Agenda — Jurupa Valley City Council, September 5, 2024 (part 2 of 6)

Facts in Support of Finding:

Criteria Pollutants
The Project’s construction and operational-related emissions would exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for criteria pollutants, including for NOX, VOCs, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. As such, the Project would conflict with AQMP Consistency Criterion No. 1, and would, therefore, conflict with the SCAQMD 2016 AQMP. Other projects within the SoCAB also have the potential to conflict with the AQMP; therefore, the Project’s impacts due to a conflict with the AQMP would be cumulatively considerable.

Sensitive Receptors
The Project could result in exposure of sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project (i.e., residences to the east and west of the Project) to potential TAC emissions from diesel trucks from future industrial land uses and existing local freeways, exceeding a cancer risk of 10 per million for long-term exposures. Additionally, emissions of DPM generated at the Project site from construction and operation of the Project could expose sensitive receptors to TAC emissions at levels that would potentially exceed SCAQMD and OEHHA healthprotective recommendations. However, as noted above, consistent with SCAQMD guidance an SLT should be applied at a project level, and identification of the applicable threshold is not applicable for this specific planlevel environmental analysis.

Mitigation measures have been recommended to further analyze and potentially reduce the potential health risks from exposure to TACs generated by the construction and operation of future developments envisioned as a part of the Project. However, the potential cumulative impact to sensitive receptors from exposure to City of Jurupa Valley Findings
TACs remains potentially significant and should be further evaluated at a project level for future developments.

MM AIR-1a
Implement MM AIR-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1b
Implement MM AIR-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1c
Implement MM AIR-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1d
Implement MM AIR-1d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1e
Implement MM AIR-1e, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1f
Implement MM AIR-1f, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1g
Implement MM AIR-1g, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1h
Implement MM AIR-1h, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1i
Implement MM AIR-1i, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-3a
Implement MM AIR-3a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-3.

MM AIR-4
Implement MM AIR-4, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-4.

4.3.2 Cultural Resources
Impact CUL-1: Cultural Resources. The project would have the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, or potential disturbance to undiscovered archaeological resources, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Finding: Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-1d, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce the impacts related to adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, or potential disturbance to undiscovered archaeological resources City of Jurupa Valley Findings
but not to a less-than-significant level. Although the City finds MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-1d feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address adverse changes in the significance of an archaeological resource, or potential disturbance to undiscovered archaeological resources infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, or potential disturbance to undiscovered archaeological resources would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding: Under the City’s local significance threshold, the Project would have significant effects if it causes a substantial adverse change or materially alters a resource as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b). The Project causes a substantial adverse change or materially alters a resource as identified in General Plan Table 4.1: Designated Historic Structures in Jurupa Valley as amended from time to time.

A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is defined at Section 15064.5(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines as the “physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.” Thirteen cultural resources within the Project’s direct impact area are eligible for the CRHR individually and/or as contributors to the significance of a district and are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. These include two historically significant areas, Hurunga Oak and Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av). Development under the Project would result in additional residential and industrial development throughout the Project site that would likely result in the alteration of these resources, which would constitute a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. It is likely that these impacts may not be mitigated or reduced to a level less than significant. In order to reduce these impacts to the greatest extent feasible, the Project shall implement Mitigation Measure (MM) MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, and MM CUL-1d.

As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the Project, those applications will be reviewed by the City for compliance with policies and programs in the General Plan and the Rio Vista Specific Plan related to the protection of historical resources. The City’s Municipal Code, which implements the City’s General Plan, would be reviewed when development applications are received, and projects would be planned to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible. However, even with implementation of the mitigation measures listed below, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

MM CUL-1a - Protection of the Hurunga Oak
The Hurunga Oak, also known as the Palmer’s oak (Quercus palmeri), is both a historic resource and a historic tribal cultural resource, as defined by Public Resources Code section 21074 (a) (1) (A). It is called the “Hurunga Oak” by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation. Direct or indirect impacts to the Hurunga Oak, located within a portion of the Native American sacred area (MRN 45), resulting from the proposed Project that may lead to its decay or death would constitute a significant impact on the environment. To ensure the continued existence of the Hurunga Oak, the following steps shall be taken in accordance with City of Jurupa Valley General Plan Policy COS 7.1:

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
The project proponent shall design the project to avoid direct impacts to the Hurunga Oak in coordination with the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation. Additionally, because the Hurunga Oak (aka Palmer Oak) is also a sensitive biological resource, the avoidance area shall include the area identified in Mitigation Measure MM BIO-5.

MM CUL-1b - Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av) Park Site
The following measures/conditions will be required to reduce the project’s potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impact on Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av) Ethnographic Area in accordance with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan Policies COS 7.1, COS 7.2, COS 7.5, COS 7.7, COS 7.8, COS 7.9, and Program COS 7.1.4.
• The project proponent shall name one of its dedicated open space parks Junā’av Park and commission the production of an informational kiosk that will be installed in the park.

Installation shall occur prior to the approval/sign off of the landscape and irrigation systems within the park. The kiosk shall include photos and/or illustrations and a narrative description of the Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av) Ethnographic Area and its contribution to the cultural heritage of the local indigenous population. The information presented on the kiosk shall be developed in coordination with the City and the consulting Native American tribes.

MM CUL-1c
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist), to provide evidence that a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523D District Record Form for Junā’av Ethnographic Area has been completed that identifies contributing and noncontributing resources, describes its historic function or use, and includes a narrative description and narrative statement of significance in accordance with pertinent guidelines. This measure shall be done in conjunction with MM CUL-2b.

MM CUL-1d
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist), to conduct archival research and prepare an educational booklet for the public that describes Jurupa (Hurúpa/ Hurú’ŋa/ Húutsuvaxpa’/Haránka) and its various ethnographic areas (e.g., Rattlesnake Mountain [Junā’av], Jurupa Hills [Sokáva], etc.) that contribute to the cultural heritage of indigenous population(s) and Jurupa’s local history. The project proponent shall circulate the booklet to the Native American Tribes who participated in the AB 52 consultation process for review and comment prior to publication if requested. The project proponent shall make the booklet available to the City of Jurupa Valley, and provide the local public libraries, government buildings, etc., with copies and potentially on the City’s website.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
Impact CUL-2: Cultural Resources. The project would have the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

Finding: Implementation of MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, and MM CUL-2h, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce construction impacts related to archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level.

Although the City finds MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, and MM CUL-2h feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address adverse changes in the significance of an archaeological resources infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to changes in the significance of an archaeological resources would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Thirteen cultural resources within the Project’s direct impact area are eligible for the CRHR individually and/or as contributors to the significance of a district and are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. These include 10 prehistoric archaeological sites, one prehistoric component of a mixed component site, and two historically significant areas, Hurunga Oak and Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av), of which archaeological resources are contributing elements. Development under the Project would result in additional residential and industrial development throughout the Project site that would likely result in the demolition or alteration of these resources, which would constitute a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. It is likely that these impacts may not be mitigated or reduced to a level less than significant. In order to reduce these impacts to the greatest extent feasible, the Project shall implement MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, and MM CUL-2h.

As the City receives development applications for subsequent development under the Specific Plan, those applications will be reviewed by the City of Jurupa Valley for compliance with policies and programs in the Specific Plan and General Plan related to the protection of historical resources. The City’s Municipal Code, which implements the City’s General Plan, would be reviewed when development applications are received, and projects will be planned to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible. However, even with implementation of the mitigation measures listed below, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

MM CUL-1a
Implement MM CUL-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1b
Implement MM CUL-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM CUL-1c
Implement MM CUL-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1d
Implement MM CUL-1d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-2a: Photogrammetric Documentation and Viewshed Analysis Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist), to provide evidence that a close range photogrammetric documentation and viewshed analysis (i.e., direct line of sight and 180-degree viewsheds) of all prehistoric sites within the project’s direct impact area through the completion of field work. The results of the analysis, including all photos and figures, shall be presented in a technical report attached to the data recovery report. Final reports must be submitted by the project Archaeologist to the City, project proponent, consulting Native American Tribe, the Eastern Information Center (EIC) located on the campus of the University of California, Riverside, and the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located on the campus of California State University, Fullerton prior to final building inspection and approval (See Below MM CUL–2f). The reports shall be transmitted by U.S. Mail, return receipt requested.

MM CUL-2b: Archaeological Phase II Testing and Data Recovery Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist), to conduct Phase II testing and a data recovery program, if avoidance is not feasible, through the completion of field work to City of Jurupa Valley standards.

Based on the current project design, the testing and data recovery (as needed) will apply to 13 impacted archaeological resources within the project’s direct impact area, and any additional resources within 100 feet of the project impact limits. In addition, surface collection of the four prehistoric isolates that fall within the project’s direct impact area (33-024196 [MRN 33], 33-024772 [MRN 36], 33-024774 [MRN 38], and 33-024775 [MRN 39]) shall be included in the data recovery plan. If the project design changes the sites that are impacted may correspondingly change (See MM CUL-2h).

The Phase II testing and data recovery program shall include preparation of a testing and data recovery plan, completion of testing and data recovery field work, archival research, lab analysis of artifacts recovered, preparation of a data recovery report, and curation of archaeological materials in a local museum or repository or an agreement that artifacts/materials shall be buried within a designated conservation area within the project area limits. The data recovery plan must include an archaeological research design for prehistoric archaeological resources that presents specific research domains/themes of interest, offer questions that shall be investigated through archaeological research and analysis, and identify data requirements necessary to address those questions. The plan shall also include, at a minimum, the following: site descriptions, background contexts, field methods, lab methods, reporting requirements, and a curation agreement with a local repository or a repatriation agreement with consulting Native American tribes. The plan shall be prepared by the Project Archaeologist and circulated for review and comment to the consulting Native American tribe and the City prior to implementation.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM CUL-2d: Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP)
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archeologist), to prepare, in consultation with the consulting Native American tribes, the contractor, and the City, a Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP), to address the details, timing and responsibility of all archaeological and tribal cultural activities that will occur on the Project site. A consulting Native American tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB 52 tribal consultation process for the Project, has not opted out of the AB52 consultation process, and is engaged in or has completed AB 52 consultation with the City as provided for in Cal Pub Res Code Section 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52. Details in the CRMP shall include: a brief description of the cultural resources present, standards and specifications for ESA and the avoided archaeological sites (14 sites currently lie outside of the project design impact area), as well as any resources that fall within 100 feet of the project impact limits. CRIMP shall include:
a) Project description and location;
b) Project grading and development scheduling;
c) Roles and responsibilities of individuals on the Project; d) The pre-grading meeting and Cultural Resources Worker Sensitivity Training details; e) The protocols and stipulations that the contractor, City, consulting Native American Tribe(s) and Project Archaeologist shall follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, human remains/cremations, sacred and ceremonial items, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.
f) The type of recordation needed for inadvertent finds and the stipulations of recordation of sacred items.
g) Contact information of relevant individuals for the Project.

MM CUL-2e: Archaeological Monitoring During Ground Disturbance Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or any permit authorizing ground disturbance, the Project Proponent shall provide a copy an engagement letter with a A qualified Archaeologist, identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archeologist), to oversee archaeological and Native American monitoring (per MM TCR-1a and MM TCR-1b) on a full-time basis for all grading and ground-disturbing activities until the Project Archaeologist in coordination with the consulting Tribe(s) and the City determines that resources are not likely to be encountered. Should any cultural resources be discovered during ground disturbance, the Monitor(s) shall be authorized to temporarily halt all construction-related activities within a 100- foot radius of the discovery while the resource is recorded onto appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 Forms and evaluated for significance per the CRMP.

MM CUL-2f: Final Archaeological Reports
Prior to final building inspection and approval, the project proponent shall provide the City of Jurupa Valley with a draft Phase II testing and data recovery report, draft archaeological monitoring report, draft California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523D District Record Form for the Junā’av Ethnographic Area including the photogrammetric documentation and viewshed analysis, draft educational booklet for Jurupa (Hurúpa/ Hurú’ŋa/ Húutsuvaxpa’/Haránka), and one or more of the following, (1) a receipt of payment to a local museum or repository for the curation of archaeological materials generated during implementation of the data recovery program and/or monitoring City of Jurupa Valley Findings
program, (2) an agreement that artifacts/materials will be buried within a designated conservation area within the project area limits or (3) a tribal repatriation agreement. The Phase II testing, data recovery report and archaeological monitoring report should follow Archaeological Resource Management Report (ARMR) format and content guidelines developed by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). They shall, at a minimum, present the results of field work, lab analysis, archival research, special studies, and identify the final disposition of artifacts. The project proponent shall provide a final testing, data recovery and monitoring reports. Reports shall address comments from the City, project proponent, and/or consulting Native American tribe(s). Final reports shall be submitted to the City, project proponent, consulting Native American tribe(s), the Eastern Information Center (EIC) located on the campus of the University of California, Riverside, and the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) located on the campus of California State University, Fullerton. The reports shall be transmitted by the project proponent or their designee via U.S. Mail return receipt requested.

MM CUL-2g: Resurvey of Site 33-003494 (MRN 3) and Site 33-003497 (MRN 6) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project proponent shall hire a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist), to resurvey sites 33-003494 (MRN 3) and 33-003497(MRN 6).

These previously recorded archaeological resources were not found during the current study and may have been obscured. These resources fall within the current direct impact area. Should the previously recorded resources be found, they would be subject to the same treatment measures placed on other prehistoric archaeological sites to reduce potentially significant impacts resulting from the project. The results of this survey shall be reported by the Project Archaeologist in a letter report and provided to the City by the project proponent at or before grading permit issuance.

MM CUL-2h: Project Design Modifications
The following steps shall be taken to reduce potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources resulting from project design modifications:

If at any time, the Rio Vista Specific Plan development footprint is modified, project impacts to cultural resources shall be reviewed by an Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archaeologist) to determine whether additional studies may be required prior to issuance of the grading permit, or prior to any project related disturbances. The Project Archaeologist in coordination with the City of Jurupa Valley, shall determine whether an update of existing literature searches, consultation, or coordination with the NAHC and the consulting Native American tribes, survey work, Phase II testing, data recovery and/or other work is necessary based upon the nature of the Project and resultant impacts to cultural resources or Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs).

Project modifications may include, but are not limited to, an increase in development impact acreage beyond what is addressed in this EIR, or within 100 feet of any resources, and/or the addition of recreational trails, trailheads utilizing existing dirt paths, or any other development that may increase public accessibility and the potential for vandalism or disturbance to cultural resources in areas proposed as open space.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
Cumulative Impact: Cultural Resources.

Finding: Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, and MM CUL-3a, which are adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to cultural resources. Although the City finds MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, and MM CUL-3a feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address cumulatively considerable impacts to cultural resources infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to cultural resources would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Historic Resources
Of the 26 cultural resources verified within the direct impact area, 13 resources are recommended eligible for the CRHR individually and/or as contributors to the significance of a district and are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. Two of these resources are historical resources that are individually eligible for the CRHR: The Hurunga Oak Native American sacred area and Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av) Ethnographic Area. As project implementation has the potential to significantly alter these resources, this could also constitute a significant cumulative impact to historic resources in the surrounding area.

Archaeological Resources
Of the 26 cultural resources verified within the direct impact area, 13 resources are recommended eligible for the CRHR individually and/or as contributors to the significance of a district and are considered historical resources for the purposes of CEQA. These include 10 prehistoric archaeological sites, one prehistoric component of a mixed component site, and two historically significant areas, Hurunga Oak and Rattlesnake Mountain (Junā’av), of which archaeological resources are contributing elements. As project implementation has the potential to destroy or significantly alter these resources, this could also constitute a significant cumulative impact to archaeological resources in the surrounding area.

Human Remains
Potential impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains are highly localized and unlikely to result in cumulative impacts. In the event that human remains are discovered, implementation of MM CUL-3 would reduce impacts to previously undiscovered human remains to a less than significant level.

Overall
As Project implementation has the potential to significantly alter or destroy historic and archaeological resources, this could also constitute a significant cumulative impact to historic and archaeological resources within the City of Jurupa and surrounding areas. Mitigation may not reduce impacts to a less than significant level but will be required to reduce impacts to the greatest extent feasible.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM CUL-1a
Implement MM CUL-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1b
Implement MM CUL-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1c
Implement MM CUL-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1d
Implement MM CUL-1d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-2a
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2b
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2d
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2e
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2f
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2g
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2h
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-3a
Implement MM CUL-3a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-3.

4.3.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impact GHG-1: The project would generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
Finding: Implementation of MM AIR-1a, MM AIR-1b, MM AIR-1c, MM AIR-1d, MM AIR-1e, MM AIR-1f, MM AIR-1g, MM AIR-1h, MM AIR-1i, MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, and MM GHG-1c, which are adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce the Project’s contribution to the generation of GHG emissions.

Although the City finds MM AIR-1a, MM AIR-1b, MM AIR-1c, MM AIR-1d, MM AIR-1e, MM AIR-1f, MM AIR1g, MM AIR-1h, MM AIR-1i, MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, and MM GHG-1c feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address generation of GHG emissions infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to the generation of GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding: Under the City’s local significance threshold, the Project would have significant effects if it exceeds the thresholds per the General Plan Policy AQ 9.5 (GHG Thresholds) - Utilize the SCAQMD Draft GHG thresholds to evaluate development proposals until the City adopts a Climate Action Plan (CAP).

Implementation of the Project would contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHG from on-site area sources and vehicle trips generated by the Project and indirectly through off-site energy production required for on-site activities, water use, and waste disposal. The emissions associated with the Project includes emissions associated with the new facilities, with the overall growth in the service population (e.g., mobile source emissions), and with the existing facilities.

Construction
Construction activities associated with future development under the Project would generate temporary short-term GHG emissions from heavy-duty construction equipment, worker trips, and material delivery and hauling. On-site activities would consist of the operation of off-road construction equipment as well as onsite truck travel (e.g., haul trucks, dump trucks, and concrete trucks). Off-site sources would include emissions from construction vehicles used for hauling materials and worker vehicle trips. The SCAQMD has not established thresholds of significance for GHG emissions resulting from construction activities at the plan level. Rather, the SCAQMD Rule 403 encourages the incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce GHG emissions during construction. New development facilitated by the General Plan would include the SCAQMD BMPs for reducing construction emissions of PM10 and PM2.5. The provisions that limit idling set forth in the SCAQMD BMPs would also reduce GHG emissions during construction.

Future development under the Project would comply with the requirements of the City’s General Plan policies and programs related to GHG emissions as well as applicable SCAQMD regulations. Therefore, future development under the Project at construction would not result in significant adverse effects related to GHG emissions. As such, the construction of the Project would result in a less than significant impact relative to this topic.

Operation
Operation of the Project would result in a net increase of GHG emissions by 90,620.26 MT CO2e per year compared to the existing conditions in the Project area. This net increase would exceed SCAQMD’s bright-line threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year; therefore, emissions are compared to the efficiency metric, which is based on achieving a trajectory toward the State’s long-term climate stabilizations goals under Executive Order S-03-05.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
While implementation of the Project would generate a substantial increase in GHG emissions and would result in per service population emissions that exceed the efficiency target, its guiding principles, design guidelines, and proposed land use designations for the plan area would contribute to minimizing emissions to the extent feasible. Guiding principles and objectives of the Project include providing for a balanced mix of uses, boosting the economy, and promoting sustainable development. Additionally, objectives of the Project include removing barriers to infill development, reusing underutilized properties, encouraging a balanced mix of uses, and promoting development that reduces VMT and encourages active transit.

General Plan Policy AQ 4.3 requires, “the installation and use of electric service units at truck stops and distribution centers for heating and cooling truck cabs, and particularly for powering refrigeration trucks, in lieu of idling of engines for power.” Other General Plan policies support the installation of electric infrastructure to support electric vehicles at residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Future developments envisioned as a part of the Project would be subject to State regulations that will reduce emissions from Project construction and operation, including Title 24 and CALGreen standards and the California Code of Regulations. Furthermore, the City of Jurupa Valley Municipal Code adopts these standards.

Under full buildout conditions, the forecast year 2035 threshold of 4.1 MT CO2e per service population per year would be exceeded in the Project site The increases in overall emissions would be attributable to the additional nonresidential and residential land uses proposed. In addition, an increase in service population would contribute to an increase in wastewater generation, water demand, and vehicle trips. New buildings would be more energy-efficient, but there would be an overall increase in energy usage due to the magnitude of new building space that would be constructed. Overall, the Project’s cumulative contribution to the long-term GHG emissions in the State would be considered potentially significant.

Even with the implementation of MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-3, due to the size of the proposed development and potential emissions of GHGs from project construction and operation, the impacts of the Project are significant and unavoidable.

MM AIR-1a
Implement MM AIR-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1d
Implement MM AIR-1d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1e
Implement MM AIR-1e, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1f
Implement MM AIR-1f, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1g
Implement MM AIR-1g, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM AIR-1h
Implement MM AIR-1h, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1i
Implement MM AIR-1i, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM GHG-1a
To identify potential implementing development project impacts, project applicants for proposed development projects that are subject to CEQA shall analyze, or shall have analyzed by a qualified air quality consultant, the construction and operational-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emission impacts of the proposed development project using the latest available CalEEMod model or other analytical method determined by the City of Jurupa Valley as lead agency in conjunction with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The results of this GHG impact analysis shall be included in the development project’s CEQA documentation. If such analysis identifies that emissions would exceed the latest recommended SCAQMD significance thresholds for GHG emissions, the City shall require the incorporation of appropriate mitigation. Mitigation should reduce identified impacts to the maximum extent feasible using, among others, measures identified in the Air Quality Element Policies of the General Plan and the most recent Air Quality Management Plan, as well as mitigation from the most recent CEQA Air Quality Handbook available at the SCAQMD, and the latest version of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity. Example topics include, but are not limited to, energy conservation and efficiency measures, use of renewable energy, reduction of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), use of zero and near-ZeroEmission Vehicles (ZEVs), waste reduction measures, and water conservation. For new nonresidential land uses, the following mitigation shall be considered, where feasible:
• The project shall install solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other source of renewable energy generation on-site, or otherwise acquire energy from the local utility that has been generated by renewable sources, which would provide 100 percent of the expected building load. The buildings shall include an electrical system and other infrastructure sufficiently sized to accommodate the PV arrays. The electrical system and infrastructure must be clearly labeled with noticeable and permanent signage.
• Only electric-powered off-road equipment (e.g., yard trucks/hostlers, forklifts, indoor material handling equipment, etc.) shall be utilized on-site for daily warehouse and business operations.

The project developer/facility owner shall disclose this requirement to all tenants/business entities prior to the signing of any lease agreement. In addition, the limitation to use only electric-powered off-road equipment shall be included in all leasing agreements.

MM GHG-1b
Buildings in the project area will be designed to provide CALGreen Standards with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®) features for potential certification and will employ energy and water conservation measures in accordance with such standards. This includes design considerations related to the building envelope, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC), lighting, and power systems. Additionally, the architectural expression such as roofs and windows in the buildings will relate to conserving energy. Compliance with this mitigation measure shall be verified by the City of Jurupa Valley prior to the issuance of a building permit.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM GHG-1c
Prior to the issuance of building permits for new development projects in the project area, the project applicant shall show on the building plans that all major appliances (dishwashers, refrigerators, clothes washers, and dryers) to be provided/installed are Energy Star-certified appliances or appliances of equivalent energy efficiency. Installation of Energy Star or equivalent appliances shall be verified by the City of Jurupa Valley prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

Impact GHG-2: The project would conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.

Finding: Implementation of MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, MM GHG-1c, MM TRANS-2a, MM TRANS-2c, and MM TRANS-2d, which are adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to criteria pollutants and sensitive receptors. Although the City finds MM GHG1a, MM GHG-1b, MM GHG-1c, MM TRANS-2a, MM TRANS-2c, and MM TRANS-2d feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to conflicts with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Under the City’s local significance threshold, the project would have significant effects if the Project is inconsistent with the following: (i) The Climate Change Scoping Plan first approved by the California Air Resources Board (ARB) in 2008 and updated every 5 years, or (ii) the Western Riverside County Council of Governments Subregional Action Plan (WRCOG Subregional CAP).

Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions include the City’s General Plan, ARB’s Scoping Plan, and SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. A consistency analysis with these plans is presented below.

City of Jurupa Valley General Plan and Municipal Code
The analysis under Impact GHG-1 demonstrates consistency with AQ 9.5 GHG Thresholds because it utilizes the SCAQMD GHG Thresholds in the absence of a qualified CAP. The Project would be consistent with policies LUE 2.2 and 2.5 because it would provide residential, recreational, and school land uses connected by a network of multiuse trails designed for pedestrian, bicycles, and equestrian use. Additionally, the Project would be consistent with policies LUE 3.4, 3.10 and 3.11, because the Project would integrate commercial and residential land uses near transit facilities and planned multiuse paths. Moreover, the Project would not conflict with policies LUE 3.15 and 7.4 because industrial and business park land uses would be sited near the southern and eastern boundaries near a major transportation corridor, State Route 60, existing light industrial uses, and would be served by existing transit. Also, PPP 3.8-1 and 3.8-2 would ensure proposed development would be consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 8.05 and 9.283 as well as any new updates associated with the California Building Standards Code (CBC), CALGreen, and water efficient landscape City of Jurupa Valley Findings
requirements as they are released. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with the City of Jurupa Valley General Plan or Municipal Code policies and programs aimed at reducing GHG emissions.

ARB Scoping Plan
Development projects accommodated under the Project are required to adhere to the programs and regulations identified by the Scoping Plan and implemented by State, regional, and local agencies to achieve the Statewide GHG reduction goals of AB 32. These future individual development projects would comply with these Statewide GHG emissions reduction measures. For example, new buildings under the Project would meet the current CALGreen and Building Energy Efficiency standards. The California Energy Commission (CEC) anticipates that new residential buildings will be required to achieve zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020 and that new nonresidential buildings will be required to achieve ZNE by 2030. Estimated Project GHG emissions include reductions associated with Statewide strategies that have been adopted since AB 32.

However, because the Project exceeds the applicable numeric screening threshold identified by the SCAQMD under GHG Impact-1, the Project has the potential to impede the State’s ability to achieve GHG reduction targets.
2022 Scoping Plan Update
The 2022 Scoping Plan reaffirms and clarifies the role of local governments in achieving the State’s climate goals, particularly as it concerns the approval of new land use development projects and their environmental review under CEQA. It outlines three distinct approaches that lead agencies may consider for evaluating the consistency of proposed plans and residential and mixed-use development projects with the State’s climate goals. However, it notes that these approaches are recommendations only and that they do not supplant lead agencies’ discretion to develop their own evidence-based approaches for determining whether a project would result in a potentially significant impact on GHG emissions.

The first approach involves consistency with a GHG reduction plan, such as a CEQA-qualified CAP. However, the City of Jurupa Valley has not developed such a CAP. Therefore, this approach is not applicable to the Project.

The second approach involves determining whether a project would result in net-zero GHG emissions.

However, the 2022 Scoping Plan acknowledges that this approach may not be appropriate or even feasible for every project.

The third approach involves assessing a project’s consistency with key project attributes that have been demonstrated to reduce operational GHG emissions while advancing fair housing. Table 3.8-4 of the Draft EIR presents these attributes and a discussion of the Project’s consistency with them. The Project would be consistent with some measures while other measures contained in the 2022 Scoping Plan would not directly apply to the Project. However, due to the Project’s VMT impacts, the Project would result in a significant impact related to consistency with the Measure Deploy ZEVs and reduce driving demand. Despite implementation of PDFs and MM TRANS-2a, MM TRANS-2c, and MM TRANS-2d, the Project would still exceed the respective reduction in VMT required to meet this measure and contribute toward meeting the State’s goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. Therefore, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Scoping Plan Appendix D, Local Actions
Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan includes a section on evaluating plan-level and project-level alignment with the State’s Climate Goals in CEQA GHG analyses and identifies several recommendations and strategies City of Jurupa Valley Findings
that should be considered for new development in order to determine consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan.

Appendix D notes that Projects that have all of the key project attributes should accommodate growth in a manner consistent with State GHG reduction goals. While the Project does not include all-electric design that is a key component to demonstrating clear consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan, the following comparison to the three aforementioned key project attributes is provided for information purposes:

Transportation electrification
MM AIR-1h would require electric vehicle charging to be provided as specified in Section A4.106.8.2 (Residential Voluntary Measures) of the CALGreen Code. MM AIR-1f would require the construction of all buildings to facilitate sufficient electric charging for trucks to plug in, in anticipation of future technology that allows trucks to operate partially or completely on electricity.

VMT reduction
As stated previously, the Project would include multiple PDFs that include: high density development and alternative transportation infrastructure, such as bicycle and pedestrian paths, that would reduce VMT.

Further, MM TRANS-2a which would require a transportation demand management program to reduce VMT, MM TRANS-2b, which would require a school car pool program, and MM TRANS-2c and MM TRANS-2d, which would require street and transit access improvements.

Building decarbonization
As described above, the General Plan and Municipal Code include policies and regulations that aim to reduce GHG emissions or would indirectly reduce GHG emissions. PPP 3.8-1 requires that the City’s Building and Safety Department ensure that the Project is designed, constructed, and operated to meet or exceed the incumbent CCR Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards and Title 24 CalGreen Standards, which will serve to reduce GHG emissions from the Project. Further, MM GHG-1 requires future residential development to shall install solar PV panels or other source of renewable energy generation on-site, or otherwise acquire energy from the local utility that has been generated by renewable sources, that would provide 100 percent of the expected building load.

SCAG’s Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Project-generated Production Attraction (PA) Home-Based (HB) VMT per capita exceeds the City’s VMT per capita impact threshold by 22.4 percent in the baseline condition and 26.2 percent in the cumulative condition and is considered potentially significant. Despite the implementation of PDFs, such as providing pedestrian and bicycle network improvements, MM TRANS-2a which would require a transportation demand management program to reduce VMT, MM TRANS-2b, which would require a school car pool program, and MM TRANS-2c and MM TRANS-2d, which would require street and transit access improvements, the Project VMT impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Project would conflict with the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS.

Table 3.8-5 of the Draft EIR provides an evaluation of the Project in comparison to the three primary transportation-land-use strategies in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS. As shown in the table, the Project would be consistent with the applicable 2020-2045 RTP/SCS land use strategies. Implementation of MM TRANS-2a, MM TRANS-2c, and MM TRANS-2d would reduce Project VMT, however, project VMT impacts would still City of Jurupa Valley Findings
exceed the City of Jurupa Valley baseline VMT threshold and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

WRCOG Subregional CAP Consistency
In 2014, the City of Jurupa Valley was one of 12 cities that collaborated with the WRCOG on a Subregional CAP that includes 36 measures to guide GHG reduction efforts through 2020. However, the City of Jurupa Valley has not adopted the Subregional CAP because it did not go through formal CEQA review by WRCOG, which intended it to be a framework for cities to implement AB 32 and for cities to develop their own CAPs.

Therefore, since the City has not adopted a CAP no impact determination can be made.

Summary
The Project is consistent with many applicable Scoping Plan goals and policies as evaluated herein, but would be inconsistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan measure to reduce VMT. Additionally, the Project incorporates a number of PDFs that go beyond the Scoping Plan requirements that would further minimize GHG emissions.

The Project promotes the goals of the Scoping Plan through implementation of the design measures that reduce energy consumption and water consumption. In addition, the Project is required to comply with the regulations described in this section that have been adopted to implement the Scoping Plan and to achieve the AB 32 2020 target and the SB 32 2030 target. However, the Project does conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan and SCAG 2020/2045 RTP/SCS due to the VMT impacts. Although MM GHG-1a, GHG-1b, GHG-1c, and TRANS-2a, MM TRANS-2c, and MM TRANS-2d would reduce GHG emissions and VMT, the reduction in emissions and VMT from these mitigation measures would not reduce impacts below the applicable thresholds. Therefore, because the Project exceeds the SCAQMD GHG numeric threshold and results in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to GHG emissions, a significant and unavoidable finding with respect to this criterion is also identified.

MM GHG-1a
Implement MM GHG-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

MM GHG-1b
Implement MM GHG-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

MM GHG-1c
Implement MM GHG-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

MM TRANS-2a
Implement MM TRANS-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact TRANS-2.

MM TRANS-2c
Implement MM TRANS-2c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact TRANS-2.

MM TRANS-2d
Implement MM TRANS-2d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact TRANS-2.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
Cumulative Impact – Greenhouse Gases: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable impact with regard to GHG emissions during operations.

Finding: Implementation of MM AIR-1a, MM AIR-1d, MM AIR-1e, MM AIR-1f, MM AIR-1g, MM AIR-1h, MM AIR-1i, MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, and MM GHG-1c, which are adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to criteria pollutants and sensitive receptors. Although the City finds MM AIR-1a, MM AIR-1d, MM AIR-1e, MM AIR-1f, MM AIR-1g, MM AIR-1h, MM AIR-1i, MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, and MM GHG-1c feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address cumulatively impacts with regard to GHG emissions during operations infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to GHG emissions during operations would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding: No single land use project could generate enough GHG emissions to noticeably change the global average temperature. Cumulative GHG emissions, however, contribute to global climate change and its significant adverse environmental impacts. The Project would generate a net increase in GHG emissions and would exceed the SCAQMD Working Group’s bright-line threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e for all land use types.

Compliance with MM AIR-1a and MM AIR-1d would assist in reducing emissions from construction equipment associated with the buildout of the Project. Implementation of MM AIR-1e through MM AIR-1i, as well as MM GHG-1a, MM GHG-1b, and MM GHG-1c, will help to reduce cumulative GHG impacts from future project operations to the extent feasible. However, even with the implementation of applicable mitigation measures, the Project impacts are cumulatively considerable.

MM AIR-1a
Implement MM AIR-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1d
Implement MM AIR-1d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1e
Implement MM AIR-1e, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1f
Implement MM AIR-1f, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1g
Implement MM AIR-1g, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM AIR-1h
Implement MM AIR-1h, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM AIR-1i
Implement MM AIR-1i, the full text of which is provided above for Impact AIR-1.

MM GHG-1a
Implement MM GHG-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

MM GHG-1b
Implement MM GHG-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

MM GHG-1c
Implement MM GHG-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact GHG-1.

4.3.4 Tribal Cultural Resources
Impact TCR-1: Tribal Cultural Resources. The project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource (TCR) that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).

Impact TCR-2: Tribal Cultural Resources. The project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1
Finding: Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, MM CUL-3a, MM TCR-1, MM TCR-3, MM TCR-4, MM TCR-5, and MM TCR-13, which are hereby adopted and incorporated into the project, would reduce the impacts related to tribal cultural resources, but not to a less-than-significant level. Although the City finds MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, MM CUL-3a, MM TCR-1, MM TCR-3, MM TCR-4, MM TCR-5, and MM TCR-13 feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address tribal cultural resources infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the City hereby determines that the project would conflict or be inconsistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b), and such impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effects.

Facts in Support of Finding: Under the City’s local significance threshold, the Project would have significant effects if it causes a substantial adverse change or materially alters sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: (1) Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; (2) Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; (3) A cultural landscape that meets the criteria of subdivision (a) is a tribal cultural resource to the extent that the landscape is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape; (4) A historical resource described in Section 21084.1, a unique City of Jurupa Valley Findings
archaeological resource as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 21083.2, or a "nonunique archaeological resource" as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 21083.2 may also be a tribal cultural resource if it conforms with the criteria of subdivision (a).

Development under the Project would result in additional residential and industrial development throughout the Project site that would likely result in the alteration and destruction of these resources, which would constitute a substantial adverse change in the significance of a TCR pursuant to Section 15064.5. While specific site plans are not available at this time, the 13 resources would be adversely impacted by the Project. In order to reduce these impacts to the greatest extent feasible, the Project shall implement MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, and MM CUL-3a. However, even with implementation of the proposed mitigation, impacts to these resources would remain significant and unavoidable.

There are 13 sites within the Project site that are associated with tribes and may be considered eligible TCRs pursuant to CEQA, and some of them may be impacted by the Project, resulting in potentially significant impact.

However, even with implementation of MM TCR-1a through MM TCR-13, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

MM CUL-1a
Implement MM CUL-1a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1b
Implement MM CUL-1b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-1c
Implement MM CUL-1c, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-1.

MM CUL-2a
Implement MM CUL-2a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2b
Implement MM CUL-2b, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2d
Implement MM CUL-2d, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2e
Implement MM CUL-2e, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2f
Implement MM CUL-2f, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-2g
Implement MM CUL-2g, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

City of Jurupa Valley Findings
MM CUL-2h
Implement MM CUL-2h, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-2.

MM CUL-3a
Implement MM CUL-3a, the full text of which is provided above for Impact CUL-3.

MM TCR-1a: Tribal Resources Component of the Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP) Prior to issuance of grading permit, or excavation, trenching, cleaning, grubbing, tree removals, grading and trenching, a qualified Archaeologist identified on the County of Riverside’s Cultural Resource Consultant List which is used by the City of Jurupa Valley (Project Archeologist), in consultation with the consulting Native American tribes, the contractor, and the City, shall include in the CRMP required by MM CUL-2d, the following components regarding Native American tribal cultural resources as provided for in Public Resources Code Section 21084.3:
a) Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to, planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural context, or planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally appropriate protection and management criteria.
b) Treating the resources with culturally appropriate dignity taking into account the tribal cultural values and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
1) Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resources. 2) Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
3) Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
c) Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places.
d) Protecting the resource.

If the Developer/Permit Applicant and the consulting tribe(s) are unable to reach an agreement, the mitigation measure shall be considered satisfied if the Developer/Permit Applicant provides sufficient documented evidence that they have made a reasonably good faith effort to reach an agreement, as determined by the City, with the consulting tribes with regards to items a-d, as listed above.

If, after conducting consultations in good faith and within the spirit of the definition, the tribe or local government cannot reach agreement on preservation or mitigation of any impact to a California Native American cultural place, neither party is required to take any action.

MM TCR-1b: Native American Component of the Cultural Resources Management Plan (CRMP) Consistent with the provisions of Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) which recognizes that California Native American tribes may have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, which concern the tribal cultural resources with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated, tribal City of Jurupa Valley Findings
knowledge about the land and tribal cultural resources at issue shall be considered for inclusion in the CRMP as requested by the consulting tribes.

MM TCR-2: Avoidance and Preservation of Significant Resources and Locations Prior to the issuance of grading permits, efforts shall be devised in consultation with the consulting Native American tribes, to avoid specific locations based on substantial evidence provided by a consulting Native American tribe so as to protect the cultural and natural context of the resource through Project re-design, and the designation of open space where significant resources are located.

MM TCR-3: Conservation Areas
Permanent conservation easements or restrictive covenants shall be required and created in consultation with the Project applicant, the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department, and the consulting Native American tribes for all open space avoidance areas based on substantial evidence provided by a consulting Native American tribe. Any and all conservation easements will be transferred, managed, or maintained only by a Third-Party entity as approved by the City.

MM TCR-4: Long-Term Management Plan for Tribal Cultural Resources A Tribal Cultural Resources Long Term Management Plan (TCR TLMP) shall be created in consultation with the Project applicant, the City of Jurupa Valley Planning Department, and the consulting Native American tribes, for significant locations based on substantial evidence provided by a consulting Native American tribe which are avoided in open space areas. The TCR TLMP shall address periodic maintenance, such as any necessary fuels modification, natural deterrents for unauthorized access, etc., in a manner that is culturally appropriate management criteria for the purpose of preserving or utilizing the resources or places, as described in PRC § 21084.3(b).

MM TCR-5: Documentation and Relocation of Significant Tangible Elements For significant locations based on substantial evidence provided by a consulting Native American tribes the Project Archaeologist shall submit photo documentation of contributing elements (cultural and natural) of any tribal cultural resources that cannot be avoided. The resources shall be photo documented using high resolution (at least 300 pixels per inch [dpi]). Bedrock Milling Features (BRMs) that cannot be avoided shall be captured in three-dimensional (3D) images for the creation of 3D models and shall be relocated to mutually agreed upon areas within the 917.3-acre Specific Planning Area. These areas must be placed in a conservation easement so they are preserved in perpetuity.

MM TCR-13: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource Objects (Non-Funerary/NonCeremonial) Upon discovery of any Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians–Kizh Nation Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh Monitor and/or Kizh Archaeologist. The Kizh will coordinate with the landowner or the relevant governmental agency (as applicable) regarding treatment and curation of these resources City of Jurupa Valley Findings
Cumulative Impact – Tribal Cultural Resources: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable impact with regard to tribal cultural resources during operations.

Finding: Implementation of MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL-2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, MM CUL-3a, MM TCR-1, MM TCR-3, MM TCR-4, MM TCR-5, and MM TCR-13, which are adopted and incorporated into the Project, would reduce the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to tribal cultural resources. Although the City finds MM CUL-1a, MM CUL-1b, MM CUL-1c, MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a, MM CUL-2b, MM CUL-2d, MM CUL-2e, MM CUL2f, MM CUL-2g, MM CUL-2h, MM CUL-3a, MM TCR-1, MM TCR-3, MM TCR-4, MM TCR-5, and MM TCR-13 feasible, special considerations, as set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), make further mitigation measures or alternatives to address cumulatively considerable impacts to tribal cultural resources infeasible. No other feasible, enforceable mitigation is available to reduce impacts to less than significant.

Therefore, the City hereby determines that any impacts related to cultural resources would be significant and unavoidable.

The City hereby makes finding (a)(3) (described above), as required by Pub. Res. Code Section 21081 and stated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, with respect to the above identified effect.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Development within the cumulative geographic scope would be required to comply with federal, State, and local laws and policies that protect cultural and TCRs, including the provisions of SB 18 and AB 52, Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, and Sections 5024.1 and 5097 of the Public Resources Code. Compliance with these policies may also require development projects to prepare site-specific project-level analysis to fulfill CEQA requirements, which also would include additional consultation that could lead to the identification of potential site-specific mitigation that would further reduce impacts.

As noted in Section 3.18.5, Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures, above, there are known TCRs in the cumulative geographic scope that may contribute to the significance of the cultural landscape and/or sites that are associated with tribes and may be considered eligible TCRs. Additionally, there is a potential for yet unidentified TCRs on the surface or subsurface within the geographic scope. Past, present, and foreseeable projects have resulted in or could result in the demolition or material alteration to some aspects of TCRs or the tribal cultural landscape that convey its significance. Implementation of existing regulations and sitespecific mitigation, as discussed above, would be required and would reduce impacts. However, since avoidance and preservation in place of such resources cannot be guaranteed, impacts to TCRs in the geographic scope are considered significant and unavoidable. When taken together, past, present, and foreseeable projects within the geographic scope could result in a significant cumulative impact to TCRs.

With respect to the project’s contribution, although MM CUL-1a through MM CUL-1d, MM CUL-2a through MM CUL-2h, MM CUL-3a, and MM TCR-1a through MM TCR-13 would lessen the Project’s impact to TCRs, the Project’s incremental contribution to the significant cumulative impact remains considerable due to the project’s location and the size and scope of the Project. Moreover, even with implementation of these measures, the destruction or material alteration of a resource that contributes to the cultural landscape would constitute a substantial adverse change since it would no longer be present on the landscape. No feasible mitigation is available to reduce the Project’s contribution to below a level of significance.

Accordingly, the Project would have a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact with respect to TCRs.