure. Except as set forth in Section 3.4.4 of this Agreement, the procedure for proposing and adopting an amendment to this Agreement shall be the same as the procedure required for entering into this Agreement in the first instance.

3.4.3 Consent. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, any amendment, including an extension of the Term, to this Agreement shall require the written consent of both Parties, in accordance with law. No amendment to all or any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless set forth in writing and signed by duly authorized representatives of each of the Parties.

3.4.4 Operating Memoranda. The Parties acknowledge that refinements and further development of the Project may demonstrate that changes are appropriate with respect to the details and performance of the Parties. The Parties desire to retain a certain degree of flexibility with respect to those items covered in general terms under this Agreement. If and when the Parties mutually find that changes, adjustments, or clarifications are appropriate to further the intended purposes of this Agreement, they may, unless otherwise required by law, effectuate such changes, adjustments, or clarifications without amendment to this Agreement through one or more operating memoranda mutually approved by the Parties. The operating memoranda may be approved on City’s behalf by the City Manager, or such person designated in writing by the City Manager, and by any corporate officer or other person designated for such purpose in a writing signed by a corporate officer on behalf of OWNER. After execution of an operating memoranda it shall be attached to this Agreement as addenda and become a part of this Agreement. Unless otherwise required by law or by this Agreement, no such changes, adjustments, or clarifications shall require prior notice or hearing, public or otherwise.

3.4.5 Termination. Unless terminated earlier, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and be of no further effect upon the expiration of the Term. The termination of this Agreement, for any reason, shall not, by itself, affect any right or duty arising from entitlements or approvals set forth under the Project Approvals.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

8 4. DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

4.1 Right to Develop.

4.1.1 Right to Develop. OWNER shall have a vested right to develop the Property during the term of this Agreement in accordance with, and to the extent of, the Project Approvals and this Agreement.

4.1.2 Effect of Agreement on Applicable Regulations. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of this Agreement, the rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use of the Property, the rate or timing of development, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and the design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Development, shall be those contained in the Project Approvals and those Applicable Regulations not inconsistent with the Project Approvals which were in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

4.1.3 Applicable Regulations. Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, the following shall govern the development of the Property (“Applicable Regulations”):

4.1.3.1 The provisions of the Jurupa Valley Municipal
Code pertaining to property development in effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement;

4.1.3.2 City ordinances and resolutions pertaining to
property development in effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement; and

4.1.3.3 The City’s General Plan, and each element thereof, in effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

4.1.4 Subsequent Project Approvals. City shall accept for processing, review and action all applications for Subsequent Project Approvals, and City staff shall use their reasonable efforts to process such applications in an expeditious manner, taking into account City’s staffing levels, and all requisite development fees shall be calculated and paid at such time as payment for such fees is due and payable, for all or a portion of the Property. City further agrees that, unless otherwise requested by OWNER, it shall not, without good cause as provided in this Agreement, amend or rescind any Subsequent Project Approvals respecting the Property after City has granted the same.

4.1.5 Amendments to Project Approvals. It is contemplated by the Parties that OWNER may, from time to time, seek amendments to one or more of the Project Approvals. In the event OWNER finds that such an amendment is appropriate or desirable, OWNER may apply in writing for an amendment to the Project Approvals to effectuate such change. The Parties acknowledge that City shall be permitted to use its sole and absolute discretion in deciding whether to approve or deny any such amendment request; provided, however, that in exercising the foregoing sole and absolute discretion, City shall not apply a standard different than it has used in evaluating requests of other property owners. Any such City Draft: 8-28-2023

9 amendments are contemplated by the Parties as being within the scope of this Agreement as long as they are consistent with the Applicable Regulations and shall, upon approval by City, continue to constitute the Project Approvals as referenced in this Agreement. The Parties agree that any such approved amendments shall not constitute an amendment to this Agreement nor require an amendment to this Agreement.

4.2 Reservation of Authority by City.

4.2.1 Limitations, Reservations, and Exceptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, the following Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the Development:

4.2.1.1 Processing fees and ch arges of every kind and nature adopted by City pursuant to state law for costs related to City’s processing of applications for Project Approvals.

4.2.1.2 Procedural regulations consistent with this
Agreement relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals, and any other matters of procedure.

4.2.1.3 Changes adopted by the City Council in the
California Building Code, California Historic Building Code, California Existing Building Code, California Electrical Code, California Mechanical Code, California Plumbing Code, California Energy Code, California Green Building Standards Code, California Referenced Standards Code, California Residential Code, International Property Maintenance Code and similar uniform codes as required by and in accordance with the authority granted to City under state law.

4.2.1.4 Regulations that are not in conflict with the Project Approvals and this Agreement.

4.2.1.5 Regulations that are in conflict with the Project Approvals provided OWNER has given written consent to the application of such regulations to the Development.

4.2.1.6 Federal, state, county, an d multi-jurisdictional laws and regulations that preempt local regulations, or mandate the adoption of local regulations, and are in conflict with the Project Approvals.

4.2.1.7 Subsequent Land Use Regulations adopted by City in connection with any Subsequent Project Approvals, necessary to protect the imminent safety or health, or both, of the residents or occupants of the Property, or the residents or people of City, or both.

4.2.2 Future Discretion of City. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 4.2, this Agreement shall not prevent City, in acting on Subsequent Project Approvals, from denying or conditionally approving any Subsequent Project Approval on the basis of the Applicable Regulations or any Subsequent Land Use Regulations not in conflict with the Project Approvals.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

10 4.2.3 Modification or Suspension by Federal, State, County, or Multi- Jurisdictional Law. In the event that Federal, State, County, or multi-jurisdictional laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date, prevent or preclude compliance with one or more of the provisions of this Agreement, such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such Federal, State, County, or multi- jurisdictional laws or regulations, and this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent with such laws or regulations and to the extent such laws or regulations do not render such remaining provision impractical to enforce.

4.2.4 Intent. City acknowledges that OWNER has reasonably entered into this Agreement and may proceed with the Development of the Property on the assumption that City has adequately provided for the public health, safety and welfare through the Applicable Regulations. In the event that any future, unforeseen public health or safety emergency arises, City shall attempt to address such emergency in such a way as not to impact the Development in accordance with the Project Approvals, and if that is not possible, to select that option for addressing the emergency which has the least adverse impact on the Development in accordance with the Project Approvals.

4.3 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. It is acknowledged by the Parties that other public agencies not subject to control by City may possess authority to regulate aspects of the Development, and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies.

4.4 Timing of Development. Except as set forth in Agreement regardless of any future enactment, by initiative, or otherwise, OWNER shall have the discretion to develop the Property, or not develop the Property, in one phase or in multiple phases at such times as OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its sole and absolute business judgment.

Specifically, City agrees that OWNER shall be entitled to apply for and receive permits, maps, occupancy certificates, and other entitlements to develop and use the Property at any time, provided that such application is made in accordance with this Agreement and the Applicable Regulations. It is the intent of the Parties to cure the deficiency identified by the Supreme Court in Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal. 3d 465 (1984), which held the failure of a development agreement to specify the timing of development did not prevent a latter- enacted initiative from applying to the project approvals applicable to the development agreement in question in that case.

4.5 Vested Rights. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereon, OWNER is obtaining the vested rights to proceed with the Development of the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereon, City is securing certain public benefits which enhance the public health, safety and welfare, a partial listing of which benefits is set forth in Section 1 of this Agreement.

4.6 No Conflicting Enactments. Except as otherwise provided by this Agreement, neither the City Council nor any other agency of City shall enact a rule, regulation, ordinance, or other measure applicable to the Property that is inconsistent or conflicts with the terms of this Agreement.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

11 4.6.1 Moratorium. It is the intent of the Parties that no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the Development of all or any part of the Development and whether enacted by initiative or otherwise) affecting parcel or subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting tentative, or final), site development permits, precise plans, site development plans, grading permits, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlements to use approved, issued, or granted within City, or portions of City, shall apply to the Development to the extent such moratorium or other limitation would restrict OWNER’s right to develop the Property as provided by this Agreement in such order and at such rate as OWNER deems appropriate at its sole and absolute discretion, as provided by this Agreement. City shall reasonably cooperate with OWNER in order to keep this Agreement in full force and effect. In the event of any legal action instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement, the Parties hereby agree to reasonably cooperate in defending such action. In the event of any litigation challenging the effectiveness of this Agreement, or any portion hereof, this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect while such litigation, including any appellate review, is pending. The filing of any third party lawsuit(s) against City or OWNER relating to this Agreement, the Project Approvals or to other development issues affecting the Property shall not delay or stop the Development, processing, or construction of the Development, unless the third party obtains a court order preventing the activity.

4.6.2 Consistency Between this Agreement and Current Laws. City represents that at the Effective Date there are no rules, regulations, ordinances, policies, or other measures of City in force that would interfere with the Development and use of all or any part of the Property according this Agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between any Applicable Regulation, Development Approval, and this Agreement, the provisions of this Agreement shall control.

4.7 Further Assurances to OWNER. The Parties further acknowledge that the public benefits to be provided by OWNER to City pursuant to this Agreement are in consideration and reliance upon assurances that the Property can be developed in accordance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement. Accordingly, while recognizing that the Development of the Property may be affected by exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Section 4.2 of this Agreement, OWNER is concerned that normally the judiciary extends to local agencies significant deference in the adoption of land use regulations that might permit City, in violation of Section 4.2, to attempt to apply regulations that are inconsistent with the Project Approvals pursuant to the exercise of the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Section 4.2 of this Agreement. Accordingly, OWNER desires assurances that City shall not and City agrees that it shall not further restrict or limit the Development of the Property in violation of this Agreement except in strict accordance with the terms of this Agreement.

4.8 Acquisition of Right of Way for Public Improvements.

4.8.1 To the extent OWNER does not have sufficient title or interest in the real property required for the construction or installation of a Public Improvement, OWNER shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required property (“Required Property”) in a timeframe calculated to allow for the orderly Development of the Project. If, following this City Draft: 8-28-2023

12 effort, OWNER is unable to acquire the Required Property, OWNER shall have the right, but not the obligation, to request that CITY acquire the Required Property pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 66462.5, which shall be applicable, regardless of whether OWNER is applying for approval of a final map. CITY shall consider in good faith the acquisition of the Required Property pursuant to an acquisition agreement in substantially the form of Exhibit “C” (“Acquisition Agreement”), pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 66462.5 or Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010 and following, as the case may be, including proceedings for immediate possession of the Property pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1255.410 and following. This Agreement is neither a commitment nor an announcement of an intent by CITY to acquire any or all of the property required for Off-Site Improvements.

4.8.2 In the event CITY delays or is unwilling or unable to acquire the Required Property, such conditions of approval shall be automatically deemed waived. The specific acquisition of Right of Way requiring public improvements shall be referenced in the Acquisition Agreement.

4.8.3 Both parties acknowledge and agree that acquisition of the Required Property in accordance with the California Eminent Domain Law, requires more time than the suggested timeframes of Government Code Section 66462.5 allow and therefore, the parties waive these time constraints and the Acquisition Agreement shall so provide. The parties further acknowledge and agree that CITY cannot exercise its power of eminent domain unless and until a Resolution of Necessity has been duly adopted by the City Council pursuant to law.

This Agreement is neither a commitment nor the announcement of an intent by CITY to acquire any or all of the Required Property for the Public Improvements.

4.8.4 If OWNER asks CITY and CITY agrees to acquire right-of-way through the use of its power of eminent domain, then OWNER and CITY shall enter into an Acquisition Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 66462.5 for each Public Improvement. OWNER shall deposit with CITY the actual costs reasonably estimated by CITY for initiating such proceedings and each stage thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Section 4.9. City shall not delay or refuse to issue any Future Development Approvals due to the failure or delay of the City to either (i) enter into the Acquisition Agreement; (ii) if necessary, failure to initiate or conclude an eminent domain proceeding, if such a proceeding is necessary to obtain the Required Property; or (iii) approve any improvement plans needed to construct any Public Improvement.

4.9 Term of Map(s) and Other Project Approvals. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 66452.6(a) and 65863.9, the term of any subdivision or parcel map that has been or in the future may be processed for all or any portion of the Property and the term of each of the Project Approvals (including, without limitation, Future Development Approvals) shall be deemed extended without further required action for a period of time through the scheduled termination date of this Agreement as set forth in Section 3.3 above.

4.10 Requirement that sufficient water supply be available to residential subdivisions. The Project includes a subdivision as defined in Government Code Section 66473.7. Any tentative map prepared for the subdivision shall comply with Government Code City Draft: 8-28-2023

13 Section 66473.7 by imposing a condition that sufficient water supply be available to service the residential subdivisions.

5. IMPACT FEES.

5.1 City Development Impact Fees. Owner shall pay all development impact fees pursuant to Chapter 3.75 or other provisions of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code (“DIF”).

For the five (5) years following the Effective Date the DIF shall be paid at the DIF rates in effect as of the Effective Date. Thereafter, the DIF shall be paid at the rate in effect as of the date of issuance of each building permit for the Property or such other time as the DIF may be paid as required by law. All persons or entities holding title or interest in any portion of the Property, including all successors and assigns of OWNER shall be separately responsible for payment of any and all DIF for that portion of the Property developed by such person or entity and shall not be responsible for payment of any DIF related to other portions of the Property.

5.2 TUMF Fees. Pursuant to Chapter 3.70 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (“TUMF”), the TUMF shall be imposed upon Development within the Property at the rate in effect as of the date of issuance of each building permit for the Property or such other time as the fees may be paid as required by law. OWNER shall be entitled to such credits as might be available pursuant to the terms of Chapter 3.70 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code or the terms of the future allowable fees. Owner understands and acknowledges that TUMF is collected and administered by the Western Riverside Council of Governments and not by the City. All persons or entities holding title or interest in any portion of the Property, including all successors and assigns of OWNER shall be separately responsible for payment of any and all TUMF for that portion of the Property developed by such person or entity and shall not be responsible for payment of any TUMF related to other portions of the Property.

5.3 MSHCP Fees. Pursuant to Chapter 3.80 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code, Western Riverside County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Fees (“MSHCP Fee”), the MSHCP Fee shall be imposed upon Development within the Property at the rate in effect as of the date of issuance of each building permit for the Property or such other time as the fees may be paid as required by law. OWNER shall be entitled to such credits as might be available pursuant to the terms of Chapter 3.80 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. Owner understands and acknowledges that the MSHCP Fee is administered by the Riverside Conservation Agency and not by the City. All persons or entities holding title or interest in any portion of the Property, including all successors and assigns of OWNER shall be separately responsible for payment of any and all MSHCP Fee for that portion of the Property developed by such person or entity and shall not be responsible for payment of any MSHCP Fee related to other portions of the Property.

5.4 Other Regional Development Impact Fees. Other regional development impact fees, or any other development impact fees imposed by another governmental agency imposed upon Development within the Property at the rate in effect as of the date of issuance of each building permit for the Property or such other times as the fee may be required to be paid by law.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

14 5.5 Application/Processing Fees. OWNER shall pay the application and processing fees for applications for entitlements and permits at the rate, and in the amount, imposed by City pursuant to the fee schedule, resolution, or ordinance in effect at the time the application is deemed complete and accepted by City for action, which fees are designed to reimburse City’s expenses attributable to processing such applications for entitlements, permits, or both.

5.6 Community Benefit Contributions. In partial consideration of the benefits received by OWNER pursuant to the terms of this Agreement and the Project Approvals, OWNER shall pay to City the following Community Benefit Contributions.

5.6.1 Facilities Benefit Contribution. OWNER shall pay to the City an annual Facilities Benefit Contribution in the initial amount of one hundred ten dollars ($110) for each multi-family residential unit and one hundred eight three dollars ($183.00) for each single family unit in the Project, subject to annual increase as described below.

5.6.1.1 The Facilities Benefit Cont ribution shall be used for the design and construction of public facilities for the City, including, but not limited, to those public facilities described on the City’s Capital Improvement Plan, as currently adopted or hereafter amended. The parties shall meet and confer in good faith bi-annually to discuss potential projects to be funded with the Facilities Benefit Contribution and how those projects will benefit the Rubidoux community but the final decision shall be determined by the City Council in its sole discretion.

5.6.1.2 The first Facilities Bene fit Contribution payment shall be paid thirty (30) calendar days after City issues the first building permit for vertical construction for a building on a per-building basis based on the number of multi-family units in the building, or the single family home, for which a building permit for vertical construction was issued and on a pro rata basis for the portion of the year remaining. Thereafter, the Facilities Benefit Contribution shall be paid annually on July 1 based on the number of building permits issued for vertical construction during the prior year.

5.6.1.3 Commencing July 1st of City’s second fiscal year in which payment of the Facilities Benefit Contribution, and annually thereafter, the Facilities Benefit Contribution rate shall automatically increase by two percent (2%)

5.6.1.4 The term of the Facili ties Benefit Contribution described in this Section 5.6.1 shall, for any Assessor Parcel or Lot, be fifty (50) years from the date the first building permit is issued for vertical construction.

5.6.2 Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution. OWNER shall pay to the City an annual Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution in the initial amounts of thirty seven dollars ($37.00) per multi-family residential unit, sixty one dollars and sixty one cents ($61.60) per single family unit, three hundred eight dollars ($308) per acre for properties designated retail, business park, hotel in the Project Approvals, and one hundred twenty three dollars ($123) per acre for properties designated light industrial in the Project City Draft: 8-28-2023

15 Approvals. The Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution shall be subject to annual increase as described below.

5.6.2.1 Maintenance of Infrastructu re Benefit funds shall be used for operation, maintenance and repair of City infrastructure that are required by the Project Approvals, including, but not lim ited to, flood and stor m protection services, sidewalks, roads, road medians, street lighting, traf fic signals and similar City facilities as determined by the City.

Nothing herein shall limit the OWNER’S obliga tions pursuant to the Project Approvals for operation, maintenance and repair of City infrastructure.

5.6.2.2 The first Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution payment shall be paid thirty (30) calendar days after City issues the first building permit for vertical construction on a per-building based on the number of multi-family units in the building, or the single family home, for which a certificate of occupancy was issued and on a pro rata basis for the portion of the year remaining. Thereafter, the Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution shall be paid annually on July 1 based on building permits for vertical construction issued during the prior year.

5.6.2.3 Commencing July 1st of City’s second fiscal year in which payment of the Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution, and annually thereafter, the Maintenance of Infrastructure Benefit Contribution rate shall automatically increase by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers; Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario), provided however, that the increase shall not be less than two percent (2%) nor more than six percent (6%). The calculation of the percentage change in the Consumer Price index shall be made by the City using the month of April over the month of April in the prior year.

5.6.3 Annual Public Safety Benefit Contribution. OWNER shall pay to the City an annual Public Safety Benefit Contribution in the initial amount of: 1) Two hundred six dollars ($206) per multi-family residential unit; 2) three hundred forty three dollars ($343.00) per single family residential; 3) twelve and six tenths cents ($0.126) per square foot for properties designated Commercial Retail in the Project Approvals; 4) nine and four tenths cents ($.094) per square foot for properties designated Commercial Other in the Project Approvals; 5) eight and four tenths cents ($.084) per square foot for properties designated Business Park in the Project Approvals; and 6) four and four tenths cents ($.044) per square foot for properties designated Light Industrial in the Project Approvals. The Annual Public Safety Benefit Contribution shall be subject to annual increase as described below. As building permits for vertical construction are issued for each new building, the Public Safety Benefit Contribution shall be adjusted upward or downward, to the square footage stated in the building permit issued by the City for the applicable building.

5.6.3.1 The annual Public Safety Benefit Contribution shall be used to supplement police, fire, emergency medical and other public safety services for the Project, as determined from time to time by the City among such services, in addition to those services currently provided.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

16 5.6.3.2 The first Public Safety Benefit Contribution payment shall be paid thirty (30) calendar days after City issues the first building permit for vertical construction for a building on a per-building basis based on the number of multi-family units in the building, or the single family home, for which a building permit for vertical construction was issued and on a pro rata basis for the portion of the year remaining. Thereafter, the Public Safety Benefit Contribution shall be paid annually on July 1 based on building permits for vertical construction issued during the prior year.

5.6.3.3 Commencing July 1st of City’s second fiscal year after which payment of the Public Safety Benefit Contribution commenced, and annually thereafter, the Public Safety Benefit Contribution rate shall automatically increase by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers; Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario), provided however, that the increase shall not be less than two percent (2%) nor more than six percent (6%) as determined by the City. The calculation of the percentage change in the Consumer Price index shall be made using the month of April over the month of April in the prior year.

5.6.4 Affordable Housing Units. All affordable housing units constructed on the Project shall be exempted from payment of the Community Benefit Contributions listed in Sections 5.6.1, 5.6.2 and 5.6.3 above. “Affordable housing units” shall mean units: (1) affordable to persons and families of very low, low or moderate income as provided California Health and Safety Code Sections 50052.5 a nd 50053 (or th eir successor statutes), adjusted for househol d size and income le vel, less the appropriate allowance for utilities; and (2) subject to a recorded affordability agreement approved by the City imposing the affordability restrictions for periods of fifty-five (55) years or more on “for rent” units and forty- five (45) years or more on “for sale” units.

5.6.5 Transitional Living Program.

5.6.5.1 OWNER shall pay to the City two hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($250,000.00) that the City shall use for its transitional living program to support housing services and opportunities for residents. Path of Life Ministries is currently providing the services for this program, but City shall retain the discretion to use or add other consultants for the program and as to the specific uses of the contribution.

5.6.5.2 This contribution shall be paid to the City in five equal installments. The first payment of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) shall be paid to the City within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement.. The remaining annual payments of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) shall be paid to the City on July 1, or the next business day thereafter, of each of the subsequent four (4) years.

5.6.6 Arts, Culture and Community Resources Fund. OWNER shall pay to the City the one-time sum of one hundred twenty five thousand dollars ($125,000.00) which the City Council, in its sole discretion, shall use allocate to entities serving the City through arts, culture or community resources programs. This payment shall be made to the City within thirty (30) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

17 5.6.7 Community Room Lease. OWNER shall lease to the City at no charge, a dedicated space of not less than two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet within the commercial area of the Project for the City’s exclusive use as a community room. The City and OWNER shall negotiate a lease in good faith consistent with the terms of this Agreement, that provides for a term of twenty (20) years in a suitable facility, with reasonable public access, and other customary and reasonable commercial lease terms (including, but not limited to, access to restrooms, cabinets, countertop and sink), with the commencement date within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the designated building, or such other time as agreed upon in writing between the parties.

5.6.8 Commercial Rehabilitation Program Contributions

5.6.8.1 OWNER shall pay to the City a one-time sum of
five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) to establish the Commercial Rehabilitation Program. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days following issuance of the first building permit for vertical construction of a non-residential building for the Project.

5.6.8.2 City shall use this fund to support and retain local businesses who may have to compete with the larger incoming tenants of the Project. The City intends to provide grants to small businesses for building improvements such as HVAC, roof repairs, or façade improvements.

5.6.8.3 Distributions from the Commercial Rehabilitation Program for these purposes shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.

5.6.9 Rubidoux Downtown Master Plan. OWNER shall pay to the City the sum of two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000.00) to support the City’s efforts to develop the Rubidoux Downtown Master Plan. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days following issuance of the first building permit for a non-residential building for the Project.

5.6.10 SR 60 Freeway/Rubidoux Bl. Interchange--Project Approval and Environmental Documentation Study. The Parties recognize the importance of moving as quickly as possible to design and construct improvements to the SR 60 Freeway/Rubidoux Bl.

Interchange so as to provide better access to the SR 60 Freeway for the benefit of the tenants of the Project and the Rubidoux community. The first step in the process is to complete a Project Approval and Environmental Documentation Study (“PAED”) for Caltrans. The estimated cost of the PAED is $3,800,000. Of this amount the City has $2,400,000 in available funds for the PAED. City agrees to fund the additional $1,400,000 for the PAED. Within sixty (60) calendar days from the Effective Date, City shall post on Planet Bids a Request for Proposals from qualified engineering firms to Conduct the PAED. Thereafter, the City shall diligently and in good faith pursue the completion of the PAED. City shall also meet and confer with Caltrans on a regular basis so as to anticipate Caltrans issues and to be able to address those issues to the extent possible in the PAED before formally submission to Caltrans.

5.6.11 Commercial Truck Enforcement.

5.6.11.1 Effective enforcement of the City’s Truck
Ordinances is essential to the success of the Project and the OWNER and lessees of non- City Draft: 8-28-2023

18 residential properties in the Project must take responsibility to ensure trucks servicing their buildings comply with the City’s Truck Ordinances.

5.6.11.2 As used in this section, “Truck Ordinances” shall mean those provisions of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code regulating parking of and use of trucks on City streets, including but not limited to, Chapter 12.25, Parking Restrictions, and Section 12.35.020, Permissible Vehicle Weight on Streets, Roads, Highways, and Bridges; Truck Routes, as those provisions now exist or may hereafter be amended or modified.

5.6.11.3 City will fund commercial truck enforcement with incoming revenues from the Public Safety Benefit Contribution described in Section 5.6.3.

5.6.11.4 With respect to trucking companies and truck
drivers providing transportation services to their respective properties, OWNER, for itself, and all successors, assigns, and lessees of non-residential properties shall: 1) Notify all truck companies and truck drivers that they must comply with City’s Truck Ordinances through means and text approved by the Director of Community Development; 2) be jointly liable with trucking companies and truck drivers for violations of the City’s Truck Ordinances; and 3) be subject to administrative citations pursuant to Jurupa Valley Municipal Code Chapter 1.20, Administrative Penalties, and other applicable City remedies for violation of these provisions.

5.6.11.5 With respect to trucking companies and truck
drivers providing transportation services to their respective properties, OWNER, for itself, and all successors, assigns, and lessees of non-residential properties hereby consent to the City’s use of cameras and other technologies on public streets to identify truck or other vehicles originating from or traveling to non-residential properties within the Project that are in violation of the City’s Truck Ordinances.

5.6.12 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, City shall not be obligated to issue building permits for a building in the Project if OWNER has not paid the Community Benefit Contributions in accordance with this Section 5.6 to the extent any payments are due prior to the issuance of the building permit being requested.

5.7 Community Facilities District--Community Benefit Contributions.

5.7.1 OWNER acknowledges and agrees that the obligations described in Section 5.6 are required by the terms of the Project Approvals and shall be paid to the City as provided therein whether or not a Community Facilities District or other financing mechanism is established to facilitate payments.

5.7.2 OWNER may request to fulfill the annual Community Benefit Contributions described in Section 5.6 through a City Services Community Facilities District pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (Gov. Code, §§ 53311-53368.3) (“CFD”). OWNER may file a Petition and Waiver with City to initiate formation of, or annexation to a City CFD if one already exists, and pay all costs associated with the formation of, or annexation to, a CFD, with payments made through a deposit with the City in an amount determined by the City to be required to pay such formation costs. OWNER shall file such a petition within twelve (12) months of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

19 5.7.3 The special taxes from the CFD shall increase annually in accordance with the provisions of Sections 5.6.1.3, 5.6.2.2 and 5.6.3.3 above.

5.7.4 CITY agrees that the maximum effective tax rate for Assessor's Parcels for properties designed as residential in the Project Approvals within each CFD, including without limitation, overlapping debt, may not exceed one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the reasonably expected value of the parcel with planned vertical improvements determined at the time of approval of the CFD and the Rates and Methods of Apportionment of the Special Taxes for the CFD.

5.7.5 The base year for the CFD shall be Fiscal Year 2024-2025 and shall include all properties for which a building permit was issue by April 1 of the prior fiscal year.

5.7.6 City agrees to use its reasonable efforts to diligently develop and implement the CFD(s) subject to public hearing and election requirements of applicable State law and, if tax-exempt bonds are to be issued, Federal tax law, the Existing Regulations and the customary and reasonable industry standards for the development of such financings for CFD(s).

OWNER shall work cooperatively and diligently with the City to complete the CFD process as expeditiously as possible. OWNER and City acknowledge and agree that the establishment of a CFD for facilities and services and the issuance of bonds supported by the special taxes are dependent on many factors that are not known at this time. The viability of the financing, the amount of special taxes for debt service, and available bond proceeds will be dependent on several factors existing at the time the bonds are sold, including, but not limited to, the financial markets, interest on tax exempt financings, housing and commercial/industrial markets, value of homes and commercial/industrial properties in the area, absorption rates for home sales and commercial/industrial sales and leasing in the area, bond underwriting criteria and ratings by bond-rating agencies. The bond terms of any CFD and the related bond issue shall be determined by the City in its discretion.

5.7.7 City agrees that upon receipt of OWNER'S written request and application and the deposit with City of sufficient funds to pay the City's costs to undertake the proceedings to establish any particular CFD, City shall conduct proceedings to establish the respective CFD(s) and OWNER shall cooperate in the conduct of such proceedings. OWNER acknowledges that this Agreement cannot obligate the City Council to establish the CFD(s) at the conclusion of those proceedings.

5.7.8 The approval of the City Council or a city-related entity of the terms of the CFD(s) shall supersede conflicting provisions of this Section 5.

5.8 Administrative Fee. OWNER shall pay to City a one-time administrative fee in the amount of fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) thirty (30) calendar days after the Effective Date and ten thousand dollars ($10,000) annually on each anniversary of the first payment, until each building contemplated by the Project Approvals obtained a Certificate of Occupancy, which shall compensate City for its costs incurred in drafting, processing and monitoring this Agreement, including, without limitation, staff time and attorney fees and costs.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

20 6. OBLIGATIONS OF THE PARTIES.

6.1 OWNER’s Obligation to Construct Public Improvements. OWNER shall, at its sole cost and expense, design, construct, install, and finally complete Public Improvements.

The design, construction, installation, and final completion of the Public Improvements shall be in conformance with City standards in effect as of the date the plans and specifications are submitted to the City Engineer for review. City Engineer shall approve, in writing, subject to the City Engineer’s determination of compliance with the City standards and Section 6.2, all Plans and Specifications for construction, installation, and final completion of the Public Improvements. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the Public Improvements shall be completed at such time as set forth in the Project Approvals. The Parties shall enter into City’s standard subdivision improvement agreement, or an applicable modification thereof approved by the City in its discretion, for the completion of the Public Improvements. OWNER shall be eligible to receive credit from the City for OWNER’s cost to construct and complete any Public Improvements that are oversized in accordance with Existing Regulations and as provided in the applicable subdivision improvement agreement.

6.2 Local, State And Federal Laws. OWNER and its contractors shall carry out the design and construction of all private improvements on the Property and all Public Improvements in conformity with all applicable laws (to the extent applicable), including, without limitation, all applicable federal, state and local occupation, employment, prevailing wage, safety and health laws, rules, regulations, and standards. OWNER shall indemnify, defend, and hold the Indemnified Parties (as defined in Section 8.1) harmless from and against any cost, expense, claim, charge, or liability relating to or arising directly or indirectly from any breach by or failure of OWNER or its contractor(s) or agents to comply with such laws, rules, regulations, and standards. OWNER’s indemnity obligations set forth in this Section 6.2 shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement.

6.3 Maintenance of Improvements. Responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of improvements provided by OWNER pursuant to this Agreement shall be apportioned between the Parties in accordance with the terms of this Section 6.3.

6.3.1 City Maintenance of Dedicated Public Improvements. City shall maintain all dedicated and accepted streets, walls, and City-owned storm drain facilities constructed by OWNER as part of the Public Improvements.

6.3.2 OWNER Maintenance of Landscaping and Storm Drain Facilities.

OWNER shall maintain all landscaping on the Property and on adjacent City rights-of-way, and all City owned and accepted storm drainage facilities on the Property, with the exception of the storm drain facilities owned and maintained by the Riverside County Flood Control District.

6.4 Easements. City shall grant such easements over City property as are reasonably needed for the Development of the Property provided such easements do not impede or interfere with public services provided on such properties. OWNER shall grant to City such easements over its property as are reasonably needed for the construction and maintenance of the Public Improvements. Such grants shall be at no additional cost to either Party.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

21 6.5 Community Facilities District--Public Improvements.

6.5.1 Request. OWNER may request in writing that the CITY establish one or more community facilities districts (each a "CFD") pursuant to the Mello Roos Community Facilities District Act to finance the design, construction, installation, and final completion of the Public Improvements as required by the Project Approvals and this Agreement and shall vote in favor of each such community facilities districts.

6.5.1.1 The Public Improvement Special Tax will be
authorized to be levied on all non-governmentally owned assessor’s parcels within each CFD to fund, in order of priority: (a) administrative expenses of the CFD; (b) scheduled debt service on bonds for the CFD that are issued to fund eligible public facilities (including, as may be permitted by the City and other agencies, public facilities in lieu of development impact fees); (c) replenishment of a reserve fund for the bonds; and (d) on a pay as you go basis, eligible public facilities (including, as may be permitted by the City and other agencies, public facilities in lieu of development impact fees).

6.5.1.2 No other CFD or public financing mechanism from another public agency shall be used to finance the Public Improvements.

6.5.2 Maximum Effective Tax Rate. CITY agrees that the maximum effective tax rate for Assessor's Parcels for properties designed as residential in the Project Approvals within each CFD, including without limitation, overlapping debt, may not exceed one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the reasonably expected value of the parcel with planned vertical improvements determined at the time of approval of the CFD and the Rates and Methods of Apportionment of the Special Taxes for the CFD.

6.5.3 Processing CFD; Viability of CFD. City agrees to use its reasonable efforts to diligently develop and implement the CFD(s) subject to public hearing and election requirements of applicable State law and, if tax-exempt bonds are to be issued, Federal tax law, the Existing Regulations and the customary and reasonable industry standards for the development of such financings for CFD(s) as determined by the City. OWNER shall work cooperatively and diligently with the City to complete the CFD process as expeditiously as possible. OWNER and City acknowledge and agree that the establishment of a CFD for facilities and services and the issuance of bonds supported by the special taxes are dependent on many factors that are not known at this time. The viability of the financing, the amount of special taxes for debt service, and available bond proceeds will be dependent on several factors existing at the time the bonds are sold, including, but not limited to, the financial markets, interest on tax exempt financings, housing and commercial/industrial markets, value of homes and commercial/industrial properties in the area, absorption rates for home sales and commercial/industrial sales and leasing in the area, bond underwriting criteria and ratings by bond-rating agencies.

6.5.4 Commencement of Proceedings. City agrees that upon receipt of OWNER'S written request and application and the deposit with City of sufficient funds as determined by the City to pay the City's costs to undertake the proceedings to establish any particular CFD, City shall conduct proceedings to establish the respective CFD(s) and OWNER City Draft: 8-28-2023

22 shall cooperate in the conduct of such proceedings. OWNER acknowledges that this Agreement cannot obligate the City Council to establish the CFD(s) at the conclusion of those proceedings.

The bond terms of any CFD and the related bond issue shall be determined by the City in its discretion.

7. CITY’S OBLIGATIONS.

7.1 Property Approvals Independent. All approvals required for the Project which may be or have been granted, and all land use entitlements or approvals generally which have been issued or will be issued by City with respect to the Project, constitute independent actions and approvals by City. If any provision of this Agreement or the application of any provision of this Agreement to a particular situation is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if this Agreement terminates for any reason, then such invalidity, unenforceability or termination of this Agreement or any part hereof shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of any such Project Approvals or other land use approvals and entitlements for the Project. In such cases, such approvals and entitlements will remain in effect pursuant to their own terms, provisions, and conditions of approval. It is understood by the Parties to this Agreement that pursuant to existing law, if this Agreement terminates or is held invalid or unenforceable as described above, such approvals and entitlements shall not remain valid for the Term, but shall remain valid for the term(s) of such approvals and entitlements.

7.2 City Cooperation. City staff shall work cooperatively with OWNER to assist in coordinating the expeditious processing and consideration of all necessary permits, entitlements and approvals. To the extent City or City’s designee is unable to process and consider permits, entitlements and approvals in an expeditious manner, OWNER shall pay to the City the costs of hiring temporary Staff or retaining an outside contractor to assist CITY in the expeditious processing and consideration of all necessary permits, entitlements and approvals.

7.3 Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreements

7.3.1 The City Council finds and determines that a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement to provide economic assistance for qualifying hotels as described in this Section will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the people in the City and will be of substantial economic benefit to the City based on the following:

7.3.1.1 The development of qualifying hotels will generate new short term and long term quality employment opportunities within the City. The qualifying hotel is expected to employ approximately 600 persons in the construction of each hotel.

Developer expects the hotel portion of the Project will generate direct long term employment for approximately 49 people within the within five (5) years from the issuance of a building permit for the qualifying hotel.

7.3.1.2 The development of qualifying hotels will expand and enhance the City’s tax base through increased property values and consumer purchasing.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

23 The development of qualifying hotels will generate new property tax, transient occupancy tax, and sales tax revenues of approximately $1,000,000.00 annually that will assist the City in funding public services for the residents and businesses within the City.

7.3.1.3 The development of qualifying hotels preserves and enhances the job/housing balance described in the City’s General Plan and various regional plans

7.3.1.4 The development of qualifying hotels will develop new and expanded commercial and business opportunities within the City. The hotels will serve as a catalyst for other commercial and business projects within the City as the hotels will provide a necessary business infrastructure to support commercial and business operations. Developers are generally reluctant to invest in a community until they see that another project has been successful and so a successful commercial project will develop confidence among retail and business developers that the City is a viable community for successful development.

7.3.1.5 There is a substantial unmet demand for hotel
rooms in the area surrounding the Project and the Project itself is a prime location for needed hotels.

7.3.1.6 The development of qualifying hotels will promote the stability and diversification of the City’s economy.

7.3.2 City shall provide up to a maximum of five hundred ninety nine thousand nine hundred ninety nine dollars ($599,999.00) in Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds for Qualified Hotels in the Project pursuant to this Section 7.3.

7.3.3 As used in this Section 7.3:

7.3.3.1 “Transient Occupancy Tax” shall mean the transient occupancy tax imposed by Chapter 3.35 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code as it currently exists or may hereafter be modified. The local transient occupancy tax shall not include: (i) Penalty assessments: (ii) any transient occupancy tax levied by, collected for or allocated to the State of California, the County of Riverside, or a district or any entity (including an allocation to a statewide or countywide pool) other than City; (iii) any administrative fee charged by the City for collection of the transient occupancy tax; (iv) any transient occupancy tax (or other funds measured by transient occupancy tax) required by the State of California to be paid over to another public entity (including the State) or set aside and/or pledged to a specific use other than for deposit into or payment from the City’s general fund; or (v) any transient occupancy tax paid in error or which is subject to correction, adjustment or offset pursuant to an amended return or otherwise where the effect of the error, adjustment or amendment is to change the amount of sales tax attributable to taxable sales and allocated to the City.

7.3.3.2 “Qualified Hotels” shall mean hotels meeting the following qualifications that shall be eligible to receive Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds pursuant to this Section 7.3:

7.3.3.2.1 Minimum of one hundred sixty (160) rooms;
City Draft: 8-28-2023

24 7.3.3.2.2 Minimum average daily room rate room
rental of one hundred ninety dollars ($190) per night (in 2023 dollars) that shall automatically increase annually on July 1 by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers; Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario); and

7.3.3.3 STR class of upper upscale, upscale, or
upper midscale hotel (including, but not limited to, hotels such as Holiday Inn Express, Embassy Suites, Springhill Suites, Country Inn & Suites, Hyatt Place, Hampton Inn, Ayres Hotel, Fairfield Inn & Suites, and similar hotel brands).

7.3.4 A Qualified Hotel may apply to the City for a “Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement.”

7.3.4.1 The Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement
shall provide that a Qualified Hotel shall receive a payment from the City in an amount equal to the Transient Occupancy Taxes actually received by the City within the previous calendar quarter from the Qualified Hotel. The payment shall be made within sixty (60) days of the beginning of each calendar quarter on July 1, October 1, January 1 and April 1 of each year until the maximum Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds are exhausted.

7.3.4.2 The City Manager is hereby authorized to enter into such Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreements with Qualified Hotels on behalf of the City in substantially the form of the Template Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “D”. In the event there is more than one Qualified Hotel that has applied for a Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreements, the City Manager may allocate available Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds among the Qualified Hotels in his or her sole discretion.

7.3.4.3 The Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement
shall be in substantially the form of the Template Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit “D”.

7.3.5 A Qualifying Hotel shall not receive Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing payment unless the City certifies that the following conditions precedent have been fulfilled:

7.3.5.1 The hotel is in compliance with all applicable
federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations;

7.3.5.2 There are no pending administrative code
compliance actions or public nuisance litigation case(s) pending against the business;

7.3.5.3 There is no litigation (including administrative actions) pending between the City and the business in which the City and the business are adverse; and

7.3.5.4 All City tax payments, assessments, or obligations to the City and outstanding penalties and interest, including but not limited to, Community City Draft: 8-28-2023

25 Facilities District special taxes, transient occupancy taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, and contributions pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals, and have been fully paid in accordance with the terms under which they were established.

7.3.6 Findings Concerning Inapplicability of Prevailing Wages.

7.3.6.1 Labor Code Section 1720(c)(3) provides that:
“(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b ), all of the following apply:
(3) (A) If the state or a politi cal subdivision reimburses a private developer for costs that would normally be borne by the public, or provides directly or indirectly a public subsidy to a private development project that is de minimis in the context of the project, an otherwise private development project shall not thereby become subject to this chapter.
(B) (i) For purposes of subpara graph (A), a public subsidy is de minimis if it is both less than six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) and less than 2 percent of the total project cost. (ii) Notwithstanding clause (i), for purposes of
subparagraph (A), a public subsidy for a project that
consists entirely of single-family dwellings is de minimis if it is less than 2 percent of the total project cost.
(iii) This subparagraph shall not apply to a project that was advertised for bid, or a contract that was awarded, before July 1, 2021.”

7.3.6.2 The City finds and determines that the economic development subsidies for Qualified Hotels in this Section 7.3 do not exceed six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000.00) and less than two percent (2%) of the total Project cost.

7.3.7 Therefore, based on the above findings in Subparagraph 7.3.6.2, the City and OWNER have determined that prevailing wages are not required to be paid on the private improvements for the Project in accordance with to Labor Code Section 1720(c)(3).

7.3.8 OWNER hereby represents to City that it understands and acknowledges the economic development subsidies pursuant to Section 7.3 of this Agreement and the potential impact on the application of prevailing wages to the Project. Accordingly, OWNER on behalf of itself and its successors in interest, hereby expressly and knowingly waives their respective rights under Labor Code Sections 1726 and 1781 to seek recovery against the City of any prevailing wage liabilities they may incur based upon this Agreement. OWNER hereby acknowledges that it has either consulted with legal counsel, or had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel, regarding the prevailing wage issues described herein and the provisions of the California Civil Code section 1542, which provides as follows: “A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to City Draft: 8-28-2023

26 exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.” OWNER hereby acknowledges that it may have claims which are presently unknown and unsuspected, and such claims in the future. Nevertheless, OWNER hereby acknowledges that this Agreement has been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that situation, and hereby expressly waive any and all rights which they may have under California Civil Code Section 1542, or under any statute or common law or equitable principal of similar effect.

OWNER’s initials: ___________________.

8. INDEMNIFICATION.

8.1 Litigation to Set Aside, Void, or Annul the Agreement. OWNER shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its affiliated agencies and districts, their agents, officers, consultants, contractors, attorneys, and employees (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons against the Indemnified Parties to set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12.1.1 of this Agreement, OWNER’s obligation pursuant to this Section 8.1 is not a benefit or burden running with the land and shall not be assigned to any person without the prior express written consent of City, unless a transfer or assignment is made pursuant to Section 12 of this Agreement.

OWNER’s duties under this Section 8.1 are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties written request to OWNER to indemnify the Indemnified Parties. OWNER shall deposit the expected costs of defense, as reasonably determined by the City Attorney, with City within ten (10) business days of notice from City of the claim and shall add to the deposit within ten (10) business days from the request of City. Without in any way limiting the provisions of this Section 8.1, the Parties agree that this Section 8.1 shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Effective Date.

8.2 Other Litigation. Notwithstanding S ection 8.1, and as a separate and distinct obligation of OWNER, to the fullest extent permitted by law, OWNER shall defend (with counsel of City’s choosing), indemnify and hold the Indemnified Parties free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of OWNER, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, OWNERs or agents in connection with the performance of the OWNER’s obligations under this Agreement, the Project or this Agreement, or the CITY’s approval of this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees and attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses. OWNER's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by OWNER, the Indemnified Parties.

8.2.1 OWNER’s duties under this Section 8.2 are solely subject to and conditioned upon the Indemnified Parties writt en request to OWNER to indemnify the Indemnified Parties. OWNER shall deposit the expected costs of defense, as reasonably determined by the City Attorney, wi th City within ten (10) busine ss days of notice from City of City Draft: 8-28-2023

27 the claim and shall add to the deposit within ten (10) business days from the request of City.

Without in any way limiting the prov isions of this Section 8.2, the Parties agree that this Section

8.2 shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of California Civil Code Section 2778 in effect as of the Effective Date.

9. PERIODIC REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENT.

9.1 Periodic Review. The Parties shall review this Agreement at least once every 12-month period from the Effective Date of this Agreement. City shall notify OWNER in writing of the date for review at least thirty (30) calendar days prior thereto. Such periodic review shall be conducted in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1.

9.2 Good Faith Compliance. During each periodic review, OWNER shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. OWNER shall furnish such reasonable evidence of good faith compliance as City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. If requested by OWNER, City shall provide to OWNER, a certificate that OWNER or a duly authorized Estoppel Certificate pursuant to the provisions of Section 13 of this Agreement.

9.3 Failure to Conduct Annual Review. City’s failure to conduct the annual review shall not be an OWNER default. Further, OWNER shall not be entitled to any remedy for City’s failure to conduct the annual review.

9.4 Initiation of Review by City Council. In addition to the annual review, the City Council may at any time initiate a review of this Agreement by giving written notice to OWNER. Within thirty (30) calendar days following receipt of such notice, OWNER shall submit evidence to the City Council of OWNER’s good faith compliance with this Agreement and such review and determination shall proceed in the same manner as provided for the annual review. The City Council shall initiate its review pursuant to this Section 9.4 only if it has probable cause to believe City’s general health, safety, or welfare is at risk as a result of specific acts or failures to act by OWNER.

9.5 Administration of Agreement. Any final decision by City staff concerning the interpretation and administration of this Agreement and Development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement may be appealed by OWNER to the City Council, provided that any such appeal shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) business days after OWNER receives written notice that the staff decision is final. The City Council shall render its decision to affirm, reverse, or modify the staff decision within thirty (30) calendar days after the appeal was filed. The decision of the City Council as to the administration of this Agreement shall be final and is not appealable. The foregoing notwithstanding, breaches of this Agreement are subject to judicial relief as provided in this Agreement.

9.6 Availability of Documents. If requested by OWNER, City shall provide to OWNER copies of any documents, reports, or other items reviewed, accumulated, or prepared by or for City in connection with any periodic compliance review by City.

10. DEFAULT; REMEDIES; DISPUTE RESOLUTION.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

28 10.1 Notice of Default. In the event of failure by a Party substantially to perform any material term or provision of this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party shall have those rights and remedies provided in this Agreement, provided that such non-defaulting Party has first provided to the defaulting Party a written notice of default in the manner required by this Section 10 identifying with specificity the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which said default may satisfactorily be cured.

10.2 Cure of Default. Upon the receipt of the notice of default, the alleged defaulting Party shall promptly commence to cure, correct, or remedy the identified default at the earliest reasonable time after receipt of the notice of default and shall complete the cure, correction, or remedy of such default not later than ten (10) business days after receipt of notice thereof if the breach of this Agreement involves the payment of money, or not later than thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of notice thereof if the breach of this Agreement does not involve the payment of money; provided, however, that if such breach may not reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) calendar day period, then a default shall exist only if the cure of such breach is not commenced within such thirty (30) calendar day period or thereafter is not diligently prosecuted to completion.

10.3 OWNER’s Remedies. Due to the size, nature, and scope of the Property and the Development, it will not be practical or possible to restore the Property to its natural condition once implementation of this Agreement has begun. After such implementation, OWNER may be foreclosed from other choices it may have had to utilize the Property and provide for other benefits. OWNER has invested significant time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Development of the Property in agreeing to the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in implementing the Development and Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement, and it is not possible to determine the sum of money that would adequately compensate OWNER for such efforts. For the above reasons, the Parties agree that damages would not be an adequate remedy if City fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement and that OWNER shall have the right to seek and obtain specific performance as a remedy for any breach of this Agreement. Moreover, City would not have consented to this Agreement if it were to be subject to damages for breach of this Agreement. Therefore, OWNER specifically agrees that it has no authority under this Agreement or otherwise to seek monetary damages against City for any breach of this Agreement by City, and shall not to seek monetary damages against City for breach of this Agreement.

10.4 City Remedies. In the event of an uncured default by OWNER of the terms of this Agreement, City, at its option, may institute legal action in law or in equity to cure, correct, or remedy such default, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, or enforce the terms of this Agreement by specific performance as its sole and exclusive remedy. Furthermore, City, in addition to or as an alternative to exercising the remedies set forth in this Section 10, in the event of a material default by OWNER, may give notice of its intent to terminate or modify this Agreement pursuant to this Agreement and/or the Development Agreement Legislation, in which event the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council in the manner set forth in this Agreement or the Development Agreement Legislation.

10.5 Judicial Review.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

29 10.5.1 Subsequent Land Use Entitlements. Based on the foregoing, in the event OWNER judicially (i ncluding by way of a reference proceeding) challenges the application of a Subsequent Land Use Regulation as being in violat ion of this Agreement and as not being a land use regulation adopted pursuant to the author ity and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Section 4.2 of this Agreement, OWNER shall bear the burden of proof in establishing that such ru le, regulation, or policy is inconsiste nt with the Applicable Regulations, the Project Approvals, or both, and City shall thereafter bear the burden of proof in establishing that such regulation was adopted pursuant to and in accordance with the authority and rights reserved and excepted as provided in Section 4.2 of this Agreement and wa s not applied by City in violation of this Agreement.

10.5.2 Collection of Fees or Community Benefit Contributions. CITY may bring an action against OWNER for any deve lopment fees due to the CITY described in Section 5 or Community Benefit Contributions due to the CITY as described in Section 5.6.

11. MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS TO CURE.

11.1 No Liens on Property as of Effective Date. OWNER warrants and represents to the CITY that as of the Effective Date of this Agreement there is no mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, lien or any other form of pledge of security on the Property or any portion of the Property.

11.2 Future Encumbrances on the Property. This Agreement shall not prevent or limit OWNER from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvements thereon with any mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, or any other form of conveyance (“Mortgage”) in which the Property, or a portion thereof or interest therein, is pledged as security, and contracted for in good faith and fair value in order to secure financing with respect to the construction, development, use, or operation of the Property.

11.3 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, and any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in or with respect to the Property or any portion thereof by a holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or any successor or assignee to said holder (“Mortgagee”), whether pursuant to foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, lease termination, or otherwise, shall be subject to all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

11.4 Mortgagee Not Obligated. No Mortgagee will have any obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform the obligations of OWNER or other affirmative covenants of OWNER hereunder, or to guarantee such performance. In addition, the Mortgagee shall have no right to develop or operate the Property without fully complying with the terms of this Agreement, and to the extent that any covenant to be performed by OWNER is a condition to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to City’s performance under this Agreement.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

30 11.5 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure. City shall, upon written request to City, deliver to each Mortgagee a copy of any notice of default given to OWNER under the terms of this Agreement, at the same time such notice of default is provided to OWNER. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure, correct, or remedy the default, within sixty (60) calendar days after the receipt of such notice from City for monetary defaults, or within sixty (60) calendar days after OWNER’s cure period has expired for non-monetary defaults, or, for such defaults that cannot reasonably be cured, corrected, or remedied within such period, the Mortgagee may cure, correct, or remedy the default if the Mortgagee commences to cure, correct, or remedy such default within such sixty (60) calendar day period, and continuously and diligently prosecutes such cure to completion. If the default is of a nature that can only be remedied or cured by such Mortgagee upon obtaining possession of the Property, such Mortgagee shall have the right to seek to obtain possession with diligence and continuity through foreclosure, a receiver or otherwise, and shall be permitted thereafter to remedy or cure the default within such time as is reasonably necessary to cure or remedy said default but in no event more than ninety (90) calendar days after obtaining possession. If any such default cannot, with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) calendar day period, then such period shall be extended to permit the Mortgagee to effect a cure or remedy so long as Mortgagee commences said cure or remedy during such ninety (90) calendar day period, and thereafter diligently pursues such cure to completion.

12. TRANSFERS OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY OR AGREEMENT.

12.1 Transfers and Assignments.

12.1.1 Restrictions on Transfers. OWNER may sell, assign, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of its interests in the Property together with all its right, title, and interest in this Agreement, or the portion thereof that is subject to the transferred portion of the Property, to any Transferee provided that: (1) the Transferee has specifically assumed in writing the obligations, or a portion of the obligations of OWNER, to design, construct, install and finally complete the Public Improvements for the Property; (2) the Transferee has the experience and financial capacity to complete the Public Improvements; and (3) if applicable, the Transferee has obtained replacement bonds, accepted by City for the Public Improvements (in which event, City shall release OWNER’s corresponding Public Improvement bonds).

12.1.2 Notice of Transfer; Agreement. In the event of any sale, assignment, or other transfer pursuant to this Section 12.1.1, (i) OWNER shall notify City at least twenty (20) business days prior to the transfer of the name of the Transferee, together with the corresponding entitlements being transferred to such Transferee and (ii) the agreement between OWNER and Transferee pertaining to such transfer shall provide that the Transferee shall be liable for the performance of those obligations of OWNER under this Agreement that relate to the Transferred Property, if any, or shall confirm that OWNER and all Transferees shall remain jointly liable for the design and construction of Public Improvements pursuant to this Agreement.

12.1.3 Exempt Transfers. The following transfers shall not be subject to the foregoing restrictions of Section 12.1: (1) transfers to easements or real property interests that are necessary to provide utility service to the Property or to extend infrastructure to the City Draft: 8-28-2023

31 Property; and (2) transfers in reorganization of OWNER, provided that management control of OWNER does not change as a result of such reorganization.

12.1.4 Rights and Duties of Successors and Assigns. Any, each, and all successors and assigns of OWNER shall have all of the same rights, benefits, duties, and obligations of OWNER under this Agreement. All entities holding title to a portion of the Property shall be jointly liable for the design and construction of the Public Improvements for that portion of the Property as set forth in this Agreement, except as provided in this Agreement or as may be modified in an operating memorandum pursuant to Section 3.4.4.

13. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES.

13.1 Written Request. Either party may at any time deliver written notice to the other party requesting an estoppel certificate (the “Estoppel Certificate”) stating: (1) this Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the Parties; (2) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing or, if so amended, identifying the amendments; and (3) no default in the performance of the requesting party’s obligations under this Agreement exists or, if a default does exist, the nature and amount of any default.

13.2 Ten (10) Business Days to Respond. A Party receiving a request for an Estoppel Certificate shall provide a signed certificate to the requesting Party within ten (10) business days after the City Attorney has approved the form of the Estoppel Certificate.

13.3 Authorized Signatories. The City Manager or any person designated by the City Manager may sign the Estoppel Certificates on City’s behalf. Any officer of OWNER may sign on OWNER’s behalf.

13.4 Reliance. An Estoppel Certificate may be relied on by assignees and mortgagees.

13.5 Failure to Provide Estoppel Certificate. Failure by a Party to provide an Estoppel Certificate within ten (10) business days after receipt of the request therefor shall be deemed confirmation that this Agreement is in full force and effect and has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing.

14. MISCELLANEOUS.

14.1 Interest of OWNER. OWNER represents and warrants that it has a legal or equitable interest in the Property and, as such, OWNER is qualified to enter into and be a party to this Agreement under the Development Agreement Legislation.

14.2 Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be effectuated by: (i) personal delivery; (ii) first class mail, registered or certified, postage fully prepaid; or (iii) reputable same-day or overnight delivery service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, addressed to the following Parties, or to such other address as any party may from time to time designate in writing in the manner as provided in this Agreement:

City Draft: 8-28-2023

32 To City: City of Jurupa Valley
8930 Limonite Avenue
Jurupa Valley, California 92509
Attn: City Manager

With a copy to: Richards, Watson & Gershon
350 South Grand Avenue, 37
h Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071
Attn: Peter M. Thorson, Esq.

To OWNER: EM Ranch Owner, LLC
484 S. San Vicente
Los Angeles, California 90048
Attn: Matthew Dugally

With a copy to: Fennemore Law
550 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 350
San Bernardino, California 92408
Attn: Brent McManigal

Any written notice, demand, or communication shall be deemed received immediately if personally delivered or delivered by delivery service, and shall be deemed received on the third day from the date it is postmarked if delivered by registered or certified mail.

14.3 Force Majeure. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either Party under this Agreement shall not be deemed to be in default where delays or failures to perform are due to the elements, fire, earthquakes, or other acts of God, supply chain disruptions and delays related to the availability of construction materials and manpower, global pandemics or governmental orders imposed in response to public health crisis, strikes, labor disputes, lockouts, acts of the public enemy, riots, insurrections, pending litigation (including litigation initiated by third-parties),breach of contract by either party, or governmental restrictions imposed or mandated by other governmental entities. The Parties may also extend times of performance under this Agreement in writing. In the event OWNER desires to invoke these force majeure provisions, OWNER shall notify City of a force majeure event within thirty (30) calendar days of the event and include a detailed description of the force majeure event and how it affects OWNER’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement.

14.4 Binding Effect; Covenants Run with Land. This Agreement, and all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties, any subsequent OWNER of all or any portion of the Property or the Development, and their respective assigns, heirs or successors in interest, whether or not any reference to this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the City Draft: 8-28-2023

33 Property. The provisions of this Agreement shall constitute mutual covenants that shall run with the land comprising the Property for the benefit thereof, and the burdens and benefits hereof shall bind and inure to the benefit of each of the Parties and all successors in interest to the Parties for the term of this Agreement.

14.5 Relationship of Parties. The Parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing this Agreement, each of the Parties is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any respect. The Parties renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained in this Agreement or in any document executed in connection with the Development of the Property shall be construed as making the Parties joint ventures or partners.

14.6 Agreement Not to Benefit Third Parties. This Agreement is made for the sole benefit of the Parties, and no other person shall be deemed to have any privity of contract under this Agreement nor any right to rely on this Agreement to any extent for any purpose whatsoever, nor have any right of action of any kind on this Agreement nor be deemed to be a third party beneficiary under this Agreement.

14.7 Nonliability of City Officers and Employees. No City official, officer, employee, agent, or representative, acting in his or her official capacity, shall be personally liable to OWNER, or any successor or assign, for any loss, costs, damage, claim, liability, or judgment, arising out of or connection with this Agreement, or for any act or omission on City’s part.

14.8 Covenant Against Discrimination. The Parties covenant and agree, for themselves and their respective successors and assigns, that there shall be no discrimination against, or segregation of, any person or group or persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or ancestry, or any other impermissible classification as defined by California or Federal law, in the performance of this Agreement. OWNER shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. Section 12101 et seq.).

14.9 No Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought and referring expressly to this Section 14.9. No delay or omission by either Party in exercising any right or power accruing upon non-compliance or failure to perform by the other Party under any of the provisions of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof, except as expressly provided in this Agreement. No waiver by either Party of any of the covenants or conditions to be performed by the other Party shall be construed or deemed a waiver of any succeeding breach or nonperformance of the same or other covenants and conditions of this Agreement.

14.10 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, to the extent that the invalidity or unenforceability does not impair the application of this Agreement as intended by the Parties.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

34 14.11 Construction. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either Party by reason of the authorship of this Agreement or any other rule of construction that might otherwise apply. As used in this Agreement, and as the context may require, the singular includes the plural and vice versa, the masculine gender includes the feminine and vice versa, “shall” is mandatory, and “may” is permissive.

14.12 Attorneys’ Fees. If legal action is brought by either Party against the other for breach of this Agreement, including actions derivative from the performance of this Agreement, or to compel performance under this Agreement, the prevailing Party shall be entitled to an award of its costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. Attorneys’ fees under this Section 14.12 shall include attorneys’ fees on any appeal and, in addition, a Party entitled to attorneys’ fees shall be entitled to all other reasonable costs and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable expert witness fees, incurred in connection with such action. In addition to the foregoing award of attorneys’ fees to the prevailing Party, the prevailing Party in any lawsuit shall be entitled to its attorneys’ fees incurred in any post-judgment proceedings to collect or enforce the judgment. This provision is separate and several and shall survive the merger of this Agreement into any judgment on this Agreement.

14.13 Recordation. This Agreement shall be recorded by City with the County Recorder of Riverside County. Amendments approved by the Parties, and any cancellation or termination of this Agreement, shall be similarly recorded.

14.14 Captions and References. The captions of the sections of this Agreement are solely for convenience of reference, and shall be disregarded in the construction and interpretation of this Agreement. Reference in this Agreement to a section or exhibit are the sections and exhibits of this Agreement.

14.15 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement and for each and every term and condition of this Agreement as to which time is an element.

14.16 Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including all exhibits attached hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and this Agreement supersedes all previous negotiations, discussions, and agreements between the Parties, and no parole evidence of any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms of this Agreement.

14.17 Exhibits. Exhibits A – D, identified as follows, are attached to this Agreement and are incorporated into this Agreement as though set forth in full:

A Legal Description of Property
B Site Map
C Template Agreement for Acquisiti on of Property Government Code Section 66462.5
City Draft: 8-28-2023

35 D. Template Transient Occ upancy Tax Sharing Agreement

14.18 Counterpart Signature Pages. The Parties may execute this Agreement in counterparts, and each of such counterparts for all purposes shall be deemed to be an original, and all of such shall constitute one and the same Agreement.

14.19 OWNER’S Representations. OWNER warrants and represents that: (i) it is duly organized and existing; (ii) it is duly authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement; (iii) by so executing this Agreement, OWNER is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement; (iv) OWNER’s entering into and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement do not violate any provision of any other agreement to which OWNER is bound; and (v) there is no existing or threatened litigation or legal proceeding of which OWNER is aware that could prevent OWNER from entering into or performing its obligations set forth in this Agreement.

14.20 No Brokers. Each Party represents to the other Party that it has not engaged the services of any finder or broker and that it is not liable for any real estate commissions, broker’s fees, or finder’s fees that may accrue by means of this Agreement, and shall hold harmless the other party from such commissions or fees as are alleged to be due from the party making such representations.

14.21 Subsequent Amendment to Authorizing Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Legislation in effect as of the Effective Date. Accordingly, subject to Section 4.2, to the extent that subsequent amendments to the Government Code would affect the provisions of this Agreement, such amendments shall not be applicable to this Agreement unless necessary for this Agreement to be enforceable or required by law or unless this Agreement is modified pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Agreement and Government Code Section 65868 as in effect on the Effective Date.

14.22 Interpretation and Governing Law. The language in all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole and in accordance with its fair meaning.

This Agreement and any dispute arising under this Agreement shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties understand and agree that this Agreement is not intended to constitute, nor shall be construed to constitute, an impermissible attempt to contract away the legislative and governmental functions of City, and in particular, City’s police powers. In this regard, this Agreement shall not be deemed to constitute the surrender or abnegation of City’s governmental powers over the Property.

14.23 No Joint and Several Liability. At any time that there is more than one OWNER, no breach of this Agreement by an OWNER shall constitute a breach by any other OWNER. Any remedy, obligation, or liability, including, without limitation, the obligations to defend and indemnify City, arising by reason of such breach shall be applicable solely to OWNER that committed the breach. However, City shall send a copy of any notice of violation to all OWNERS, including those not in breach. In addition, a default by any Transferee shall only affect that portion of the Property owned by such Transferee and shall not cancel or diminish in any way OWNER’s rights under this Agreement with respect to any portion of the City Draft: 8-28-2023

36 Property not owned by such Transferee. The Transferee shall be responsible for the reporting and annual review requirements relating to the portion of the Property owned by such Transferee, and any amendment to this Agreement between City and a Transferee shall only affect the portion of the Property owned by such Transferee. [INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK; SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
City Draft: 8-28-2023

37 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.
“OWNER”

EM RANCH OWNER LLC
a California limited liability company
By: __________________________
Mathew Dugally
Managing Member

OWNER’S SIGNATURES
[NOTE: If the OWNER is a corporation, it must
be represented by two individuals who shall
execute this Agreement on behalf of the
corporation as follows: (A) one from the
corporation's "Operational Group" (Chair of the
Board, President, or a Vice-President) and; (B)
one from the corporation's "Financial Group"
(Secretary, Assistant Secr etary, Chief Financial
Officer, Treasurer or As sistant Treasurer). A
resolution of the Board of Directors designating
one individual to sign the agreement on behalf of
the corporation will be a ccepted. See California
Corporations Code section 313. If the OWNER is
a limited liability compan y, limited liability
partnership, or partnership, then the managing
member of the LLC or the managing partner of the
LLP or partnership must sign the Agreement.]

City Draft: 8-28-2023

38 “CITY”
CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, a California
municipal corporation

___________________________________
Chris Barajas, Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC, City Clerk

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

RICHARDS WATSON & GERSHON

_________________________________
Peter M. Thorson, Cit
y Attorney

City Draft: 8-28-23

A-1
12774-0179\2827875v10.doc

EXHIBIT A

LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY

City Draft: 8-28-23

B-1
12774-0179\2827875v10.doc

EXHIBIT B

SITE MAP
City Draft: 8-28-23

C-1
12774-0179\2827875v10.doc

EXHIBIT C

TEMPLATE AGREEMENT FOR ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66462.5

AGREEMENT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66462.5
(___________________ PROJECT)
This Agreement for acquisition of real property pursuant to Government Code section 66462.5 is made and entered into as of ___________________, 20__, by and between EM Owner, LLC, a California limited liability company (“OWNER” hereinafter) and the CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY, a municipal corporation (“CITY” hereinafter). OWNER and CITY are referred to jointly below as “parties.” In consideration of the recitals of facts and purposes, the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement and for the further consideration described in this Agreement, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Recitals. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that this Agreement is made with respect to the following facts and purposes that each agrees to be true and correct.

A. On ___________________, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2023-___ approving a Development Agreement between OWNER and CITY for the OWNER’s Project within the City (“Development Agreement”). All capitalized terms in this Agreement shall have the same definitions as described in the Development Agreement, including, without limitation, Property, Project, and Project Approvals.

B. To facilitate the orderly development of the Project through the Project Approvals on the Property the OWNER will be required to construct certain Public Improvements.

Satisfaction of such conditions of the Development Approvals, however, involves real property that is neither owned by OWNER or CITY (the “Off-Site Property” hereinafter). A legal description and map depiction of the Off-Site Property required to satisfy the condition of approval is attached hereto as Exhibit 1, and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full.

C. Pursuant to California Government Code section 66462.5 and Section 4.9 of the Development Agreement, when a condition of a subdivision map approval or a development agreement requires the installation or construction of improvements on Off-Site Property not owned or controlled by the OWNER, and title cannot be obtained by negotiated purchase, a city is required to commence proceedings to acquire Off-Site Property by eminent domain or such off-site improvement conditions will be waived. Pursuant to said section 66462.5, a city and an OWNER may enter into an agreement to allocate the costs and responsibilities for acquisition of such Off-Site Property.

D. OWNER has recorded or intends to record Tract Map No. ________ and, under a separate subdivision improvement agreement, has agreed (and posted security) to undertake and complete all required public improvements set forth in _______________________, including City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

_________________________________ said Off-Site Property, following recordation of Tract Map No. ________.

E. CITY has been provided credible evidence that OWNER has made a good faith effort to acquire the Off-Site Property but has been unable to do so by negotiated purchase; F. California Government Code Section 40404 and California Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1230.010 et seq. authorizes CITY to acquire by eminent domain any and all property necessary for ________________________ purposes; G. The CITY must comply with Relocation Assistance Act, Government Code Sections 7260 et seq., and the Eminent Domain Law, Code of Civil Procedure Sections 1230.010 et seq., and their implementing regulations, in acquiring property for public improvements (“Public Land Acquisition Statutes”).

H. To facilitate the satisfaction of the condition of approval, CITY and OWNER now mutually desire to enter into this Agreement under Government Code Section 66462.5 concerning acquisition of the Off-Site Property and to allocate responsibility between the respective parties; and
I. This Agreement is solely made in furtherance of the authority granted under Government Code Section 66462.5 and Section 4.9 of the Development Agreement. The parties recognize that CITY cannot exercise its power of eminent domain until all legally required preconditions under the Land Acquisition Statutes, including a Resolution of Necessity have been lawfully adopted by the City Council of the CITY pursuant to law. This Agreement is neither a commitment nor an announcement of an intent by CITY to acquire any or all of the Off-Site Property that may be identified in this Agreement. In the event CITY elects to commence an action after the required public hearing on the Resolution of Necessity, then CITY shall cause the eminent domain action for the acquisition of the specified interest or interests (whether fee, leasehold or otherwise) in and to the Off-Site Property to be filed and expeditiously processed to completion by and through the use of CITY’s power of eminent domain.

2. CITY Acquisition of Off-Site Property. Subject to OWNER’s timely and continuous performance of all elements of this Agreement and the Development Agreement, CITY shall cause an action pursuant to the Land Acquisition Statutes to be pursued to completion for the acquisition of the Off-Site Property using legal counsel and consultants of CITY’ reasonable selection. OWNER agrees CITY’s selected legal counsel is not representing OWNER in any capacity and further that OWNER is not a third party beneficiary under the engagement agreement between CITY and CITY’s selected legal counsel.

3. OWNER Responsible for All Costs of Acquisition. OWNER shall solely responsible for all Off-Site Property acquisition costs, which shall include, but not be limited to, the costs of title reports and/or litigation guarantees, litigation expenses, court costs, attorneys’ fees, deposits necessary to take immediate possession of any such interest, deposits reflecting verdicts as to the value of any such interest necessary to obtain any final order or orders of condemnation, any sum paid as and for a settlement of any suit filed by CITY pursuant to this Agreement, payments for land and improvements on the land, severance damages, fixtures and City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

equipment payments, payments for loss of business goodwill, relocation benefits, precondemnation damages, relocation expenses, abandonment damages, Off-Site Property Owners’ statutory costs and litigation expenses authorized by the Eminent Domain Law, codified as Code of Civil Procedure Section 1230.010, et seq. (Eminent Domain Law), Public Land Acquisition Statutes and any and all fees, costs and expenses arising from or related to any of the foregoing items, actions, and proceedings. No settlement of an action brought by CITY to acquire Off-Site Property or arising from CITY’s action(s) shall be effective without OWNER first providing its written approval thereof to CITY, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.

4. Limitations on City’s Ability to Acquire Off-Site Property; Time Waiver. The parties hereto recognize that if the City Council, in its discretion, adopts a Resolution of Necessity and authorizes the filing of an eminent domain proceeding, the City may not be able to obtain the fee title to the Property within the time set forth in Government Code section 66462.5 and in recognition of this potential circumstance the parties hereby waive the time requirements for action by the City set forth in Government Code Section 66462.5.

5. Deposit of Costs. Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement by CITY, OWNER shall deliver to CITY the sum of _______________ Thousand Dollars ($_______.00).

CITY agrees to deposit said sum in a separate CITY account (“Acquisition Fund”) and to use the principal sum, and any interest earned thereon, in furtherance of satisfying the costs specified in this Agreement, other than the unsatisfied costs identified in this paragraph.

A. CITY shall, on a monthly basis, or as often as CITY deems necessary, provide OWNER with an accounting of disbursements from the Acquisition Fund established pursuant to paragraph 5, above. In the event disbursements reduce the balance of the fund to Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or less, OWNER, within five (5) business days following a written request of CITY, shall deliver to CITY such additional monies as are necessary to maintain the balance in the Acquisition Fund at ___________ Thousand Dollars ($______________.00).

B. In addition to its deposits to the Acquisition Fund, OWNER agrees to deliver to CITY, promptly upon demand by CITY, the entire amount CITY determines is required by the Eminent Domain Law (“Deposit Amount”), which amount CITY will deposit under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1255.010, et seq. if CITY and OWNER agree that CITY should seek prejudgment possession of the Off-Site Property. If the City’s expert valuation witness determines at the date of exchange of valuation data under Code of Civil Procedure section 1258.220 that the fair market value of the Off-Site Property is higher than the Deposit Amount, OWNER shall deliver this additional amount to CITY upon five (5) business days written notice by CITY or as ordered by any court of competent jurisdiction. CITY shall promptly deposit this additional amount with the Court.

C. If for any reason OWNER fails to maintain the Acquisition Fund balance referenced in subparagraph 5.A., or fails to provide the monies as required by subparagraph 5.B, CITY may utilize and draw down all or any portion of the improvement security deposited pursuant to the separate subdivision improvement agreement to pay any of the costs and expenses referenced herein for acquisition of the Off-Site Property. CITY shall not commence any activity under or in furtherance of this Agreement until OWNER provides CITY and CITY City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

agrees with and approves a written acknowledgment from both the OWNER and the person, firm, or entity who has provided the referenced security that: (i) the CITY may make demand on the security for the purposes described in this Agreement; (ii) the surety will promptly pay such monies to CITY upon CITY’s demand and (iii) the amount of the security deposit is adequate to fund both the anticipated physical improvements under the map and the anticipated costs of acquisition pursuant to this Agreement.

D. When any eminent domain action which was commenced pursuant to this Agreement is concluded, CITY shall remit to OWNER the balance of the Acquisition Fund within sixty (60) days after full payment of just compensation, costs and all applicable litigation expenses have been made to Off-Site Property Owners. Additionally, CITY shall expeditiously withdraw any funds remaining on deposit with the Court and disburse the same to OWNER once a final order of condemnation or a dismissal of the eminent domain action is entered by the Court.

6. OWNER Acquisition of Property. If OWNER should independently acquire all or any portion of the Off-Site Property by negotiated purchase after an eminent domain action is filed by the CITY, OWNER shall immediately notify CITY of the acquisition. After OWNER obtains fee title to the subject interest CITY shall move to abandon all or any unnecessary part of the action relating to the property acquired by negotiation. If a complete or partial abandonment is filed, OWNER shall bear any and all costs, expenses and/or damages related thereto, including, but not limited to, any condemnee’s recoverable costs and/or recoverable attorneys’ fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1268.610, et seq.

7. General
A. Notices. Any and all notices, requests or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement or by reason of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when: (i) delivered in person or by courier or overnight delivery service; or (ii) five (5) business days after mailing, by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the parties at the following addresses or any such other address or addresses as the parties may, from time to time, designate in writing in the manner herein specified:

CITY: CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY
8750 Limonite Avenue
Jurupa Valley, CA 92589
Attention: City Manager
With a copy to:

RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON
350 South Grand Avenue, 37th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90071-3101
Attention: Mr. Peter M. Thorson, City Attorney

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

To OWNER: EM Ranch Owner, LLC
484 S. San Vicente
Los Angeles, California 90048
Attn: Matthew Dugally

With a copy to: Fennemore Law
550 E. Hospitality Lane, Suite 350
San Bernardino, California 92408
Attn: Brent McManigal

B. Further Cooperation. Each party to this Agreement agrees to cooperate by performing any further acts and by executing and delivering any and all additional monies, items, or documents which may be reasonably necessary to carry out the terms and provisions of this Agreement, and each party to this Agreement agrees that it will not act in any manner whatsoever which would hinder, impede, interfere or prohibit or make more onerous or difficult the performance of the other party hereto under this Agreement.

C. Amendment. No amendment to this Agreement shall be effective unless first provided in writing and executed by the parties hereto.

D. No Agency or Joint Venture. The terms and provisions of this Agreement shall not cause the parties hereto or any of each parties’ agents, consultants, contractors or other providers of professional services to be construed in any manner whatsoever as partners, joint venturers or agents of each other in the performance of their respective duties and obligations under this Agreement, or subject either party to this Agreement to any obligation, loss, charge or expense of the other party to this Agreement.

E. Time of Essence. Time is expressly ma de of the essence of each and every provision of this Agreement.

F. Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assignees.

G. Remedies. No remedy or election hereunde r shall be deemed to be exclusive but shall, wherever possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at or in equity.

H. Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action arising directly or indirectly under this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of Riverside County, California.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereof have executed and entered into this Agreement as of the date set forth above.

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY,
a municipal corporation

_______________________________
Rod B. Butler
City Manager

Attest:

_______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk

Approved As to Form:

_______________________________
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

OWNER
________________________

____________________________
Name:

Title:

____________________________
Name:

Title:

OWNER’S SIGNATURES
[NOTE: If the OWNER is a corporation, it must be represented by two individuals who shall execute this Agreement on behalf of the corporation as follows: (A) one from the corporation's "Operational Group" (Chair of th e Board, President, or a Vice-Pr esident) and; (B) one from the corporation's "Financial Group" (Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer or Assistant Treasurer). A resolution of the Board of Directors designating one individual to sign the agreement on behalf of the corporation will be accepted . See California Corporations Code section 313. If the OWNER is a limited liability company, limite d liability partnership, or partnership, then the managing member of th e LLC or the managing partner of the LLP or partnership must sign the Agreement.]

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

EXHIBIT 1 TO OFF-SITE ACQUISITION AGREEMENT

LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND MAP DEPICTION OF THE OFF-SITE PROPERTY

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

EXHIBIT D

TEMPLATE TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX SHARING AGREEMENT

TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX SHARING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN
THE CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY AND __________________________

THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of _____________________ by and between the City of Jurupa Valley (“City”) and _______________________________, a ____________________ (“Developer”). In consideration of the mutual covenants set forth in this Agreement, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. RECITALS. This Agreement is made with respect to the follow facts and for the following purposes, which each of the parties acknowledge and agree to be true and correct:

A. Developer proposes to build a hotel on property generally located at and described as Lot ____ of Map No. _____ in the Official Records of the County of Riverside (“Hotel Property”).

B. Developer’s proposed hotel will be an upper _____________ hotel with ____ rooms, a minimum room rental rate of $_____ per night and the following amenities:
_____________ (“Hotel”).

C. On ___________________, 2023 the City of Jurupa Valley and EM Ranch Owner LLC entered into that certain “Development Agreement by and Between the City of Jurupa Valley and EM Ranch Owner LLC” recorded as Document No. _______________ in the Official Records of Riverside County (“Development Agreement”).

D. The Development Agreement pertains to the development of a mixed use project consisting of residential, commercial, hotel and industrial on the property described in the Development Agreement (“Project”).

E. Section 7.3 of the Development Agreement provides for Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Agreements for hotels being developed as part of the Project.

F. The purpose of this Agreement and the intent of the parties is to implement the provisions of Section 7.3 of the Development Agreement.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

2. SUBSTANTIAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS TO THE CITY FROM THIS
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX SHARING AGREEMENT. The City further finds, determines and declares that a transient occupancy tax sharing agreement to provide economic assistance for qualifying hotels as described in this Agreement will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the people in the City and will be of substantial economic benefit to the City based on the following:

A. The development of the Hotel will generate new short term and long term quality employment opportunities within the City. The Hotel will employ approximately 200 persons in the construction of the Hotel. The Hotel will generate direct long term employment for approximately 49 people within the within five (5) years from the issuance of a building permit for the Hotel.

B. The development of the Hotel will expand and enhance the City’s tax base through increased property values and consumer purchasing. The development of the Hotel will generate new property tax, transient occupancy tax, and sales tax revenues in the annual amount of approximately $1,000,000.00 within five (5) years from the issuance of a building permit for the hotel that will assist the City in funding public services for the residents and businesses within the City.

C. Development of the Hotel preserves and enhances the job/housing balance described in the City’s General Plan and various regional plans D. The development of the Hotel will develop new and expanded commercial and business opportunities within the City. The Hotel will serve as a catalyst for other commercial and business projects within the City as the Hotel will provide a necessary business infrastructure to support commercial and business operations. Developers are generally reluctant to invest in a community until they see that another project has been successful and so a successful commercial project will develop confidence among retail and business developers that the City is a viable community for successful development.

E. There is a substantial unmet demand for hotel rooms in the area surrounding the Hotel and the Hotel Property itself is a prime location for needed hotels.

F. The development of the Hotel will promote the stability and diversification of the City’s economy.

3. DEFINITIONS. As used in this this Agreement:

A. “Transient Occupancy Tax” shall mean the transient occupancy tax imposed by Chapter 3.35 of the Jurupa Valley Municipal Code as it currently exists or may hereafter be modified. The local transient occupancy tax shall not include: (i) Penalty assessments: (ii) any transient occupancy tax levied by, collected for or allocated to the State of California, the County of Riverside, or a district or any entity (including an allocation to a statewide or countywide pool) other than City; (iii) any administrative fee charged by the City for collection of the transient occupancy tax; (iv) any transient occupancy tax (or other funds measured by transient occupancy tax) required by the State of California to be paid over to another public entity (including the State) or set aside and/or pledged to a specific use other than for deposit into or City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

payment from the City’s general fund; or (v) any transient occupancy tax reasonably determined by the City Manager to have been paid in error and determined to be subject to correction, adjustment or offset pursuant to an amended return or otherwise where the effect of the error, adjustment or amendment is to change the amount of sales tax attributable to taxable sales and allocated to the City.

B. “Qualified Hotels” shall mean hotels meeting the following qualifications that shall be eligible to receive Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds pursuant to Section 7.3 of the Development Agreement:
1) Minimum of one hundred sixty (160) rooms;
2) Minimum average daily room rate room rental of one hundred ninety dollars ($190) per night (in 2023 dollars) that shall automatically increase annually on July 1 by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers; Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario); and
3) STR class of upper upscale, upscale, or upper midscale hotel (including, but not limited to, hotels such as Holiday Inn Express, Embassy Suites, Springhill Suites, Country Inn & Suites, Hyatt Place, Hampton Inn, Ayres Hotel, Fairfield Inn & Suites, and similar hotel brands).

4. TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX SHARING.

A. City shall provide up to a maximum of five hundred ninety nine thousand five hundred ninety nine dollars ($599,000.00) in Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds for the Hotel pursuant to this Agreement.

B. Hotel shall receive a payment from the City in an amount equal to the Transient Occupancy Taxes actually received by the City within the previous calendar quarter from the Hotel. The payment shall be made within sixty (60) days the end of each calendar quarter on July 1, October 1, January 1 and April 1 of each year until the maximum Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing Funds are exhausted.

C. The Hotel shall not receive Transient Occupancy Tax Sharing payments pursuant to this Section 4 unless the City certifies that the following conditions precedent have been fulfilled:
1) The Hotel is in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations;
2) There are no pending administrative code compliance actions or public nuisance litigation case(s) pending against the business; 3) There is no litigation (including administrative actions) pending between the City and the business in which the City and the business are adverse; and City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

4) All City tax payments, assessments, or obligations to the City and outstanding penalties and interest, including but not limited to, Community Facilities District special taxes, transient occupancy taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, and contributions pursuant to this Agreement and the Project Approvals, and have been fully paid in accordance with the terms under which they were established.

5. FINDINGS CONCERNING INAPPLICABILITY OF PREVAILING WAGES.

A. Labor Code Section 1720(c)(3) provides that:
“(c) Notwithstanding subdivision (b ), all of the following apply:
(3) (A) If the state or a politi cal subdivision reimburses a private developer for costs that would normally be borne by the public, or provides directly or indirectly a public subsidy to a private development project that is de minimis in the context of the project, an otherwise private development project shall not thereby become subject to this chapter.
(B) (i) For purposes of subpara graph (A), a public subsidy is de minimis if it is both less than six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) and less than 2 percent of the total project cost. (ii) Notwithstanding clause (i), for purposes of
subparagraph (A), a public subsidy for a project that
consists entirely of single-family dwellings is de minimis if it is less than 2 percent of the total project cost.
(iii) This subparagraph shall not apply to a project that was advertised for bid, or a contract that was awarded, before July 1, 2021.”
B. The City finds and determines that the economic development subsidies for the Hotel in Section 4 is both less than six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000.00) and less than two percent (2%) of the total Project cost
C. Therefore, based on the above findings, the City and Developer have determined that prevailing wages are not required to be paid on the private improvements for the Project in accordance with to Labor Code Section 1720(c)(3).

D. Developer hereby represents to City that it understands and acknowledges the economic development subsidies pursuant to Section 4 of this Agreement and the potential impact on the application of prevailing wages to the Project. Accordingly, Developer on behalf of itself and its successors in interest, hereby expressly and knowingly waives their respective rights under Labor Code Sections 1726 and 1781 to seek recovery against the City of any prevailing wage liabilities they may incur based upon this Agreement. Developer hereby warrants and represents to City that it has either consulted with legal counsel, or had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel, regarding the prevailing wage issues described herein City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

and the provisions of the California Civil Code section 1542, which provides as follows: “A general release does not extend to claims that the creditor or releasing party does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release and that, if known by him or her, would have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor or released party.” Developer hereby acknowledges that it may have claims which are presently unknown and unsuspected, and such claims in the future. Nevertheless, Developer hereby acknowledges that this Agreement has been negotiated and agreed upon in light of that situation, and hereby expressly waive any and all rights which they may have under California Civil Code Section 1542, or under any statute or common law or equitable principal of similar effect.

Developer’s initials: ___________________.

6. GENERAL.

A. Notices. Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this Agreement must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service with return receipt or affidavit of delivery, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as, but not limited to, FedEx, that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by a written notice provided in accordance with this Section. Notice shall be effective upon delivery to the addresses specified below or on the third business day following deposit with the document delivery service or United States Mail as provided above.

To City: City of Jurupa Valley
8930 Limonite Avenue
Jurupa Valley, California 92509
Attention: Cit
y Manager

With a copy to: Peter M. Thorson, Esq.

Richards, Watson & Gershon
350 S. Grand Ave., 37
th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071

To: Developer:

With a cop
y to:

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

B. Entire Agreement, Modifications. Except for the Development Agreement, this Agreement and the documents referenced herein contain the complete expression of the whole agreement between the parties with respect to the obligations set forth herein, and there are no promises, representations, agreements, warranties or inducements, either expressed verbally or implied, except as are fully set forth herein. This Agreement cannot be enlarged, modified, or changed in any respect except by written agreement between the parties.

No alteration, supplement, modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing by all of the parties hereto.

C. Applicable Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be deemed to have been entered into and shall, in all respects, be interpreted, construed, enforced and governed by and under the laws of the State of California. The venue of any legal action relating to this Agreement shall be in the Superior Court of California or U.S. District Court, as applicable, with jurisdiction over the County of Riverside.

D. Independent Advice of Legal Counsel. Each party acknowledges that it had retained independent legal counsel of its own choice to review this Agreement and that prior to the execution hereof each party has had the opportunity to review the terms of this Agreement with its counsel and is entering into this Agreement after such review.

E. Consent to Use and Release Transient Occupancy Tax Information.

Developer, on behalf of itself, any affiliate, and its successors and assigns, and to the extent such consent is required by any applicable legal provision, consents to the City's review, use and public release of Transient Occupancy Tax information relating to the Hotel and as otherwise required by this Agreement to the extent necessary for the City to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement.

F. Validity of Agreement. All parties agree that this Agreement is legal, valid and binding on each party and enforceable in accordance with its terms.

G. Binding on Successors. Except as further provided in this paragraph, this Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors, assigns, executors and administrators.

H. Attorneys’ Fees. If any legal action or any arbitration or other proceeding is brought for the enforcement of this Agreement or because of an alleged dispute, breach, default or misrepresentation in connection with any of the provisions of this Agreement, the successful or prevailing party or parties shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and other costs and expenses incurred in that action or proceeding in addition to any other relief to which it or they may be entitled.

I. Time. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.

J. Force Majeure Delays. Nonperformance of any of the conditions or covenants herein by any party hereto shall be excused when performance is prevented or delayed by reason of any of the following forces reasonably beyond the control of such party: acts of God, strike, war, lockout, labor trouble, reasonable inability to secure materials or labor, unreasonable delay by a governmental entity in the issuance of any required governmental City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

permit, license or approval, act of nature (including but not limited to hurricane, earthquake, windstorm, flood, wildfire, or other severe weather or environmental condition) insurrection, riot, casualty, acts of public enemy, governmental restrictions, litigation initiated by a party other than a party hereto or its affiliate, unreasonable acts or failures to act of any governmental agency or entity or unreasonable delays of any contractor, subcontractor or supplier. In such event, nonperformance shall be excused and the time of performance shall be extended only by the number of days the performance is delayed or prevented.

K. Authority to Execute this Agreement. The person or persons executing this Agreement on behalf of a party warrants and represents that he or she has the authority to execute this Agreement on behalf of the party and has the authority to bind that party to the performance of its obligations hereunder.

City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY,
a municipal corporation

_______________________________
Rod B. Butler
City Manager

Attest:

_______________________________
Victoria Wasko, CMC
City Clerk

Approved As to Form:

_______________________________
Peter M. Thorson
City Attorney
City Draft: 8-28-2023

C-3

DEVELOPER,
a _____________________

By:________________________________________
Name:

Title:

By:________________________________________
Name:

Title:

ATTACHMENT NO. 4

Draft Environmental Impact Report
Direct link:
https://www.jurupavalley.org/DocumentCenter/View/2844/The- District-DEIR-For-Public-Review_Revised

Appendices available on the City’s website page under
Development Services/Planning/Environmental Reports at
“MA21269 The District at Jurupa Valley”:
https://www.jurupavalley.org/DocumentCenter/Index/68

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH # 2022040044
FOR

THE DISTRICT AT JURUPA VALLEY
PREPARED FOR:

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY

City of Jurupa Valley
Thomas Gorham, Principal Planner
8930 Limonite Avenue
Jurupa Valley, CA 92509
Prepared by:

UltraSystems Environmental Inc.
16431 Scientific Way
Irvine, CA 92618-4355
Telephone: 949.788.4900
FAX: 949.788.4901
www.ultrasystems.com
June 2023

This page intentionally left blank.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page i June 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... 1-1

1.1 Project Overview .................................................................................................................................. 1-1

1.2 Existing Project Site Conditions ..................................................................................................... 1-2

1.3 Areas of Controversy .......................................................................................................................... 1-2

1.4 Summary of Environmental Impacts ........................................................................................... 1-2

2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE ...................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Document Format ................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.2 Purposes of CEQA and this EIR ...................................................................................................... 2-5

2.3 Regionally Significant Project ......................................................................................................... 2-6

2.4 Incorporated Documents .................................................................................................................. 2-6

2.5 Technical Reports and Supporting Information ..................................................................... 2-7

2.6 Responsible and Trustee Agencies ............................................................................................... 2-8

2.7 Public Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report ................................................. 2-9

2.8 Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting ................................................................ 2-9

2.9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .................................................................... 2-13

2.10 Potential Impacts of the Project Discussed in the DEIR ..................................................... 2-13

2.11 Effects Found Not to be Significant ............................................................................................. 2-14

2.12 Agriculture and Forestry Resources- ......................................................................................... 2-14

2.13 Wildfire .................................................................................................................................................. 2-15

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 3-1

3.1 Introduction and Project Background ......................................................................................... 3-1

3.2 Project Location and Setting ........................................................................................................... 3-1

3.2.1 Project Location and Existing Conditions .................................................................. 3-1

3.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses ..................................................................................................... 3-1

3.3 Project Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.4 Project Characteristics ....................................................................................................................... 3-0

3.4.1 Development Plan ................................................................................................................ 3-0

3.4.2 Proposed Land Uses ............................................................................................................ 3-1

3.4.3 Signage and Monuments ................................................................................................. 3-12

3.4.4 Circulation and Street Improvements ....................................................................... 3-15

3.4.5 Infrastructure and Utility Plan ...................................................................................... 3-17

3.5 Project Construction and Phasing ............................................................................................... 3-17

3.5.1 Project Phasing .................................................................................................................... 3-17

3.5.2 Demolition ............................................................................................................................. 3-17

3.5.3 Onsite Construction ........................................................................................................... 3-17

3.5.4 Utilities ................................................................................................................................... 3-18

3.5.5 Offsite Improvements ....................................................................................................... 3-18

3.5.6 Soil Removal ......................................................................................................................... 3-19

3.6 Discretionary and Ministerial Approvals ................................................................................. 3-23

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................. 4.1-1

4.1.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.1-1

4.1.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.1-6

4.1.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 4.1-6  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page ii June 2023

4.1.4 Methodology........................................................................................................................ 4.1-7

4.1.5 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................. 4.1-7

4.1.6 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................................. 4.1-8

4.1.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.1-27

4.2 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................ 4.2-1

4.2.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.2-4

4.2.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.2-8

4.2.3 Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................................ 4.2-8

4.2.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.2-10

4.2.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.2-14

4.2.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.2-17

4.2.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.2-60

4.3 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................ 4.3-1

4.3.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.3.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.3-5

4.3.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 4.3-5

4.3.4 Methodology........................................................................................................................ 4.3-7

4.3.5 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................. 4.3-9

4.3.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.3-11

4.3.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.3-28

4.4 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 4.4-1

4.4.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.4-1

4.4.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ......................................................... 4.4-11

4.4.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.4-11

4.4.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.4-15

4.4.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.4-16

4.4.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.4-16

4.4.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.4-23

4.5 Energy .................................................................................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.5-1

4.5.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 4.5-2

4.5.4 Methodology........................................................................................................................ 4.5-7

4.5.5 Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................. 4.5-7

4.5.6 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................................. 4.5-8

4.5.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.5-17

4.6 Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................................. 4.6-1

4.6.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.6-1

4.6.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.6-15

4.6.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.6-17

4.6.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.6-18

4.6.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.6-19

4.6.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.6-21

4.6.7 Cumulative Impacts .......................................................................................................... 4.6-6

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.7-4

4.7.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 4.7-5

4.7.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.7-10  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page iii June 2023

4.7.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.7-11

4.7.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.7-12

4.7.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.7-28

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................. 4.8-1

4.8.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.8-2

4.8.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.8-16

4.8.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.8-16

4.8.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.8-21

4.8.5 Thresholds of Significance ......................................................................................... 4.8-22

4.8.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.8-24

4.8.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.8-36

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...................................................................................................... 4.9-1

4.9.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................... 4.9-1

4.9.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments ............................................................. 4.9-4

4.9.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................... 4.9-6

4.9.4 Methodology........................................................................................................................ 4.9-9

4.9.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.9-10

4.9.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.9-11

4.9.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.9-23

4.10 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................................ 4.10-1

4.10.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.10-1

4.10.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.10-5

4.10.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.10-5

4.10.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.10-6

4.10.5 Thresholds of Significance ......................................................................................... 4.10-6

4.10.6 Environmental Impact Analysis .............................................................................. 4.10-7

4.10.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.10-38

4.11 Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................... 4.11-1

4.11.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.11-1

4.11.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.11-2

4.11.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.11-4

4.11.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.11-5

4.11.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.11-5

4.11.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.11-5

4.11.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.11-7

4.12 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 4.12-1

4.12.1 Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................... 4.12-2

4.12.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .................................................... 4.12-4

4.12.3 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................ 4.12-4

4.12.4 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 4.12-8

4.12.5 Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................................... 4.12-9

4.12.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ....................................................................... 4.12-11

4.12.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.12-28

4.13 Population and Housing .............................................................................................................. 4.13-1

4.13.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.13-1

4.13.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.13-4

4.13.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.13-4

4.13.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.13-5

4.13.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.13-6  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page iv June 2023

4.13.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.13-6

4.13.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.13-10

4.14 Public Services ................................................................................................................................ 4.14-1

4.14.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.14-1

4.14.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.14-2

4.14.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.14-3

4.14.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.14-6

4.14.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.14-7

4.14.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ................................................................................ 4.14-8

4.14.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.14-15

4.15 Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 4.15-1

4.15.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.15-1

4.15.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.15-1

4.15.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.15-1

4.15.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.15-2

4.15.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.15-2

4.15.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.15-3

4.15.7 Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................... 4.15-6

4.16 Transportation ................................................................................................................................ 4.16-1

4.16.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.16-2

4.16.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.16-3

4.16.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.16-3

4.16.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.16-1

4.16.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.16-2

4.16.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.16-4

4.16.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.16-28

4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 4.17-1

4.17.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.17-2

4.17.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.17-2

4.17.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.17-3

4.17.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.17-4

4.17.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.17-5

4.17.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.17-6

4.17.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.17-11

4.18 Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................................... 4.18-1

4.18.1 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................ 4.18-1

4.18.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments .......................................................... 4.18-0

4.18.3 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................ 4.18-0

4.18.4 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 4.18-3

4.18.5 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................... 4.18-3

4.18.6 Environmental Impact Analysis ............................................................................... 4.18-4

4.18.7 Cumulative Impacts .................................................................................................... 4.18-13

5.0 ALTERNATIVES ..................................................................................................................................... 5-1

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

5.1.1 Significant Unavoidable Impacts ................................................................................... 5-2

5.1.2 Summary of Proposed Specific Plan ............................................................................. 5-3

5.1.3 Proposed Specific Plan Objectives ................................................................................ 5-3

5.2 Alternatives Considered and Rejected as Infeasible ............................................................. 5-4  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page v June 2023

5.3 Overview of Selected Alternatives ................................................................................................ 5-5

5.4 Analysis of Alternative 1 – No Project/No Development Alternative .......................... 5-11

5.4.1 Description of Alternative .............................................................................................. 5-11

5.4.2 Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................... 5-11

5.4.3 Comparison of Alternative 1 to the Proposed Project ........................................ 5-14

5.4.4 Relationship of Alternative 1 to Project Objectives ............................................. 5-14

5.5 Analysis of Alternative 2 – No Project/Existing Specific Plan Alternative ................. 5-15

5.5.1 Description of Alternative .............................................................................................. 5-15

5.5.2 Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................... 5-15

5.5.3 Comparison of Alternative 2 to the Proposed Project ........................................ 5-20

5.5.4 Relationship of the Alternative to Project Objectives ......................................... 5-21

5.6 Analysis of Alternative 3: Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative ................................ 5-21

5.6.1 Description of Alternative .............................................................................................. 5-21

5.6.2 Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................... 5-22

5.6.3 Comparison of Alternative 3 to the Proposed Project ........................................ 5-28

5.6.4 Relationship of the Alternative to Project Objectives ......................................... 5-29

5.7 Analysis of Alternative 4: Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative ..................................... 5-29

5.7.1 Description of Alternative .............................................................................................. 5-29

5.7.2 Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................... 5-30

5.7.3 Comparison of Alternative 4 to the Proposed Project ........................................ 5-37

5.7.4 Relationship of the Alternative to Project Objectives ......................................... 5-37

5.8 Analysis of Alternative 5: No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative ............................................................................................................................................ 5-37

5.8.1 Description of Alternative .............................................................................................. 5-37

5.8.2 Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................... 5-38

5.8.3 Comparison of Alternative 5 to the Proposed Project ........................................ 5-43

5.8.4 Relationship of the Alternative to Project Objectives ......................................... 5-43

5.9 Environmentally Superior Alternative ...................................................................................... 5-44

6.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................... 6-1

6.1 Significant Unavoidable Impacts ................................................................................................... 6-1

6.2 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes .................................................................... 6-1

6.3 Growth Inducing Impacts ................................................................................................................. 6-2

6.3.1 Population and Housing .................................................................................................... 6-2

6.3.2 Employment ........................................................................................................................... 6-2

6.3.3 Utility Infrastructure Improvements ........................................................................... 6-3

6.3.4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 6-3

7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 7-1

8.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ 8-1

9.0 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 9-1

9.1 Lead Agency ........................................................................................................................................... 9-1

9.2 Project Applicant’s Representative .............................................................................................. 9-1

9.3 UltraSystems Environmental Inc. .................................................................................................. 9-1

9.3.1 Environmental Management Team .............................................................................. 9-1

9.3.2 Technical Staff ....................................................................................................................... 9-1

9.3.3 Subconsultants ...................................................................................................................... 9-2  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page vi June 2023

9.3.4 Technical Team – Project Applicant Consulting Firms ......................................... 9-2

10.0 CONSULTATION AND COORDINATION ...................................................................................... 10-1

11.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .................................................. 11-1

11.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 11-1

12.0 RECIPIENTS OF THE EIR ................................................................................................................. 12-1

12.1 Agencies and Organizations .......................................................................................................... 12-1

12.2 Recipients Emailed on March 31, 2022 .................................................................................... 12-3

12.3 Commenters Who Commented During the NOP Public Review Period and Included their Contact Information ................................................................................... 12-3

TABLES
Table 1.0-1 –Impacts and Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................... 1-3 Table 2.6-1 – Responsible and Trustee Agencies ................................................................................................. 2-8 Table 2.8-1 – Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments ................................................................. 2-9 Table 3.4-1 – Proposed Land Use Summary ........................................................................................................... 3-1 Table 3.4-2 – Proposed Land Uses by Phase .......................................................................................................... 3-2 Table 3.5-1 - Equipment by Construction Phase ................................................................................................ 3-17 Table 3.6-1 – Ministerial Permits and Approvals ............................................................................................... 3-23 Table 4.0-1 – City of Jurupa Valley General Plan Buildout Projections ....................................................... 4-6 Table 4.0-2 – Cumulative Development Land Use Summary .......................................................................... 4-9 Table 4.2-1 - Ambient Air Quality Standards for Criteria Air Pollutants ................................................. 4.2-1 Table 4.2-2 - Federal and State Attainment Status ........................................................................................... 4.2-5 Table 4.2-3 - Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data ......................................................................................... 4.2-5 Table 4.2-4 - Equipment by CalEEMod Construction Activity .................................................................. 4.2-11 Table 4.2-5 - Equipment by CalEEMod Construction ................................................................................... 4.2-11 Table 4.2-5 - South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds ........................ 4.2-16 Table 4.2-6 - Localized Significance Thresholds for Construction & Operation ................................ 4.2-16 Table 4.2-7 – Comparison of Existing Approved Emerald Ranch Specific Plan and Proposed District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Land Use Summary .......................................................................................... 4.2-24 Table 4.2-10 -Phase I Construction-Related Emissions ............................................................................... 4.2-34 Table 4.2-11 – Phase 2 Construction Related Emissions ............................................................................ 4.2-35 Table 4.2-12 – Phase 1 Unmitigated Operational Emissions ..................................................................... 4.2-35 Table 4.2-13 – Phase 1 Mitigated Operation Emissions .............................................................................. 4.2-36 Table 4.2-14 - Phase 2 - Unmitigated Operational Emissions ................................................................... 4.2-37 Table 4.2-15 - Phase 2 Mitigated Operational Emissions ........................................................................... 4.2-37 Table 4.2-16 – Construction Emissions (Phase 2) + Operations (Phase 1) ......................................... 4.2-38 Table 4.2-17 – Project Buildout Operational Emissions .............................................................................. 4.2-39 Table 4.2-18 – Equipment Specific Grading Rates ......................................................................................... 4.2-41 Table 4.2-19 – Localized Significance of Phase 1 Construction Emissions (Maximum Pounds per Day) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.2-42 Table 4.2-20 – Localized Significance of Phase 2 Construction Emissions (Maximum Pounds per Day) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.2-43 Table 4.2-21 - Localized Significance of Phase 1 Operational Emissions (Maximum Pounds per Day) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.2-44  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page vii June 2023
Table 4.2-22 - Localized Significance of Phase 2 Operational Emissions (Maximum Pounds per Day) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.2-45 Table 4.2-23 - Localized Significance of Operational Emissions at Project Buildout (Maximum Pounds per Day) ............................................................................................................................................................. 4.2-46 Table 4.2-24 - Project Buildout Operational Dispersion Modeling ......................................................... 4.2-46 Table 4.2-25 - Existing Sensitive Receptor Locations .................................................................................. 4.2-50 Table 4.2-26 - Results of Carcinogenic Risk Assessment ............................................................................ 4.2-57 Table 4.2-27 - Results of Chronic Hazard Assessment ................................................................................. 4.2-57 Table 4.2-28 – Summary of Air Quality Impacts ............................................................................................. 4.2-59 Table 4.3-1 – Impacts to Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types within the Project Area (acres) ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.3-17 Table 4.4-1 – Previously Recorded Cultural Resources Within the Project Site (APE) ..................... 4.4-7 Table 4.4-2 - Buildings Identified in the Project Site Greater than 50-Years-Old ................................ 4.4-9 Table 4.5-1 – Estimated Project Construction Energy Use ......................................................................... 4.5-12 Table 4.5-2 - Estimated Project Operational Energy Use ............................................................................ 4.5-13 Table 4.6-2 - Construction Best Management Practices ................................................................................. 4.6-0 Table 4.7-1 - Global Warming Potential (GWP) Values Relative to CO2 .................................................. 4.7-2 Table 4.7-2 – Description of Greenhouse Gases ................................................................................................. 4.7-3 Table 4.7-3 – Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................. 4.7-15 Table 4.7-4 – Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................. 4.7-16 Table 4.7-5 – Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency .. 4.7-23 Table 4.8-1 – Cortese Sites on and within 0.5-Mile of the Project Site ..................................................... 4.8-9 Table 4.8-2 – Other Hazardous Materials Sites on and Within 0.5-Mile of the Project Site .......... 4.8-13 Table 4.9-1 – Santa Ana River Reaches 3 and 4: Pollutants Listed on 2018 Section 303 (D) List of Water Quality Limited Segments ............................................................................................................................... 4.9-4 Table 4.9-2 – Comparison of Pre-Development and Mitigated Post-Development Project Flows . 4.9- 20 Table 4.10-1 - Existing Land Use, Zoning, And Development for the Project Site and Project Area ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4.10-1 Table 4.10-2 - General Plan Consistency Analysis ...................................................................................... 4.10-11 Table 4.10-3 - Consistency Analysis with RTP/SCS ................................................................................... 4.10-33 Table 4.12-1 - Nearest Existing Sensitive Receivers ..................................................................................... 4.12-3 Table 4.12-2 - Measured Ambient Noise Levels ............................................................................................. 4.12-3 Table 4.12-3 - Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Sources .................................................. 4.12-6 Table 4.12-4 - Noise and Vibration Significance Thresholds.................................................................. 4.12-11 Table 4.12-5 - Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................... 4.12-14 Table 4.12-6 - Opening Year 2023 Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................... 4.12-16 Table 4.12-7 - Opening Year 2026 Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................... 4.12-18 Table 4.12-8 - Vibration Levels of Construction Equipment .................................................................. 4.12-23 Table 4.12-9 - Cumulative Off-Site Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................... 4.12-29 Table 4.13-1 - Population Characteristics ......................................................................................................... 4.13-1 Table 4.13-2 - Population Forecast ...................................................................................................................... 4.13-1 Table 4.13-3 - Housing Characteristics............................................................................................................... 4.13-2 Table 4.13-4 - City of Jurupa Valley RHNA Allocation 2021-2029 .......................................................... 4.13-3 Table 4.13-5 - Employment Projections............................................................................................................. 4.13-3 Table 4.13-6 - Jobs Housing Balance ................................................................................................................... 4.13-4 Table 4.13-7 - Estimated Project Operational Employment Generation .............................................. 4.13-8 Table 4.13-8 - Cumulative Projects List (Projects in City of Jurupa Valley Only) .......................... 4.13-11 Table 4.14-1 - Schools Serving the Project Site ............................................................................................... 4.14-1  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page viii June 2023
Table 4.14-2 - Jurupa Unified School District Student Generation Factors ......................................... 4.14-2 Table 4.14-3 - Estimated Project Student Generation ............................................................................... 4.14-12 Table 4.14-4 - Riverside County Library System Libraries in Jurupa Valley ................................... 4.14-14 Table 4.15-1 - Public Parks Near the Project Site ........................................................................................... 4.15-1 Table 4.16-1 – Existing Roadways In and Near the Project Site .............................................................. 4.16-2 Table 4.16-2 – VMT Screening Steps ................................................................................................................ 4.16-19 Table 4.16-3 - VMT Analysis, Residential Uses............................................................................................. 4.16-22 Table 4.16-4 - VMT Analysis, Industrial/Employment Uses .................................................................. 4.16-22 Table 4.16-5 - VMT Analysis, Regional Retail/Other Uses ...................................................................... 4.16-23 Table 4.16-6 - Effectiveness of VMT Reduction Measures ...................................................................... 4.16-25 Table 4.17-1 - Summary of AB52 and SB18 Consultation Process ......................................................... 4.17-7 Table 4.18-1 - Projected Annual Water Production Requirements for RCSD .................................... 4.18-2 Table 4.18-2 - Landfills Serving West Hollywood .......................................................................................... 4.18-3 Table 4.18-3 - Project Water Demand Determination ................................................................................. 4.18-8 Table 4.18-4 - Estimated Project Wastewater Generation ...................................................................... 4.18-10 Table 4.18-5 - Estimated Project Solid Waste Generation ....................................................................... 4.18-12 Table 5.3-1 - Summary of Alternatives ..................................................................................................................... 5-7 Table 5.3-2 - Comparison Summary of Project Impacts and Alternatives Impacts ............................... 5-8 Table 5.3-3 - Comparison of Alternatives and Their Ability to Meet Project Objectives ................... 5-10 Table 5.6-1 – Land Use Summary - Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative ........................................... 5-21 Table 5.6-2 – Total Building Area - Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative ........................................... 5-22 Table 5.6-3 – Trip Generation - Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative .................................................. 5-23 Table 5.6-4 – Estimated Energy Demands, Reduced Commercial Uses Alternatives .......................... 5-24 Table 5.6-5 - Estimated Project Operational Employment Generation – Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5-26 Table 5.7-1 – Land Use Summary - Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative ................................................ 5-29 Table 5.7-2 – Total Building Area - Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative ................................................ 5-30 Table 5.7-3 – Trip Generation Estimate - Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative .................................... 5-31 Table 5.7-4 – Estimated Energy Demands - Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative ............................... 5-32 Table 5.7- 5 - Estimated Project Operational Employment Generation - Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5-35 Table 5.8-1 – Land Use Summary - No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative ......................... 5-37 Table 5.8-2 – Total Building Area - No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative ......................... 5-38 Table 5.8-3 – Trip Generation - No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative ................................ 5-39 Table 5.8-4 – Estimated Energy Demands - No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative ........ 5-40 Table 10.0-1 – Agencies and Organizations Contacted .................................................................................... 10-1 Table 11.0-1 –Draft Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ......................................................... 11-3

FIGURES
Figure 3.2-1 - Regional Location .................................................................................................................................. 3-0 Figure 3.2-2 - Project Location ..................................................................................................................................... 3-0 Figure 3.4-1 - Land Use Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3.4-2 - Renderings of Proposed Residential Buildings-Attached .................................................... 3-5 Figure 3.4-3 - Rendering of Proposed Residential Buildings-Detached ...................................................... 3-6 Figure 3.4-4 - Renderings of Proposed Commercial Buildings ....................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3.4-5 - Renderings of Proposed Commercial Buildings-Integrated ................................................ 3-8 Figure 3.4-6 - Renderings of Proposed Industrial & Warehouse Buildings ............................................ 3-10  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page ix June 2023
Figure 3.4-7 - Renderings of Proposed Business Park Buildings ................................................................. 3-11 Figure 3.4-8 – Open Space Plan .................................................................................................................................. 3-13 Figure 3.4-9 – Freestanding Sign Program ............................................................................................................ 3-14 Figure 3.4-10 – Proposed Circulation Plan ........................................................................................................... 3-16 Figure 3.5-1 - Water Plan .............................................................................................................................................. 3-20 Figure 3.5-2 - Sewer Plan ............................................................................................................................................. 3-21 Figure 3.5-3 - Stormwater Drainage Plan .............................................................................................................. 3-22 Figure 4.0-1 – Cumulative Projects Map .................................................................................................................. 4-0 Figure 4.1-1 – Photo Location Map .......................................................................................................................... 4.1-2 Figure 4.1-2 - Site Photographs 1 through 4 ....................................................................................................... 4.1-3 Figure 4.1-3 - Site Photographs 5 through 8 ....................................................................................................... 4.1-4 Figure 4.1-4 - Site Photographs 9 through 12 ..................................................................................................... 4.1-5 Figure 4.1-5 – Santa Ana River Trail Location ................................................................................................. 4.1-11 Figure 4.1-6 – View From Santa Ana River Trail ............................................................................................ 4.1-12 Figure 4.1-7 – Views From Residential Areas in Riverside ........................................................................ 4.1-13 Figure 4.1-8 – Santa Ana River View from State Route 60 ......................................................................... 4.1-15 Figure 4.1-9 - Illustrative Cross Section at SR 60 and Industrial/Logistics Area .............................. 4.1-16 Figure 4.1-10 – Sign Locations 1 ........................................................................................................................... 4.1-20 Figure 4.1-11 - Sign Locations View 1 ................................................................................................................. 4.1-21 Figure 4.1-12 - View 2 - Eastbound State Route 60 ....................................................................................... 4.1-22 Figure 4.1-13 - View 3 - Westbound State Route 60 ..................................................................................... 4.1-23 Figure 4.1-14 - View 4 - Westbound State Route 60 ..................................................................................... 4.1-24 Figure 4.1-15 - View 5 - Westbound State Route 60 ..................................................................................... 4.1-25 Figure 4.2-1 - Trends of South Coast Air Basin Maximum 3-Year Design Values for Ozone and PM2.5 (1) ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4.2-7 Figure 4.2-2 - Warehouse/Truck Parking Permitted by Land Use Plan ............................................... 4.2-48 Figure 4.2-3 - Existing Sensitive Receptor Locations ................................................................................... 4.2-51 Figure 4.2-4 - Inbound Truck Circulation Plan ................................................................................................ 4.2-54 Figure 4.2-5 - Outbound Truck Circulation Plan ............................................................................................. 4.2-55 Figure 4.2-6 – Operational Truck Circulation Plan ........................................................................................ 4.2-56 Figure 4.3-1 – Soils Map ............................................................................................................................................... 4.3-2 Figure 4.3-2 – Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types ................................................................. 4.3-4 Figure 4.3-3 – Locations of Aquatic Resources ................................................................................................ 4.3-20 Figure 4.4-1 - USGS Topographic Map of the Study Area ............................................................................... 4.4-2 Figure 4.6-1 – Regionally Active Faults ................................................................................................................. 4.6-3 Figure 4.6-2 – Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones .................................................................................... 4.6-4 Figure 4.6-3 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (1 of 8) ............................................. 4.6-5 Figure 4.6-4 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (2 of 8) ............................................. 4.6-6 Figure 4.6-5 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (3 of 8) ............................................. 4.6-7 Figure 4.6-6 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (4 of 8) ............................................. 4.6-8 Figure 4.6-7 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (5 of 8) ............................................. 4.6-9 Figure 4.6-8 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (6 of 8) .......................................... 4.6-10 Figure 4.6-9 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (7 of 8) .......................................... 4.6-11 Figure 4.6-10 – Geotechnical Boring Locations and Geologic Units (8 of 8) ....................................... 4.6-12 Figure 4.6-11 – Paleontological Sensitivity Map ............................................................................................ 4.6-16 Figure 4.8-1 – Locations of SSI Borings ................................................................................................................. 4.8-4 Figure 4.8-2 - Soil Vapor Sampling Locations, 2015 Phase II Subsurface Investigation ................... 4.8-7 Figure 4.8-3 – Open Cortese List Sites On and Within 0.5-Mile of Project Site .................................. 4.8-12 Figure 4.8-4 – Airport Land Use Compatibility Zones for Flabob Airport ............................................ 4.8-14  TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page x June 2023
Figure 4.8-5 – Airport Noise Contours for Flabob Airport ......................................................................... 4.8-15 Figure 4.8-6 - Fire Hazard Severity Zone - State Responsibility Area .................................................... 4.8-17 Figure 4.8-7 - Fire Hazard Severity Zone - Local Responsibility Area ................................................... 4.8-18 Figure 4.9-1 - Surface Water and Watersheds .................................................................................................... 4.9-3 Figure 4.9-2 – FEMA Flood Hazard Zones ............................................................................................................ 4.9-5 Figure 4.10-1 - General Plan Land Use Designations .................................................................................... 4.10-3 Figure 4.10-2 - Zoning Designations .................................................................................................................... 4.10-4 Figure 4.10-3 – Land Use Plan ............................................................................................................................. 4.10-10 Figure 4.11-1 – Mineral Resource Zones and Sectors .................................................................................. 4.11-3 Figure 4.12-1 - Noise Monitoring Locations ..................................................................................................... 4.12-5 Figure 4.12-2 - Noise Contours for Flabob Airport ..................................................................................... 4.12-27 Figure 4.13-1 – Map of Cumulative Projects ................................................................................................. 4.13-13 Figure 4.15-1 – Nearby Public Parks and Recreational Facilities ............................................................ 4.15-0 Figure 4.16-1 – Transit Route #29 ....................................................................................................................... 4.16-6 Figure 4.16-2 – Transit Route #49 ....................................................................................................................... 4.16-7 Figure 4.16-3 – Circulation Plan .................................................................................................................................. 4-9 Figure 4.16-4 – Multi-Use Trail Network ........................................................................................................ 4.16-10 Figure 4.16-5 – Cross Section-Modified Arterial ......................................................................................... 4.16-11 Figure 4.16-6 – Cross Section- Industrial Collector .................................................................................... 4.16-12 F
igure 4.16-7 – Cross Section-Local Street .................................................................................................... 4.16-13 Figure 4.16-8 – Cross Section-Rubidoux Boulevard .................................................................................. 4.16-14 Figure 4.16-9 – Gateway Treatment-Rubidoux Boulevard and A Street ........................................... 4.16-15 Figure 4.16-10 – Gateway Treatment-Rubidoux Boulevard and A Street ........................................ 4.16-15 Figure 4.16-11 – Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) ............................................................................................ 4.16-21 Figure 4.18-1 – Drainage Areas on the Project Site ....................................................................................... 4.18-4

Appendices
Appendix A – Notices and Distribution
Appendix A1 – Notice of Preparation Filing with County Clerk Appendix A2 – Notice of Preparation (NOP)
Appendix A3 – Notice of Completion
Appendix A4 – NOP Distribution Lists
Appendix A5 – Newspaper Publication Affidavit

Appendix B – Scoping Meeting Information
Appendix B1 – Scoping Meeting PowerPoint Presentation

Appendix C – Comments on Notice of Preparation
Appendix C1 – Public Comment Tracking Matrix
Appendix C2 – Public Comments

Appendix D – Technical Reports, Studies, and Assessments Appendix D1 – Air Quality Assessment
Appendix D2 – Health Risk Assessment
Appendix D2.1 – EPA EJScreen Report
Appendix D3 – Biological Technical Report
Appendix D4 – Burrowing Owl Focused Survey
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page xi June 2023
Appendix D5 – Aquatic Delineation
Appendix D6 – Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Habitat Assessment Appendix D7 – Cultural Resources Technical Report
Appendix D8 – Energy Calculations
Appendix D9 – Geotechnical Report 2022
Appendix D10 – Geotechnical Recommendations Memo
Appendix D11 – Geotechnical Report 2015
Appendix D12 – Paleontological Records Search
Appendix D13 – Greenhouse Gas Assessment
Appendix D14 – Phase I Environmental Stie Assessment
Appendix D14.1 – Limited Soil Investigation
Appendix D14.2 – AEI Correspondence to DO Capital
Appendix D14.3 – County of Riverside DEH Concurrence Letter Appendix D15 – Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix D16 – Hydrology and Hydraulics Report
Appendix D17 – Water Supply Assessment
Appendix D18 – Acoustical Assessment
Appendix D19 – Utility and Public Services Information Letters Appendix D20 – Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix D20.1 – Traffic Impact Analysis Memo
Appendix D21 – Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
Appendix D22 – SB 18 Request to Native American Tribes
Appendix D23 – Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study

SECTION 1.0 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-1 June 2023

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the proposed District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan (P roject). In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines § 15123, this chapter provides a brief Project description; identifies significant effects and proposed mitigation measures or alternatives that would reduce or avoid those effects; describes areas of controversy known to the Lead Agency and issues to be resolved; summarizes alternatives; and summarizes environmental impacts.

1.1 Project Overview
The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan proposes development of approximately 248.3 acres in the northeast part of the City of Jurupa Valley, including 1,196 residential units on 42.0 acres; 1,472,500 square feet of commercial uses on 97.7 acres; 30,000 square feet of business park uses on 7.8 acres; 1,500,000 square feet of industrial/logistics uses on 67.3 acres; 11.1 acres of public open space ; and

22.4 acres of public improvements (including roadways and public facilities such as storm drainage basins).

Discretionary Permits
The project includes requests for several discretionary permits detailed below:
• Approval of the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan and repeal of the existing Emerald Meadows Specific Plan (SP-337)
• General Plan Amendment to change the underlying land use designations to accommodate the proposed multi -use Project; create a new General Plan Overlay, the “Commercial Retail -Integrated Use Overlay and establish the Commercial Retail - Integrated Use Overlay on a portion of the Project site; and to establish the Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay Zone on a portion of the Project site. • Change of Zone to modify the existing Specific Plan Zone from the Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan to the new District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan • Development Agreement to vest the Project and allow for the orderly development within the Specific Plan area.
• Tentative Maps(s) to subdivide the Project site into several parcels with varying land uses and including street vacations.

The initial subdivision map for the project is Tentative Tract 38318 that will establish both numbered and lettered lots along with the streets necessary to facility construction of the Project. Development of the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan would be phased through multiple projects over many years. Phase 1 is envisioned to start with demolition and rough grading of the entire Project site in 2023, with completion of the first buildings in 2025. Start of construction of Phase 2 is envisioned with grading in 2026; building completion will be in 2028 (Kimley- Horn, 2023a, p. 45- 48). The Specific Plan would be implemented via multiple development projects. Details as to construction schedules and construction equipment for each development project are identified and analyzed as part of this Environmental Impact Report.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-2 June 2023

1.2 Existing Project Site Conditions
The Project site is vacant except for 11 single-family residences in the central part of the site and two garages on the southeast site boundary at 5231 and 5225 34th Street. Remnants of demolished structures are present near Wallace Street in the middle of the site, and near 30th Street and Hall Avenue in the north part of the site (AEI, 2019). The Project si te is relatively flat; elevations onsite range from approximately 845 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the north -central part of the site to 785 feet amsl next to the south site boundary. The entire site is fenced off. Existing site conditions are discussed in more detail in Section 3.0.

Nearly the entire project site is disturbed land supporting little vegetation, which consists of weeds and scattered trees. A small strip of disturbed riparian vegetation is present along the Jurupa Ditch in the west half of the site.

The General Plan land use designations for the project site are Medium Density Residential (MDR; 2- 5 dwelling units [DU] per acre); Medium High Density Residential (MHDR; 5 -8 DU/acre); High Density Residential (<14 DU/acre); Very High Densit y Residential (< 30 DU/acre); and Commercial Retail (CR) (City of Jurupa Valley, 2022a). The project site is zoned Specific Plan (Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan) (City of Jurupa Valley, 2022b).

1.3 Areas of Controversy
Based on the NOP comment letters provided in Appendix A2 of this DEIR, issues raised by the public included project impacts on: transportation regarding proposed industrial uses; health effects of air pollutants; proposed parks and trails and project impacts on parks; impacts to County draina ge facilities and mitigation for such impacts; and impacts on Native American tribal resources.

Refer to Appendix A2 for all comments received during the public review period, including a comment tracking matrix that provides a summary of the comments rece ived during the public review period and where those comments are addressed in the EIR. It should be noted that CEQA does not require the lead agency to respond individually to all comments received during the public scoping period.

1.4 Summary of Environmental Impacts
Table 1.0-1 below provides a summary of the environmental impacts of the Project evaluated in this DEIR. These impacts are summarized as follows:
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-3 June 2023
Table 1.0-1

IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Aesthetics
a) Would the project have a
substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project
substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
No impact. No mitigation measures are required. No impact. c) In non-urbanized areas, would
the project substantially degrade
the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings (Public
views are those that are
experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point).
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. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. d) Would the project create a new
source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-4 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
affect day or nighttime views in
the area.

Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Impacts determined to be No Impact (see Section 6, Other CEQA Considerations) a) Would the project 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 non-agricultural use? b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Codes § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code § 51104(g))?
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Air Quality
a) Would the project conflict with
or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan?
Significant. MM AQ-1 Mitigation Measures (applicable to all Specific Plan uses). Minimize Construction Emissions.

Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the City Engineer shall confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans and Specifications require all construction contractors to
incorporate the following measures to minimize
construction emissions.
• All off -road diesel -powered construction
equipment greater than 50 horsepower meets California Air Resources Board Tier 4 Final off-road emissions standards or incorporate CARB Level 3 Verified Diesel Emission
Control Strategy (VDECS). Requirements for Tier 4 Final equipment and the option for Level 3 VDECS shal
l be
included in applicable bid documents and successful
contractor(s) must demonstrate the ability to supply such Significant and
unavoidable.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-5 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
equipment. A copy of each unit’s Best Available Control Technology (BACT) documentation (certified tier
specification or model year specifica tion), and CARB or SCAQMD operating permit (if applicable) shall be provided to the City at the time of mobilization of each applicable unit of equipment. This equipment shall be used when
commercial models that meet the construction needs of the proposed
Project are commercially available from local
suppliers/vendors. The determination of commercial
availability of such equipment shall be made by the City, based on applicant-provided evidence from expert sources, such as construction contractors in the region.
• The maximum daily disturbance area (actively
graded area) shall not exceed 4 acres per day.
• Construction equipment shall be properly
maintained according to manufacturer specifications.
• All diesel- powered construction equipment,
delivery vehicles, and delivery trucks shall be turned off when not in use. On- site idling shall be limited to three minutes in any one hour.
• Construction on- road haul trucks shall be model
year 2010 or newer if diesel-fueled.
• Information on ridesharing programs shal l be
made available to construction employees.
• During construction, lunch options shall be
provided onsite.
• A publicly visible sign shall be posted at the
primary construction entrance with the telephone number and person to contact regarding dust com plaints per
SCAQMD Standards.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-6 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
• All construction contractors shall be provided
information on the South Coast Air Quality Management
District Surplus Off- road Opt -In “SOON” funds which
provides funds to accelerate cleanup of off -road diesel vehicles.
• The Project shall demonstrate compliance with
SCAQMD Rule 403 concerning fugitive dust and provide
appropriate documentation to the City of Jurupa Valley. • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging
areas, soil piles, graded areas, unpaved access roa ds) shall be watered two times per day.
• All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other
loose material off-site shall be covered.
• All visible mud or dirt track -out onto adjacent
public roads shall be removed using wet - power vacuum
street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry-power sweeping shall be prohibited.
• All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads, driveways, or
driving surfaces shall be limited to 15 mph.
• All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved
shall be completed as soon as possible.
• Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading, unless seeding or soil binders are used.
• A publicly visible sign shall be posted with the
telephone number and the name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust com
plaints. This person
shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours.

The phone number of the SCAQMD shall also be visible to ensure compliance.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-7 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
MM AQ-2 Low VOC Paint. During construction, the
Project shall utilize “Super -Compliant” low VOC paints which have been reformulated to exceed the regulatory VOC limits (i.e., have a lower VOC content than what is required) put forth by SCAQMD’s Rule 1113 for all architectural
coatings. Super-Compliant low VOC paints shall be no more than 10g/L of VOC. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Jurupa Valley Building and Safety Department shall confirm that plans include the following specifications:
• All architectural coatings will be super -compliant
low VOC paints.
• Recycle leftover paint. Take any leftover paint to a
household hazardous waste center; do not mix leftover
water-based and oil-based paints.
• Keep lids closed on all paint containers when not in
use to prevent VOC emissions and excessive odors.
• For water-based paints, clean up with water only.

Whenever possible, do not rinse the cleanup water down
the drain or pour it directly into the ground or the storm drain. Set aside the can of cleanup water and take it to the hazardous waste center (www.cleanup.org).
• Use compliant low- VOC cleaning solvents to clean
paint application equipment.
• Keep all paint - and solvent -laden rags in sealed
containers to prevent VOC emissions.
• Contractors shall construct/buil d with materials
that do not require painting and use pre-painted
construction materials to the extent practicable.
• Use high- pressure/low-volume paint applicators
with a minimum transfer efficiency of at least 50 percent or  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-8 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
other application techniques w ith equivalent or higher transfer efficiency.

MM AQ-3 Vehicle Trip Reduction. Develop a
qualifying Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)/ Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to reduce mobile
emissions for all uses. The TDM plan shall be approved by the City of Jurupa Valley prior to the issuance of building permits and incorporated into the Project’s Covenants , Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). The TDM plan shall discourage single -occupancy vehicle trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as carpooling, taking transit, walking, and biking. The following measu res shall be incorporated into the TDM plan.

TDM Requirements for Non-Residential Uses:
• The Project Applicant shall consult with the local
transit service provider on the need to provide
infrastructure to connect the Project with transit services.

Evidence of compliance with this requirement may include correspondence from the local transit provider(s) regarding the potential need for installing bus turnouts, shelters, or bus stops at the site.
• The portion of the TDM plan for non -residential
uses shall include, but not be limited to the following potential measures: ride -matching assistance, preferential carpool parking, flexible work schedules for carpools, half- time transportation coordinators, providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides, designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride- sharing vehicles, and including bicycle end of trip facilities.

This list may be updated as new methods become available.

Verification of this measure shall occur prior to building permit issuance for the commercial uses.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-9 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
TDM Requirements for Residential Units:
• Owner-Occupied Units. Upon a residential dwelling
being sold or offered for sale, the Project Applicant shall notify and offer to the buyer or prospective buyer, as soon as it may be done, materials describing public transit, ridesharing, and nonmotorized commuting opportunities
available in the vicinity of the Project. Such information shall be transmitted no later than the close of escrow. This information shall be submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Division for review and approval, prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.
• Rental Units. Upon a residential dwelling being
rented or offered for rent, the Project Applicant or
subsequent property manager shall notify and offer to the tenant or prospective tenant, materials describing public transit, ridesharing, and nonmotorized commuting
opportunities in the vicinity of the development. The
materials shall be approved by the City of Jurupa Valley. The materials shall be provided no later than the time the rental agreement is executed. This information shall be submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Division for review and approval, prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a residential project.

MM AQ-4 Prohibition of Fireplaces. The
installation of wood-burning and natural gas fireplaces shall be prohibited. The purpose of this measure is to limit
emissions of ROG, NOX, particulate matter and visible
emissions from wood -burning and natural gas fireplaces used for supplemental heat, or ambiance and does not apply to HVAC systems. This prohibition shall be noted on the deed and/or lease agreements for future property
owners/tenants to obey
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-10 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
MM AQ-5 Electric Landscape Equipment. Prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits, the Planning Division shall confirm that the Project’s Covenants Conditions and
Restrictions (CC&Rs) and/or tenant lease agreements
include contractual language that all landscaping
equipment us ed onsite shall be 100 percent electrically powered. All residential and non - residential properties shall be equipped with exterior electrical outlets to
accommodate this requirement. This requirement shall be included in the third -party vendor agreements for
landscape services for the building owner and tenants, as applicable. This mitigation measure does not apply to open space areas that are maintained by the Park’s District or City of Jurupa Valley. Those entities are required to comply with applicable State and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) rules regulating landscape equipment.

MM AQ-6 Warehouse Mitigation Measures
(Electrical Rooms). Prior to the issuance of a building permit for tenant improvements, the Planning Department shall confirm that the Project is designed to include the following:
• The buildings’ electrical room shall be sufficiently
sized to hold additional panels that may be needed to supply power for the future installation of electric vehicle (EV) truck charging s tations on the site. Conduit should be installed from the electrical room to tractor trailer parking spaces in a logical location(s) on the site determined by the Project Applicant during construction document plan check, for the purpose of accommodating the future installation of EV truck charging stations at such time this technology becomes commercially available and the buildings are being served by trucks with electric-powered engines.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-11 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
• The buildings’ electrical room shall be sufficiently
sized to hol d additional panels that may be needed in the future to supply power to trailers with transport
refrigeration units (TRUs) during the loading/unloading of refrigerated goods. Conduit should be installed from the electrical room to the loading docks determi
ned by the
Project Applicant during construction document plan check as the logical location(s) to receive trailers with TRUs.

This mitigation measure applies only to tenant
improvements and not the building shell approvals.

MM AQ-7 TRUs to be Plug -in-Capable. Prior to the
issuance of tenant occupancy permits, the Planning
Department shall confirm that tenant lease agreements
include contractual language that requires all Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) entering the Project site be plug- in capable. Ele ctrical hookups shall be provided as part of the tenant improvements for any tenant that requires cold storage. The electrical hookups shall be provided at loading bays for truckers to plug in any onboard auxiliary
equipment and power refrigeration units w hile their truck is stopped. This mitigation measure applies only to tenant improvements and not the building shell approvals.

MM AQ-8 Truck Rule Signage. Prior to the issuance
of a tenant occupancy permit, the Planning Department
shall confirm that all tr uck access gates and loading docks within the Project site shall have a sign posted those states the following:
• Truck drivers shall turn off engines when not in
use.
• Truck drivers shall shut down the engine after five
minutes of continuous idling operation (pursuant to Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 2485). Once  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-12 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
the vehicle is stopped, the transmission is set to “neutral” or “park”, and the parking brake is engaged.
• Telephone numbers of the building facilities
manager and CARB to report violations.
• Signs shall also inform truck drivers about the
health effects of diesel particulates, the California Air Resources Board diesel idling regulations, and the
importance of being a good neighbor by not parking in
residential areas.

This mitigation measure applies only to tenant
improvements and not the building shell approvals.

MM AQ-9 Energy Efficiency for Trucks (Carl
Moyer Program). Prior to the issuance of a tenant
occupancy permit, the Planning Department shal l confirm that the Project plans and specifications shall include requirements (by contract specifications) that vendor
trucks for the industrial buildings include energy efficiency improvement features through the Carl Moyer Program —
including truck modern ization, retrofits, and/or
aerodynamic kits and low rolling resistance tires — to
reduce fuel consumption. This mitigation measure applies only to tenant improvements and not the building shell
approvals.

MM AQ-10 Prior to the issuance of a tenant occupancy
permit for any residential, commercial, or industrial
building, the Planning Department shall confirm that the Project plans and specifications for the residential,
commercial, and industrial buildings shall include electric vehicle (passenger car) chargi
ng stations and parking
spaces at each building for employees and the public to use as required by the CalGreen Code in effect at the time of  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-13 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
permit issuance. This mitigation measure applies only to tenant improvements and not the building shell approvals.

MM AQ-11 Prior to the issuance of a tenant occupancy
permit, the Planning Department shall confirm that the
Project plans and specifications show the following:
• All outdoor cargo handling equipment (including
yard trucks, hostlers, yard goats, pallet ja cks, and forklifts) are zero emission/powered by electricity. Each building shall include the necessary charging stations for cargo handling equipment. Note that SCAQMD Rule 2305
(Warehouse Indirect Source Rule) Warehouse Actions and
Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) points may be
earned for electric/zero emission yard truck/hostler usage.

This mitigation measure applies only to tenant
improvements and not the building shell approvals.
• All standard emergency generators (i.e. non -cold
storage generat ors) shall meet California Air Resources Board Tier 4 Final emissions standards. A copy of each unit’s Best Available Control Technology (BACT) documentation
(certified tier specification) and CARB or SCAQMD
operating permit (if applicable) shall be provid ed to the City.

MM AQ-12 Warehouse Indirect Source Rule (Rule
2305). The Project tenants shall comply with the SCAQMD Warehouse Indirect Source Rule (Rule 2305). This rule is expected to reduce NOX and PM10 emissions during
operations. Emission reductions resulting from this rule were not included in the Project analysis. Compliance with Rule 2305 is enforced by the SCAQMD through their
reporting process and is required for all warehouse projects greater than 100,000 square feet.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-14 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
MM AQ-13 Residential Mitiga tion Measures: Prior
to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant or successor in interest shall provide documentation to the City of Jurupa Valley demonstrating that the Project is designed to prohibit natural gas use within residential structures.
b) Would the project result in a
cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is
non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
Significant. MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-13 apply. Significant and unavoidable.
c) Would the project expose
sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. d) Would the project result in
other emissions (such as those
leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Biological Resources
a) Would the project have a
substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special -status
species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations, or by the
Significant. BIO-1 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey : To remain in compliance with the MBTA and CFGC § 3503 and §
3503.5, no direct impacts shall occur to any nesting birds, including raptors, their eggs, chicks, or nests during the breeding season (February 1 to September 15). If vegetation removal activities must occur during this breeding season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey to determine the presence or absence of breeding migratory Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-15 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
birds, including raptors within the impact footprint. If nests or breeding activities are located on the survey area, an avoidance buffer area would be required around the nesting site. The width of the buffer shall be determined by a
qualified biologist, and biological monitoring would be required during construction until the young have fledge d.

If no nesting birds are detected during the pre-construction survey, no additional measures would be required (RECON, 2023a, p. 29).

BIO-2 Pre -Construction Burrowing Owl Survey: A pre -
construction survey shall be required within 30 days prior to any ground disturbing activities. If western burrowing owls are present, one of the following mitigation measures from the MSHCP (WRCRCA 2003) shall also be required:
• Based on the results of the Pre- Construction
Burrowing Owl Survey, if the site contains or is part of an area that supports less than 35 acres of suitable habitat, or the survey reveals that the site and surrounding area
support fewer than three pairs of western burrowing owls, the on -site western burrowing owls shall be passively or actively relocated following accepted protocols; or
• Based on the results of the Pre- Construction
Burrowing Owl Survey, if the site, including adjacent areas, supports three or more pairs of western burrowing owls, supports greater than 35 acres of suitable habitat, an d is non-contiguous with MSCHP Conservation Area lands, at
least 90 percent of the area with long- term conservation value and western burrowing owl pairs shall be conserved on-site (RECON, 2023a, p. 30).

BIO-3 Biological Monitor: Per the MSHCP requirements
stated in Volume 1, Appendix C of the MSHCP, A qualified project biologist shall monitor construction activities for the duration of the Project to ensure that practicable measures  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-16 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of
habitat and species of concern outside the Project footprint (Riverside County, 2003).
• A biological monitor shall monitor activities that
result in tree or vegetation removal to minimize the
likelihood of inadvertent impacts to nesting birds and
special-status wildlife spe cies, with special attention given to any protected species observed during the pre -
construction breeding bird surveys. Monitoring shall also be conducted periodically during construction activities to ensure no new nests are built during any vegetation
removal or building demolition activities between February 1 and September 15. The biological monitor shall ensure that all Best Management Practices (BMPs), avoidance,
protection and mitigation measures described in the
relevant project permits and reports are in place and are adhered to.
• The biological monitor shall have the authority to
temporarily halt all construction activities and all non - emergency actions if sensitive species and/or nesting birds are identified and would be directly affected. The m onitor shall notify the appropriate resource agency and consult if needed. If necessary, the biological monitor shall relocate the individual outside of the work area where it shall not be harmed. Work can continue at the location if the applicant and the
consulted resource agency determine that the
activity will not result in adverse effects to the species. • The appropriate agencies shall be notified if a dead
or injured protected species is located within the Project site. Written notification shall be made within 15 days of the date and time of the finding or incident (if known) and must include; location of the carcass, a photograph, cause of death (if known), and other pertinent information.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-17 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
b) Would the project have a
substantial adverse impact on
any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. c) Would the project have a
substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
Potentially significant. BIO-4: Prior to City and County approvals, including the issuance of a Riverside County Flood
Control District (RCFCD) Encroachment
Permit, and prior to ground disturbance and
construction of the Project, the applicant shall
obtain or provide documentation that an
Agency declines jurisdiction of any features
and a permit is not required:

A. A Section 404 CWA General or Individual permit for
the permanent fill of 3.10 acres and 4,462 linear feet of Waters of the U.S. or documentation that a Section 404
permit is not required (i.e. Army Corps declines
jurisdiction or definition of Water of US changes
pursuant to Sackett vs. Environmental Protection
Agency;
B. A Section 401 CWA Water Quality Certification from
the RWQCB for water quality impacts related to the
permanent fill of 3.10 acres and 4,462 linear feet of
Waters of the U.S.; and certification in conjunction with the USACE 404 permit or a Waste Discharge
Requirement permit pursuant to Porter-Cologne Act.

Less than significant
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-18 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
C. A Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSAA)
from CDFW to authorize permanent impacts to 3.10
acres and 4,462 linear feet as CDFW Streambed, and

1.43 acres as CDFW Riparian.

The Project Applicant would be responsible for
complying with all permit conditions. Such conditions
may include, but are not limited to, implementation of
best management practices (i.e., erosion and sediment
control measures) and seasonal work restrictions, as
appropriate. In addition, the USACE, RWQCB, and
CDFW are expected to require compensatory
mitigation for impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the
U.S. and State, including riparian habitat. The amount
of required compensatory habitat acreage would be
based on the functions and values of impacted
features. Habitat compensation would be provided at
a ratio of up to 1:1 of created to filled or disturbed in - kind habitat, pending coordination with the agencies.

This ratio may be reduced through the permit process
if the agencies find that a different ratio is sufficient to mitigate impacts to jurisdictional Waters of the U.S.
and State, including riparian habitat. If there is a
change in the law where one or more of these Permits
is not required, evidence of that change shall be
submitted to the Planning D epartment for its review
and concurrence.

d) Would the project interfere
substantially with the movement
of any resident or migratory fish
or wildlife species or with
Less than significant. No mitigation is required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-19 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
established resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the
use of wildlife nursery sites?
e) Would the project conflict with
any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy
or ordinance?
Less than significant. No mitigation is required. Less than significant. f) Would the project conflict with
the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Communities
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
Significant. Mitigation measures BIO-1 – BIO 4 from Section 4.3 and NOI-1 and NOI-2 from Section 4.12, Noise.

Less than significant.

Cultural Resources
a) Would the project c ause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Potentially significant. CUL-1: Cultural Resources Monitoring Program (CRMP). Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the Permit Applicant shall provide evidence to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department that a qualified professional
archaeologist (Professional Archaeologist) that is listed on the City of Jurupa Valley Cultural Resources Consultant List, has been contracted to implement a Cultural Resources
Monitoring Program (CRMP). The CRMP shall identify the
details of all ground disturbing acti vities and provides procedures that must be followed to avoid or reduce
potential impacts to cultural, archaeological, and tribal cultural resources to a level that is less than significant. A fully executed copy of a CRMP along with the executed
copies of Monitoring Agreements with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians -Kizh Nation, Soboba Band of Luiseño Less than significant
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-20 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Indians, and Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation , either
individually or collectively, shall be provided to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department to ensure compliance with this measure. At the conclusion of monitoring, if
resource(s) are determined to be less than significant, written evidence that monitoring was completed shall be provided to the Jurupa valley Planning Department. If any resources(s) are significant, Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CR-2
shall apply.

CUL-2: Treatment Plan. A Treatment Plan shall be
prepared and implemented by the Project Archaeologist to protect the identified archaeological resource(s) from
damage and destruct ion. The Treatment Plan shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(f) for historical resources and Public Resources Code §21083.2(b) for
unique archaeological resources. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment . If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery
excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. If historic Native
American tribal cultural resour ces are involved, the
Treatment Plan shall include a statement that the
preparation of the Treatment Plan was discussed with the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians -Kizh Nation, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, and Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel
Nation. The statement shall identify the date(s) and contact persons involved. A final report containing the significance and treatment findings shall be prepared by the Project Archaeologist and submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department and the Eastern I nformation Center, University of California, Riverside. If a historic tribal cultural resource is involved, a copy shall be provided to the
Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians -Kizh Nation, Soboba  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-21 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Band of Luiseño Indians, and Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel
Nation.
b) Would the project c ause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Significant. Mitigation measures CUL-1 and CUL-2. Less than significant. c) Would the project disturb any
human remains, including those
interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Energy
a) Would the project result in
potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?

and
b) Would the project conflict with
or obstruct a state o r local plan
for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Geology and Soils
a) Would the project directly or
indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects,

 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-22 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. iii) Seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. iv) Landslides? Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. c) Would the project be located
on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project,
and potentially result in on - or
off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-23 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
d) Would the project be located
on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or
property?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. e) Would the project have soils
incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks
or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal
of waste water?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. f) Would the project d irectly or
indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature?
Significant. PALEO-1 Paleontological Monitoring. The
following note shall be included on any Grading Plan:
“Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground - disturbing activities, the Project Applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor. The qualified paleontologist shall monitor mass grading and excavation activities in areas to be graded or excavated in excess of fifteen feet. Full -time monitoring of grading or excavation activities shall be performed starting from the surface in undisturbed areas of older Quaternary (middle to late Pleistocene) alluvial fan deposits within the Project boundary, as shown on a grading plan. Paleontological
monitors will be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and to remove
samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of small fossil inverte brates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow for the removal of abundant or large specimens in a timely manner. Monitoring may be reduced if the
Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-24 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
potentially fossiliferous units are not present in the
subsurface, or if present, are determined upon exposure and examination by qualified paleontological personnel to have a low potential to contain or yield fossil resources.”
PALEO-2 Paleontological Resource Impact
Management Plan. The following note shall be included on any grading plan:
“Prior to the issuance of any permits allowing ground - disturbing activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, pot- holing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, dri lling, and
trenching, the Project Applicant/Developer shall submit a Paleontological Resources Impact Mitigation Program
(PRIMP) for the area to be graded. The PRIMP shall include the methods that will be used to protect paleontological resources that may exist within the Project site, procedures for monitoring, fossil preparation and identification,
curation into a repository, and preparation of a final report at the conclusion of grading pursuant to the
recommendations provided in Paleontological Assessme nt prepared by the San Diego Museum of Natural History on March 30, 2022 (Technical Appendix D12 to this EIR) and the criteria identified below.

Excavation and grading activities in deposits with high paleontological sensitivity (as identified in MM 4.6-1) shall be monitored by a paleontological monitor following the PRIMP. The performance standards set forth in the PRIMP shall include:
a) If paleontological resources are encountered
during the course of ground disturbance, the
paleontological monitor shall have the authority to
halt construction activities and temporarily
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-25 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
redirect work at least 50 away from the area of the
find in order to assess its significance.
b) In the event that paleontological resources are
encountered when a paleontological monitor is not
present, work in the immediate area of the find
shall be redirected and a paleontologist shall be
contacted to assess the find for significance and
adjust the level of monitoring if needed.
c) Collected resources shall be prepared to the point
of identification, identified to the lowest taxonomic
level possible, cataloged, and curated into the
permanent collection of a scientific institution.
d) Identification and curation of specime ns into a
professional, accredited public museum repository
with a commitment to archival conservation and
permanent retrievable storage (e.g., the Western
Science Center Museum, 2345 Searl Parkway,
Hemet, California 92543). The paleontological
program sho uld include a written repository
agreement prior to the initiation of mitigation
activities.
e) At the conclusion of the monitoring program, a
report of findings shall be prepared to document
the results of the monitoring program, including
lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and
graphics to accurately record their original
location.”

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-26 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
a) Would the project generate
greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
Significant. GHG-1 Renewable Energy Generation . Prior
to issuance of each building’s permit for each development phase, the Project shall be required to install solar
photovoltaic (PV) panels or other source of renewable
electricity generation on -site, based on the maximum roof area available for solar (i.e., solar -ready zone). The solar- ready zone shall comply with Section 110.10 of the 2022 California Energy Code and shall comply with access,
pathway, ventilation, an d spacing requirements, and
exclude skylight area.

The final PV generation facility size requires approval by Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE’s Rule 21 governs operating and metering requirements for any facility
connected to SCE’s distribution system. Should SCE limit the off-site export, the proposed Project may utilize a battery energy storage system (BESS) to lower off-site export while maintaining on -site renewable generation to off -set
consumption.

Each building shall include an electrical syst em and other infrastructure sufficiently sized to accommodate the PV arrays. The electrical system and infrastructure must be clearly labeled with noticeable and permanent signage. The schedule of photovoltaic system locations may be updated as needed.

GHG-2: Building Energy Efficiency. Prior to the
issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant or
successor in interest shall provide documentation to the City of Jurupa Valley demonstrating that the Project is designed to achieve Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) standards or meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards in effect at the time of building permit application in order to exceed 2023 Title 24 energy efficiency standards by a minimum of 15 percent.

Significant and
unavoidable.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-27 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
GHG-3: Energy Efficient Appl iances. For
residential projects, all major appliances (e.g., dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers and dryers, and water
heaters) installed shall be Energy Star certified or of equivalent energy efficiency where applicable. Prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, the City of Jurupa Valley shall verify implementation of this requirement.

GHG-4: Solid Waste Diversion. The
development shall divert a minimum of 75 percent of
landfill waste. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, a recyclables collection and load area shall be constructed in compliance with City standards for recyclable collection and loading areas. The diversion plan shall also comply with the established solid waste and recycling laws including AB 939 and AB 341.

b) Would the project conflict with
an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
Significant. MM AQ-3 , AQ -4, AQ-5, and MM AQ-13 in the Air Quality Assessment and MM GHG-1 through GHG-4.

Less than significant.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
a) Would the project c reate a
significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project c reate a
significant hazard to the public or
the environment through
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-28 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Would the project e mit
hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste
within one -quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. d) Would the pr oject b e located
on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code §65962.5 and,
as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
Significant. HAZ-1 Site Remediation Management Plan: In accordance with the December 15, 2022 Standard
Voluntary Agreement entered into between the Project
Applicant and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), prior to issuance of project grading permits, the Project Applicant shall provide written verification to the City of Jurupa Valley demonstrating DTSC approval of: 1) a Supplemental Site Investigation (SSI) Work Plan; and 2) a Removal Action Work Plan (RAW) or Remedial Action Work
Plan (RAP) if removal action is appropriate.

The SSI Work Plan will include a Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan which provides protocols for
sampling to ensure that on-site soils are fully characterized, to the extent practicable, and to ensure proper classification of on
-s
ite soils for on-site reuse or for off-site disposal. The SSI Work Plan shall comply with ASTM Standard E -1903
and DTSC requirements, as applicable.

The RAW Plan shall comply with California Health and
Safety Code Sections 25323.1 and 25356.1. Poten tial
response actions include soil management, land use
controls, cover, capping, and long -term operation and
Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-29 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
maintenance, as needed. The RAW Plan will include
measures to address worker and public safety, air quality, and fugitive dust generated from the earthmoving activities during implementation of the response action. The Removal Action Work Plan will include components such as:
• A Soils Management Plan to ensure safe and
appropriate handling of site soils and transport and
off-site disposal, if necessary.
• Sampling and Analysis Plan with corresponding
Quality Assurance Plan to confirm the effectiveness
of the RAW , if applicable.
• A Contingency Plan for new findings that may occur
during site grading.
• Dust control measures and an Air Monitoring Plan in
accordance with SCAQMD Rule 1156, Rule 1466, and
Rule 403, as applicable.
• Any other components deemed necessary by the
DTSC to protect groundwater, air quality, or human
health or as required by California Health and Safety
Code Section 25356.1.

If the p roposed removal action does not meet the
requirements of Health and Safety Code section 25356.1(h), Proponent will prepare a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) in
accordance with Health and Safety Code section 25356.1(c) for DTSC review and approval.

The RAP summarizes the results of the site characterization, risk evaluation and feasibility study and sets forth in detail appropriate steps to remedy soil, surface water and
groundwater contamination at the Site and adjacent areas.

In addition, the RAP s hall contain a schedule for
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-30 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
implementation of all proposed removal and remedial
actions.

HAZ-2 Post Remediation Requirements/Restrictions:

Prior to issuance of building permits for construction of project buildings on a particular parcel where remediation was required, the Project A pplicant shall provide a copy or copies of a deed restriction or land use covenant, if required by the DTSC, which has been recorded over the parcel for which a building permit is sought. The deed restriction or land use covenant shall serve as a land use control to limit the use of the parcel to permissible uses based upon
applicable screening levels and shall be in a form approved by the DTSC and recorded pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 25395.99.

HAZ-3 Post Remediation Clearance Determination:

Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any project building on a particular parcel where remedial
activities under the oversight of the DTSC occurred, the Project Applicant shall provide written verifica tion from DTSC to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Director
demonstrating either: 1) that the parcel has been
remediated sufficiently to allow safe occupancy of buildings thereon; or 2) issuance of a “No Further Action” letter or equivalent for the parc el. The written verification shall serve to indicate that the parcel is suitable for the intended development based upon screening levels appropriate for the relevant land use exposure scenario, or other risk
methodology required by the DTSC, and that no further
investigation or remediation is required other than any long-term operation and maintenance requirements or
monitoring that may be required by DTSC or other
regulatory agencies.

 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-31 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
e) For a project located within an
airport land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise
for people residing or working in
the project area?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. f) Would the project impair
implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?

Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. g) Would the project expose
people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?

Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Hydrology and Water Quality
a) Would the project violate any
water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project
substantially decrease
groundwater supplies or
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-32 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that
the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c) Would the project
substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the
alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces,
in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or offsite;
ii) Substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would
result in flooding on- or offsite;
iii) Create or contribute
runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted
runoff;
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. iv) Impede or redirect flood
flows?

 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-33 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
d) Would the project result in
flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants
due to project inundation?
No impact. No mitigation measures are required. No impact. e) Would the project conflict with
or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Land Use and Planning
a) Would the project physically
divide an established
community?
No impact. No mitigation measures are required. No impact. b) Would the project cause a
significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use
plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Mineral Resources
a) Would the project result in the
loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the
residents of the state?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project result in the
loss of availability of a locally
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-34 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a
local general plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?
Noise
a) Would the project result in
generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Significant. NOI-1 Construction Noise Mitigation Plan Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, a note shall be provided on grading and building plans indicating that, during grading and construction, the property
owner/developer shall be resp onsible for requiring
contractors to implement the following measures to limit construction-related noise:
• The construction contractor shall limit commercial
construction activities adjacent to or within 200 feet of residential uses to weekdays, between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., and limit high-noise-generating construction activities (e.g., grading, demolition, pile driving) near sensitive receptors to weekdays between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m.
• The construction contractor shall ensure that all
internal combustion engine -driven equipment is equipped with mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.
• The construction contractor shall locate stationary
noise-generating equipment as far as possible from
sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction project area. In addition, the Project contractor shall place such stationary construction
equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from
sensitive receptors nearest the Project site.

Significant and
unavoidable
(cumulative off-site
traffic noise).
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-35 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
• The construction contractor shall prohibit
unnecessary idling (no more than 5 minutes) of internal combustion engines.
• The construction contractor shall, to the maximum
extent practical, locate on -site equipment staging areas to maximize the distance between construction -related noise sources and noise -sensitive receptors nearest the Project site during all project construction.
• For construction activity within 50 feet or impact
pile driving within 285 feet of any noise-sensitive receptors, a temporary noi se barrier shall be installed by the
applicant/developer. This temporary noise barrier shall be installed prior to the onset of construction activities that would require the use of heavy construction equipment. The barrier shall be located between the con struction zone and all adjacent sensitive receptor land uses. The temporary sound barrier shall provide a reduction in noise that shall meet the City’s construction noise threshold of 55 dBA Lmax as measured at the façade of the sensitive receptor land uses. The noise barrier shall be a minimum height of 8 feet and be free of gaps and holes and must achieve a Sound
Transmission Class (STC) of 25 or greater. The barrier can be either (a) a 0.75-inch-thick plywood wall or (b) a hanging blanket/curtain with a surface density or at least 2 pounds per square foot. For either configuration, the construction side of the barrier shall have an exterior lining of sound absorption material with a Noise Reduction Coefficient
(NRC) rating of 0.7 or higher. Temporary barriers would not be necessary if the applicant/developer can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that construction noise levels would be below 80 dBA Leq threshold at sensitive receptors. • Impact pile driving within 285 feet of any noise -
sensitive r eceptors shall use an acoustical shroud (i.e., a  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-36 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
noise curtain shall be installed on the pile driver or around the pile) to reduce noise by up to approximately 15 dBA.

Additionally, foundation pile holes shall be predrilled, or sonic or vibratory pile drives shall be used, as feasible based on geologic conditions, to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile.
• The construction contractor shall designate a
“disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for
responding to any complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator shall determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., a bad muffler) and shall require that measures be implemented to correct the problem.
• These measures may only be granted an exception
if an application for construction-related exception is made to and considered by the Building Official of the City in accordance with Section 11.05.070 of the Municipal Code.

Operational Noise
NOI-2 Stationary Source Operational Noise Reduction
Plan Prior to issuanc e of building permits, the property owner/developer shall be responsible to implement the
following measures to limit on -site operational stationary noise source impacts:
• Any proposed large scale, mixed- use, or master -
planned developments shall demonstrate compliance with
Noise Policy NE 1.9 and NE 1.10 of the City’s Noise Element by incorporating acoustic site planning to the satisfaction of the Planning Director that adequately minimizes potential noise impacts to adjacent land uses to meet the City’s
standards shown in General Plan Figure 7- 3. In addition, such projects shall demonstrate compliance with Noise
Policy NE 3.1 of the City’s Noise Element, such projects and shall submit an Operational Noise Reduction Plan to the  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-37 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Planning Director for review and approval. The plan shall identify specific techniques and measures to reduce on-site stationary operational noise to ensure compliance with the noise performance standards of Section 11.05.040 of the Municipal Code. Noise reduction design features may
include, but are not limited to, locating stationary noise sources on the site to be shielded by structures (buildings, enclosures, or sound walls) or by using equipment that has a quieter noise rating.
• Any future commercial or industrial development
projects that would include stationary noise sources, such as loading, shipping, or parking facilities within 200 feet of a residential parcel, shall demonstrate compliance with Noise Policy NE 3.3 of the City’s Noise Element and shall submit an Operational Noise Reduction Plan to the Planning Director for review and approval. The plan shall identify specific techniques and measures to reduce on -site
stationary operational noise to ensure compliance with the noise performance standards of Section 11.05.040 of the Municipal Code. Noise reduction design features may
include, but are not limited to, locating stationary noise sources on the site to be shielded by structures (buildings, enclosures, or sound walls).

b) Would the project result in
generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Significant from
construction.

Less than significant from
operation.

NOI-3 Construction Vibration Reduction Plan Prior to
issuance of grading and/or building permits, a note shall be provided on grading and building plans indicating that, during grading and construction, the property
owner/developer shall be responsible for requiring
contractors to implement the following mea sures to limit construction-related vibration impacts:
• For any future development projects that would
necessitate the use of pile driving within 100 feet of
Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-38 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
an off-site structure , shall submit a Construction
Vibration Reduction Plan that identifies speci fic
techniques, such as the depth and location of
temporary trenching, that would reduce potential
vibration impacts to less than significant for the
impacted structure.
• For any future development projects that would
necessitate the use of large vibratory rollers within
30 feet of an off -site structure, or the use of other
heavy construction equipment within 15 feet of an
off-
site structure, shall submit a Construction
Vibration Reduction Plan that identifies specific
techniques, such as the depth and loca tion of
temporary trenching, that would reduce potential
vibration impacts to less than significant for the
impacted structure.
• The individual project owner/developer shall
submit the Construction Vibration Reduction Plan
to the Planning Director for review and approval.

Upon approval by the City, the construction
vibration reduction measures shall be incorporated
into the construction documents.

c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land u se plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-39 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Population and Housing
a) Would the project i nduce
substantial unplanned
population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Would the project d isplace
substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Public Services
a) Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for any of
the following public services:

 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-40 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Fire Protection Services Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Police Protection Services Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Schools Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Parks Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Other public facilities?
(Libraries)
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Recreation
a) Would the project increase the
use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Transportation
a) Would the project conflict with
a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-41 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
b) Would the project conf lict or
be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Less than significant for
Residential and
Employment VMT.

Potentially significant for
cumulative VMT.

TRANS-1: Transportation Demand Management
Program. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the
Property Owner shall provide assurances that the
transportation demand management measures described
below, will be perpetually implemented, regardless of
property ownership, and a mechanism for informing
subsequent property owners of the transportation demand management plan requirements. These requirements may
be accomplished through recordation of covenants,
conditions and restrictions and/or the formation of a
transportation management association which ass umes
responsibility for implementation and monitoring of the transportation demand management measures or other
measures deemed acceptable by the City.

TDM Requirements for Non-Residential Uses:

1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any phase, the Project Applicant shall consult with the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) on the need to provide infrastructure to connect the Project with transit services and to relocate the existing bus stop on northbound Rubidoux Boulevard
at Frontage Road southwar
d to the intersection of
Rubidoux Boulevard and proposed A Street. The applicant shall fund such relocation. The Project Applicant shall fund a study on behalf of RTA to determine whether adding bus service along proposed A Street in the Project site would be warranted by potential ridership and be practicable for RTA. Evidence of compliance with this requirement may
include correspondence from the local transit provider(s) regarding the potential need for installing bus turnouts, shelters, or bus stops at the site.

Less than significant
for Residential and
Employment VMT.

Significant and
unavoidable for
cumulative VMT.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-42 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation

2. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any commercial use, future tenants in employment-generating land uses developed pursuant to the proposed Project
shall implement measures including, but not be limited to, the following: ride -matching assistance; preferential
carpool parking; flexible work schedules for carpools;
transportation coordinators; providing a web site or
message board for coordinating rides; designating
adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting
areas for ride -sharing vehicles; and including bicycle end of trip facilities including bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers. The measures chosen must achieve a total estimated VMT reduction not less than 8.3 percent. This list may be updated as new methods become available.

TDM Requirements for Residential Units:

3. Owner-Occupied Units. Upon a residential dwelling being sold or offered for sale, the Project Applicant shall notify and offer to the buyer or prospective buyer, as soon as it may be done,
materials describing public transit,
ridesharing, and nonmotorized commuting opportunities
available in the vicinity of the Project. Such information shall be transmitted no later than the close of escrow. This information shall be submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Division for review and approval prior to the
issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a
residential project.

4. Rental Units. Upon a residential dwelling being rented or offered for rent, the Project Applicant shall notify and offer to the tenant or prospective tenant, materials describing public transit, ridesharing, and nonmotorized commuting opportunities in the vicinity of the development. The
materials shall be approved by the City of Jurupa Valley.  SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-43 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
The materials shall be provided no later than the time the rental agreement is executed. This information shall be submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Division for review and approval, prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for a rental project.
c) Would the project
substantially increase hazards
due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatib le
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. d) Would the project result in
inadequate emergency access?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Tribal Cultural Resources
a) Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as
either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object
with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that
is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in
the California Register of
Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as
Potentially significant. Mitigation measures CUL-1 and CUL-2 in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources.

TCR-1 Disposition of Prehistoric and/or Tribal
Cultural Resources. One of the following treatments
shall be applied:

1. Preservation–in-place, if feasible this is the
preferred option. Preservation in place means avoiding
the resources, leaving them in the place where they
were found with no development affecting the integrity
of the resources.

2. Reburial of the resources on the Project
property. The measures for reburial shall be culturally appropriate as determined through consultation with
the consulting Tribe(s)and include, at least, the
Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-44 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k)?
or
ii) A resource determined by the
lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resource Code § 5024.1. In
applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1,
the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a
California Native American
Tribe?
following: Measures to protect the reburial area from
any future impacts in perpetuit y. Reburial shall not
occur until all required cataloguing and recordation
have been completed on the cultural resources, with
the exception that sacred and ceremonial items, burial
goods, and Native American human remains are
excluded. No cataloguing, ana lysis, or other studies
may occur on human remains grave goods, and sacred
and ceremonial items. The designated 10’ x 10’ location for reburial shall be in a predetermined area that is
limited in accessibility, not subject to erosion or
flooding, and may require the incorporation of natural
deterrents such as prickly plants, etc. The final artifact inventory associated DPR forms and location of the
reburial shall be included in a confidential Phase IV
Report. The Phase IV Report shall be filed with CHRIS
Sy
stem at the Eastern Informational Center, at UC
Riverside, under a confidential cover and not subject to a Public Records Request. Copies of the Phase IV Report shall also be provided to the
Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians-Kizh Nation, Soboba Band of L uiseño
Indians, and Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation.”
Utilities and Service Systems
a) Would the project require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of
Significant for
construction and
operation of proposed
electric lines and natural
gas pipelines.

Less than significant for
storm water drainage and
Mitigation measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 in Section 4.7,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

Less than significant.
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-45 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
balance of new utility
facilities.
b) Would the project have
sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry,
and multiple dry years?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. c) Would the project result in a
determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves
or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve
the project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s
existing commitments?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. d) Would the project generate
solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant. e) Would the project comply with
federal, state, and local
management and reduction
statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
Less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. Less than significant.

Wildfire
 SECTION 1.0 -EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 1-46 June 2023
Threshold Level of Significance
Before Mitigation
Mitigation Measures Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Impacts determined to be Less than Significant (see Section 6, Other CEQA Considerations) a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

SECTION 2.0 - INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-1 June 2023

2.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
This Draft EIR (DEIR) has been prepared in accordance with all criteria, standards, and procedures of CEQA (California Public Resource Code § 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, § 15000 et seq.).

Pursuant to CEQA § 21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article 4 and § 15367, the City of Jurupa Valley is the Lead Agency under whose authority this DEIR has been prepared. “Lead Agency” refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. Serving as the Lead Agency and before considering action to approve the Project, the City of Jurupa Valley has the obligations to:
(1) ensure that this DEIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA; (2) review and consider the information contained in this DEIR as part of its decision making process; (3) make a statement that this DEIR reflects the City of Jurupa Valley’s independent judgment; (4) ensure that all significant effects on the environment are eliminated or s ubstantially lessened where feasible; and, if necessary,
(5) make written findings for each unavoidable significant environmental effect stating the reasons why mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in this DEIR are infeasible and citing the specific benefits of the proposed Project that outweigh its unavoidable adverse effects (CEQA Guidelines §§ 15090 through 15093).

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15040 through § 15043, and upon completion of the CEQA review process, the City of Jurupa Valley has the legal authority to do any of the following:
• Approve the proposed Project;
• Require feasible changes in any or all activities involved in the Project in order to substantially lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment; • Disapprove the Project; or
• Approve the Project even though the Project would cause a significant effect on the environment if the City makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision th at: 1) there is no feasible way to lessen the effect or avoid the significant effect; and 2) expected benefits from the Project will outweigh significant environmental impacts of the Project.

This DEIR fulfills the CEQA environmental review requirements for the Project and all other governmental discretionary and administrative actions related to the Project.

2.1 Document Format
This DEIR contains all of the information required to be included in a DEIR as specified by the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines (California Public Resources Code, § 21000 et. seq. and California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 5). CEQA requires that a DEIR contain, at a minimum, certain specified  SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-2 June 2023
content. The locations of such required content are specified in the list of sections below. • Table of Contents
• Summary: Section 1.0
• Project Description: Section 3.0
• Environmental Setting; Sections 4.1 through 4.18
• Environmental Impact Analysis: Sections 4.1 through 4.18 and Section 5.0 • Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot be Avoided if the Proposed Project is Implemented: Section 6.1
• Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by t he Proposed Project Should it be Implemented: Section 6.3
• Growth-Inducing Impact of the Proposed Project: Section 6.4 • Analysis of the Project’s Energy Conservation Measures: Sections 4.5 and 6.3 • Consideration and Discussion of Mitigation Measures Proposed to Minimize Significant Effects: Sections 4.1 through 4.18 and Section 5.0
• Consideration and Discussion of Alternatives to the Proposed Project: Section 5.0 • Effects Not Found to be Significant: Section 6.5
• Organizations and Persons Consulted: Section 10.0
• Discussion of Cumulative Impacts: Sections 4.1 through 4.18

In summary, the content and format of this DEIR is as follows:
• Section 1.0, Executive Summary, includes a Project introduction, a brief description of the Project, a summary of the areas of contr oversy/issues to be resolved, and a summary of the Project’s environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and significance of impacts following the application of mitigation measures, Project design features, and mandatory compliance with applicable plans, policies, and programs.
• Section 2.0, Introduction and Purpose, provides introductory information about the CEQA process and the responsibilities of the City of Jurupa Valley, serving as the Lead Agency of this DEIR. This section identifies the Project’s potential environmental impacts and effects found not to be significant. This section also includes a description of the Notice of Preparation (NOP) comments received, a description of the document format, as well as the purpose of CEQA and this DEIR.
• Section 3.0, Project Description , serves as the DEIR ’s Project Description for purposes of CEQA and contains a level of specificity commensurate with the level of detail proposed by the Project. This section also describes the environmental setting, including de scriptions of the Project site’s physical conditions and surrounding context used as the baseline for analysis in this DEIR.
• Section 4.0, Environmental Analysis, provides an analysis of potential direct, indirect, and cumulatively considerable impacts that may occur with implementation of the Project. A conclusion concerning significance is reached for each discussion; mitigation measures are presented as warranted. The environmental changes identified in Section 4.0 and throughout this DEIR are referred to as “effects” or “impacts” interchangeably. In the environmental analysis subsections of Section 4.0, the existing and historical baseline conditions are disclosed that are pertinent to the subject area being analyzed, accompanied by a specific analysis of physical impacts that may be caused by Project development. The analyses are  SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-3 June 2023
based in part upon technical reports that are appended to this DEIR . Information also is drawn from other sources of analytical materials that directly or indirectly relate to th e Project and are cited in Section 7.0, References. Where the analysis demonstrates that a physical adverse environmental effect may or would occur without undue speculation after compliance with mandatory federal, State, and local laws and regulations, feasible mitigation measures are recommended to reduce or avoid the significant effect. In most cases, mandatory compliance with regulatory requirements and/or the implementation of the identified mitigation measures would reduce the Project’s adverse environmental impacts to below a level of significance. If mitigation measures are not available or feasible to reduce an identified impact to below a level of significance, the environmental effect is identified as a significant and unavoidable adverse impact, for which a statement of overriding considerations would need to be adopted by the City of Jurupa Valley pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15093.

Section 4.0 is organized by 18 issue areas (Subsections 4.1 through 4.18) with each following the below framework:
o Environmental Setting. Describes the environmental setting, including descriptions of the Project site’s physical conditions, surrounding context, and applicable regulatory requirements, plans, and policies. The existing setting is define d as the condition of the Project site and surrounding area on March 31, 2022, the approximate date that this DEIR’s NOP was released for public review. o NOP/Scoping Comments. Includes public comments received based on this DEIR ’s NOP and Scoping Meeting.
o Thresholds of Significance. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.7, the City of Jurupa Valley adopted local CEQA Guidelines. The City’s local CEQA Guidelines are based on the CEQA checklist included in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G and may h ave been modified to address specific conditions in Jurupa Valley.
o Impact Analysis. As required by CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(a), this DEIR identifies direct, indirect, cumulatively-considerable, short-term, long-term, on-site, and/or off- site impacts of th e Project. A summarized “impact statement” is provided in each subsection following the analysis.
o Plans, Policies, or Programs (PPP). These are existing regulatory requirements such as plans, policies, or programs applied to the Project based on current fe deral, State, or local law which effectively reduce environmental impacts. o Project Design Features (PDF). These include characteristics of the Project that help reduce potential environmental impacts.
o Level of Significance before Mitigation . Concludes the level of significance before mitigation.
o Mitigation Measures. These are the measures proposed to mitigate any potentially significant Project impacts.
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-4 June 2023
o Level of Significance after Mitigation. Concludes whether or not the Project’s direct impacts and cumulat ively considerable impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of mitigation.
o Cumulative Impacts . CEQA requires that a DEIR contain an assessment of the cumulative impacts that may be associated with a proposed project. As noted in CEQA Guidelines § 15130(a), “an EIR shall discuss cumulative impacts of a project when the project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.” “A cumulative impact consists of an impact which is created as a result of the combination of th e project evaluated in the EIR together with other projects creating related impacts” (CEQA Guidelines § 15130(a)(1)).
• Section 5.0, Project Alternatives , describes and evaluates alternatives to the Project that could reduce or avoid the Project ’s adverse environmental effects. CEQA requires a DEIR to consider a reasonable range of alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. Seven alternatives were considered for analysis and five alternatives, including the No Project/No Development Alternative, No Project/Existing Specific Plan Alternative, Reduced Commercial Uses Alternative, Reduced Industrial Uses Alternative, and No Commercial and Industrial Uses Alternative are analyzed and presented as a reasonable range of alternatives in this section.
• Section 6.0 Other CEQA Considerations. This section describes significant unavoidable Project impacts and the reasons why the Project is being proposed notwithstanding the significant unavoidable impacts. An analysis of the significant irreversible changes in the environment and potential secondary effects of the Project are also included. Additionally, this section analyses potential g rowth-inducing impacts of the Project and potential secondary effects caused by the implementation of mitigation measures for the Project . This section provides brief analyses of the two topics not analyzed in detail in Chapter 4, Agriculture and Forestry Resources, and Wildfire.
• Section 7.0 References. This section presents the references cited in the DEIR including the documents (printed and digital references) , websites, data, software, and individuals (personal communications) consulted in preparing this document. • Section 8.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations. This section presents the acronyms and abbreviations used throughout the DEIR.
• Section 9.0 List of Preparers. This section i dentifies the agencies, consultants, and individuals involved in preparing this DEIR.
• Section 10.0 Consultation and Coordination . This section provides a list of federal, state, and local agencies and organizations contacted during preparation of this DEIR. • Section 11.0 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. This section presents a table with Mitigation Measures (MMs), Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs), and any Project Design Feature s (PDFs) specific to each resource area. The table also lists the responsible party/monitoring party and during what stage(s) of the Project these measures would be implemented.
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-5 June 2023
• Section 12.0 Recipients. This section includes a list of agencies, organizations, and individuals to whom notification of availability of the DEIR was sent. • Technical Appendices. CEQA Guidelines § 15147 states that the “information contained in an EIR shall include summarized information sufficient to permit full assessment of significant environmental impacts by reviewing agencies and members of the public,” and that the “placement of highly technical and specialized analysis and data in the body of an EIR shall be avoided.” Therefore, the detailed technical studies, reports, and supporting documentation that were used in preparing this DEIR are bound separately as Technical Appendices. The Technical Appendices are available for review on the City’s website at www.jurupavalley.org/DocumentCenter/Index/68
in the Environmental Reports folder
labeled MA21269 The District at Jurupa Valley during the public review period for the DEIR and are contained in a flash drive in a pocket of the back cover of hard copies of the DEIR. The individual technical studies, reports, and supporting documentation that comprise th e Technical Appendices are listed below in Section 2.5, Technical Reports and Supporting Information.

2.2 Purposes of CEQA and this EIR
As stated by the CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a), the basic purposes of CEQA are to:
• Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed development activities involving discretionary government approvals (including the approval of private development projects); • Identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; • Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be feasible; and
• Disclose to the public the reasons why the governmental agency approved the Project in the manner the agency chose (if the Project involves significant environmental effects).

This DEIR is an informative document that represents the independent judgment of the City of Jurupa Valley regarding the physical environmental effects that could result from the construction and operation of the Project . The City of Jurupa Valley (hereaft er “City”) received applications from DO Capital Partners (hereafter “Project Applicant”) for the approval and development of The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2023) (Project) on approximately 248.3 gross acres.

The subject property (hereafter, “Project site”) is located in the City of Jurupa Valley, east of Rubidoux Boulevard, north of 34th Street, south of the SR-60 freeway, and west of the Santa Ana River. The new specific plan (The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan) would replace the Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan (SP-337) and EIR (SCH 2004031007) that was approved by Riverside County in 2005, prior to the City’s incorporation.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15161, a Project EIR should “…focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project,” and “…examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.” As the first step in the CEQA compli ance process, the City of Jurupa Valley prepared an NOP pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15082. When the  SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-6 June 2023
Lead Agency determines that an EIR will clearly be required for the project, an Initial Study is not required (CEQA Guidelines § 15063). Since it was determined that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, the Lead Agency determined that an EIR was required and an Initial Study was not prepared. Public comments were received on the NOP, and the D EIR addresses the environmental topics listed below in Section 2.8, Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting, in the DEIR.

2.3 Regionally Significant Project
When an EIR is prepared for any project that is considered to be of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance, as defined by CEQA Guidelines § 15206, then the Draft EIR must be submitted to the State Clearinghouse and the appropriate metropolitan area council of governments for review and comment. A project is considered to be of statewide, regional, or area -wide significance if, among other criteria, it consists of a proposed local general plan, element, or amendment thereof for which an EIR was prepared.

The proposed Project includes a requested General Plan Amendment to change the underlying land use designations to accommodate the proposed multi -use Project, and to establish the Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay Zone on a portion of the Project site.

Therefore, the Project is considered a Regionally Significant Project under CEQA Guidelines § 15206.

Thus, in compliance with CEQA Guidelines § 15206, the Draft EIR will be submitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) for review and comment.

2.4 Incorporated Documents
CEQA Guidelines § 15150 permits the incorporation by reference “ [of] all or portions of another document … [and is] most appropriate for including long, descriptive, or technical materials that provide general background but do not contribute dir ectly to the analysis of a problem at hand.” Documents, analyses, and reports that are incorporated into this DEIR by reference are listed below and are also found in Section 7.0, References, of this DEIR. The purpose of incorporation by reference is to assist the Lead Agency in limiting the length of an EIR. Where this DEIR incorporates a document by reference, the document is identified in the body of the DEIR, citing the appropriate section(s) of the incorporated document and describing the relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and this DEIR. All references cited in this DEIR are available at the website address provided in Section 7.0, References, and/or at the City of Jurupa Valley City Hall, Planning Department, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, California 92509.

The following documents are incorporated by reference and cited in this DEIR as appropriate:
• The City of Jurupa Valley General Plan, adopted by the City Council on September 7, 2017. • City of Jurupa Valley Zoning Map, updated concurrently as of the time of this writing. • City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code (various chapters), codified through Ordinance No. 2022-20, enacted November 23, 2022.
• City of Jurupa Valley Zoning Ordinance Title 9, codified through Ordina nce No. 2022 -20, enacted November 23, 2022.
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-7 June 2023

2.5 Technical Reports and Supporting Information
This DEIR contains detailed technical studies, reports, and supporting documentation summarized herein and bound separately in Technical Appendices in accordance with CEQA Guidelines § 15147.

The Technical Appendices are available for review at the City of Jurupa Valley City Hall, Planning Department, 8930 Limonite Avenue, Jurupa Valley, California 92509 during the c ity’s regular business hours or can be requested in el ectronic form by contacting the c ity’s Planning Division or are available on the c ity’s website at www.jurupavalley.org /DocumentCenter/Index/68 in the Environmental Reports folder labeled MA21269 The District at Jurupa Valley during the public review period for the DEIR. The individual technical studies, reports, and supporting documentation that comprise the Technical Appendices are as follows:

This DEIR includes the following appendices:

• Appendix A – Notices and Distribution
o A1 – Notice of Preparation Filing with County Clerk
o A2 – Notice of Preparation (NOP)
o A3 – Notice of Completion
o A4 – NOP Distribution Lists
o A5 – Newspaper Publication Affidavit
• Appendix B – Scoping Meeting Presentation and Comments o B1 – Scoping Flysheet
o B2 – Scoping Meeting PowerPoint Presentation
• Appendix C – Comments on Notice of Preparation
o C1 – Public Comment Tracking Matrix
o C2 – Public Comments
• Appendix D – Technical Reports, Studies, and Assessments o Appendix D1 – Air Quality Assessment
o Appendix D2 – Health Risk Assessment
o Appendix D2.1 – EPA EJScreen Report
o Appendix D3 – Biological Technical Report
o Appendix D4 – Burrowing Owl Focused Survey
o Appendix D5 – Aquatic Delineation
o Appendix D6 – Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly Habitat Assessment o Appendix D7 – Cultural Resources Technical Report
o Appendix D8 – Energy Calculations
o Appendix D9 – Geotechnical Report 2022
o Appendix D10 – Geotechnical Recommendations Memo 2019 o Appendix D11 – Geotechnical Report 2015
o Appendix D12 – Paleontological Records Search
o Appendix D13 – Greenhouse Gas Assessment
o Appendix D14 – Phase I Environmental Stie Assessment
o Appendix D14.1 – Limited Soil Investigation
o Appendix D14.2 – AEI Correspondence to DO Capital
o Appendix D14.3 – County of Riverside DEH Concurrence Letter o Appendix D15 – Water Quality Management Plan
o Appendix D16 – Hydrology and Hydraulics Report
o Appendix D17 – Water Supply Assessment
o Appendix D18 – Acoustical Assessment
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-8 June 2023
o Appendix D19 – Utility and Public Services Information Letters o Appendix D20 – Traffic Impact Analysis
o Appendix D20.1 – Traffic Impact Analysis Memo 2023
o Appendix D21 – Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
o Appendix D22 – SB 18 Request to Native American Tribes o Appendix D23 – Sanitary Sewer Capacity Study
o Appendix D24 – Caltrans Declassification Request Evaluation Report

2.6 Responsible and Trustee Agencies
The California Public Resource Code (§ 21104) requires that all EIRs be reviewed by responsible and trustee agencies (see also CEQA Guidelines § 15082 and § 15086(a)). As defined by CEQA Guidelines § 15381, “the term ‘Responsible Agency’ includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency that have discretionary approval power over the project.” A “Trustee Agency” is defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15386 as “a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California.” Table 2.6-1, Responsible and Trustee Agencies, identifies the Responsible and Trustee Agencies and various actions needed by these agencies to implement the Project.

Table 2.6-1

RESPONSIBLE AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES
Agency Action
Responsible Agencies
California Department of Toxic Substances Control
(DTSC)
Responsible for oversight of contaminated soil
removal from the Project site to ensure public health
and safety pursuant to the December 15, 2022
Standard Voluntary Agreement e ntered into by and
between the Project Applicant and DTSC.

Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
Responsible for the master planned drainage
infrastructure that would be utilized by the Project
and issuing an encroachment permit for any
construction related activities occurring within
District right of way or facilities.

Rubidoux Community
Services District (RCSD)
Approvals required for the installation of new RCSD
facilities/connections to service the Project
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB)
Responsible for the protection of California’s water
resources and water quality. The S anta Ana RWQCB
is responsible for issuance of a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permit to
ensure that during and after Project construction,
on-site water flows do not result in siltation, other
erosional actions, or degradation o f surface or
subsurface water quality. Implementation of Waste
Discharge Requirements ( WDR) program for
streambed alteration.

South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD)
Responsible for the issuance of construction-related
permits. that allow for the construction and
operation of the Project to ensure that during and
post-Project construction and during Project
operation, Project emissions do not result in
significant impacts to air quality
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-9 June 2023
Agency Action
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Responsible for the issuance of any regulatory permits for jurisdictional waters.

California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) Responsible for issuance of encroachment permits if required.

Jurupa Area Recreation and Parks District (JARPD) Responsible for approval of all park development plans.

US Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) Responsible for the issuance of any regulatory permits for jurisdictional waters.

2.7 Public Review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report This DEIR is being distributed to responsible agencies, other affected agencies, and interested parties.

Additionally, in accordance with Public Resources Code § 21092(b)(3), the DEIR is being provided to all parties who have previously requested copies. The Notice of Completion (NOC) and Notice of Availability (NOA) of the DEIR will be distributed as required by CEQA. During the 45 -day public review period, this, DEIR its technical appendices, and all documents incorporated by reference, will be made available for review.

After the 45 -day public review period, the City will issue written responses to all environmental issues raised. The Final EIR (which includes the DEIR, the public comments and responses to the DEIR, and findings) will be included as part of the environmental record for consideration by the City Council.

2.8 Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting
Table 2.8-1 , Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments, summarizes the substantive comments received regarding this DEIR ’s NOP. The purpose of this table is to present the primary environmental issues of concern raised by public agencies and the general public during the NOP review period and this DEIR’s Scoping Meeting. The table is not intended to list every comment received by the City during the NOP review period. Regardless of whether or not a comment is listed in the table, all applicable comments received in response to the NOP and at the Scoping Meeting are addressed in this DEIR. The NOP and all comment letters received by the City in response to the NOP are included in Appendix B and Appendix C of this DEIR.

Table 2.8-1

SUMMARY OF NOP AND SCOPING MEETING COMMENTS
Agency/
Organization/
Individual
Date Comments
Location in this
DEIR Where
Comment is
Addressed
Public Agencies
California
Department of
Justice
April 11,
2022
Keep this Agency on the notification list for the
Project. Is there a site plan that you can share?
Noticing;
Section 3, Project
Description
City of Riverside
Community
Development
Department

April 29,
2022
All cumulative and regional impacts be fully
analyzed and mitigated.

Parks, Recreation, and Community Services:
• Impacts on City’s parks, include
Sections 4.1-4.18,
Cumulative impacts:

Section 4.15
Recreation
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-10 June 2023
Agency/
Organization/
Individual
Date Comments
Location in this
DEIR Where
Comment is
Addressed
mitigation measures for any recreational
impacts.
• Consistency with the City’s Trails Master
Plan
• Discuss trail connection to local, County
and adjacent jurisdiction trail systems
• Discuss the Mission Boul evard Bridge
Replacement Project and the trail facilities
to be included in the District Plan to
facilitate trail travel between the Project
area and Riverside.
• Discuss the interface of development
along the Santa Ana River to avoid turning
our backs on th e River. Impacts on views
of the rivers and adjacent parks and open
spaces from the 60 Freeway.
• Provide a call-out for the green line on the
eastern edge of the industrial logistics
land use.

Public Works – Traffic Engineering Division :
requests a school evaluation to determine where all
students from the new housing will attend.

Public Works – Land Development Division:
requests review of the Drainage Study and Public
Works Section.

Section 4.1,
Aesthetics

Sections 4.14, Public
Services,
and 4.15, Recreation

Section 4.10, Land
Use and Planning
County of
Riverside -
Riverside County
Department of
Environmental
Health
March 31,
2022
Requests that the applicant completes the DEH
[Department of Environmental Health] review
process.

Section 4.8, Hazards
and Hazardous
Materials
Native American
Heritage
Commission
(NAHC)
April 14,
2022
• Recommends consultation with the
California Native American tribes that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with
the geographic area of your proposed
Project.
• Provided the requirements of AB 52 and SB

18. Sections 4.4,
Cultural Resources,
and 4.14, Tribal
Cultural Resources
Riverside County
Flood Control and
Water
Conservation
District
April 28,
2022
• Any District ROW or easements will
require an encroachment permit.
• Include all appendices that were used to
support the conclusions found i n the
environmental document.
• Regulatory Permits: If regulatory permits
are required, the applicant will be required
to furnish such permits prior to the
issuance of a District Encroachment
Informational

 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-11 June 2023
Agency/
Organization/
Individual
Date Comments
Location in this
DEIR Where
Comment is
Addressed
Permit.
• District will review to verify that
temporary and permanent impacts with its
ROW or easement are covered.
• District will need to confirm that no
compensatory mitigation would impede
the District’s maintenance activities.
• District is Responsible Agency and an
MSHCP Permittee. CEQA document should
include a MSHCP Consistency analysis.
• District would consider accepting
ownership of certain storm drain facilities
that are constructed as part of the Project
upon written request
• Site in Rubidoux Master Drainage Plan
area; thus, the Project may cause impacts to
MDP facilities

Section 4.3,
Biological Resources City of Fontana May 2,
2022
Requests to review transportation impact analysis Request to Review Document
RCA/Riverside
County
Transportation
Commission

April 1,
2022
• A portion of the Project occurs w/in MSHCP
cells and a Joint Review (JPR 05- 03—03-
01) was performed by the RCA and the
Project was found to be consistent with the
MSHCP.
• The site in MSCHP criteria cells. RCA found
EMRSP consistent w/MSHCP, but neither
CDFW nor USFWS concurred.

Southern
California
Association of
Governments
(SCAG)
April 27,
2022
• Analyze consistency w/adopted 2020 –
2045 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS or Connect SoCal).
• Requests review of the environmental
document
Sections 4.16,
Transportation, and

4.10, Land Use and
Planning
South Coast Air
Quality
Management
District (South
Coast AQMD)
April 14,
2022
• Requests that all appendices and technical
documents related to air quality, health
risk, and greenhouse gas analyses and
electronic versions of all emission
calculation spreadsheets including input
and output files be sent to them.
• CEQA Air Quality Analysis: recommends
using the AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality
Handbook and website. Identify all
potential adverse air quality impacts and
all pollutant sources.
• Mitigation Measures: Significant adverse
air quality impacts, required feasible
mitigation measures that go beyond what
is required by law to minimize these
impacts.

Section 4.2, Air
Quality
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-12 June 2023
Agency/
Organization/
Individual
Date Comments
Location in this
DEIR Where
Comment is
Addressed
• Health Risk Reduction Strategies: relating
to the effectiveness and feasibility of any
filtration units, including building
filtration systems, building design,
orientation, location, vegetation barriers
or landscape screening.

Riverside County
Airport Land Use
Commission
April 12,
2022
Project requires ALUC review. Project is located
with the Flabob Airport Influence
Area (AIA) and Riverside Municipal AIA.

Section 4.8, Hazards
and Hazardous
Materials
Organizations
Southern
California Edison
December
14, 2020
States that the Project may interfere with easement
rights, and/or facilities held by Southern California
Edison and requests grading, drainage, landscape,
and street improvement plans/maps with
references to Edison facilities and easements.

Informational
Californians Allied
for a Responsible
Economy
("CARE CA")
April 29,
2022
General Comments
Project Description and Baseline
• Unspecified Industrial Use: include
potential use of transportation
refrigeration units (TRUs) during Project
operation, and heavy truck traffic in its
VMT analysis.
• Air Quality: address current
epidemiological studies regarding the
effects of pollution and various kinds of
environmental stress on public health.
• Mitigation: Every effort must be made to
incorporate modern technology in the
mitigation measures and MMRP. For
example, a requirement that all off -road
equipment and trucks using the site
during cons truction and operations be
zero emission, near- zero emissions or
alternative-fueled vehicle.
• Full Disclosure: Provide all sources and
referenced materials.

Sections 4.16,
Transportation, and

4.2, Air Quality
Gabrieleno Band
of Mission Indians
– Kizh Nation
April 5,
2022
Wants to set up a meeting to discuss the Project.

Requests consultation.

Section 4.17, Tribal
Cultural Resources
Southern
California Gas
Company
April 25,
2022
SoCalGas does not operate any facilities within this
Project.

The distribution of SoCalGas may maintain and
operate facilities within your Project scope.

Assure that there is no conflict.

Section 4.18, Utilities
and Service Systems
Southwest
Carpenters
April 29,
2022
Labor union representing 50,000 union carpenters.

City should require community benefits such as
requiring local hire and use of a skilled and trained
workforce to build the Project.

Require workers who have graduated from a Joint
Does not address
CEQA adequacy

 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-13 June 2023
Agency/
Organization/
Individual
Date Comments
Location in this
DEIR Where
Comment is
Addressed
Labor Management apprenticeship training
program.

Local hire; COVID workplace safety
Yuhaaviatama of
San Manuel
Nation
April 26,
2022
Nearby cultural resources within the proposed
Project area.

Requests the cultural report, geotechnical report
and Project plans showing the depth of proposed
disturbance.

Section 4.17, Tribal
Cultural Resources

2.9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
In compliance with Public Resources Code § 21081.6 a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) will be prepared for this DEIR. Per CEQA § 15091(d), “When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures.”

2.10 Potential Impacts of the Project Discussed in the DEIR In compliance with the procedural requirements of CEQA, the City of Jurupa Valley prepared an NOP (Appendix A) to determine the scope of environmental analysis for this DEIR. Public comment on the scope of this DEIR consisted of written comments received by the City of Jurupa Valley in response to the NOP. This DEIR is a full scope DEIR. During preparation of the DEIR the City determined that impacts to two environmental factors —Agricultural Resources and W ildfire—would be less than significant. Impacts on those two factors are addressed in Section 6.5, Effects Not Found to be Significant.

Each subsection of Section 4.0 of the DEIR evaluates several specific subject matters related to the general topic of the subsection. The title of each subsection is not limiting; therefore, refe r to each subsection for a full account of the subject matters addressed therein. Environmental issues and their corresponding sections are listed as follows:

4.1 Aesthetics 4.10 Land Use and Planning

4.2 Air Quality 4.11 Mineral Resources

4.3 Biological Resources 4.12 Noise

4.4 Cultural Resources 4.13 Population and Housing

4.5 Energy 4.14 Public Services

4.6 Geology and Soils 4.15 Recreation

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.16 Transportation

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems  SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-14 June 2023

2.11 Effects Found Not to be Significant
Section 15128 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR “contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that various possible significant effects of a project were determined not to be significant and were therefore not discussed in detail in the EIR.” The following topics were found to have either no impact or a less than significant impact on the environment and therefore did not warrant further analysis in the DEIR and thus do not warrant mitigation: agriculture and forestry resources, and wildfire. Refer to the text below for a brief discussion of each of these environmental topics, which were eliminated from further analysis in the DEIR.

2.12 Agriculture and Forestry Resources-
Threshold a): Would the project 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 non-agricultural use? Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project woul d have significant effects if: The Project is identified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on General Plan Figure 4.13, Farmland in Jurupa Valley and the project will convert such land to non-agricultural use.

Most of the Project site, approximately 166 acres, is mapped as Other Land, which is land not included in any other farmland mapping category. The balance of the Project site – approximately 66 acres – is mapped as Urban and Built -Up Land. No prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, or unique farmland are mapped on or near the site; therefore, no impacts would occur.

Threshold b): Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is located within the A-P (Light Agriculture with Poultry); A-2 (Heavy Agriculture); or A-D (Agriculture- Dairy) zone and the project proposes a use inconsistent with the permitted or conditionally permitted uses in these zones; and/or the project is under an existing Williamson Act Contract pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 and implemented by Riverside County Ordnance No, 509 and a Notice of Cancellation.

The Project site is zoned Specific Plan. The existing Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan (EMRSP) permits residential, commercial, institutional, and park and open space uses (JHA Consulting, 2005).

The EMRSP does not permit agricultural uses. Upon approval of the proposed District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan, the site would also be zoned Specific Plan, and again would not be zoned for agricultural uses. Project implementation would not conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and no impact would occur.

The Project site is not subject to Williamson Act contracts; the nearest agricultural preserve is approximately 3.5 miles away. Project implementation would not conflict with Williamson Act contracts, and no impact would occur.
 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-15 June 2023
Threshold c): Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: N/ A.

There is no land within Jurupa Valley that meets the criteria to be classified as "forest land" or "timberland."
The Project site is zoned Specific Plan (SP), and is not zoned as forest land, timberland, or timberland production. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with zoning for forest land or timberland, and no impact would occur.

Threshold d): Would the proj ect result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: N/A.

There is no land within Jurupa Valley that meets the criteria to be classified as "forest land." No forest land is present on or next to the Project site. The Project site is almost entirely vacant, and is 96.9 percent disturbed land, 2.5 percent developed land, and 0.6 percent disturbed riparian.

Disturbed land appears to have been historically graded and/or developed and shows signs of being recently mowed or disked. This area contains little vegetation cover, consisting mostly of bare ground, nonnative weeds, and scattered trees (Recon, 2022). Project development would not cause a loss of forest land or convert forest land to non-forest use, and no impact would occur.

Threshold e): Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farm land, to non -agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
The Project site and surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture. Land to the south, west and northwest of the site is built out with urban uses, and the Santa Ana River abuts the east site boundary. The areas to the north, south and west are designated as “Urban and Built -up Land”, and the areas to the east are designated as “Other Lands”. No mapped Important Farmland or forest land is present surrounding the Pr oject site. Therefore, project development would not indirectly convert farm or forest lands to non-agricultural use or non-forest use on land surrounding the Project site, and no impact would occur.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the proje ct would have significant effects if: The project is located on "Farmland of Local Importance" as shown on General Plan Figure 4.13, Farmland in Jurupa Valley or by the Farmland Maps maintained by the California Department of Conservation) and the project is inconsistent with General Plan Policy COS 4.2 Agricultural Land Conversion which states: "Discourage the conversion of productive agricultural lands to urban uses unless the property owner can demonstrate overarching Community -wide benefits or need for conversion."

2.13 Wildfire

 SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-16 June 2023
Under the City’s local significance Screening Criteria: If the project site is not located in or near state responsibility area as shown on the State Responsibility Area Viewer maintained by the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection or within a High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as shown in General Plan Figure 8- 11: Wildfire Severity Zones in Jurupa Valley, it may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

The Project site is not locat ed within in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone ( FHSZ) mapped by CAL FIRE.

Notwithstanding, for disclosure purposes, the following thresholds were evaluated:

Threshold a): If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The Project site is not located within in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone ( FHSZ) mapped by CAL FIRE.

The nearest FHSZ to the Project site is a High FHSZ in a State Responsibility Area (SRA) approximately

0.3 mile to the northwest (CAL FIRE, 2022). The nearest Very High FHSZ in a Local Responsibility Area to the Project site is a Very High FHSZ approximately 1.8 miles to the west in the city of Jurupa Valley (CAL FIRE, 2022a). A portion of the Project site is within a Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) area mapped as an Interface Zone (CAL FIRE, 2022c); however, it does not meet the WUI cri teria since it is not also located within a FHSZ.

Emergency response plans relevant to the Project site include the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2018), the County of Riverside Multi -Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (County of Riverside, 2018), and the Riverside County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) (County of Riverside, 2019). Evacuation routes abutting and near the Project site are presumed to include Rubidoux Boulevard and Mission Boulevard – both of which are de signated Primary Corridors in the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan – and SR-60.

Construction
Project construction would not impair implementation of an emergency response plan. Construction would not impede emergency access to the Project site or the su rrounding community. Trucks and construction equipment would travel to and from the site via truck routes designated by the City of Jurupa Valley. Rubidoux Boulevard and Mission Boulevard are each designated Primary Corridors by the City of Jurupa Valley G eneral Plan. Offsite improvements would consist of connections of proposed utilities to existing utilities in roadways next to the site.

Project construction would comply with all applicable codes and ordinances for emergency access.

Therefore, with adhere nce to regulatory requirements, construction would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, any adopted emergency response or evacuation plans.

Operation
During operation, the proposed Project would not involve activities that would impede public access or travel along the public right -of-way or interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. The proposed Project would continue to adhere to the City’s and County’s emergency response plans and policies. Therefore, project operation would have less than significant impacts regarding emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans.  SECTION 2.0 – INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 2-17 June 2023
Threshold b): Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
No slopes are present on or next to the Project site that would substantially exacerbate wildfire hazards. The mean wind speed in Riverside is approximately fou r miles per hour most of the year (March through December), and lower than that in January and February. Prevailing directions are from the east and southeast (Pacific Energy Center, 2015). Project development would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope or prevailing winds, and impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold c): Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Project development would involve installation and maintenance of utilities. Utility mains would be installed in proposed roadways onsite and would be extended to connect to utility mains in existing roadways next to the site. Construction and maintenance of underground utilities would not substantially exacerbate fire risk. Impacts of such construction and maintenance would be part of the impacts of the whole project analyzed throughout Chapter 4 of this DEIR; no additional impact would occur.

Electric distribution lines on Rubidoux Boulevard west of the site and 34th Street south of the site are overhead. Electric distribution lines installed as part of the Project would be underground.

Project development would not involve installation or maintenance of overhead electric lines that would exacerbate wildfire risks. Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold d): Would project development expose people o r structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
No substantial slopes – where impacts subsequent to wildfires, including flooding, landsli des, and mudflows, could be anticipated to originate – are present onsite. Project construction would include installation of a drainage system with capacity meeting requirements of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Theref ore, Project drainage changes would not cause downstream flooding. Impacts would be less than significant.

Section 6.5 of this DEIR includes a discussion as to why these environmental topics have been determined to be not significant.

SECTION 3.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION
 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-1 June 2023

3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 Introduction and Project Background
The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan proposes development of approximately 248.3 acres in the northeast part of the City of Jurupa Valley, including 1,196 residential units on 42.0 acres; 1,472,500 square feet of commercial uses on 97.7 acres; 30,000 square feet of business park uses on 7.8 acres; 1,500,000 square feet of industrial/logistics uses on 67.3 acres; 11.1 acres of public open space; and

22.4 acres of public improvements (including roadways and public facilities such as storm drainage basins). The Project site is bounded by the State Route (SR) 60 freeway on the north, the Santa Ana River on the east, 34 th Street and single -family residential uses on the south, and Rubidoux Boulevard on the west. Most of the Project site is vacant and undeveloped, though previously used for agriculture, commercial and residential uses; 11 single- family residences are present in the central part of the Project site.

The County of Riverside approved the Emerald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan (EMRSP) SP-337 on the site in 2005, but the EMRSP was not developed. The EMRSP proposed a mixed -use community with residential, commercial retail, and park and open space uses.

The Project includes applications for the following discretionary permits from the City of Jurupa Valley, the lead agency:
• Approval of the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan and repeal of the existing Emerald Meadows Specific Plan (SP-337)
• General Plan Amendment to c hange the underlying land use designations to accommodate the proposed multi-use Project; create a new General Plan Overlay, the “Commercial Retail - Integrated Use Overlay and establish the Commercial Retail- Integrated Use Overlay on a portion of the Project site; and to establish the Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Center Overlay Zone on a portion of the Project site.
• Change of Zone to modify the existing Specific Plan Zone from the Eme rald Meadows Ranch Specific Plan to the new District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan • Development Agreement to vest the Project and allow for the orderly development within the Specific Plan area.
• Tentative Maps(s) to subdivide the Project site into several parcels with varying land uses and including street vacations. The initial subdivision map for the project is Tentative Tract 38318 that will establish both numbered and lettered lots along with the streets necessary to facilitate construction of the Project.

3.2 Project Location and Setting

3.2.1 Project Location and Existing Conditions
The Project site is approximately 248 acres on the east boundary of the City of Jurupa Valley, which is in the northwest corner of Riverside County and in the Upper Santa Ana River Valley (see Figure

3.2-1). Regional access to the Project site area is from SR-60 via Rubidoux Boulevard. Wallace Street passes through the Project site north to south; Hall Avenue /30th Street (one roadway with two names for different segments) passes through the northern part of the site. The entire site is fenced, including along Wallace Street, Hall Avenue and 30th Street within the Project site, and along  SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-2 June 2023
Rubidoux Boulevard on the west and 34th Street on the south. No public access to the site is available with the exception of access to existing residential uses. The Project site consists of 85 parcels.  SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-0 June 2023
Figure 3.2-1

REGIONAL LOCATION

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-1 June 2023
The Project site is vacant except for 11 single-family residences in the central part of the site and two garages on the southeast site boundary at 5231 and 5225 34th Street. Remnants of demolished structures are present near Wallace Street in the middle of the site, and near 30th Street and Hal l Avenue in the north part of the site (AEI, 2019). The Project site is relatively flat; elevations onsite range from approximately 845 feet above mean sea level (amsl) in the north -central part of the site to 785 feet amsl next to the south site boundary.

3.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is surrounded by the following land uses (see Figure 3.2-2):
• North: The SR -60 freeway, single- family and multi -family residential, commercial and industrial uses.
• South: Single family and multi -family dwellings, ch urches, educational institutions, and light agriculture uses.
• East: Santa Ana River and City of Riverside jurisdictional boundary with residential, and parks and recreational uses.
• West: Single-family and multi-family residential, and commercial uses.

3.3 Project Objectives
The applicant’s objectives for the proposed Project are:
• Respond to the physical and market -driven aspects of future development opportunities.
• Transform the area into a visually attractive , welcoming, and safe development and environment.
• Define the appropriate location, maximum intensity and mix of uses through new development standards.
• Create guidelines and standards for architecture that reinforces the unique character and identity of the City of Jurupa Valley characterized by high quality architectural forms and material and emphasize a Southern California lifestyle that maximizes the outdoor spaces.
• Encourage compatible land uses and interface with adjacent properties by incorporating natural buffers with expanded parkways, trails, drives and/or local streets.
• Facilitate a balance of job-to-housing growth within the City of Jurupa Valley. • Capitalize on predictable and marketable future development opportunities that provide the City with economic benefits through employment, tax revenues and infrastructure improvements.
 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-0 June 2023
Figure 3.2-2

PROJECT LOCATION

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-0 June 2023
• Establish an open space plan that accommodates recreation amenities and areas for the community to gather for outdoor venues.
• Create a multimodal circulation network within the site to adequately service envisioned uses, activities and contain vehicular impacts. • Provide flexible parking standards to encourage parking facilities that meet the parking demand for all users at all times, in order to avoid excess, unnecessary parking and ensuring no overflow parking into public streets.
• Create guidelines and standards for safe and efficient vehicular and pedestrian movement; and minimize impacts of truck traffic and circulation throughout the site and adjoining areas.
• Establish infrastructure improvements for water, sewer, storm drains, utilities, roads, intersections and other facilities to adequately support development. • Create a sustainable environment by incorporating strategies that minimize consumption of natural resources, conserve energy and water, incorporate natural systems and minimize release of pollutants into the environment.

3.4 Project Characteristics

3.4.1 Development Plan
The proposed District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2023) includes a development plan for a variety of residential and non- residential uses that incorporate strong employment opportunities through the warehouse/industrial and commercia l land uses that would generate demand for retail services and businesses. In addition to economic development, the residential land uses support the General Plan’s Housing Element by providing housing opportunities to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

The development plan outlines the land use and infrastructure planning for the Specific Plan area and includes the following sections:
• Land Use Plan
• Circulation Plan
• Conceptual Street Improvements
• Regional and Emergency Access
• Infrastructure and Utility Plan
• Public Services
• Grading Plan

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-1 June 2023

3.4.2 Proposed Land Uses
Table 3.4-1 shows the proposed land uses in the Specific Plan area as shown in the Specific Plan.

Table 3.4-2 shows the proposed land uses per Project development phase. The proposed land use plan is shown in Figure 3.4-1.

Table 3.4-1

PROPOSED LAND USE SUMMARY
Land Use Gross
Acreage
Non- Residential
Square Feet (SF) Hotel Rooms Dwelling
Unit

COMMERCIAL

Neighborhood 20.4 160,000 --- ---
Retail 70.3 1,200,000 --- ---
Existing Non-Conforming 1.1 --- ---
Tourist 5.9 112,500 160 ---
Commercial Sub-Total 97.7 1,472,500 160 ---

RESIDENTIAL

High Density Residential 42.0 --- --- 1,196
25+ du/acre

Residential Sub-Total 42.0 --- --- 1,196

BUSINESS PARK

Business Park 6.8 30,000 --- ---
Existing Non-Conforming 1.0 --- ---
Business Park Sub-Total 7.8 30,000 --- ---

INDUSTRIAL/LOGISTICS

Industrial 67.3 1,500,000 --- ---
Industrial Sub-total 67.3 1,500,000 --- ---

OPEN SPACE

Open Space 11.1 --- --- ---
Open Space Sub-Total 11.1 --- --- ---

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS

Public Streets 15.8 --- --- ---
Public Parkway - --- --- ---
Public Facility 6.6 --- --- ---
Public Imp Sub-Total 22.4 --- --- ---
TOTALS 248.3 acres 3,002,500 SF 160 Rooms 1,196 Units
Source: City of Jurupa Valley, 2023.

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-2 June 2023
Table 3.4-2

PROPOSED LAND USES BY PHASE
Land Use Acres
Proposed
Residential
Units
Proposed Square
Feet, nonresidential
uses
Phase 1
Residential (High-Density) 10.4 302 ---
Business Park Business Park 6.8 --- 30,000
Existing Nonconforming 1.0 ---
Subtotal 7.8 --- 30,000
Industrial 67.3 --- 1,500,000
Commercial Retail 69.8 --- 1,200,000
Existing nonconforming 1.1 ---
Subtotal 70.9 --- 1,200,000
Public Improvements

Streets 15.7 --- ---
Parkways 0.7 --- ---
Right-of-way 5.2 --- ---
Subtotal 21.6 --- ---
Total, Phase 1 182.8 302 2,730,000
Phase 2
Residential (High-Density) 31.2 894 ---
Commercial Neighborhood 20.3 --- 160,000
Tourist (160 hotel rooms) 5.9 --- 112,500
Subtotal 26.2 --- 272,500
Open Space 11.1 --- ---
Total, Phase 2 65.6 894 272,500

TOTALS 248.3 1,196 3,002,500
Source: City of Jurupa Valley, 2023.

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-3 June 2023
Figure 3.4-1

LAND USE PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-4 June 2023
Residential
The Residential land use area allows for a variety of housing types including single family and multi- family units so as to diversify the City’s housing stock. The Residential Land Use Area uses the General Plan Residential Land Use Designation of Highest Density Residential (HHDR), which allows up to 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). The maximum buildout for the Residential Land Use is 1,196 dwelling units, including four existing residential units. The Residential land use area is generally located along the southern portion of the Specific Plan, away from higher volume roadways such as Rubidoux Boulevard and SR -60. The Residential Land Use Area incorporates active and passive recreational and open space areas with landscaped parkways, trails, and privat e common area amenities. The residential area would total approximately 41.6 acres. Renderings of proposed residential building designs are shown in Figures 3.4-2 and 3.4-3.

Commercial Neighborhood
The Commercial Neighborhood land use area envisions convenient retail sales and services primarily focused on supporting local residents and employees through smaller -scale, pedestrian -oriented commercial development such as food markets, convenience stores, restaurants, other retail stores, and personal service s including gyms, health and beauty, and dry cleaning. The Commercial Neighborhood land use area would implement the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) General Plan land use designation. The Commercial Neighborhood Land Use Area spans 20.3 acres at the western portion of the Project site fronting Rubidoux Boulevard . Primary access is provided from Street A with signage along Rubidoux Boulevard for clear identification and wayfinding. This land use designation allows a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.60.

Commercial Retail
The Commercial Retail Land Use Area encourages regional shopping centers with large major anchor/big-box retail tenants supported by smaller retail establishments, grocery stores, restaurants, drug stores, entertainment, and personal service u ses in multi-tenant buildings and/or freestanding commercial pads. The Commercial Retail General Land Use area would implement the Commercial Retail (CR) General Plan land use designation. The Commercial Retail Land Use area encompasses 69.8 acres in the center of the Specific Plan area and serves as one of the commercial core areas for the Specific Plan. The area serves as a transition to commercial neighborhood land use area. Primary access and signage for major retail tenants are located along Street A a nd integrated with adjacent land use areas through secondary access points. Renderings of commercial buildings are shown on Figures 3.4-4 and 3.4-5.

Commercial Retail-Integrated Use
Commercial Retail - Integrated Use is a business or businesses that combin e their various business operations into a single business operation at one site. A Commercial Retail-Integrated Use shall have a traditional “brick and mortar” retail showroom for display and sale of products to the public and may include the following bu siness operations: product assembly/light manufacturing; warehousing; customer pick-up and/or shipping/receiving. Each individual Commercial Retail-Integrated Use shall have a minimum of 10 percent of its total floor area occupied by a retail showroom. Verification of the area dedicated to retail showroom shall occur as part of the required Site Development Permit.

Any building designed for a Commercial Retail -Integrated Use shall comply with the design guidelines included in Section 4.3.6, Commercial – “Buffering and Screening”.  SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-5 June 2023
Figure 3.4-2

RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS - ATTACHED

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-6 June 2023
Figure 3.4-3
RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS – DETACHED

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-7 June 2023
Figure 3.4-4

RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-8 June 2023
Figure 3.4-5

RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS-INTEGRATED

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-9 June 2023
A building for a Commercial Retail -Integrated Use shall be designed with a minimum of 500 -foot buffer between a loading dock door and any residential dwelling unit within a Residential zone/district. When a building has been constructed for a Commercial Retail -Integrated Use pursuant to this Section and the user vacates that building , all future users shall comply with this Specific Plan. Any building constructed for a Commercial Retail - Integrated Use may be subdivided, partitioned, or redesigned to accommodate new businesses or multiple businesses (including Commercial Retail – Integrated Uses) so long as th e use/uses are permitted and comply with the applicable requirements of this Specific Plan . Specifically for any subsequent Commercial Retail - Integrated Use(s), a minimum of 10 percent of the floor area of an individual Commerci al Retail - Integrated Use shall be maintained and operated as a retail showroom.

Commercial retail-Integrated use is an overlay that is incorporated into the Commercial Retail area of the Project.

Commercial Tourist
The Commercial Tourist land use area p ermits the development of hospitality and entertainment - related uses. Primary permitted uses include hotels, exhibit/concert halls, tourist visitor centers, travel agencies, and automobile related uses including EV charging stations and rental agency offices.

The Commercial Tourist land use area implements the Commercial Tourist (CT) General Plan land use designation. The Commercial Tourist land use area is located within two areas of the Specific Plan totaling 5.9 acres. There is a Commercial Tourist use at Hall and 30th Street with access off of 30th Street, and another along Rubidoux Boulevard, south of the Commercial Neighborhood with access off A Street.

Industrial/Logistics
The Industrial/Logistics (“Industrial”) land use area is intended to provide a wide range of industrial uses including research and development; light manufacturing, assembly and processing of manufactured goods and materials; warehousing and distribution including e -commerce, high-cube logistics and cross- dock facilities. Ancillary uses include, office, employee services, and property management facilities. This Land Use implements and is consistent with the Light Industrial General Plan Land Use designation. The Agua Mansa Warehouse and Distribution Overlay Zone is applied to the Industrial Land Use Area of the Specific Plan. The Industrial Land Use Area is 67.3 acres at the eastern portion of the Specific Plan boundary, adjacent to the Santa Ana River. The southern boundary of the Industrial Land Use Area includes an expansive lands caped paseo to screen and buffer from the adjacent Residential Land Use Area to the south. Renderings of proposed industrial/logistics buildings are shown below on Figure 3.4-6.

Business Park
The Business Park land use area permits employee-intensive uses, including research and development, technology centers, corporate offices, clean industry, and supporting retail uses. The Business Park Land Use Area implements the Business Park (BP) General Plan land use designation.

The Business Park Land Use Area spans 7.8 acres at the northern portion of the Specific Plan, between the SR-60 Eastbound onramp and the Industrial/Logistics Land Use Area along 30th Street. Primary access for tenants would be located along 30th Street and C Street, with signage visible from SR -60.

Renderings of proposed business park building designs are shown in Figure 3.4-7.  SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-10 June 2023
Figure 3.4-6

RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL & WAREHOUSE BUILDINGS

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-11 June 2023
Figure 3.4-7

RENDERINGS OF PROPOSED BUSINESS PARK BUILDINGS

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-12 June 2023
Open Space
The Open Space land use area accommodates open spaces areas for residents, employees, and visitors in the form of neighborhood parks, urban parks, recreational facilities, community centers, play areas, greenbelts, and off -street trails. The Open Space Land Use Area also incorporates landscape buffers and other water quality management practices to treat stormwater.

The Open Space land use area of 11.1 acres will at a minimum meet the City’s parkland requirement of three acres per 1,000 new residents. The Specific Plan may include a combination of park dedication, community improvements associated with the residential development, as well as payment of “in-lieu” fees to meet parkland requirements. The precise location, design, and amenities provided in the Open Space Land Use Areas will be determined by the implementing projects. The neighborhood park construction in conjunction with any new residential development shall be substantially complete prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy of the 75th percentile of residential units in the Residential Land Use Area.

In addition to the Open Space Land Use Areas identified, residential development will incorporate private and common areas that will expand and connect to the open space areas, and other adjacent uses. The location s of these facilities will be determined through subsequent site development permits and will comply with Specific Plan development standards. The Project open space plan is presented in Figure 3.4-8 below.

3.4.3 Signage and Monuments
The Project would include standards for signage that could be installed within each land use area.

Signage standards may include but not be limited to commercial/industrial signs (wall and monument), directional signage, entry features/monuments, and freeway- oriented signs, including Project pylon signs and billboards. The goal would be to provide a comprehensive and cohesive approach to signage throughout the Project site. A Comprehensive Master Sign Program that incorporates the sign standards of the Specific Plan and the Jurupa Valley Zoning Ordinance will be subject to review and approval by the City of Jurupa Valley Community Development Director prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Project.

Four free-standing signs along SR -60 are proposed, consisting of three double -sided electronic display billboard signs and one double -sided static display billboard sign. The maximum heights for each type of sign would be 65 feet. The total display area per p ylon would be 14 feet x 48 feet, for a total of 672 square feet, per side. The locations of proposed freestanding signs are shown on Figure

3.4-9.
 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-13 June 2023
Figure 3.4-8

OPEN SPACE PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-14 June 2023
Figure 3.4-9

FREESTANDING SIGN PROGRAM

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-15 June 2023

3.4.4 Circulation and Street Improvements
The Circulation Plan describes the movement of vehicles and pedestrians within th e Specific Plan area and the connections to major regional circulation routes. The Circulation Plan addresses traffic safety, access and internal circulation, truck circulation, and the proposed multi -use trail network.

The Circulation Plan, shown on Figure 3.4-10, provides new roadways and streets to accommodate traffic generated by the anticipated uses as well as facilitate internal vehicular access to the surrounding areas. Portions of existing roads in the Specific Plan area would be vacated and be absorbed into the Specific Plan Land Use Areas land uses they reside in.

The scale and orientation of the circulation network provides strategic routes for efficient mobility to help residents, workers, and visitors reach their destinations in Jurupa Valley an d the region.

Conceptual street cross-sections illustrate the street improvements and parkways. Due to the mix of industrial, commercial, and residential land uses, special attention to directing truck traffic away from residential uses have been incorpora ted into the Circulation Plan. Circulation improvements include the following:

• Improving streets with curb, gutter, sidewalk, and landscaping. • Street designs are shown in the Specific Plan as conceptual, and will be established with final engineering as part of the first Final Map. Specific Plan Figure 2- 3, Circulation Plan, shall be substantially maintained with minor adjustments to account for access and ultimate alignments.
• Street designs which would discourage trucks from entering or traveling through the Residential Land Use Area or on existing 34th Street through the use of traffic calming devices.

Calming devices will include the following:
o A gateway treatment at A Street along Rubidoux Avenue, which should have a height restriction element;
o A rou ndabout shall be a design feature included at the intersections of Wallace Avenue and A Street; and
o Bike lanes will be included within the multi-use trail network along A Street, B Street, and Wallace south of future roundabout.
• The combination of the above will promote lower speeds adjacent to the Residential Land Use Areas and provide a means to improve pedestrian and vehicular safety. • The backbone circulation identifies the proposed location, extent, and intensity of major components of public and pri vate transportation proposed to be located within the Specific Plan area.

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-16 June 2023
Figure 3.4-10

PROPOSED CIRCULATION PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-17 June 2023
Conceptual Street Improvements
The proposed Specific Plan includes conceprtual street inmprovements for A Street, B Street, 30 th Street, Hall Avenue, Wallace Street, 34 th Street, and Rubidoux Boulevard. A roundabout is also planned to be located at the intersection of Wallace Street, and fu ture A Street and B Street. The roundabout provides a significant traffic control measure to deter truck traffic, while providing an amenity to the community. The Specific Plan also discusses regional emergency access, parking, and public transit in Sections 2.8, 2.9, and 2.10 respectively.

3.4.5 Infrastructure and Utility Plan
Section 2.11 of the Specific Plan includes the Infrastructure and Utility Plan, which identifies the infrastructure, utilities, and public services and facilities provided to the Specific Plan area. The components of the Infrastructure and Utility Plan are water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage, dry utilities (i.e., electricity, natural gas, communications, etc.), and public services and facilities (law enforcement, fire, and trash collection). These are discussed in more detail in Section 3.5, Project Construction and Phasing.

3.5 Project Construction and Phasing

3.5.1 Project Phasing
Development of the District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan would be phased through multiple projects over many years. Phase 1 is envisioned to start with demolition and rough grading of the entire site in 2023, with completion of buildings in 2025. Start of construction of Phase 2 is envisioned with grading in 2026; building completion will be in 2028 (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, p. 45-48).

3.5.2 Demolition
Seven of the 11 existing residential buildings onsite would be demolished and the demolition debris removed before site preparation for construction of the proposed Project.

3.5.3 Onsite Construction
Typical development projects would involve construction subphases including demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Construction equipment estimated to be used for Project development is listed below in Table 3.5 -1. Detailed construction information for each project will be determined as each project is reviewed and approved by the City.

Table 3.5-1

EQUIPMENT BY CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Construction Activity
Phase1 Equipment Type No. of
Pieces
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1
Excavators 3
Rubber-Tired Dozers 2
Site Preparation Rubber-Tired Dozers 3
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4
Grading Excavators 2
 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-18 June 2023
Construction Activity
Phase1 Equipment Type No. of
Pieces
Graders 1
Scrapers 1
Rubber-Tired Dozers 2
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2
Building Construction
Cranes 1
Forklifts 3
Generator Sets 1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3
Welders 1
Paving
Pavers 2
Paving Equipment 2
Rollers 2
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1
Source: Kimley-Horn, 2023a. CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix D1 for model outputs.

Notes: 1. This is by construction phase according to CalEEMod not specific to proposed Project development phases discussed previously.

3.5.4 Utilities
Water
Project development would include construction of a network of water mains under existing and proposed roadways. The mains would connect to existing mains at two places: Rubidoux Boulevard west of the site, and 34
th Street to the south. Figure 3.5-1 shows the proposed water plan.

Sewer
Project development would involve construction of a system of sewers that would connect to an existing sewer main at the intersection of Wallace Street and 34 th Street; all wastewater from the
Project would be conveyed to that existing main. Figure 3.5-2 shows the proposed sewer plan.

Stormwater Drainage
Development of the Project would include construction of a network of storm drains in the western and central portions of the site that would connect to an existing 21 -inch storm drain at the intersection of Wallace Street and 34
th Street. The Project would involve replacement of the existing 21-inch storm drain under Wallace Street between 34 th Street and 37th Street with a 24 -inch storm drain. A separate storm drainage system in the east part of the site would include a box culvert, and a public detention basin which would detain flows before releasing through an existing outlet pipe under the Santa Ana River. Figure 3.5-3 shows the proposed stormwater drainage plan.

3.5.5 Offsite Improvements
Under the proposed Project, offsite improvements would include construction of utility laterals connecting to utility mains in surrounding roadways. Such utilities would include replacement of a storm drain in the segment of Wallace Avenue between 34 th and 37th streets.

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-19 June 2023

3.5.6 Soil Removal
Due to past uses of the Project site, areas of lead- impacted soils were identified by a previous 2008 site investigation. As discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards, it is conservatively estimated that up to 320 cubic yards of export would be required to remove lead-impacted and other potentially impacted soils from the site, pursuant to the remedial activities that will be conducted under the oversight of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC).
 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-20 June 2023
Figure 3.5-1

WATER PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-21 June 2023
Figure 3.5-2

SEWER PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-22 June 2023
Figure 3.5-3

STORMWATER DRAINAGE PLAN

 SECTION 3.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 3-23 June 2023

3.6 Discretionary and Ministerial Approvals
Each development project undertaken pursuant to the Specific Plan would require a Site Development Permit; a may require an additional Tentative Tract Map or a Conditional Use Permit(s) depending on the proposed land use types. Table 3.6-1 identifies ministerial permits and approvals required from the City , other public agencies and/or quasi -public agencies (utilities) necessary for the construction of the Project.

Table 3.6-1

MINISTERIAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Agency Permit or Approval
City of Jurupa Valley Building & Safety
Division Building Permits, and Demolition Permits.

Riverside County Fire Department
Building plan check and approval. Review for compliance with the California Fire Code, California Building Code, California Health & Safety Code and Jurupa Valley Municipal Code. Plans for fire detection and alarm systems, and automatic sprinklers.

City of Jurupa Valley Public Works
Department
Approval for proposed offsite utility improvements and Tree Removal Permit.

Rubidoux Community Services District
[water service and sewer service]
Letter of authorization/consent for proposed improvements to provide water supply and sewer connections to new
development.

Southern California Edison Company Letter of authorization/consent for proposed improvements to provide electrical connection to new development.

SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-1 June 2023

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

4.0.1 Summary of EIR Scope
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines §§15126 –15126.4, this DEIR Section 4.0, Environmental Analysis, provides analyses of potential direct, indirect, and cumulatively considerable impacts that could occur from planning, constructing, and operating the proposed Project.

In compliance with the procedural requirements of CEQA, the City of Jurupa Valley prepared a Notice of Preparation (Technical Ap pendix A) to determine the scope of environmental analysis for this DEIR. Public comment on the scope of this DEIR consisted of written comments received by the City of Jurupa Valley in response to the NOP. The City received written comments from several a gencies and organizations during the 30-day public review period from March 31 to April 29, 2022.

4.0.2 List of Commenters
Table 2.8- 1, Summary of NOP and Scoping Meeting Comments , summarizes the substantive comments received regarding this EIR’s NOP. The purpose of Table 2.8-1 is to present the primary environmental issues of concern raised by public agencies and the general public during the NOP review period and this EIR’s Scoping Meeting. The table is not intended to list every comment received by the City during the NOP review period. Regardless of whether or not a comment is listed in the table, all applicable comments received in response to the NOP and at the Scoping Meeting are addressed in this EIR. The NOP and all comment letters received by t he City in response to the NOP are included in Technical Appendix A of this EIR.

Comment topics included land use and planning, air quality, public services, transportation, hydrology and water quality, biological resources, and Native American cultural re sources, among others. Taking all known information and public comments into consideration, 18 primary environmental subject areas are evaluated in this Section 4.0, as listed below. Each subsection of this Section 4.0 evaluates several specific subject ma tters related to the general topic of the subsection.

The title of each subsection is not limiting; therefore, refer to each subsection for a full account of the subject matters addressed therein. Environmental issues and their corresponding sections are:

4.1 Aesthetics 4.10 Land Use and Planning

4.2 Air Quality 4.11 Mineral Resources

4.3 Biological Resources 4.12 Noise

4.4 Cultural Resources 4.13 Population and Housing

4.5 Energy 4.14 Public Services

4.6 Geology and Soils 4.15 Recreation

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 4.16 Transportation

4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 4.17 Tribal Cultural Resources

4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.18 Utilities and Service Systems During preparation of the DEIR, it was determined that impacts to two subject areas would be less than significant. Those subject areas, Agricultural and Forestry Resources and Wildfire, are addressed in Section 6, Other CEQA Considerations , of this DEIR. Each topical section includes the following information:
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-2 June 2023

• A description of the existing setting including a discussion of the regulatory framework, if applicable.
• Identification of thresholds of significance.
• Analysis of potential Project effects.
• Identification of additional Project-specific mitigation measures, if required, to reduce the identified Project impacts.
• Identification of the level of significance of impacts after mitigation, including unavoidable significant adverse impacts.
• Evaluation of potential cumulative impacts.

4.0.3 Organization of Environmental Analysis
To assist the reader with comparing information between environmental issues, each section is organized under seven major headings:
• Existing Conditions
• NOP/Scoping Comments
• Regulatory Framework
• Methodology
• Thresholds of Significance
• Environmental Impact Analysis
• Cumulative Impact Analysis
In addition, Section 1.0, Executive Summary, summarizes all impacts by environmental issue. Each section’s Environmental Impact Analysis includes the discussion of Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs), Project Design Features (PDFs), and Mitigation Measures (MMs).

Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs)
These include existing regulatory requirements such as plans, policies, or programs (PPP s) applied to the Project on the basis of federal, state, or local law currently in place that effectively reduce environmental impacts. If applicable, they will be identified in the Impact Analysis section below.

Project Design Features (PDFs)
If a projec t includes within its project scope features or construction techniques that minimize environmental impacts, those features can be incorporated into the Project description as project design features (PDFs). Examples of PDFs include, but are not limited to, installation of solar panels, implementation of energy efficient design standards, use of zero emission equipment and vehicles, or a site design that creates or maintains open space. Because PDFs are incorporated into the Project, they do not constitute mitigation measures. Even so, PDFs are incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure that they are implemented as a part of the Project conditions of approval.
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-3 June 2023

Mitigation Measures
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15370 defines “mitigation” as:
• Avoiding the impact altogether,
• Minimizing the impact by limiting its degree or magnitude, • Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environmental resource,
• Reducing or eliminating the impact over time, through actions that preserve or maintain the resource, and
• Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environmental conditions, including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements.

By definition, mitigation measures are not part of the original project design. Rather, mitigation measures are actions required by the City to reduce impacts to the environment resulting from the original project design. Mitigation measures are identified by the City after the Project has undergone environmental review and are above and beyond PPPs and PDFs, to further reduce environmental impacts.

4.0.4 Thresholds of Significance
Purpose
To help clarify and standardize analysis and decision-making in the environmental review process in the City of Jurupa Valley, the City has established these CEQA Thresholds of Significance (which have been in general use since at least 2011). These Thresholds are offered as guidance in preparing all environmental review documents (including Initial Studies and EIRs).

These Thresholds are intended to implement and supplement provisions in the CEQA Guidelines for determining the significance of environmental effects, including sections 15064, 15064. 4, 15064.5064.7, 15065, 15382, and Appendix G, and form the basis of the City's Initial Study and Environmental Review Checklist. ·
The Thresholds should be used to evaluate the potential primary effects of a project and should be considered when evaluating the potential secondary effects of a project, including the potential effects of mitigation measures.

Definition
A "threshold of significance" is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non -compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-4 June 2023

Using Environmental Standards as Thresholds of Significance The City may adopt or use an environmental standard as a threshold of significance. In adopting or using an environmental standard as a threshold of significance, a public agency shall explain how the particular requirements of that environmental standard avoid project impacts, including cumulative impacts, to a less- than-significant level, and why the environmental standard is relevant to the analysis of the project under consideration. For the purposes of the City Guidelines, an "environmental standard" i ncludes existing regulatory requirements such as plans, policies, or programs applied to the project based on the basis of federal, state, or local law currently in place which effectively reduce environmental impacts.

Revisions to Thresholds
These Thresholds may be revised administratively without a public hearing if the revision involves a Threshold that is a regulatory requirement applied to the project adopted by federal, state, or local law which effectively reduces environmental impacts.

Thresholds of Significance Methodology
A "threshold of significance" is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non -compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.

To help clarify and standardize analysis and decision-making in the environmental review process in the City of Jurupa Valley, the City has established CEQA Thresholds of Significance which are intended to implement and supplement provisions in the CEQA Guidelines for determining the significance of environmental effects, including sections 15064, 15064.4, 15064.5,15064.7, 15065, 15382, and Appendix G, and form the basis of the environmental impact analysis in this EIR.

4.0.5 Terminology Used in this DEIR
The level of significance is identified for each impact in this DEIR. Although the criteria for determining significance are different for each topi c area, the environmental analysis applies a uniform classification of the impacts based on definitions consistent with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines:
• No impact. The Project would not change the environment. • Less than significant. The Project would not caus e any substantial, adverse change in the environment.
• Significant impact. A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment would occur and would exceed the threshold(s) of significance presented in this DEIR, requiring the consideration of mitigation measures.

Each subsection also includes a discussion or listing of the applicable laws and regulations that the Project is required to comply with (if any). If impacts are identified as significant after mandatory compliance with laws and regulations, feasible mitigation measures are presented that would either  SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-5 June 2023

avoid the impact or reduce the magnitude of the impact. The following terms are used to describe the level of significance following the application of recommended mitigation measures:
• Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment would occur that would exceed the threshold(s) of significance presented in this EIR; however, the impac t can be avoided or reduced to a less- than-significant level through the application of feasible mitigation measure(s).
• Significant and unavoidable. A substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the physical environment would occur that would exceed the threshold(s) of significance presented in this EIR. Feasible and enforceable mitigation measure(s) that have a proportional nexus to the Project ’s impacts are either not available or would not be fully effective in avoiding or reducing the impact to below a level of significance.

4.0.6 Scope of Cumulative Effects Analysis
Section (§)15130 of the CEQA Guidelines states that cumulative impacts shall be discussed where they are significant. It further states that this discussion shall reflect the level and severity of the impact and the likelihood of occurrence, but not in as great a level of detail as that necessary for the project alone. Section 15355 of the Guidelines defines cumulative impacts as “...two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.” Cumulative impacts represent the change caused by the incremental impact of a project when added to other proposed or committed projects in the vicinity.

The C EQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1) states that the information utilized in an analysis of cumulative impacts should come from one of two sources:

A. A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency.

B. A summary of projections contained in an adopted General Plan or related planning document designed to evaluate regional or area-wide conditions.

The cumulative impact analysis in this EIR uses both Method A and Method B. Method B uses the City of Jurupa Valley’s comprehensive General Plan, which was adopted by the Jurupa Valley City Council on September 7, 2017. Cumulative impact analyses also use the projections in the long -range planning documents, such as Southern California Association of Governments in its Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and South Coast Air Quality Management District’s 2016 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). This information was supplemented with a list of related projects (Method A), described in detail below.

The projections for residential and non- residential buildout potential under the District at Jurupa Valley Draft EIR are included in Table 4.0-1, City of Jurupa Valley General Plan Buildout Projections.

The projected growth conditions in the City by 2035 include a conversion of a total of 4,494 acres of vacant developable land, which is 16.1 percent of the total City area. Future growth is anticipated to result in 14,332 new residential units and a maximum of 36.6 million square feet of new nonresidential buildings.
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-6 June 2023

Table 4.0-1

CITY OF JURUPA VALLEY GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT PROJECTIONS Cumulative impact analyses for several topical sections are also base d on the most appropriate geographic boundary for the respective impact. For example, cumulative air quality impacts are based on the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes other jurisdictions besides the City of Jurupa Valley. The approach for each topical section is further discussed below. Several potential cumulative impacts that encompass regional boundaries (e.g., air quality, greenhouse gases, traffic) have been addressed in the context of various regional plans and defined significance thresholds.

Following is a summary of the approach and extent of cumulative impacts, which is further detailed in each topical environmental section.
• Aesthetics. Aesthetic impacts are based on the regional scenic resources specified in the City’s General Plan, such as the Pedley Hills, Jurupa Mountains, and the Santa Ana River. • Air Quality. Air quality impacts are based on the regional boundaries and emissions standards of the South Coast Air Basin.
• Biological Resources. The cumulative impact analysis for biologic al resources considers development of the proposed Project in conjunction with other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site. The cumulative impact evaluation also takes into consideration the geographic area covered by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), which is the prevailing habitat conservation plan applicable to the Project site.
• Cultural Resources. Cultural resources impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumul ative impacts. This cumulative impact analysis considers development of the Project site in conjunction with other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site.
• Energy. Energy impacts are based on the service areas of Southern California Edison and SoCalGas and fuel consumption in the state.
• Geology and Soils. Geologic and soils impacts are site specific and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts. However, the cumulative analysis considers the Project site and nearby related projects.
• Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. Potential GHG emission impacts are not bounded by geography but affect global climate change. The assessment of cumulative GHG impacts, Land Use
Existing
Land
Uses
(acres)
2035 Additional
Units
2035 Additional
Population
(Persons)
Change,
2014-2035
Percent Change,
2014-2035
Max Less
Intense* Max Less
Intense Max Less
Intense Max Less
Intense
Residential 10,023.6 14,332 10,032 152,587 136,464 +53,745 +37,622 54% 38% Non-
Residential
4,660.5 840 630 41,376 31,032 Not
Provided
Not
Provided
Not
Provided
Not
Provided
* Less Intense land use is considered to be 70 percent or 0.7 of maximum density, which is more likely and typically experienced given physical and other constraints often encountered during development.

Source: City of Jurupa Valley, 2017
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-7 June 2023

therefore, is based on the regional boundaries and emissions standards of the South Coast Air Basin.
• Hazards and Hazard ous Materials. Cumulative analysis highlights the regulatory requirements related to the storage, handling, and use of hazardous substances. Project impacts, however, are site specific, and generally would not combine with impacts of other projects to resu lt in cumulatively considerable impacts. However, the cumulative analysis considers the Project site and nearby related projects. • Hydrology and Water Quality. The cumulative impact analysis for hydrology and water quality analysis considers potential hydro logy and water quality effects of the Project in conjunction with other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site as well as other projects located in the Santa Ana River Basin and the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin.
• Land Use and Planning. Cumulative analysis for land use consistency considers the Project’s impacts in conjunction with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan. • Mineral Resources. Cumulative analysis for mineral resources considers the Project ’s impacts in conjunction wi th the General Plan, and in the San Bernardino Production- Consumption (P-C) Region that spans much of the parts of the Upper Santa Ana River Valley in San Bernardino and Riverside counties and most of the San Jacinto Basin in Riverside County.
• Noise. Cumulative traffic noise is assessed relative to applicable City General Plan noise level standards and considers development, including construction and long -term use, of the proposed Project in conjunction with other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site. The study area is aligned with the traffic study area. • Public Services. Cumulative impacts for each public service consider the affected agency’s service area (for instance, for schools, the Jurupa Unified School District). • Population and H ousing. Cumulative impacts on population and housing are analyzed based on General Plan projections for the cities of Jurupa Valley and Riverside combined. As the Project site is on the border of two cities, using projections for Jurupa Valley alone would not adequately show cumulative impacts.
• Recreation. Analysis of cumulative impacts to recreational facilities addresses facilities within the portion of the Jurupa Area Recreation and Parks District (JARPD) service area within the City of Jurupa Valley.
• Transportation. Cumulative analysis for transportation impacts related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) considers development in the City of Jurupa Valley and the land use assumptions contained in the Connect SoCal, (2020 –2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy).
• Tribal Cultural Resources. Cumulative analysis considers development of the proposed Project in conjunction with other development projects and planned development projects in the vicinity of the Project site that are in the northwestern area of Riverside County and  SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-8 June 2023

the traditional use area of Native American Tribes who have engaged the city in consultations under SB18 and AB52 as described in Section 4.17, Tribal Cultural Resources. • Utilities and Service Systems. The cumula tive area considered for water supply and wastewater-related issues are the service area of the RCSD. Cumulative impacts to stormwater drainage are addressed for the watershed. Cumulative solid waste disposal impacts are controlled through development of the General Plan.

4.0.7 Cumulative Projects
The list of cumulative projects was prepared based the Project ’s Traffic Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix D20) and uses data from the cities of Jurupa Valley and Riverside. A total of 63 cumulative projects were identified in the traffic study area, listed on Table 4.0-2 and mapped on Figure 4.0-1.

The list of related projects is only used for cumulative analysis for select topics such as cumulative noise impacts and identifying adjacent projects for constructio n-related impacts. Refer above to the summary of the approach and extent of cumulative impacts for each topic.

 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-9 June 2023
Table 4.0-2

CUMULATIVE DEVELOPMENT LAND USE SUMMARY
Project
# Project Name/Number Land Use Residential
Units
Square Feet
(nonresidential
uses)
Jurisdiction
1 Proposed Rio Vista Specific Plan Single-Family Detached Housing 579 --- JV1 Single-Family Attached Housing 290 --- JV
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 346 --- JV
Public Park 22.2 --- JV
Middle School/Junior High School 600 --- JV
2 Proficiency Rubidoux (or
Capital)
Warehousing --- 1,300,000 JV
3 Agua Mansa Development
Project
Warehousing --- 335,000 JV
4 Neighborhood Commercial Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 12,180 JV 5 Mondragon Auto Repair Coffee/Donut Shop w/ Drive-thru --- 2,400 JV 6 MA20084 Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-thru --- 8,300 JV 7 MA20132 Automobile Sales (Used) --- 3.165 JV
8 MA21214 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 50,000 JV
9 Saddlehorn Ranch Single-Family Detached Housing 31 --- JV 10 Havana Investment Spec
Building
Warehousing --- 72,288 JV
11 Action Plumbing Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 9,736 JV 12 Highland Park Single-Family Detached Housing 97 --- JV 13 Market Street Commercial Convenience Store/Gasoline Station --- 3,098 JV High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant --- 4,750 JV
Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-thru --- 2,860 JV
Automated Car Wash --- 2,850 JV
14 Avalon Court Single-Family Detached Housing 24 --- JV 15 Emerald Ridge South Single-Family Detached Housing 97 --- JV Single-Family Attached Housing 118 --- JV
16 Emerald Ridge North Single-Family Detached Housing 184 --- JV  SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-10 June 2023
Project
# Project Name/Number Land Use Residential
Units
Square Feet
(nonresidential
uses)
Jurisdiction
17 Rubidoux Commercial
Development LLC
Business Park --- 306,894 JV
18 Agua Mansa Commerce Park High-Cube Transload and Short-Term Storage --- 4,277,000 JV Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 150 --- JV
Shopping Plaza (40-150k) --- 25,000 JV
19 MA17099 Single-Family Detached Housing 48 --- JV
20 Bailey Building Warehousing --- 32,700 JV
21 La Rue Apartments Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 80 --- JV 22 Kiewit Infrastructure West Warehousing --- 63,000 JV 23 Mission Gateway Plaza &
Mission Gateway Villas
Shopping Center (>150k) --- 31,375 JV
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 68 --- JV
24 Karcher Industrial Project Warehousing --- 190,594 JV 25 Wheeler Trucking Inc. Warehousing --- 25,910 JV
26 Commercial Center Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 18,800 JV Fast-Food Restaurant w/ Drive-thru --- 5,910 JV
27 West Coast Cold Storage High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse --- 122,000 JV 28 P12-0799 Single-Family Detached Housing 7 --- R
29 P13-0087 Senior Adult Housing-Multifamily 67 --- R
30 P14-0183 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 146 --- R
31 P14-1033 Warehousing --- 308,000 R
32 P15-0535 Hotel 239 --- R
33 P16-0321 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 165 --- R
Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 22,000 R
34 P16-0620 Automobile Parts and Service Center --- 3,008 R 35 P16-0862 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant --- 4,525 R 36 P17-0001 Single-Family Detached Housing 7 --- R
37 P17-0030 Affordable Housing 72 --- R
 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-11 June 2023
Project
# Project Name/Number Land Use Residential
Units
Square Feet
(nonresidential
uses)
Jurisdiction
General Office Building --- 42,400 R
38 P18-0020 Mobile Home Park 104 --- R
39 P18-0091 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 482 --- R
Shopping Plaza (40-150k) --- 44,500 R
Convenience Store/Gasoline Station 16 --- R
Hotel 229 --- R
40 P18-0122 Senior Adult Housing-Multifamily 58 --- R
41 P18-0199 Warehousing --- 26,076 R
42 P19-0089 Affordable Housing 10 --- R
43 P19-0420 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) 33 --- R
44 P19-0560 Hotel 225 --- R
45 P19-0620 Single-Family Attached Housing 17 --- R
46 P19-0665 General Office Building --- 128,000 R
47 P19-0694 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) 116 --- R
48 P19-0869 Strip Retail Plaza (<40k) --- 3,400 R
49 P20-0035 Affordable Housing 33 --- R
50 P20-0239 Single-Family Detached Housing 8 --- R
51 P20-0487 Warehousing --- 27,860 R
52 PR-2020-000105 General Office Building --- 48,000 R
53 PR-2020-000241 General Office Building --- 2,050 R
54 PR-2021-001052 Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) --- 115,000 R 55 PR-2020-000429 General Office Building --- 6,000 R
56 SB2 High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse --- 506,000 JV 57 Holly Street Truck Terminal Warehousing --- 450,000 JV 58 COL3 High-Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse --- 447,330 R 59 P06-0782 Single-Family Detached Housing 15 --- R
60 P05-0269 Single-Family Detached Housing 9 --- R

 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 

7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-12 June 2023
Project
# Project Name/Number Land Use Residential
Units
Square Feet
(nonresidential
uses)
Jurisdiction
61 P06-1031

Single-Family Detached Housing 7 --- R
62 P09-0835 General Office Building --- 132,136 R
63 P06-1237 Medical-Dental Office Building --- 65,281 R Total 4,777 7,482,556 Not applicable
1 JV = City of Jurupa Valley; R = City of Riverside
Source: Kimley Horn, 2022

 SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4-0 June 2023
Figure 4.0-1

CUMULATIVE PROJECTS MAP

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-1 June 2023

4.1 Aesthetics
This section evaluates the Project’s potential impacts related to scenic vistas, state scenic highways, compliance with regulations governing scenic quality, and light and glare. The following analysis is based on information obtained from on-site observations, site photos; Google Earth Pro (Google Earth, 2022); City of Jurupa Valley General Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2017a); and the proposed Specific Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2023).

4.1.1 Existing Conditions
Project Site and Surrounding Area
The Specific Plan area is characterized as predominantly vacant land, with limited previous development of older residential properties. The surrounding neighborhoods have been developed over time with residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Land uses surrounding the Specific Plan are generally described as follows:
• North: The SR-60 freeway, followed by single family and multifamily residential, commercial and industrial uses.
• South: Single family dwellings and multiple -family dwellings, churches, e ducational institutions, and light agriculture uses.
• East: Santa Ana River followed by residential, and parks and recreational uses in the City of Riverside.
• West: Single -family and multi -family residential and commercial uses and Rubidoux Boulevard.

Figure 4.1-1 shows an aerial photo of the Project site and surrounding areas with the locations of photos found in Figures 4.1-2 through 4.1-4. These photographs show the existing conditions both on the Project site and surroundings.

Scenic Views and Vistas
The City’s General Plan defines scenic vistas as “points or corridors that are accessible to the public and that provide a view of scenic areas and/or landscapes.” Specifically, the City identifies publicly accessible vantage points of the Santa Ana River, the Jurupa Mountains, and the Pedley Hills as scenic vistas.1 From the Project site, the Jurupa Mountains are approximately 2.67 miles northwest, the Pedley Hills are approximately 2.96 miles to the southwest, and Mount Rubidoux is a pproximately one mile to the east, as measured from the center of Mount Rubidoux to the center of the Project site.

1 City of Jurupa Valley General Plan (City of Jurupa Valley, 2017a; pp. 1-17 to 1-19)  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-2 June 2023
Figure 4.1-1

PHOTO LOCATION MAP

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-3 June 2023

Figure 4.1-2
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 1 THROUGH 4

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-4 June 2023

Figure 4.1-3
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 5 THROUGH 8

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-5 June 2023

Figure 4.1-4
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS 9 THROUGH 12

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-6 June 2023
State and Scenic Highways
There are no officially designated State or County Scenic Highways near the Project site. The nearest officially designated state scenic highway is SR-38, located approximately 12.3 miles northeast of the Project site. The nearest eligible state scenic highway is I -215 from SR-74 near Romoland to SR -74 near Perris, located approximately 16 miles southeast of the Project site (Caltrans, 2022).

Lighting
Existing light sources on and near the Project site include exterior and interior building lights, streetlights, and vehicle lights. Streetlights are present along portions of Wallace Avenue onsite, and near existing residences that are on 34th Street and Rubidoux Boulevard. Given the sparse development on the Project site, lighting levels are low.

4.1.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments
The following comment was received from David Murray, Principal Planner at the City of Riverside in regard to aesthetics:
“Discuss the interface of development along the Santa Ana River to avoid turning our backs on the river. Impacts on views of the rivers and adjacent parks and open spaces from the 60 Freeway”.

4.1.3 Regulatory Framework
Federal
There are no federal regulations that pertain to this issue area.

State
State Scenic Highways
California's Scenic Highway Program was created by the Legislature in 1963. Its purpose is to protect and enhance the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors, through special conservation treatment. The State laws governing the Scenic Highway Program are found in the Streets and Hig hways Code, Sections 260 through 263. A highway may be designated as scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view. (Caltrans, 2022).

Local
City of Jurupa Valley General Plan
The City of Jurupa Valley General Plan identifies policies that relate to aesthetic resources within the City. The specific policies outlined in the City’s General Plan that are related to aesthetics and that apply to the proposed Project are listed in DEIR Section 4.10 , Land Use and Planning, Table 4.10.1, General Plan Consistency Analysis.
 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-7 June 2023
Specific Plan
Section 3.0, Land Use and Development Standards , constitutes the zoning for the Specific Plan Area and sets forth regulations addressing setbacks, parking, landscaping, walls and fencing, outdoor storage, and signs. Se ction 4.0, Design Guidelines, provides a framework for building placement, architectural treatments, landscape plantings, lighting, and other design elements.

4.1.4 Methodology
This impact discussion evaluates impacts from future planned development on the site and the Project’s potential to: obstruct views of scenic vistas from public vantage point s; damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway corridor; conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality; and to create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

4.1.5 Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with § 15064.7 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Jurupa Valley adopted local CEQA Guidelines. The City’s local CEQA Guidelines are based on the CEQA checklist included in Appendix G of the Stat e CEQA Guidelines. The City of Jurupa Valley Guidelines recognizes the following significance thresholds related to aesthetics. Based on these significance thresholds, a project would have a significant impact on aesthetics if it would:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project would substantially block public views of a scenic vista that is visible from a scenic corridor as identified by General Plan Figure 4-23.

Note: Scenic vistas are points or corridors that are accessible to the public and that provide a view of scenic areas and/or landscape. In general, scenic resources include natural areas that are visible to the public and include natural landmarks, hills and mountain peaks, ridgelines, floodplains and stream channels, agricultural fields, mature trees and agricultural windbreaks, riparian woodlands, and other prominent or unusual landscape features, Scenic backdrops include hillsides and ridges that rise above or adjacent to urban or rural areas or highways.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.

Screening Criteria: If the project is not located within a state scenic highway, it may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is located within a state scenic highway corridor pursuant to the Streets and Highways Code, Sections 260 through 263 and the project will damage trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings.
 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-8 June 2023
c) Conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is inconsistent with General Plan policies or Municipal Code requirements pertaining to scenic quality.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is inconsistent with General Plan Policy COS 10 .1, which requires outdoor lighting to be shielded and prohibits outdoor lighting that:

1. Operates at unnecessary locations, levels, and times.

2. Spills onto areas off-site or to areas not needing or wanting illumination.

3. Produces glare (intense line-of-site contrast).

4. Includes lighting frequencies (colors) that interfere with astronomical viewing.

5. Includes building materials (e.g., exterior materials, windows, etc.) that create glare (Daytime glare impacts would be considered significant if buildings, signage or thematic elements that incorporate substantial amounts of reflective building materials were to be developed on the Project Site in areas that are highly visible to off-site glare-sensitive uses. Nighttime glare impacts would be considered significant if future buildings, signage or thematic elements which incorporate highly reflective building materials were to be developed on the Project Site in close proximity to both glare sensitive uses and motor vehicle traffic or would be illuminated by high brightness special effects or event lighting associated with the proposed Project.

Daytime glare -sensitive uses generally include residential areas, freeways, and outdoor activity areas (recreational areas and parks). Uses sensitive to nighttime glare generally include residential uses, some commercial and institutional uses, and wildlife habitat within natural areas.

4.1.6 Environmental Impact Analysis
Threshold a): Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project would substantially block public views of a scenic vista that is visible from a scenic corridor as identified by General Plan Figure 4-23.

Note: Scenic vistas are points or corridors that are accessible to the public and that provide a view of scenic areas and/or landscape. In general, scenic resources include natural areas that are visible to the public and include natural landmarks, hills and mountain peaks, ridgelines, floodplains and stream channels, agricultural fields, mature trees and agricultural windbreaks, riparian woodlands, and other  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-9 June 2023
prominent or unusual landscape features, Scenic backdrops include hillsides and ridges that rise above or adjacent to urban or rural areas or highways.

A.1 Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs) and Project Design Features (PDFs) Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs)
The following PPP applies to the Project and would reduce impacts relating to scenic vistas:

PPP 4.1-1 Building height, landscape setback, and building setback are required to comply with Table 3-3: Development Standards of the Specific Plan.

Project Design Features (PDFs)
The Specific Plan is a planning document to guide development; it does not propose specific development projects. As such, there are no Project Design Features applicable to the Project.

A.2 Impact Analysis
Based on the City’s CEQA Guidelines, if the Project is located adjacent to a scenic corridor as identified by General Plan Figure 4-23, Jurupa Valley Scenic Corridors and Roadways, and would substantially block views of a scenic vista that is visible from public places (e.g., parks, plazas, the grounds of civic buildings, streets and roads, and publicly accessible open space, impacts may be significant absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

Note: Scenic vistas are
points or corridors that are accessible to the public and that provide a view of scenic areas and/or landscape. In general, scenic resources include natural areas that are visible to the public and include natural landmarks, hills and mountain peaks, ridgelines, floodplains and stream channels, agricultural fields, mature trees and agricultural windbreaks, riparian woodlands, and other prominent or unusual landscape features. Scenic backdrops include hillsides and ridges that rise above or adjacent to urban or rural areas or highways.

The City’s General Plan defines scenic vistas as “points or corridors that are accessible to the public and that provide a view of scenic areas and/or landscapes.” Specifically, the City identifies publicly accessible vantage points of the Santa Ana River, Jurupa Mountains, and t he Pedley Hills as scenic vistas (City of Jurupa Valley, 2017a, pp. 1-17-1-19). Although not within the City, Mount Rubidoux is a scenic resource for the City of Riverside (2025 City of Riverside General Plan and Supporting Documents EIR Section 5.1 – Aesthetics).

Views from Designated Scenic Corridors
The closest scenic corridors are Limonite Avenue (located approximately 0.44 miles to the southwest), 46th Street (located approximately 1.25 miles to the south and southeast), and Camino Real (located appro ximately 2.18 miles to the west and southwest), and Crestmore Road (located approximately 0.31 miles to the south). General Plan Figure 3 -30, Scenic Corridors, also designates Sierra Avenue as a scenic corridor from its intersection with Armstrong Road, ap proximately 0.45 miles west of the Project site, continuing northwest to the City of Fontana city limits. Because there are no scenic corridors in the immediate vicinity of the Project site, there is no impact in this regard.  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-10 June 2023
On-Site Public Views of Scenic Vistas
As shown in Figure 4.1-2 Site Photographs 1 through 4 and Figure 4.1-3, Site Photographs 5 through 8, the public rights-of-way within and surrounding the Project site provide distant and partial views of the Jurupa Mountains (approximately 2.67 mil es) northwest, Pedley Hills (approximately 2.96 miles to the southwest), and Mount Rubidoux (approximately one mile, as measured from the center of Mount Rubidoux to the center of the Project site to the east) (Google Earth 2023).

Future development allowe d by the Specific Plan could interfere with the distant and partial views of these scenic vistas. However, the following regulations contained in the Specific Plan would limit the height and massing of buildings:
• Section 3.3.1 Floor Area Ratio, of the Specific Plan, floor area ratios range from .50 to .70 for non-residential land uses. This effectively prevents buildings from occupying the entirety of a lot area which limits the buildings from substantially blocking views. • Section 3.3.3, Building Setback Line, no building or structure shall be constructed within the Building Setback Line. All setbacks shall be free and clear to the sky relative to building or structure placement except for landscaping and sidewalks and perimeter walls for residential neighborhoods, primary commercial or industrial uses provided that the first four feet of the wall is screened by a landscape buffer. • Table 3-3, Development Standards, limits building heights from 35 feet to 75 feet.

With the implementation of t he combination of floor area ratio limits , building setback lines, and building heights, the partial views to these scenic resources would still be publicly available from the Project site post-development. As a result, the implementation of the Project does not have the potential to have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and impacts would be less than significant.

On-Site Public Views of the Santa Ana River
Views from the public-right-of way of existing streets within and adjacent to the Project site (Wallace Street, 34th Street, Hall Avenue, 30th Street, Frontage Road, and Rubidoux Boulevard) are blocked by the raised berm that runs along the eastern border of the site adjacent to the Santa Ana River (see Figures 4.1-2 Photo 1 and 4.1-3 Photo 8). Therefore, the Project would not block unobstructed public views of the River, and there is no impact in this regard.

Views of the Santa Ana River from the City of Riverside The primary public view of the river from the City of Riverside is from an approximately 4,000-foot- long segment of the Santa Ana River Trail along the east side of the Santa Ana River in the City of Riverside. This view corresponds to the distance between 34th Street and SR 60 on the Jurupa Valley side of the river. Refer to Figures 4.1-5 through 4.1-7 which shows the location of the Santa Ana River Trail and various public viewing vantage points to the river.  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-11 June 2023
Figure 4.1-5

SANTA ANA RIVER TRAIL LOCATION

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-12 June 2023
Figure 4.1-6

VIEW FROM SANTA ANA RIVER TRAIL

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-13 June 2023
Figure 4.1-7

VIEWS FROM RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN RIVERSIDE

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-14 June 2023
As shown in Figures 4.1-5 through 4.1-7, the existing public views of the Santa Ana River are already blocked because the elevation is the same or lower than these vantage points and because of the intervening structures and vegetation block any view. Therefore, impacts are less than significant in this regard.

Views of Future Development on the Project Site from the City of Riverside As noted above, the City of Riverside requested that the EIR “Discuss the interface of development along the Santa Ana River to avoid turning our backs on the river.” The Specific Plan land uses proposed adjacent to the Santa Ana River are Industrial/Logistics (I-L) and Public Facility (PF). The I- L designation is intended to provide a wide range of industrial uses including research and development; light manufacturing, assembly and processing of manufactured goods and materials; warehousing and distribution including e -commerce, high-cube logistics and cross-dock facilities. Ancillary uses include, office, employee services, and property management facilities. The Public Facility designation provides for the development of a stormwater basin.2 As required by Table 3-9: Wall, Fencing, and Screening Requirements, of the Specific Plan, all loading docks and truck parking areas shall be visually screened from the public right-of-way. Screening may include landscaping, decorative walls, or any other appropriate screening material or combination of materials to achieve the required screening. Additionally, the Santa Ana River is approximately 1,000 feet wide, and abundant vegetation —including trees —in the riverbed would partly screen the proposed Project from the public vantage points in the City of Riverside. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Views from State Route 60
As shown in Figure 4.1-8, Santa Ana River View from State Route 60 , only the berm adjacent to the River is seen from eastbound traffic because the travel lanes are approximately at the same elevation as the Project site. As shown in Figure 4.1 -9, Illustrative Cross Section at SR 60 and Industrial/Logistics Area, the travel lanes elevate over the Santa Ana River at the Mission Boulevard Bridge, which is at a point past the Project site, and thus the development on the Project site would not obstruct the views of the River from this vantage point. Therefore, there are no impacts in this regard.

2 The District at Jurupa Valley, Draft Specific Plan November 2022.  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-15 June 2023
Figure 4.1-8
SANTA ANA RIVER VIEW FROM STATE ROUTE 60

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-16 June 2023
Figure 4.1-9
ILLUSTRATIVE CROSS SECTION AT SR 60 AND INDUSTRIAL/LOGISTICS AREA

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-17 June 2023
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impacts on scenic vistas would be less than significant.

A.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

A.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold b): Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Screening Criteria: If the project is not located within a state scenic highway, it may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

B.1 Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs), and Project Design Features (PDFs) Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs)
No PPPs apply to project impacts on a state scenic highway.

Project Design Features (PDFs)
No PDFs apply to project impacts on a state scenic highway.

B.2 Impact Analysis
The nearest designated state scenic highway to the Project site is a segment of State Route 91 approximately 23 miles to the southwest (Caltrans, 2022). Project development would not damage scenic resources in the designated segment of SR-91 and no impact would occur.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation: No impacts on scenic resources would occur.

B.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

B.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation
No impact would occur.
 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-18 June 2023
Threshold c): (In an Urbanized Area) Would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is inconsistent with General Plan policies or Municipal Code requirements pertaining to scenic quality.

C.1 Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs), and Project Design Features (PDFs) Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs)
The following PPP applies to the Project and would reduce impacts relating to conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality:

PPP 4.1.2 Future development is subject to the Section 3 - Land Use and Development Standards and Section 4 – Design Guidelines of the Specific Plan.

Project Design Features (PDFs)
The Spe cific Plan is a planning document to guide development; it does not propose specific development projects. The Specific Plan includes development standards and design guidelines that all subsequent project proposals will have to comply with.

C.2 Impact Analysis
According to the United States Census Bureau (USCB) 2020 Census, which is the most recent Census for which data is available, an urban area is defined as an area that encompasses at least 2,500 people, for which at least 1,500 reside outside institutional group quarters (USCB, 2019). Additionally, CEQA Guidelines section 21094 (e) (B) (5), “Urban area” includes either an incorporated city or an unincorporated area that is completely surrounded by one or more incorporated cities that meets both of the following criteria:
(A) The population of the unincorporated area and the population of the surrounding incorporated cities equal a population of 100,000 or more.

(B) The population density of the unincorporated area is equal to, or greater than, the population density of the surrounding cities.

According to these criteria, the Project site is within an urbanized area and the following analysis focuses on the potential conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

Site Development
The Specific Plan is a planning document to guide development; it does not propose specific development projects. Future development of the Specific Plan will occur through the processing of a variety of implementing projects, including, but not limited to tract maps, parcel maps, grading  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-19 June 2023
plans, site development permits, conditional use permits, tenant improvements, and sign permits. All implementing projects shall be submitted to the City of Jurupa Valley Community Development Department for review and processing. The Community Development Department shall review all plans for consistency with the applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality contained in Specific Plan Section 3, Land Use and Development Standards , and Section 4, Design Guidelines. With implementation of these regulations, impacts would be less than significant.

Freeway Signs
The Project proposes three digital billboards and two static free -standing freeway -oriented signs along SR-60. See Figure 4.1- 10, Sign Locations, and Figures 4.1 -11 through 4.1-15, which depict views of the signs identified in Figure 4.1-10.

Specific Plan Section 4.8, Comprehensive Master Sign Program , requires the preparation of a Sign Program that includes, but is not limited to, provisions for construction materials, coordination with building architecture, and lighting. The Sign Program requires a Site Development Permit, reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director or his/her designee in accordance with Section 5.5, Implementation . Such approval shall comply with the design s tandards contained in Section 4.9 .1, Design Standards , which inc ludes, but is not limited to, equipment screening, sign orientations, and landscaping and groundcover at the base of the signs.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation: With implementation of PPP 4.1 -1 and as substantiated in the General Plan Consistency Analysis in Section 4.1.8, Land Use and Planning, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts are less than significant.

C.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

C.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant.

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-20 June 2023
Figure 4.1-10

SIGN LOCATIONS

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-21 June 2023
Figure 4.1-11
SIGN LOCATIONS VIEW 1

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-22 June 2023
Figure 4.1-12
VIEW 2 - EASTBOUND STATE ROUTE 60

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-23 June 2023
Figure 4.1-13
VIEW 3 - WESTBOUND STATE ROUTE 60

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-24 June 2023
Figure 4.1-14
View 4 – Westbound State Route 60

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-25 June 2023
Figure 4.1-15
VIEW 5 – WESTBOUND STATE ROUTE 60

 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-26 June 2023
Threshold d): Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project is inconsistent with General Plan Policy COS 10.1, which requires outdoor lighting to be shielded and prohibits outdoor lighting that:

1. Operates at unnecessary locations, levels, and times.

2. Spills onto areas off-site or to areas not needing or wanting illumination.

3. Produces glare (intense line-of-site contrast).

4. Includes lighting frequencies (colors) that interfere with astronomical viewing.

Nighttime glare impacts would be considered significant if future buildings, signage or thematic elements which incorporate highly reflective buildi ng materials were to be developed on the Project Site in close proximity to both glare sensitive uses and motor vehicle traffic or would be illuminated by high brightness special effects or event lighting associated with the proposed Project. Daytime glare-
sensitive uses generally include
residential areas, freeways, and outdoor activity areas (recreational areas and parks). Uses sensitive to nighttime glare generally include residential uses, some commercial and institutional uses, and wildlife habitat within natural areas.

D.1 Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs), and Project Design Features (PDFs) Plans, Policies, and Programs (PPPs)
PPP 4.1.3 Outdoor lighting fixtures are required to comply with Section 3.7, Lighting Requirements, Section 4.5, Lighting, and Section 4.9.2, Lighting and Display Requirements of the Specific Plan.

Project Design Features (PDFs)
The Specific Plan is a planning document to guide development; it does not propose specific development projects. The Specific Plan includes lighting requirements that prohibit light spillage off-site and downward facing light fixtures for all future development D.2 Impact Analysis
Based on the City’s CEQA Guidelines, if the project is inconsistent with General Plan Policy COS 10.1, Outdoor Lighting, impacts may be significant absent substantial evidence to the contrary.  SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-27 June 2023
Under existing conditions, the Project site is mostly vacant except for four housing structures on the property and does not produce much light or glare; therefore, implementation of the Project would result in an increase in ambient light generation, primarily associated with building lights, and security/parking lot lighting.

Outdoor Lighting
As required by PPP 4.1-3, Outdoor lighting fixtures are required to comply with Section 3.7, Lighting Requirements, and Section 4.5, Lighting , of the Specific Plan. These regulations require all exterior lighting fixtures to be directed downward to illuminate the site and avoid unnecessary glare and light pollution on adjacent properties. Subsequent project approvals for specific buildings will have to comply with these requirements and will be evaluated by the Community Development Department to ensure compliance with the standards specified to prevent light spillage off-site. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.

Glare
The Project would introduce some sources of glare through building materials like windows.

Buildings may have windows and the specific design of each proposed building will be evaluated for compliance with the Specific Plan and City Code. Implementation of the Specific Plan and development of the proposed buildings would not result in large expanses of reflective materials so the increase in glare would be less than significant in this regard.

Freeway Sign Lighting
Section 4.9.2, Lighting and Display Requirements , of the Specific Plan requires that all digital billboards must comply with all applicable laws and regulations concerning brightness, including, without limitation, California Vehicle Code Section 21466.5, and as amended and that signs are to be oriented primarily for viewing from the freeway and shall be oriented, and adequately shielded if necessary, to prevent the trespass of light and glare upon any residential land use (within 1,000 feet of the sign), including those in mixed-use districts, as exists on the date of building permit issuance. With implementation of PPP 4.1.3, impacts would be less than significant.

Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Less than significant.

D.3 Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

D.4 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Impacts would be less than significant.

4.1.7 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic area for cumulative analysis includes the cumulative development projects listed in Table 3- 1, Cumulative Projects. This development would be required to comply with the overall land use vision, design review regulations, and policies in local and regional planning documents as they apply to those projects.
 SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.1-28 June 2023
As discussed under Threshold a), the City’s General Plan specifies the Pedley Hills, Jurupa Mountains, and Santa Ana River as scenic resources and publicly accessible vantage points that provide views of these scenic resources are considered scenic vistas. The EIR also evaluated impacts to views of Mount Rubidoux in the City of Riverside because it is within one mile of the Project site and is considered a scenic resource by the City of Riverside. Due t o the project site ’s distance from these resources, intervening development, and topography relative to these scenic resources, the development of the proposed Project would not block public views of the Pedley Hills, Jurupa Mountains, the Santa Ana River, or Mount Rubidoux.

The reasonably foreseeable development projects listed in Table 3 - 1, Cumulative Projects, would not have any impacts that would directly combine with the development proposed on the P roject site because of their distance to the Project site. Therefore, the Project, in conjunction with other planned or approved projects, would not have cumulatively considerable impacts on scenic vistas.

As discussed under Threshold b), there are no designated or eligible State Scenic Highways adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, the proposed Project has no impact on a scenic resource within a scenic highway, nor does it contribute to a cumulatively significant impact in this regard. Therefore, the Project, in conjunction with other planned or approved projects, would not have cumulatively considerable impacts on a state scenic highway.

As discussed under Threshold c), the proposed Project would not result in direct impacts related to conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Future development projects would be required to comply with the applicable development standards and design guidelines of the Specific Plan, which are consistent with the General Plan. The reasonably foreseeable development projects listed in Table 3 - 1, Cumulative Projects, would have to comply with applicable zoning or other regulations regarding scenic quality. Therefore, the Project, in conjunction with other planned or approved projects, would not have cumulatively cons iderable impacts in regard to conflicts with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

As discussed under Threshold d), mandatory compliance with the applicable requirements of the Specific Plan’s development standards regulating light and glare would ensure the proposed Project would result in less -than-significant impacts to light and glare, and daytime and nighttime views.

Other development projects in the region also would be subject to the same or similar lighting standards. Therefore, the Project, in conjunction with other planned or approved projects, would not have cumulatively considerable impacts on light and glare.

 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-1 June 2023

4.2 Air Quality
This section is based in part on information obtained from two technical reports prepared by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc.: an air quality assessment (Kimley-Horn, 202 3a) and a health risk assessment (Kimley- Horn, 202 3b), which are provided in Appendix D1 and Appendix D2 , respectively. This section describes the existing air quality setting and potential effects from the implementation of the District Specific Plan on the site and its surrounding area. The section identifies and describes relevant federal, state, regional and municipal air quality regulations, standards, policies, and plans; characterizes ambient air quality near the Project site and defines criteria for significance of impacts.

Air Pollutants and Health Effects
The following are brief descriptions of individual pollutants and pollutant classes that have been associated with a wide range of human health effects, including increased respiratory symptoms, hospitalization for heart or lung diseases, and even premature death.

Criteria Pollutants
Criteria pollutants are air pollutants for which acceptable leve ls of exposure can be determined and an ambient air quality standard (AAQS) has been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and/or ARB . The criteria air pollutants of concern are nitrogen dioxide (NO 2),
carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO 2), lead, and ozone, and their precursors. Since the proposed Project would not generate appreciable SO 2 or lead emissions, 3 it is not necessary for the analysis to include those two pollutants. Federal and state AAQS are listed in Table 4.2-1. Presented below is a description of the air pollutants of concern.

Table 4.2-1

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS Pollutant Averaging Time State Standards1 National Standards2 Ozone (O3) 2, 5, 7
8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137
µg/m3) 0.070 ppm
1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180
µg/m3) NA
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) 1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3)
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339
µg/m3) 0.10 ppm11
Annual Arithmetic
Mean

0.030 ppm (57
µg/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3)
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 8
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105
µg/m3) 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3)
1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655
µg/m3) 0.075 ppm (196 µg/m3)
Annual Arithmetic
Mean NA 0.03 ppm (80 µg/m3)
Particulate Matter (PM10) 1, 3, 6
24-Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3
Annual Arithmetic
Mean 20 µg/m3 NA

3 Sulfur dioxide emissions will be about 0.08 pound per day during construction and about 0.16 pound per day during operations.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-2 June 2023
Pollutant Averaging Time State Standards1 National Standards2 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 3, 4,
6, 9
24-Hour NA 35 µg/m3
Annual Arithmetic
Mean 12 µg/m3 12 µg/m3
Sulfates (SO4-2) 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 NA
Lead (Pb) 10, 11
30-Day Average 1.5 µg/m3 NA
Calendar Quarter NA 1.5 µg/m3
Rolling 3-Month
Average NA 0.15 µg/m3
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 µg/m3) NA
Vinyl Chloride (C2H3CI) 10 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) NA Notes:
ppm = parts per million; µg/m 3 = micrograms per cubic meter; mg/m 3 = milligrams per cubic meter; – = no information available.
1 California standards for O3, carbon monoxide (except Lake Tahoe), sulfur dioxide (1-hour and 24-hour), nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate matter - PM10, and visibility reducing particles are values that are not to be exceeded. The standards for sulfates, Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide, lead, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride are not to be equaled or exceeded. If the standard is for a 1 -hour, 8-hour or 24-hour average (i.e., all standards except for lead and the PM 10 annual standard), then some measurements may be excluded. Measurements are excluded that ARB determines would occur less than once per year on the average. The Lake Tahoe carbon monoxide standard is 6.0 ppm, a level one -half the national standard and two-thirds the State standard.
2 National standards shown are the "primary standards" designed to protect public health. National standards other than for O3, particulates and those based on annual averages are not to be exceeded more than once a year. The 1- hour O3 standard is attained if, during the most recent three-year period, the average number of days per year with maximum hourly concentrations above the standard is equal to or less than one. The 8-hour O3 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 4th highest daily concentrations is 0.070 ppm or less. The 24-hour PM10 standard is attained when the 3-year average of the 99th percentile of monitored concentrations is less than 150 µg/m3. The 24-hour PM2.5 standard is attained when the 3-year average of 98th percentiles is less than 35 µg/m3. 3 Except for the national particulate standards, annual standards are met if the annual average falls below the standard at every site. The national annual particulate standard for PM 10 is met if the 3-year average falls below the standard at every site. The annual PM2.5 standard is met if the 3-year average of annual averages spatially-averaged across officially designed clusters of sites falls below the standard.

NAAQS are set by the USEPA at levels determined to be protective of public health with an adequate margin of safety. 4 On October 1, 2015, the national 8-hour O3 primary and secondary standards were lowered from 0.075 to 0.070 ppm. An area will meet the standard if the fourth -highest maximum daily 8 -hour O3 concentration per year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than 0.070 ppm. USEPA will make recommendations on attainment designations by October 1, 2016, and issue final designations October 1, 2017. Nonattainment areas will have until 2020 to late 2037 to meet the health standard, with attainment dates varying based on the O3 level in the area. 5 The national 1-hour O3 standard was revoked by the USEPA on June 15, 2005. 6 In June 2002, ARB established new annual standards for PM2.5 and PM10. 7 The 8-hour California O3 standard was approved by the ARB on April 28, 2005, and became effective on May 17, 2006. 8 On June 2, 2010, the USEPA established a new 1-hour SO2 standard, effective August 23, 2010, which is based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The existing 0.030 ppm annual and 0.14 ppm 24-hour SO2 NAAQS however must continue to be used until one year following USEPA initial designations of the new 1 - hour SO2 NAAQS.
9 In December 2012, USEPA strengthened the annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 15.0 to 12.0 μg/m3. In December 2014, the USEPA issued final area designations for the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Areas designated “unclassifiable/attainment” must continue to take steps to prevent their air quality from deteriorating to unhealthy levels. The effective date of this standard is April 15, 2015.
10 ARB has identified lead and vinyl chloride as ‘toxic air contaminants’ with no threshold level of exposure below which there are no adverse health effects determined.
11 National lead standards, rolling 3 -month average: final rule signed October 15, 2008. Final designations effective December 31, 2011.

Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan , 2022; California Air Resources Board, Ambient Air Quality Standards, May 6, 2016.

Source: Kimley-Horn, 2023a, Table 5, p. 13.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-3 June 2023
Ozone (O3)
Ozone, an important component of smog, is a highly reactive and unstable gas capable of damaging living cells, such as those present in the linings of the human lungs. This pollutant forms in the atmosphere through complex reactions between chemicals directly emitted from vehicles, industrial plants, consumer products and many other sources. Ozone is a powerful oxidant – i ts actions can be compared to household bleach, which can kill living cells (such as germs or human skin cells) upon contact. It forms in greater quantities on hot, sunny, calm days. In metropolitan areas of California, ozone concentrations frequently exceed existing health -protective standards in the summertime.

Health effects from Ozone include respiratory symptoms, worsening of lung disease leading to premature death, and damage to lung tissue.
4 Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM 2.5)
Airborne particulate matter (PM) is not a single pollutant, but rather is a mixture of many chemical species. It is a complex mixture of solids and aerosols composed of small droplets of liquid, dry solid fragments, and solid cores with liquid coatings. Particles vary widely i n size, shape and chemical composition, and may contain inorganic ions, metallic compounds, elemental carbon, organic compounds, and compounds from the earth’s crust. Particles are defined by their diameter for air quality regulatory purposes. Those with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10) are inhalable into the lungs and can induce adverse health effects. Fine particulate matter is defined as particles that are 2.5 microns or less in diameter (PM2.5). Therefore, PM2.5 comprises a portion of PM10. 5 The
health effects from PM include premature death, hospitalization for worsening of cardiovascular disease, hospitalization for respiratory disease, asthma- related emergency room visits, and Increased symptoms, increased inhaler usage.
6 Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless gas. It results from the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as natural gas, gasoline, or wood, and is emitted by a wide variety of combustion sources, including motor vehicles, power plants, wildfires, and incinerators. Nationally and, particularly in urban areas, the majority of outdoor CO emissions to ambient air come from mobile sources. Carbon monoxide can also be formed through photochemical reactions in the atmosphere from methane and non- methane hydrocarbons, other volatile organic hydrocarbons in the atmosphere, and organic molecules in surface waters and soils. There are also a number of indoor sources of CO that contribute to total exposure. Health effects from CO include chest pain in patients with heart disease, headache light-headedness, and reduced mental alertness

7. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) is a pungent gas that, along with fine airborne particulate matter, contributes to the reddish- brown haze characteristic of smoggy air in California. Although NO2 can be directly emitted from combustion sources, much of the NO 2 in the ambient air is formed in the atmosphere through reactions between nitric oxide (NO) and other air pollutants that require the p resence of sunlight (photochemical reactions). NO2 levels in air vary with direct emission levels, as well as with

4 California Air Resources Board, Common Air Pollutants. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/common-air-pollutants.

Accessed April 3, 2023.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid.
7 Ibid.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-4 June 2023
changing atmospheric conditions, particularly the amount of sunlight. The health effects from N0 2 include lung irritation and enhanced allergic responses.

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
SO2 is a member of a family of chemicals comprised of sulfur and oxygen that are collectively known as sulfur oxides (SOX). SOX, including SO 2, are emitted when sulfur- containing fuel is burned. Some examples of sources include motor vehicles, locomotives, ships, and off -road diesel equipment that are operated with fuels that contain high levels of sulfur. In addition, SO 2 and the other SOX are emitted from some industrial processes, such as natural gas and petroleum extr action, oil refining, and metal processing. The health effects from SO2 include Worsening of asthma: increased symptoms, increased medication usage, and emergency room visits8.

4.2.1 Existing Conditions
The California Air Resources Board (ARB) divides the State into 15 air basins that share similar meteorological and topographical features. The Project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which includes the non- desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties, as well as all of Orange County.

The topography and climate of Southern California combine to make the Basin an area highly favorable for forming air pollution. A warm air mass frequently descends over the cool, moist marine layer produced by the interaction between the ocean’s surface and the lowest layer of the atmosphere. Within the atmosphere, the warm upper layer forms a cap over the cooler surface layer, which traps the pollutants near the ground. Light wind s can further limit ventilation. Additionally, the region experiences more days of sunlight than any other major urban area in the nation except Phoenix, Arizona. This abundant sunlight triggers the photochemical reactions which produce ozone and PM2.5

9. Regional Air Quality
The USEPA and the ARB designate air basins where ambient air quality standards are exceeded as “nonattainment” areas. If standards are met, the area is designated as an “attainment” area. If there is inadequate or inconclusive data to make a definitive attainment designation, they are considered “unclassified.” National nonattainment areas are further designated as marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme as a function of deviation from standards.

Table 4.2-2 shows the attainment status of the SCAB for each criteria pollutant for both the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The region is currently nonattainment for ozone and PM

2.5. 8 Ibid.
9 SCAQMD, Air Quality Management Plan, Chapter 1, p. 1-7. http://www.aqmd.gov/home/air-quality/clean-air-plans/air- quality-mgt-plan. Accessed April 3, 2023.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-5 June 2023
Table 4.2-2

FEDERAL AND STATE ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutants State Classification Federal Classification
Ozone (O3) (1 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Extreme) Ozone (O3) (8 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Extreme) Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (24 Hour Standard) – Non-Attainment (Serious) Particulate Matter (PM2.5) (Annual Standard) Non-Attainment Non-Attainment (Moderate) Particulate Matter (PM10) (24 Hour Standard) Non-Attainment Attainment (Maintenance) Particulate Matter (PM10) (Annual Standard) Non-Attainment – Carbon Monoxide (CO) (1 Hour Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance) Carbon Monoxide (CO) (8 Hour Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance) Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (1 Hour Standard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (Annual Standard) Attainment Attainment (Maintenance) Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) (1 Hour Standard) Attainment Unclassifiable/Attainment Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) (24 Hour Standard) Attainment –
Lead (Pb) (30 Day Standard) – Unclassifiable/Attainment Lead (Pb) (3 Month Standard) Attainment –
Sulfates (SO4-2) (24 Hour Standard) Attainment –
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) (1 Hour Standard) Unclassified – Source: The District at Jurupa Valley Air Quality Assessment, (Kimley-Horn, 2023a) Local Air Quality
Existing Pollutant Levels at Nearby Monitoring Stations The ARB monitors ambient air quality at approximately 250 air monitoring stations across the state.

Existing levels of ambient air quality, historical trends, and projections near the Project are documented by measurements made by the SCAQMD, the air pollution regulatory agency in the SCAB that maintains air quality monitoring stations which process ambient air quality measurements. The closest air monitoring station to the Project site that monitors ambient concentrations of ozone, PM10, PM2.5 and NO2 pollutants is the Rubidoux-Mission Boulevard station. It is 0.79 mile southwest to the Project site. The ambient air quality data in the proposed Project vicinity as recorded at these stations for 2019 to 2021 and the applicable federal and state standards are shown in Table 4.2-3.

Table 4.2-3

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA
Criteria Pollutant 2019 2020 2021
Ozone (O3) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.123 0.143 0.117
8-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.096 0.115 0.097
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.09 ppm) 24 46 20
NAAQS 8-hour (>0.070 ppm) 59 82 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 1.51 1.72 2.10
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>35 ppm) 0 0 0
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-6 June 2023
Criteria Pollutant 2019 2020 2021
CAAQS 1-hour (>20 ppm) 0 0 0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 56.0 66.4 52.0
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>0.100 ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns (PM10) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration 132.5 142.1 76.5 State 24-hour Maximum Concentration 182.4 137.7 114.3
State Annual Average Concentration (CAAQS=20 µg/m3) 40.9 -- 33.2 Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>150 µg/m3) 0 0 0
CAAQS 24-hour (>50 µg/m3) 110 115 75
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration 55.7 59.9 82.1
State 24-hour Maximum Concentration 57.6 61.9 82.1
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>35 µg/m3) 5 12 11
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; ppm = parts per million.
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; – = not measured
1 Measurements taken at the Rubidoux - Mission Boulevard Monitoring Station at 5888 Mission Boulevard, Riverside, California 92509 (CARB# 33144), which is the closet monitoring station that measures O3, CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5.

Source: Kimley-Horn, 2023a, Table 3, p. 10) All pollutant measurements are from the ARB Aerometric Data Analysis and Management system database (https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam) except for CO, which were retrieved from the ARB Air Quality and Meteorological Information System (https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/aqdselect.php).

Air Quality Trends
As of 2022, the region’s population exceeds 17 million people, yet emissions have continued to decrease. In the South Coast Air Basin, approximately 406 tons per day of VOCs and 351 tons per day of NOx were emitted in 2018 (the base-year of the emissions inventory and modeling analysis in the 2022 AQMP). Based on current regulations and actions already taken, emissions are estimated to be approximately 339 tons per day of VOC emissions and 184 tons per day of NOx emissions in 2037.

However, these levels are not low enough to meet the 2015 8 - hour ozone NAAQS for the Basin and significant additional emissions reductions are necessary. Subst antial progress has been made in reducing the pollutants that form ozone (i.e., VOCs, NOx) and PM2.5 emissions through regulatory measures, voluntary actions, and partnerships with other agencies and stakeholders. Figure 1 -6 illustrates the ozone and PM2.5 levels in the Basin as a percentage of the federal standard which demonstrates that while air quality progress has been dramatic since the 1990s, much work remains to bring the Basin into attainment of the ozone standards.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-7 June 2023
Figure 4.2-1
TRENDS OF SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN MAXIMUM 3-YEAR DESIGN VALUES FOR OZONE AND PM2.5 (1)

Source: SCAQMD, 2022 Air Quality Management Plan.
(1) (As Percentages Of Current Federal Standards. 24-Hour Pm2.5 Design Values Exclude Exceptional Events Caused By The Bobcat and El Dorado Fires In 2020)

 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-8 June 2023

4.2.2 Notice of Preparation/Scoping Comments
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the proposed Project was released for the local review period from March 31, 2022 to April 29, 2022. The State review period started on April 1, 2022 and ended on May 2, 2022. A scoping meeting was held April 20, 2022 at City of Jurupa Valley City Hall ; no comments that pertain to air quality were made during the EIR Scoping Meeting.

Comments related to air quality were received from the following:
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Email from Lijin Sun dated April 14, 2022, recommended that the analysis follows the guidance and methods of the AQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, its Localized Significance Analysis method, and other analytical methods; the EIR should also include a mobile source health risk assessment if the project generates long-term diesel emissions, and provide mitigation measures that the Lead Agency should consider in reducing potential impacts to air quality. Given the proximity of proposed project residences to the State Route 60 freeway, several mitigation measures described by the ARB should be considered if necessary.
• Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Letter from Frank Wen, Ph.D.

Manager, Planning Strategy Department, dated April 27, 2022, recommending that the City review the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (Final PEIR) for Connect SoCal for guidance, as appropriate. The PEIR includes a list of project -level performance s tandards- based mitigation measures that may be considered for adoption and implementation by lead, responsible, or trustee agencies in the region, as applicable and feasible. • Californians Allied for a Responsible Economy (CARE). Letter from Jeff Modrzejew ski dated April 29, 2022, opined that the EIR should consider and analyze all reasonably foreseeable uses including higher intensity uses such as construction and operation of cold storage warehouse space. The letter suggests that the analysis include the potential use of transportation refrigeration units (TRUs) during project operation, and heavy truck traffic in its VMT analysis. It states that a health risk assessment should be done and the project should mandate zero emission or alternative fuel vehicles onsite during construction and operation. • City of Riverside. Letter from David Murray, Principal Planner, Planning Division dated April 29, 2023, expressing concerns with cumulative impacts, such as traffic, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and that all cumulative and regional impacts be fully analyzed and mitigated.

4.2.3 Regulatory Setting
Air pollutants are regulated at the federal, state, regional, and local level. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates at the federal level. Th e California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulates at the state level. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regulates at the regional level, and the City of Jurupa Valley regulates at the local level.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-9 June 2023
Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
Under the federal Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) establishes health-based air quality standards that all states must achieve. These are known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The EPA oversees approval of all State Implementation Plans which are comprehensive plans that describe how a state will attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

State
California Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act also allows states to adopt additional or more stringent air quality standards if necessary. California has adopted a set of standards known as California Ambient Air Quality Standards. The State Standards differ from the federal Standards in some instances.

California Air Resources Board
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for reducing emissions from motor vehicle and consumer products. The Board has the overall responsibility for statewide air quality maintenance and air pollution prevention. California has set standards for certain pollutants, such as particulate matter and ozone, which are more protective of public health than the federal standards.

California has also set standards for some pollutants that are not addressed by federal standards, such as Visibility Reducing Particles, Sulfates, Hydrogen Sulfide, and Vinyl Chloride. In addition, The California Air Resources Board reviews and approves State Implementation Plan elements prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management and submits them to the EPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register.

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
Under federal law (23 U.S. Code § 134 and 49 U.S. Code § 5303), SCAG is designated as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and is designated as a Regional Transportation Planning Agency and a Council of Governments under state law (California Government Code, § 29532, et. seq.). SCAG is responsible for preparing the portion of the SIP that addresses transportation control measures, land use, and growth projections. In particular, SCAG dev elops long- range regional transportation plans including sustainable communities strategy and growth forecast components, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations and a portion of the South Coast AQMD’s AQMPs. SCAG p rovides plans for six counties and 26 planning areas according to the attainment status of ozone, particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) and PM2.5 NAAQS. South Coast Air Basin and Coachella Valley are both included in their planning areas.

South Coast Air Quality Management District
The California Clean Air Act also establishes requirements for cities and counties to meet. South Coast AQMD was created by the state legislature to facilitate compliance with the federal Clean Air Act and to implement the state air quality program. Toward that end, South Coast AQMD develops regulations designed to achieve these public health standards by reducing emissions from business and industry.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-10 June 2023
California is divided into 35 air quality management districts. These districts are responsible for controlling emissions primarily from stationary sources (e.g., power plants, chemical plants, oil refineries, manufacturing facilities, and other industrial facilities). The District also sets "significance thresholds" for various air pollutant emissions during a project's construction and/or operation. The Project is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).

Air Quality Management Plan
South Coast AQMD staff develops rules based on control measures identified in the Air Quality Management Plan and which are designed to reduce air pollution from specific sources. Generally, the rule-making process incorporates extensive information gathering and research into available technologies, coordination with industry groups, and analysis of the economic impact of each proposed rule or rule amendment. South Coast AQMD provides an opportunity for public input on every proposed rule. At public workshops and consultatio ns, the public can voice suggestions and concerns about the impact of a proposed rule. A final public hearing is held before the South Coast AQMD Governing Board before the Board votes on the proposed or amended rule.

In addition to developing air polluti on regulations, South Coast AQMD is under a legal obligation to enforce these regulations. Air pollution regulations are primarily meant to ensure that the surrounding (or ambient) air meets federal and state air quality standards. AQMD also has broad authority to regulate toxic and hazardous air emissions, and these regulations are enforced in the same manner as those which pertain to the ambient air quality standards. South Coast AQMD has devised a broad compliance program to provide for enforcement activities.

Local
City of Jurupa Valley General Plan
Local air quality within Jurupa Valley varies from place to place and depends on both regional wind patterns and proximity to local pollution sources. The City of Jurupa Valley General Plan, principally through its Air Quality Element, contains a variety of goals and policies that address air quality improvement. These are identified and evaluated in the General Plan Consistency Analysis table in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning.

4.2.4 Methodology
This air quality impact analysis considers construction and operational impacts associated with the Project. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model
® (CalEEMod). 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. Air quality impacts were assessed according to methodologies recommended by CARB and the SCAQMD (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, p. 21).

Construction
CalEEMod Version 2022.1.1.6 (CAPCOA, 2022 ), which incorporates onroad emission factors from EMFAC 2021 for applicable calendar years in the Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB, was used to estimate construction emissions for offroad equipment exhaust , onroad exhaust emissions from construction employee commuting and vendor activity, and onroad exhaust emissions from hauling activity.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-11 June 2023
Construction equipment, trucks, worker vehicles, and gr ound-disturbing activities associated with project construction (see Table 4.2-4) would generate emissions of criteria air pollutants and their precursors. Daily regional construction emissions are estimated by assuming construction occurs at the earliest feasible date (i.e., a conservative estimate of construction activities) and applying off - road, fugitive dust, and on-road emissions factors in CalEEMod. The Project is a Specific Plan, and no development proposals are included at this time. Buildout of the Specific Plan would occur in multiple phases over several years and future development would be subject to project -specific City discretionary review and approval. It is anticipated that project construction would occur over two development phases.

Table 4.2-4
EQUIPMENT BY CalEEMod CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
CalEEMod Defined
Construction Activity 1 Equipment Type No. of
Pieces
Hours/
Day
Horse-
power
Load
Factor
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 33 0.73
Excavators 3 8.00 36 0.38
Rubber-Tired Dozers 2 8.00 367 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber-Tired Dozers 3 8.00 367 0.40
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 4 8.00 84 0.37
Grading
Excavators 2 8.00 36 0.38
Graders 1 8.00 148 0.41
Scrapers 1 8.00 367 0.40
Rubber-Tired Dozers 2 8.00 423 0.48
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 84 0.37
Building Construction
Cranes 1 7.00 367 0.29
Forklifts 3 8.00 82 0.20
Generator Sets 1 8.00 14 0.74
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 84 0.37
Welders 1 8.00 46 0.45
Paving
Pavers 2 8.00 81 0.42
Paving Equipment 2 8.00 89 0.36
Rollers 2 8.00 36 0.38
Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 37 0.48
Source: CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.6. Refer to Appendix D1 for model outputs. 1 This is construction activity phase defined by CalEEMod not project phase.

It was assumed in the modeling that all applicable provisions of SCAQMD Rule 403 would be followed.

CalEEMod considers these control measures to be “mitigation,” although, being legally mandatory, they are not considered as such in this EIR.

Localized Significance Analysis for Criteria Pollutants The purpose of this analysis is to estimate whether ambient air quality standards for NO 2, CO, PM10 or PM2.5 would be violated in the immediate vicinity of the Project . To facilitate impact analysis, the SCAQMD developed a methodology for modeling many combinations of project footprint area, source-receptor distance, and local meteorology in the SCAB (Chico and Koizumi, 200 8). From the results of the analysis, SCAQM D developed mass rate look -up tables that can be used to determine whether a project’s emissions may generate significant localized air quality impacts on offsite receptors (including sensitive receptors). Based o n the source receptor area ( SRA) number, the  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-12 June 2023
distance to the receptor and the site area, the output of the modeling is a set of pollutant -specific emission thresholds.

Toxic Air Contaminants
For this project, the chief toxic air contaminant during construc tion will be diesel particulate matter (DPM), a carcinogen. Kimley-Horn prepared a health risk assessment (HRA) for exposure of nearby workers and residents to DPM emissions during construction (Kimley- Horn, 2023b). The basic approach was to quantify hourl y DPM emissions from construction activities at various locations, conduct air dispersion modeling to estimate annual average concentrations at sensitive receivers, and to quantify lifetime cancer risk and chronic noncancer 10 risk for individuals in different age classes. Details of the HRA’s assumptions, calculations, modeling and risk calculations are provided in Appendix D2.

Operation
Project operations would result in emissions of area sources (consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape eq uipment), energy sources (electricity and natural gas usage), mobile sources (motor vehicles from p roject generated vehicle trips), and off- road equipment. Project - generated operational emissions would be predominantly associated with motor vehicle use.

Emissions from each of these categories are discussed below.

Area Sources. Area source emissions would be generated due to consumer products use , onsite equipment, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment that were previously not present on the site. Many consumer products contain VOCs that are emitted during product use. These typically include cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics, and toiletries. • Energy Sources. Energy source emissions would be generated due to electricity and natural gas usage associated with the Project . Primary uses of electricity and natural gas by the Project would be for space heating and cooling, water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Energy source emissions were calculated in CalEEMod. No changes were made to the default energy usage consumption rates or emissions factors. • Mobile Sources. Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NO X, PM10, and
PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern. NO X and ROG react with sunlight to form O 3, known as photochemical smog. Additionally, wind currents readily transport PM10 and PM2.5.

However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source.

Project-generated vehicle emissions are based on the trip generation rates within the Traffic Impact Analysis for District at Jurupa Valley in the City of Jurupa Valley (Traffic Impact Analysis) prepared by Kimley-Horn (Kimley-Horn, 2022a), and Traffic Analysis Memorandum (Kimley-Horn, 2023c), and incorporated into CalEEMod as recommended by the SCAQMD (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, p. 22). This Traffic Impact Analysis is a local transportation analysis and not part of the CEQA Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)-focused transportation analysis. ARB’s EMission FACtor Model (EMFAC20 21) was used for emission rates in CalEEMod. Project trip generation from the Traffic Impact Analysis is based

10 Data on health effects of acute (short-term) exposure to DPM are insufficient to allow risk assessments thereof.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-13 June 2023
on the following Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) land use categories (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, pp. 22-23):
• ITE Land Use 150: Warehousing ( 1,650,000 square feet, 2,822 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 155: High -Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse (Non- Sort) (300 thousand square feet, 543 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 155: High -Cube Fulfillment Center Warehouse (Sort) (300 thousand square feet, 1,932 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 157: High -Cube Cold Storage Warehouse (150 thousand square feet, 318 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 220: Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) ( 1,192 dwelling units, 8,034 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 310: Hotel (160 rooms, 1,278 total daily vehicle trips). • ITE Land Use 411: Public Park (11.1 acres, 8 total daily vehicle trips). • ITE Land Use 770: Business Park (30 thousand square feet, 373 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 815: Free Standing Discount Store (120 thousand square feet, 6,464 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 820: Shopping Center (>150k) (200 thousand square feet, 7,402 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 850: Supermarket (40 thous and square feet, 3,754 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 890: Furniture Store (100 thousand square feet, 630 total daily vehicle trips).
• ITE Land Use 934: Fast -Food Restaurant w/ Drive -thru (12.5 thousand square feet, 5,844 total daily vehicle trips).

The Project would generate 39,402 daily trips (not accounting for internal capture and pass -by trips).
11 Mobile-source emission rates in CalEEMod incorporated the ARB SAFE Rule adjustment factors (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, pp. 22-23).12

11 After accounting for internal capture/pass-by trips, the Project will generate 35,016 daily trips (non-PCE); see Appendix D20.1.
12 The USEPA repealed SAFE Rule Part 1 on January 28, 2022. Therefore, the mobile source emissions in this analysis are conservative.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-14 June 2023
As discussed above, the SCAQMD provides significance thresholds for emissions associated with project construction and operations. The proposed project’s construction and operational emissions are compared to the daily criteria pollutant emissions significance thresholds in order to determine the significance of a project’s impact on regional air quality.

The localized effects from the Project ’s onsite emissions were evaluated in accordance with the SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Threshold (LST) Methodology (Chico and Koizumi, 2008) , which uses onsite mass emissions rate look-up tables and project-specific meteorology. LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor.

The aforementioned HRA prepared by Kimley-Horn (Kimley-Horn, 2023b) also estimated cancer and noncancer chronic health risk from exposure to DPM during project operations. Details of the analysis are in Appendix D2.

4.2.5 Thresholds of Significance
In accordance with § 15064.7 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Jurupa Valley adopted local CEQA Guidelines. The City’s local CEQA Guidelines are based, in part, on the CEQA checklist included in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines. The City of Jurupa Valley Guidelines rec ognizes the following significance thresholds and Significance Criteria related to air quality. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations Based on these significance thresholds, a project would have a significant impact on air quality if it would:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The proposed project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or dela y the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the current South Coast Air Quality Management District's Air Quality Management Plan and the project would significantly exceed the growth assumptions used t o prepare the current South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan Air Quality Management Plan. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in nonattainment under an applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project's air emissions exceed the applicable regional significance thresholds established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

NOTE: According to the SCAQMD, individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for project specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-15 June 2023
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if:
• The project would exceed the SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) which were developed in response to environmental justice and health concerns raised by the public regarding exposure of individuals to criteria pollutants in local communities; • The project would create a Maximum Incremental Cancer Risk: of 10 in 1 million at the nearest sensitive receptor or off -site worker; or a Hazard Index (project increment) 1.0 or greater at the nearest sensitive receptor or off-site worker. • The project emissions would contribute traffic volumes to an intersection in the vicinity of the project site which exceeds 100,000 vehicles per hour. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Screening Criteria: If the project is not any of the following, it may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. • Agricultural uses (livestock and farming)
• Wastewater treatment plants
• Food processing plants
• Chemical plants
• Composting operations
• Refineries
• Landfills
• Dairies
• Fiberglass molding facilities
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The project shall not 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 Thresholds
The significance criteria established by SCAQMD may be relied upon to assist one in making the above determinations. The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality during construction and operational activities of land use development projects, as shown in Table 4.2.5. If a project’s emissions exceed one or more of the thresholds, then they are potentially significant regionally
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-16 June 2023
Table 4.2-5

SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS Criteria Air Pollutants and
Precursors Construction-Related Operational-Related
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 55
Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 150
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 150
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 55 55
Source: SCAQMD, 2019.

Localized Carbon Monoxide
In addition to the daily thresholds listed above, development associated with the Project would also be subject to the ambient air quality standards. These are addressed through an analysis of localized CO impacts. The significance of localized impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels near the Project site are above state and federal CO standards; the more stringent California standards are 20 ppm for 1-hour and 9 ppm for 8- hour. The SCAB has been designated as in attainment under the 1- hour and 8-hour standards.

Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the CO hotspot analysis, the SCAQMD developed LSTs for onsite emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at new development sites. (Offsite mobile source emissions are not included in the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum emissions that can be generated at a project without expecting to cause or substantially contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent state or federal ambient air quality standards. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within a project source receptor area (SRA), as demarcated by the SCAQMD, and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. LST analysis for construction is applicable for all projects that disturb five acres or less on a single day. The Project site is located within SCAQMD SRA 23.

Table 4.2-6 shows the LSTs for a 1-acre, 2-acre, 4-acre (interpolated), and 5-acre project in SRA 23.

Because the nearest sensitive receptors are adjacent residences to the south of the Project site and a residential building within the Project boundary, the thresholds for distances of 25 meters or less are listed below.

Table 4.2-6

LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR CONSTRUCTION & OPERATION Localized Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations (Maximum Pounds Per Day) Project Size Nitrogen Oxides
(NOx)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Respirable
Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Fine Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
1 Acre 118/118 602/602 4/1 3/1
2 Acres 170/170 883/883 7/2 4/1
4 Acres 237/237 1,346/1,346 11/3 7/2
5 Acres 270/270 1,577/1,577 13/4 8/2
Source: SCAQMD, 2008. Kimley-Horn, 2023a, Table 8, p. 21.

Table 4.2-6 shows that the LSTs increase as acreages increase due to the dispersion of the air pollutants over a greater area. It should be noted that LSTs are screening thresholds and are therefore conservative since the analysis is only considering the dispersion of air pollutants over five acres  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-17 June 2023
before reaching sensitive receptors, as opposed to accounting for dispersion over a greater area ..

Project construction will occur in two Phases and grading is anticipated to disturb a maximum of 4.0 acres in a single day. (Kimley- Horn, 2023a, p. 46) Project operations would occur over an approximately 248.3-acre site. Therefore, on-site emissions would disperse over a larger area, which would decrease the concentrations. It should be noted that LSTs were developed for small typical projects and generally are not applicable to regional projects, such as the proposed project. 13 Notwithstanding, LSTs were conservatively applied in this analysis (Kimley-Horn, 2023a, pp. 21, 49).

4.2.6 Environmental Impact Analysis
Threshold a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if: The proposed project wo uld result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the current South C oast Air Quality Management District's Air Quality Management Plan and the project would significantly exceed the growth assumptions used to prepare the current South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan Air Quality Management Plan.

A.1 Plans, Policies, Programs (PPPs), and Project Design Features (PDFs) Plans Policies and Programs (PPPs)
These include existing regulatory requirements such as plans, policies, or programs (PPPs) applied to the Project on the basis of federal, state, or local law currently in place that effectively reduce environmental impacts. If applicable, they will be identified in the Impact Analysis section below.

PPP 4.2-1 Rule 401 (Visible Emissions). This Rule prohibits discharge into the atmosphere from any single source of emission whatsoever of any air contaminant for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour which is as dark or darker in shade as that designated No. 1 on the Ringelmann Chart, as published by the United States Bureau of Mines.

PPP 4.2-2 Rule 402 (Nuisance). This Rule prohibits 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.

PPP 4.2-3 Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust). This rule is intended to reduce the amount of PM entrained in the ambient air from anthropogenic (manmade) fugitive dust sources by requiring actions to prevent, reduce, or mitigate fugitive dust emissions. Rule 403 applies to any

13 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July 2008.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-18 June 2023
activity or manmade condition capable of generating fugitive dust. Some specific requirements of Rule 403 that apply to all construction projects, regardless of the size of their disturbed areas, are addressed below:
• No person shall cause or allow emissions of fugitive dust to remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source or to exceed 20 percent opacity if the dust emission is a result of a moving motorized vehicle. • Apply applicable Best Available Control Measures in Table 1 of Rule 403 to minimize fugitive dust emissions during active operation. • No person shall cause or allow PM10 levels to exceed 50 micrograms per cubic meter when determined as the difference between upwind and downwind samples collected on high volume PM samplers or other USEPA approved equivalent method for PM10 monitoring at the Project limits for a five hour period during the time of Active Operations. Sa mpling will only occur if a complaint is reported to the SCAQMD, in which case the decision to conduct sampling will be made by SCAQMD, and SCAQMD will conduct sampling.
• No person shall allow track out to extend 25 feet or more in cumulative length from the point of origin from an active operation, and all track out from an active operation shall be removed at the end of each workday or evening shift. • No person shall conduct an active operation with a disturbed surface area of five or more acres, or with a daily import or export of 100 cubic yards or more of bulk material without at least one of the measures listed under subparagraph (d)(5) of Rule 403 at each vehicle egress.

PPP 4.2-4 Rule 445 (Wood burning Devices). The purpose of this rule is to reduce th e emission of PM from wood burning devices. Section (d)(1) requires that no person shall permanently install a wood burning device into any new development.

PPP 4.2-5 Rule 481 (Spray Coating Operations) applies to all spray painting and spray coating operations and equipment. This rule would apply to the application of architectural coatings to the exterior and interior or of the building walls.

PPP 4.2-6 Rule 1108 (Cutback Asphalt) governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the VOC content in asphalt used in the SoCAB. This rule would regulate the VOC content of asphalt used during construction. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction of the proposed Project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1108.

PPP 4.2-7 Rule 1113 (Architectural C oatings). The purpose of this rule is to limit the VOC content of architectural coatings used in the District and applies to any person who supplies, sells, markets, offers for sale, or manufactures any architectural coating that is intended to be field applied within the District and any person who applies, stores at a worksite, or solicits the application of any architectural coating within the District.

PPP 4.2-8 Rule 1143 (Consumer Paint Thinners & Multi -Purpose Solvents) governs the manufacture, sale, and use of paint thinners and solvents used in thinning of coating  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-19 June 2023
materials, cleaning of coating application equipment and other solvent cleaning operations by limiting their VOC content. This rule regulates the VOC content of solvents used during construction. Solvents used during the construction phase must comply with this rule,.

PPP 4.2-9 Rule 1186 (PM10 Emissions From Paved and Unpaved Roads and Livestock Operations) limits the presence of fugitive dust on paved and unpaved roads and sets certification protocols and requirements for street sweepers that are under contract to provide sweeping services to any federal, State, county, agency or special district such as water, air, sanitation, transit, or school district.

PPP 4.2-10 Rule 1403 (Asbestos Emissions from Demolition/Renovation Activities) specifies the work practice requirements to limit asbestos emissions and exposure from building demolition and renovation activities. Requirements include asbestos surveying; notification; asbestos -containing material (ACM) removal procedures and time schedules; ACM handling and cleanup procedures; and storage, disposal, and landfilling requirements for asbestos-containing waste material (ACWM).

PPP 4.2-11 Rule 2305 (Warehouse Indirect Source Rule). Rule 2305 was adopted by the SCAQMD Governing Board on May 7, 2021, to reduce NOX and particulate matter emissions associated with warehouses and mobile sources attracted to warehouses. This rule applies to all existing and proposed warehouses over 100,00 0 square feet located in the SCAQMD. Rule 2305 requires warehouse operators to track annual vehicle miles traveled associated with truck trips to and from the warehouse. These trip miles are used to calculate the warehouse’s WAIRE (Warehouse Actions and In vestments to Reduce Emissions) Points Compliance Obligation. WAIRE Points are earned based on emission reduction measures and warehouse operators are required to submit an annual WAIRE Report which includes truck trip data and emission reduction measures. Reduction strategies listed in the WAIRE menu include acquire zero emission (ZE) or near zero emission (NZE) trucks; require ZE/NZE truck visits; require ZE yard trucks; install on -site ZE charging/fueling infrastructure; install onsite energy systems; and install filtration systems in residences, schools, and other buildings in the adjacent community. Warehouse operators that do not earn a sufficient number of WAIRE points to satisfy the WAIRE Points Compliance Obligation would be required to pay a mitigation fee. Funds from the mitigation fee will be used to incentivize the purchase of cleaner trucks and charging/fueling infrastructure in communities nearby.

PPP 4.2-12 Title 24. The proposed Project is required to comply with Title 24 of the CCR established by the California Energy Commission regarding energy conservation standards.

PPP 4.2-13 Cal Green Code. The Project shall be designed in accordance with the applicable California Green Building Standards (CALGreen) Code (24 CCR, Part 11). CALGreen is updated on a three -year cycle; the 2022 CALGreen went into effect January 1, 2023.

The Building Official or designee shall ensure compliance prior to the issuance of each building permit. These requirements include, but are not limited to:
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-20 June 2023
• Design buildings to be water -efficient. Install water -efficient fixtures in accordance with § 4.303 (residential) and § 5.303 (nonresidential) of the California Green Building Standards Code Part 11.
• Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardou s construction and demolition waste in accordance with § 4.408.1 (residential) and § 5.408.1 (nonresidential) of the California Green Building Standards Code Part

11. Project Design Features (PDFs)
If a project includes within its project scope features or construction techniques that minimize environmental impacts, those features can be incorporated into the Project description as project design features (PDFs). Examples of PDFs include, but are not limited to, installation of solar panels, implementation of energy efficient design standards, use of zero emission equipment and vehicles, or a site design that creates or maintains open space. Because PDFs are incorporated into the Project, they do not constitute mitigation measures. Even so, PDFs are incorpor ated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure that they are implemented as a part of the Project conditions of approval.

PDF 4.2-1 Industrial Land Use Buffer. Where there are industrial uses adjacent to residential, there is a required 750-foot buffer area from any industrial building to any residential building. The buffer area can be used as open space, providing landscape and infrastructure improvements that can include sidewalks, trails, and other passive uses.

PDF 4.2-2 Specific Plan Section 2.6.3 Truck Circulation. The Specific Plan is designed to minimize the interaction between truck trips and passenger vehicles. Trucks exiting from the SR -60 at Rubidoux Boulevard would enter the development via Frontage Road, 30th Street and B Street to access the Industrial and Commercial Retail Land Use areas. The circulation plan incorporates a roundabout at the intersection of A Street, B Street and Wallace Avenue so as to deter truck traffic, redirecting truck traffic away from the residential land uses. Additionally, gateway monuments will be implemented, which will create flexibility in height of vehicles acceptable to enter roadways. The following exhibits shows the planned truck traffic routes based on site plan and street design. (see Figure 2 -4 and 2- 5 for Inbound and Outbound Truck Circulation Plan).

PDF 4.2-3 Specific Plan Section 2.7.8, Roundabout. A Roundabout will be located at the intersection of Wallace Street, and future A Street and B Street. The Roundabout provides a significant traffic control measure to deter truck traffic, while providing an amenity to the community.

PDF 4.2-5 Landscaped Paseo. Adjacent to Industrial. As shown on Specific Plan Figure 2 -2- Open Space Plan, the southern boundary of the Industrial Land Use Area includes an expansive landscaped paseo to screen and buffer from the adjacent Residential Land Use Area to the south.

PDF 4.2-6 Truck Routes. The Specific Plan is designed to minimize the interaction between truck trips and passenger vehicles. Trucks exiting from the SR- 60 at Rubidoux  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-21 June 2023
Boulevard would enter the development via Frontage Road, 30th Street and B Street to access t he Industrial and Commercial Retail Land Use areas. The circulation plan incorporates a roundabout at the intersection of A Street, B Street and Wallace Avenue so as to deter truck traffic, redirecting truck traffic away from the residential land uses. Additionally, gateway monuments will be implemented, which will create flexibility in height of vehicles acceptable to enter roadways. The following exhibits shows the planned truck traffic routes based on site plan and street design. (see Figure 2-4 and 2-5 for Inbound and Outbound Truck Circulation Plan).

PDF 4.2-7 10 Hour Limit for Construction Equipment. The construction plans and specifications shall prohibit off -road diesel powered construction equipment from being in the "on" position for more than 10 hours per day during Project construction.

PDF 4.2-8 Model Year 2010 Fleet. The Project Applicant/Developer /Tenant shall require that all facility -owned and operated fleet equipment with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 14,000 pounds accessing the site meet or exceed 2010 model -year emissions equivalent engine standards as currently defined in California Code of Regulations Title 13, Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 4.5, Section 2025. Facility operators which own vehicles subject to Section 2025 shall maintain records on -site demonstrating compliance with this requirement and shall make records available for inspection by the local jurisdiction, air district, and state upon request.

PDF 4.2-9 ZE Trucks by 2030. The Project Applicant/Developer/Tenant shall require that all heavy-duty trucks entering or operated on the Project site to be zero- emission beginning in 2030, if such trucks are widely available and economically feasible.

PDF 4.2-10 LEED Buildings. The Project will achieve certification of compliance or demonstrate equivalency with LEED green building standards.

PDF 4.2-11 MERV 13 Filters within 500 Feet of TAC Source. Projects that will introduce sensitive receptors within 500 feet of freeways and other sources should consider installing high efficiency of enhanced filtration units, such as Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) 13 or better. Installation of enhanced filtration units can be verified during occupancy inspection prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit.

PDF 4.2-12 MERV Filters Program. Develop an ongoing monitoring, inspection, and maintenance program for the MERV filters.
a. Disclose potential health impacts to prospective sensitive receptors from living in close proximity to freeways or other sources of air pollution and the reduced effectiveness of air filtration systems when windows are open or residents are outside.
b. Identify the responsible implementing and enforcement agency to ensure that enhanced filtration units are installed on-site before a permit of occupancy is issued. c. Disclose the potential increase in energy costs for running the HVAC system to prospective residents.
d. Provide information to residents on where MERV filters can be purchased.  SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-22 June 2023
e. Provide recommended schedule (e.g., every year or every six months) for replacing the enhanced filtration units.
f. Identify the responsible entity such as future residents themselves, Homeowners Association, or property managers for ensuring enhanced filtration units are replaced on time.
g. Identify, provide, and disclose ongoing cost -sharing strategies, if any, for replacing the enhanced filtration units.
h. Set criteria for assessing progress in installing and replacing the enhanced filtration units; and
i. Develop a process for evaluating the effectiveness of the enhanced filtration units.

A.2 Impact Analysis
Applicable Air Quality Plans
As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the USEPA requires each state with nonattainment areas to prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan that demonstrates the means to attain the federal standards. The State Implementation Plan 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 CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment of the state and federal ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.

As discussed in Section 4.2.3, the currently approved plans for bringing the SCAB into attainment are the 2022 AQMP and the Southern California Association of Governments’ 2020 RTP/SCS. The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based on the latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories, and SCAG’s late st growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.

According to the City of Jurupa Valley CEQA Guidelines, the following two criteria used to determine if a project is in conflict with the applicable air quality plan (in accordance with CEQA Threshold a):
• Criterion 1) If the proposed project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specifie d in the current South Coast Air Quality Management District's Air Quality Management Plan: and • Criterion 2) If the proposed project would significantly exceed the growth assumptions used to prepare the current South Coast Air Quality Management District' s (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan.
 SECTION 4.2 – AIR QUALITY 
7124/The District at Jurupa Valley Specific Plan Draft EIR Page 4.2-23 June 2023
Consistency Criterion No.1 Analysis
As shown below, Construction Emissions (Phase 2) + Operations (Phase 1), depending on the particular scenario, at one time or another all criteria pollutants will have a significant and unavoidable impact, with the exception of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), which is a colorless gas formed when fuel containing sulfur is burned and when gasoline is extracted from oil , such as in petroleum refineries, cement manufacturing, metal processing facilities, locomotives, and ships.

Even with the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures as described below and mandatory compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations, impacts are significant and unavoidable.

On the basis of the analysis under Consistency Criterion No. 2 below, the Project is determined to be inconsistent with Criterion No. 1.

Consistency Criterion No. 2 Analysis
The SCAQMD relies, in part, on the population projections used for the 2020 RTP/SCS as one of the components to forecast future emissions identified in the 2022 AQMP. There are a variety of data sources used to prepare the jurisdictional growth forecasting for the 2020 RTP/SCS, including:
• California Department of Finance (DOF) population and household estimates; • California Employment Development Department (EDD) jobs report by industry; • 2015 existing land use and General Plans from local jurisdictions; • 2010 census and latest ACS data (2013-2017 5-year samples); • County assessor parcel databases;
• 2011 and 2015 business establishment data from InfoGroup; and • SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS growth forecast.
14 This information was integrated in the 2022 AQMP.15
The 2022 AQMP growth data is based, in part, on SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS. The SCAG region is diverse and large, and the types and classifications of land use used by one jurisdiction often differ from those used by another. The result is that there are many different land use types and classifications that SCAG must organize for its own analyses.

Given the number of square miles the SCAG region encompasses, SCAG developed a simplified series of Land Development Categories (LDCs) to represent the dominant themes taken from the region’s many General Plans. This was developed in order to facilitate regional modeling of land use information from nearly 200 distinct jurisdictions. The LDCs employed in the RTP/SCS are not intended to represent detailed land use policies, but are used to describe the general conditions likely to occur within a specific area if recently emerging trends, such as transit -oriented development, were to continue in concert with the implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS.

Jurupa Valley City CouncilSeptember 7, 2023

Jurupa Valley City Council
September 7, 2023