Agenda packet — Ontario City Council, May 2, 2023 (part 1 of 4)

CITY OF ONTARIO
Regular City Council/Housing Authority
Meeting
MAY
2, 2023
City Hall
303 East B Street, Ontario, CA 91764

MAYOR PAUL S. LEON • MAYOR PRO TEM DEBRA DORST-PORADA
COUNCIL MEMBERS ALAN D. WAPNER, JIM W. BOWMAN AND RUBEN VALENCIA CITY CLERK SHEILA MAUTZ • TREASURER JAMES R. MILHISER
CITY MANAGER SCOTT OCHOA • CITY ATTORNEY RUBEN DURAN

WELCOME TO A MEETING OF THE ONTARIO CITY COUNCIL

All documents for public review are on ﬁle with the Records Management/City Clerk's Department located at 303 East B Street, Ontario, CA 91764.

Anyone wishing to speak in person during public comment or on a particular item will be required to ﬁll out a blue slip. Blue slips must be turned in prior to public comment beginning or before an agenda item is taken up. The Clerk will not accept blue slips after that time. To comment by email, submit your comments no later than 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting by emailing your name, agenda item you are commenting on and your comments to
[email protected].

All
comments received by the deadline will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration before action is taken on the matter and will be entered into the record.

Comments will be limited to 3 minutes. Speakers will be alerted when they have 1 minute remaining and when their time is up. Speakers are then to return to their seats and no further comments will be permitted.

In accordance with State Law, remarks during public comment are to be limited to subjects within Council's jurisdiction. Remarks on other agenda items will be limited to those items.

Remarks from those seated or standing in the back of the chamber will not permitted. All those wishing to speak including Council and Staff need to be recognized by the Chair before speaking.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 1

ACCOMODATIONS

If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's oﬃce at 909-395-2009. Notiﬁcation of 48 hours prior to the meeting will help the City make reasonable arrangements. Equipment for the hearing impaired is available in the Records Management Office.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

The regular City Council and Housing Authority meeting begins with Closed Session and Closed Session Comment at 5:00 p.m., Public Comment at 6:30 p.m., immediately followed by the Regular Meeting and Public Hearings. No agenda item will be introduced for consideration after 10:00 p.m. except by majority vote of the City Council.

CALL TO ORDER
(OPEN SESSION)

ROLL CALL

Dorst-Porada, Wapner, Bowman, Valencia, Mayor/Chairman Leon

CLOSED SESSION PUBLIC COMMENT

The Closed Session Public Comment portion of the Council/Housing Authority meeting is limited to a maximum of 3 minutes for each speaker and comments will be limited to matters appearing on the Closed Session. Additional opportunities for further Public Comment will be given during and at the end of the meeting.

CLOSED SESSION
GC 54656.9(d)(1), CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION Ruben Valencia v. City of Ontario, Case No. CIVSB2302751

GC 54956.9 (d)(1), CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION Agustin Martinez v. City of Ontario, and Does 1-10, inclusive, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Case No. 5:21-cv-01099-JGB-SP

GC 54957.6, CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIONS: City Negotiator: City Manager or his designees; Bargaining Units: Ontario Police Officers Association, Ontario Police Management Group, Ontario Professional Fireﬁghters Association Local 1430, Ontario Fire Management Group, Department Heads, Executives, AFSCME Local 3061, Teamsters Local 1932, Association of Management Employees, Confidential Group, and Part-time Employees.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 2

ATTACHMENT:

20230502 Closed Session

GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: APN: 1011-382-09; 801-805 South Mountain Avenue; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Peter Stuart Dejager and Michelle Julie Dejager; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment

GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: APN: 1011-382-65; 1045 West Mission Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Kalpesh P. Solanki; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: APNs: 1048-472-24 and 1048-472-25; 1131 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator:

Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Patty Bashoura; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: APN: 0110-061-21; 1217 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Kulendra N Rami; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Property: APN: 0110-061-25; 1241 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Babubhai Prajapati Shashikalaben Premchandbhai Prajapati; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Bowman

INVOCATION
Pastor Taylor Kern, Ontario United Reformed Church

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney

SPECIAL CEREMONIES

RECOGNITION OF WATER POSTER CONTEST WINNERS
I am going to add text here and then make it the color white so no one can see it.

But it will create the space we need.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 3

1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

ATTACHMENT:

20230404 Minutes.docx

2. BILLS & PAYROLL

3. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY PUBLIC COMMENTS 6:30 P.M.

The Public Comment portion of the Council/Housing Authority meeting is limited to 30 minutes with each speaker given a maximum of 3 minutes. An opportunity for further Public Comment may be given at the end of the meeting. Under provisions of the Brown Act, Council is prohibited from taking action on oral requests.

To comment by email, submit your comments by email no later than 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting by emailing your name, agenda item you are commenting on and your comment to [email protected]. All Comments received by the deadline will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration before action is taken on the matter and entered into the record. As previously noted -- if you wish to address the Council, fill out one of the blue slips at the rear of the chambers and give it to the City Clerk.

AGENDA REVIEW/ANNOUNCEMENTS

The City Manager will go over all updated materials and correspondence received after the Agenda was distributed to ensure Council Members have received them. He will also make any necessary recommendations regarding Agenda modiﬁcations or announcements regarding Agenda items to be considered.

CONSENT CALENDAR

All matters listed under CONSENT CALENDAR will be enacted by one motion in the form listed below – there will be no separate discussion on these items prior to the time Council votes on them, unless a member of the Council requests a speciﬁc item be removed from the Consent Calendar for a separate vote.

Each member of the public wishing to address the City Council on items listed on the Consent Calendar will be given a total of 3 minutes.

Minutes for the regular meetings of the City Council and Housing Authority of April 4, 2023 and approving same as on file in the Records Management Department.

Bills March 31, 2023 through April 13, 2023, and Payroll March 26, 2023 through April 8, 2023
when audited by the Finance Committee.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 4 AND FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 20267 LOCATED AT 1250 WEST PHILLIPS STREET

ATTACHMENT:

20230502 Parcel Map 20267^01 EXH A.pdf

ATTACHMENT:

20230502 Parcel Map 20267^02 RESO^RM

4. A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO IN-LIEU AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL NO. 20273

ATTACHMENT:

Resolution Approving Amended In Lieu Agreement^01^RESO^RM

ATTACHMENT:

First Amendment In-Lieu Agreement Draft^02

5. AN AGREEMENT FOR AUTOMATIC AID AND MUTUAL AID BETWEEN TWO FIRE DISTRICTS

AND CITY OF ONTARIO

6. AMENDMENTS TO DESIGN SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL WATER SUPPLY STUDIES That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving an Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security and Final Parcel Map No. 20267 located at 1250 West Phillips Street.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA,

APPROVING AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 20267 LOCATED AT 1250 WEST PHILLIPS STREET.

That the City Council consider and:

A
.

Approve an amendment (the "Amendment") to certain Agreement regarding Community Facilities District Formation for Parcel Map No. 20273 and Fee In-Lieu (the "Agreement), which was executed on November 23, 2021, by and between the City and Prologis L.P. (the "Developer"); and
B
.

Authorize the City Manager or his designee to ﬁnalize, execute, and record the Amendment.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA,

AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A FIRST AMENDMENT TO IN- LIEU AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 20273.

That the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreements with Chino Valley Fire District and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District for Fire Mutual Aid and Automatic Aid for rapid dispatch services.

That the City Council take the following actions:

A
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee to execute Amendment No. 5 to the Design Services Agreement (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) with Albert A. Webb Associates of Riverside, California, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, a total not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, and a term from June 16, 2020, to June 16, 2025, for on-call as needed services in preparing Water Supply Assessments (WSA’s) and Written Verifications (WV's).

B
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Design Services Agreement (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) with CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 5

7. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS ON 95 PROPERTIES LOCATED

THROUGHOUT THE CITY

ATTACHMENT:

File No. PZC22-001^01 PC Back-up.pdf

ATTACHMENT:

File No. PZC22-001 ^02 Exhibit A REVISED.pdf

ATTACHMENT:

File No. PZC22-001^03^ORD^RM.docx

8. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT REVISING AND

CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT CODE PlaceWorks Inc. of Santa Ana, California, for a total not-to-exceed $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, a total not-to-exceed $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, and a term from June 16, 2020, to June 16, 2025, for on-call as needed services in preparing WSA’s and WV’s.

That the City Council adopt
an Ordinance approving a Zone Change (File No. PZC22-001) amending the zoning designations on 95 parcels located citywide to make the Oﬃcial Zoning Map consistent with The Ontario Plan 2050 Policy Plan (General Plan) Land Use Plan (Exhibit LU-01).

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FILE NO. PZC22-001, A CITY INITIATED REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS ON 95 PROPERTIES LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO MAKE THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CONSISTENT WITH THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 POLICY PLAN (GENERAL PLAN) LAND USE PLAN (EXHIBIT LU-01), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APNS: 1008-522-04, 1008-522-01, 1008-522-02, 1008-522-03, 1008-513-16, 1008-441-01, 1048-525-12, 1049-094-07, 1049-094-10, 1049-094-08, 1049-094-09, 1048-525-14, 1048-525-13, 1048-525-15, 1048-523-15, 1048-523-16, 1048-523-18, 1048-522-08, 1048-522-09, 1048-522-10, 1048-522-11, 1048-524-14, 1048-524-15, 1048-524-16, 1048-524-17, 1048-525-16, 1048-525-17, 1048-525-18, 1048-525-19, 1048-525-20, 1048-523-17, 1049-094-04, 1049-094-14, 1049-094-02, 1049-094-01, 1049-093-10, 1049-093-09, 1049-093-07, 1049-093-06, 1049-093-04, 1049-093-03, 1049-093-02, 1049-093-01, 1049-091-04, 1049-091-03, 1049-091-02, 1049-091-01, 1049-094-13, 1049-094-05, 1049-094-11, 1049-094-06, 1049-093-08, 1049-093-05, 1010-502-08, 1010-502-09, 1048-604-15, 0210-551-02, 0210-551-03, 1050-272-20, 1050-272-01, 1050-272-21, 1050-284-01, 1051-221-07, 1051-222-13, 1051-222-12, 1051-222-01, 1051-221-08, 1051-222-11, 1051-221-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-221-10, 1051-222-09, 1051-221-11, 1051-222-08, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051-221-16, 1051-221-15, 1051-221-20, 1051-271-66, 1051-271-67, 1051-271-06, 1048-556-05, 1048-556-04, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-01, 1048-556-14, 0110-071-01, 0110-061-01, 0110-071-06, 0110-071-02, 0110-072-11, 0110-072-10, AND 0110-071-07.

That the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving File No. PDCA23-001, a Development Code Amendment revising and clarifying certain provisions of Chapters 1.0 (Development Code

Enactment and General Provisions), 2.0 (Administration and Procedures), 5.0 (Zoning and Land Use), 6.0 (Development and Subdivision Regulations), 8.0 (Sign Regulations), and 9.0 (Definitions and Glossary) of the City of Ontario Development Code.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 6

ATTACHMENT:

PDCA23-001 2023 Dev Code Update #1^01 AR ATTACH A

ATTACHMENT:

PDCA23-001 2023 Dev Code Amendment #1- PC Back-up

ATTACHMENT:

PDCA23-001 2023 Dev Code Update 1^02^ORD^RM

ATTACHMENT:

PDCA23-001_2023 Dev Code Update #1^03 ORD ATTACH A

9. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES WITHIN CITY OF ONTARIO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 64 (SUNSET RANCH)

ATTACHMENT:

CFD No. 64 Sunset Ranch^ORD^RM

10. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL MATERIAL TESTING AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SERVICES

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FILE NO. PDCA23-001, A DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT REVISING AND CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF CHAPTERS 2.0 (ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURES), 5.0 (ZONING AND LAND USE), 6.0 (DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS), 8.0 (SIGN REGULATIONS), AND 9.0 (DEFINITIONS

AND GLOSSARY) OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO DEVELOPMENT CODE AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF.

That the City Council consider and adopt an Ordinance authorizing the levy of special taxes within City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 64 (Sunset Ranch).

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA,

LEVYING A SPECIAL TAX WITHIN THE CITY OF ONTARIO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 64 (SUNSET RANCH).

That the City Council take the following actions:

A
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) with Kleinfelder, Inc., of Ontario, California, in the amount of $400,000 for a total amount of $466,554 for On-call Geotechnical and Material Testing Services.

B
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the following three- year Professional Services Agreements (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) for On-call Geotechnical and Material Testing Services for a total compensation amount of $650,000:
1 .

RMA Group, Inc., of Rancho Cucamonga, California, for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $200,000;
2 .

Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical & Environmental Sciences Consultants, Inc., of Irvine, California, for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $150,000; 3 .

Smith-Emery Laboratories, Inc., of Anaheim, California, for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $150,000; and
4 .

Twining, Inc., of Riverside, California, for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $150,000.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 7

11. AN AMENDMENT FOR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE EQUIPPING WELL NO. 43 PROJECT

12. AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF FLEET VEHICLES

13. ONE-YEAR ACTION PLAN FOR THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ("CDBG"), HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS ("HOME"), AND EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS GRANT ("ESG") PROGRAMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-24
C
.

Authorize the City Manager or his designee to extend the agreements for up to two additional consecutive one-year periods.

That the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager, or designee to execute Amendment No. 5 to the Professional Services Agreement (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) with AKM Consulting Engineers Inc. of Irvine, California, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $58,224 for construction management and inspection services, and a term from September 17, 2019, to October 2, 2024.

A
.

Authorize the cooperative purchase and delivery of four BMW Police Motorcycles in the amount of $144,131 from Long Beach BMW Motorcycles of Long Beach, California, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Los Angeles County Sheriﬀ Contract PO- SH-22009476-1, Bid RFB-IS-22201046-1;
B
.

Authorize a 20% contingency of $28,826 to mitigate any unforeseen issues with supply chain surcharges and manufactures price increases, for a total amount not-to-exceed $172,957 for four BMW Police Motorcycles;
C
.

Authorize the cooperative purchase and delivery of the following vehicles from National Auto Fleet Group of Watsonville, California, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 091521-NAF for a total amount not-to exceed $228,648:
1 .

One Ford Expedition for the Police Department in the amount of $54,956 plus a 20% contingency of $10,991 for a total amount not-to-exceed $65,947; 2 .

One Ford F150 for the Integrated Waste Department in the amount of $46,472 plus a 20% contingency of $9,294 for a total amount not-to-exceed $55,766; and 3 .

One Ford F350 Utility for the Parks & Maintenance Department in the amount of $89,112 plus a 20% contingency of $17,823 for a total amount not-to-exceed $106,935.

That the City Council:

A
.

Approve the One-Year Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2023-24 for the Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG"), HOME Investment Partnerships ("HOME"), and Emergency Solutions Grant ("ESG") Programs (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department);
B
.

Direct staﬀ to prepare and transmit the ﬁnal documents to U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"); and
C
.

Authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to take all actions necessary or desirable to CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 8

ATTACHMENT:

EXHIBIT A.pdf

14. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A TEMPORARY REDUCTION IN CERTAIN BUILDING PERMIT FEES

ATTACHMENT:

Building Department Fee Reduction^01^RESO^RM

ATTACHMENT:

Building Department Fee Reduction^02^ATTACHMENT

15. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE 2021-22 PROGRAM YEAR TO ALLOCATE FUNDS

RECEIVED FROM THE AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN (ARP) ACT HOME SUPPLEMENTAL

ALLOCATION

16. IMPLEMENTATION OF VOLUNTARY WATER CONSERVATION STAGE implement the One-Year Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Subrecipient Agreements.

That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a temporary reduction in certain building permit fees.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TEMPORARY REDUCTION IN CERTAIN BUILDING PERMIT FEES.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Pursuant to Government Code Section 65009, if you challenge the City’s zoning, planning or any other decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to the public hearing. Aﬃdavits of posting compliance, for all items below, are on file with the Records Management Department.

That City Council ("City") and the Board of the Ontario Housing Authority ("Authority") take the following actions:

A
.

Approve the Second Amendment to the FY 2021-22 Annual Action Plan (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) (“Substantial Amendment”); and B
.

Authorize the City Manager/Executive Director or his designee to sign all documents necessary to implement the Agreements

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS/DISCUSSION/ACTION
That the City Council rescind the Stage 3 Water Conservation Plan measures (Section 6-8.28 of the Ontario Municipal Code) and implement the Voluntary Conservation Stage of the Ontario Municipal Code Water Conservation Plan (Section 6-8.25 of the Ontario Municipal Code).

STAFF MATTERS
CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 9

City Manager Ochoa

COUNCIL MATTERS
Mayor Leon
Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada
Council Member Wapner
Council Member Bowman
Council Member Valencia

ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 10 1 of 4

CITY OF ONTARIO

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Council // Housing Authority // Other // (GC 54957.1) May 2, 2023
ROLL CALL: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.

STAFF: City Manager / Executive Director __, City Attorney __ In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54656.9(d)(1), CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION Ruben Valencia v. City of Ontario, Case No. CIVSB2302751 No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.9 (d)(1), CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL, EXISTING LITIGATION Agustin Martinez v. City of Ontario, and Does 1-10, inclusive, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, Case No. 5:21-cv-01099-JGB-SP
No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ 11 2 of 4

CITY OF ONTARIO

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Council // Housing Authority // Other // (GC 54957.1) May 2, 2023
(continued)
In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54957.6, CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATIONS: City Negotiator: City Manager or his designees; Bargaining Units: Ontario Police Officers Association, Ontario Police Management Group, Ontario Professional Firefighters Association Local 1430, Ontario Fire Management Group, Department Heads, Executives, AFSCME Local 3061, Teamsters Local 1932, Association of Management Employees, Confidential Group, and Part-time Employees.

No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: APN: 1011-382-09; 801-805 South Mountain Avenue; City/Authority Negotiator:

Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Peter Stuart Dejager and Michelle Julie Dejager; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment
No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ 12 3 of 4

CITY OF ONTARIO

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Council // Housing Authority // Other // (GC 54957.1) May 2, 2023
(continued)
In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: APN: 1011-382-65; 1045 West Mission Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Kalpesh P. Solanki; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: APNs: 1048-472-24 and 1048-472-25; 1131 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Patty Bashoura; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ 13 4 of 4

CITY OF ONTARIO

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
City Council // Housing Authority // Other // (GC 54957.1) May 2, 2023
(continued)
In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: APN: 0110-061-21; 1217 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Kulendra N Rami; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ In attendance: Dorst-Porada _, Wapner _, Bowman _, Valencia _, Mayor / Chairman Leon _.  GC 54956.8, CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Property: APN: 0110-061-25; 1241 East Holt Boulevard; City/Authority Negotiator: Scott Ochoa or his designee; Negotiating parties: Babubhai Prajapati Shashikalaben Premchandbhai Prajapati; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.

No Reportable Action Continue Approved
/ / / / / /
Disposition: _________________________________________________________________ Reported by:
___________________________________________
City Attorney / City Manager / Executive Director
14 ONTARIO CITY COUNCIL/

ONTARIO HOUSING AUTHORITY

MINUTES
APRIL 4, 2023
(Not Official Until Approved)
(Not Official Until Approved)

JOINT MEETINGS
The regular meetings of the Ontario City Council and the Housing Authority were held on Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at Ontario City Hall, 303 E. B Street Ontario, California.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Leon called the joint meetings to order at 5:34 p.m.

ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mayor/Chairman: Paul S. Leon
Mayor pro Tem/Vice Chair: Debra Dorst-Porada (arrived at 5:36 p.m.) Council/Authority Members: Alan D. Wapner, Jim W. Bowman and Ruben Valencia
ABSENT: Council/Authority Members: None.

Also present were City Manager / Executive Director Scott Ochoa, City Attorney/Legal Counsel Ruben Duran, and City Clerk / Secretary Sheila Mautz.

CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Leon inquired whether persons were present who wished to speak to the Closed Session items. Hearing no one, City Attorney Duran announced the matters for discussion as listed on the agenda, and the City Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:35 p.m. for discussion of the following:
 GC 54957.6, LABOR NEGOTIATIONS: City Negotiator: City Manager or his designees; Bargaining Units: Ontario Police Officers Association, Ontario Police Management Group, Ontario Professional Firefighters Association Local 1430, Ontario Fire Management Group, Department Heads, Executives, AFSCME Local 3061, Teamsters Local 1932, Association of Management Employees, Confidential Group, and Part-time Employees.

OPEN MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Mayor Leon reconvened the meetings at 6:36 p.m. for the regular session. 15 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 2 of 7 ends

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Bowman.

INVOCATION
The invocation was led by Pastor Richard Hernandez from the Church of God.

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney Duran announced there was no reportable action.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Assistant City Clerk Isbell announced there was one written public comment:

Karla B. Canez, regarding volleyball for individuals 18 years of age and under.

Mayor Leon called upon the first speaker:

Euleas England, was not present when called upon.

Arnold San Miguel , spoke on Southern California Association of Government’s 2024 Regional Plan Update and encouraged the community to attend their workshops.

Randy Beckendam, spoke on warehouse development in the City.

AGENDA REVIEW/ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Manager Ochoa made no announcements.

CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Bowman seconded by Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada and carried by a unanimous vote 5-0, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented.

Mayor Leon and Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada spoke on the importance of funding crossing guards to maintain the safety of school age children.

1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes for the regular meetings of the City Council, Housing Authority and Ontario Public Financing Authority of March 7, 2023, and approving same as on file in the Records Management Department.
16 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 3 of 7 ends

2. BILLS & PAYROLL
Bills March 3, 2023 through March 16, 2023 in the amount of $13,983.617.87, and Payroll February 26, 2023 through March 11, 2023 in the amount of $4,250,217.54, when audited by the Finance Committee.

3. A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR COST SHARING WITH THE CITY

OF CHINO FOR THE EUCLID AVENUE STORM DRAIN PROJECT
The City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding for cost sharing with the City of Chino for the estimated $51,000,000 Euclid Avenue Storm Drain Project on Euclid Avenue from Merrill Avenue to south of Pine Avenue in the City of Chino; and authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to execute said MOU and a subsequent tri-party funding Agreement with the San Bernardino County Flood Control District (SBCFCD) and the City of Chino

4. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE SECURITY

CAMERAS, ACCESS CONTROL, PAGING/DURESS INSTALLATION, REPAIR WITH AMERICAN THREAT ASSESSMENT CONSULTING, INC.

The City Council authorized the City Manager to execute an Amendment to the current Agreement with American Threat Assessment Consulting Inc., of Rancho Cucamonga, California, for maintenance services to manage and maintain the City's security camera, access control, and paging/duress installation for a total not to exceed the amount of $229,500 and extended the term for an additional one year.

5. AN AMENDMENT TO THE GOODS AND SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WASTEBUILT ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, LLC. FOR COMMERCIAL BIN

MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
The City Council approved the Development Impact Fee Credit Agreement (File No.

PDIF21-4) between the City of Ontario and Ontario CC 2.0, LLC, for facility construction associated with Parcel Map No. 20027, located near the southwest corner of Hamner Avenue and Riverside Drive, within the Edenglen Specific Plan, and authorized the City Manager to execute the Agreement.

6. A CHANGE ORDER TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH M. BREY

ELECTRIC FOR THE OMUC, PARKS AND MAINTENANCE, AND INTEGRATED

WASTE OFFICE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Authorized Change Order No. 3 to the Construction Contract with M. Brey Electric, Inc. of Beaumont, California, in the amount of $22,570, for the OMUC, Parks and Maintenance, and Integrated Waste Office Improvements Project;
17 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 4 of 7 ends

B. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute said contract and authorized the filing of the notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction activities related to the project;

7. PRE-AUTHORIZED LIST OF VENDORS TO PROVIDE SPECIALIZED

EQUIPMENT, SERVICES, AND TRAINING FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT The City Council approved the attached list of pre-authorized vendors.

8. AMENDMENTS TO ON-CALL PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES

AGREEMENT FOR THE BON VIEW PARK SPORTING FIELD PROJECT AND

AWARD OF A DESIGN-BUILD AGREEMENT AND A CONSTRUCTION

MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CITY HALL

PARKING STRUCTURE PROJECT
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 9 to the on-call Project Management Services Agreement with Transtech Engineers, Inc. of Chino, California, to provide project management services and environmental assessment for the Bon View Park Sporting Field Project in an amount not to exceed $17,076;
B. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 10 to the on-call Project Management Services Agreement with Transtech Engineers, Inc., of Chino, California, for construction management support for the construction of the City Hall Parking Structure Project in an amount not to exceed $1,994,875;
C. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute a Design-Build Agreement with McCarthy Building Companies, Inc., of Newport Beach, California, to provide design-build construction services for the City Hall Parking Structure Project in the amount of $27,279,143 with a contingency of $2,700,000 for a total contract value of $29,979,143; and D. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to agreements, assessments, easements, lot line adjustments, reduction of retention accounts, contracts and contract amendments within the authorization limits, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

9. A SOLE SOURCE AGREEMENT WITH ALL CITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. FOR CROSSING GUARD SERVICES
The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute all documents necessary for a sole source agreement with All City Management Services, Inc. of Santa Fe Springs, California, for crossing guard services for a term of three years with the possibility to extend another two, making a total contract term of five years. A total estimated contract amount of $ 3,229,654. 18 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 5 of 7 ends

10. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL

PROJECT MANAGEMENT SERVICES
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Approved and authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute the following three-year Professional Services Agreements for on-call Project Management Services for a total compensation amount of $1,000,000:
a. Transtech Engineers, Inc., of Chino, California for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $350,000;
b. Tilden-Coil Constructors, Inc., of Riverside, California for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $350,000;
c. Grin Structures, Inc., of Irvine, California for a total contract amount not- to-exceed $100,000;
d. Moote Companies, LLC., of Irvine, California for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $100,000; and
e. CBRE Heery, of Los Angeles, California for a total contract amount not-to- exceed $100,000.

B. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to extend the agreements for up to two additional consecutive one-year periods.

11. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2-1.203 OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL

CODE RELATING TO SALARY COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND THE

CITY COUNCIL
The City Council adopted an Ordinance introduced on March 21, 2023, Amending Section 2-1.203 of the Ontario Municipal Code relating to Salary Compensation for the Mayor and City Council.

ORDINANCE NO. 3244 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2-1.203 OF THE ONTARIO

MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SALARY COMPENSATION FOR THE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL.

12. AN ORDINANCE APPROVING FILE NO. PUD22-003, A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ON 0.11-ACRE OF LAND LOCATED AT 213 NORTH FERN AVENUE
The City Council considered and adopted an Ordinance first introduced on March 21, 2023, approving File No. PUD22-003, the Fern Townhomes Planned Unit Development, establishing development standards, design guidelines, and infrastructure requirements to facilitate a residential development at 213 North Fern Avenue.

ORDINANCE NO. 3243 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FILE NO. PUD22-003, A PLANNED

UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, DESIGN

GUIDELINES, AND INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY 19 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 6 of 7 ends

LOCATED AT 213 NORTH FERN AVENUE, WITHIN LUA-3 (HOLT BOULEVARD) OF THE MU-1 (DOWNTOWN MIXED USE) ZONING DISTRICT AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1048-572-06.

STAFF MATTERS
City Manager Ochoa made no comments.

COUNCIL MATTERS

BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
Mayor Leon expressed his gratitude for the overwhelming interest in Boards and Commissions. He noted applications were still being reviewed and anticipated making appointments at the April 18, 2023 meeting.

Mayor Leon wished Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada a happy birthday.

Council Member Wapner announced Victor Glover landing on the moon and suggested the City invite him for a special recognition.

Council Member Bowman requested the meeting be adjourned in honor of Riverside Fire Captain Tim Strack who recently passed.

Council Member Valencia congratulated Ontario Police Department on a successful Baker to Vegas run and achieving first place in their class.

Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada encouraged residents to attend Inland Empire Utilities Agency meetings.

Mayor Leon spoke on the importance of adequate care for senior citizens.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Leon adjourned the meetings of the Joint Agencies at 6:57 p.m. in memory of Riverside Fire Captain Tim Strack and announced the next regular meeting on April 18, 2023.

Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK/SECRETARY
20 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – April 4, 2023

Page 7 of 7 ends

APPROVED:
_____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR/CHAIRMAN
21 Department: Engineering
Prepared By: Angela Truong
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Reviewed By: Raymond Lee, Khoi Do
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 3
SUBJECT:

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 20267 LOCATED AT 1250 WEST PHILLIPS STREET

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
May
2, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving an Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security and Final Parcel Map No. 20267 located at 1250 West Phillips Street.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the Growth and Evolution of the City's Economy Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
Ensure the Development of a Well Planned, Balanced, and Self-Sustaining Community in Ontario Ranch
FISCAL IMPACT:

There is not a direct ﬁscal impact associated with this action. All public infrastructure improvements required will be constructed by the Developer at its sole cost.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:

Final Parcel Map No. 20267, consisting of two residential lots on approximately 7 acres of land, as shown on Exhibit A, has been submitted by the Developer, Viola S.

Schaefer, Trustee of the Philip E. Schaefer and Viola S. Schaefer 2004 Revocable Trust. Tentative Parcel Map No. 20267 was approved by the Planning Commission on January 26, 2021.

Improvements will include streets, storm drain, sewer main, ﬁber optic conduits, streetlights, and parkway landscaping with irrigation. All landscape improvements will be consistent with current City approved drought measures.

The Developer has entered into an Improvement Agreement with the City for Final Parcel Map No. 20267 and posted adequate security to ensure construction of the required improvements. This map meets all conditions of the Subdivision Map Act and the Ontario Municipal Code and has been reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
22 PARCEL 1

2.36 AC.

PARCEL 2

4.13 AC.

PHILLIPS STREET

EXHIBIT A
PM-20267

MAP NOT TO SCALE
DATE: 02/23/2023
PROJECT ID: PM-20267

EXHIBIT A
2 LOT SUBDIVISION
SITE
23 RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AND FINAL PARCEL MAP NO. 20267
LOCATED AT 1250 WEST PHILLIPS STREET.

WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 20267 submitted for approval by Viola S.

Schaefer, Trustee of the Philip E. Schaefer and Viola S. Schaefer 2004 Revocable Trust, was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario on January 26, 2021; and
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map No. 20267 consists of two lots, being a subdivision of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map Number 4197, as per Map recorded in Book 38 of Parcel Maps, Page 10, in the City of Ontario, County of San Bernardino, State of California, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County; and WHEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to final approval of Parcel Map No. 20267, Viola S. Schaefer, Trustee of the Philip E. Schaefer and Viola S. Schaefer 2004 Revocable Trust, has offered the Improvement Agreement together with good and sufficient improvement security, in conformance with the City Attorney’s approved format, for approval and execution by the City; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Ontario, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. That said Improvement Agreement be, and the same is, approved and the City Manager is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City, and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and
SECTION 2. That said Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney; and SECTION 3. That Final Parcel Map No. 20267 be approved and that the City Clerk be authorized to execute the statement thereon on behalf of said City.

The City Clerk of the City of Ontario shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May 2023. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
24 ATTEST:
________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
_______________________________

BEST, BEST & KREIGER, LLP

CITY ATTORNEY
25 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )

CITY OF ONTARIO )
I, SHEILA MAUTZ, City Clerk of the City of Ontario, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that foregoing Resolution No. 2023- was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Ontario at their regular meeting held May 2, 2023 by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
The foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2023- duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held May 2, 2023. _____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
26 Department: Financial Services
Prepared By: Cruz Torres
Staff Member Presenting:

Armen Harkalyan, Executive Director of Finance
Reviewed By: Cecilia House, - -
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 4
SUBJECT:

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENT TO IN-LIEU AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL NO. 20273

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
May
2, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council consider and:

A
.

Authorize the City Manager or his designee to finalize, execute, and record the Amendment.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods Ensure the Development of a Well Planned, Balanced, and Self-Sustaining Community in Ontario Ranch
FISCAL IMPACT:

The Amendment will allow the City to collect special tax revenues from the Developer for Fiscal Year 2023-24 due to the delay of the formation of a community facilities district for Parcel Map No. 20273. The revenues are projected to generate approximately $986,000 to fund Administrative Fees and Municipal Services. The General Fund will be reimbursed approximately $940,000 for City services after the administrative expenses are deducted. The revenue and pass- through amounts have been budgeted for FY 2023-24 budget.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:

On May 4, 2021, the City and Developer entered into a Development Agreement (File No. PDA18-004) (the “Development Agreement”) for the development of a contemporary employment center laid out in a master-planned, campus-like setting, comprising of six industrial planning areas and ﬁve business park planning areas, with the business park areas concentrated along Eucalyptus Avenue in the northern portion of the Merrill Commerce Center Speciﬁc Plan (File No. PSP18-011) area (the “Project”), which was approved by the City Council by Ordinance No. 3183 on May 4, 2021 and recorded in the Oﬃcial Records of the County of San Bernardino as Document No. 2021-0214563 on May 10, 2021. 27 Pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Development Agreement, the Developer must form a community facilities district, pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (commencing with Government Code Section 53311) for Parcel Map No. 20273 (the “Project CFD”) prior to recordation of any parcel map and issuance of building permits. In February 2021, the Developer requested to initiate formation of the Project CFD and deposited funds with the City for that purpose. In connection therewith, in its review of voter registration records, the City discovered multiple voters registered within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273 and were advised not to proceed with formation of the Project CFD until the voters were no longer recognized by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters (the “County Registrar”) as being registered within the property boundaries.

Due to the lack of conﬁrmation from the County Registrar that no registered voters were within the property boundaries of Parcel No. 20273 on November 23, 2021, the City and Developer entered into the Agreement, which required Developer to pay to the City what otherwise would have been the special tax levy on permitted parcels in the Project CFD for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 levy period if the Project CFD was not formed by May 1, 2022 (the “Original CFD Deadline”).

On March 28, 2023,
the County Registrar's Oﬃce conﬁrmed that there were no registered voters within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273. A CFD formation schedule has been created to establish the Project CFD in time to place the special tax levy on the Fiscal Year 2023-24 property tax bill. The City is proceeding with the Amendment to the In-Lieu Agreement to ensure that it will be able to levy Fiscal Year 2023-24, if the CFD formation is delayed.

The attached Resolution would approve the Amendment to the Agreement, which requires the Developer to pay to the City what otherwise would have been the special tax levy on permitted parcels in the Project CFD for the Fiscal Year 2023-24 levy period if the Project CFD is not formed by August 1, 2023.
28 RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO,

CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A FIRST AMENDMENT TO IN-LIEU AGREEMENT FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 20273.

WHEREAS, on or about May 4, 2021, the City of Ontario (the “City”) and Prologis L.P. (the “Developer”) entered into that certain Development Agreement (File No.

PDA18-004) (the “Development Agreement”) for the development of a contemporary employment center laid out in a master-planned, campus-like setting, comprising six industrial planning areas and five business park planning areas, with the business park areas concentrated along Eucalyptus Avenue in the northern portion of the Merrill Commerce Center Specific Plan (File No. PSP18-011) area (the “Project”), which was approved by the City Council by Ordinance No. 3183 on May 4, 2021 and recorded in the Official Records of the County of San Bernardino as Document No. 2021-0214563 on May 10, 2021; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Development Agreement, Developer must form a community facilities district, pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (commencing with Government Code Section 53311) for Parcel Map No. 20273 (the “Project CFD”) prior to recordation of any parcel map and issuance of building permits; and
WHEREAS, in February 2021, Developer requested to initiate formation of the Project CFD and deposited funds with the City for that purpose; and WHEREAS, in connection therewith, in its review of voter registration records, the City discovered multiple voters registered within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273 and were advised not to proceed with formation of the Project CFD until the voters were no longer recognized by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters (the “County Registrar”) as being registered within the property boundaries; and WHEREAS, due to the lack of confirmation from the County Registrar that no registered voters were within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273, on November 23, 2021, the City and Developer entered into that certain Agreement re:

Community Facilities District Formation for Parcel Map No 20273 and Fee In-Lieu (the “Agreement”), which required Developer to pay to the City what otherwise would have been the special tax levy on permitted parcels in the Project CFD for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 levy period if the Project CFD was not formed by May 1, 2022 (the “Original CFD Deadline”); and
WHEREAS, the County Registrar is still working through the confirmation regarding registered voters, and thus the Project CFD was not formed by the Original CFD Deadline, and has not yet been formed; and
29 WHEREAS, the City and Developer now desire to amend the Agreement pursuant to the terms of a First Amendment to Agreement re: Community Facilities District Formation For Parcel Map No. 20273 and Fee In-Lieu (the “Amendment”), attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein.

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

SECTION 1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and the City Council of the City (the “City Council”) so finds and determines.

SECTION 2. Approval of Amendment. The Amendment is hereby approved by the City Council in substantially the form presented at this meeting, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, with such insertions, omissions and changes as shall be approved by the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, or either of their designees (the “Authorized Officers”), with such changes therein, deletions therefrom and additions thereto as may be approved by such Authorized Officers, the execution of the Amendment being conclusive evidence of such approval. The execution, delivery and recording of the Agreement is hereby confirmed and ratified. The Authorized Officers are hereby directed and authorized to execute and to cause the Amendment to be recorded in the official records of the County of San Bernardino, and to take all other necessary actions to effectuate the transaction contemplated by this Resolution.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect from and after the date of its passage and adoption.

The City Clerk of the City of Ontario shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May 2023. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
30 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

CITY ATTORNEY
31 STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
32 EXHIBIT A

FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
[attached]
33 46700.90308\34353187.3
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Ontario
303 East “B” Street
Ontario, CA 91764
Attn: City Clerk
EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEE PER GOV. CODE § 27383
(Space Above For Recorder’s Use)
FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT RE:

COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FORMATION
FOR PARCEL MAP NO. 20273 AND FEE IN-LIEU

BETWEEN THE CITY OF ONTARIO AND
PROLOGIS L.P.

1. PARTIES AND DATE.

This First Amendment to Agreement re: Community Facilities District Formation for Parcel Map No. 20273 and Fee In-Lieu (the “First Amendment”) is entered into as of this ___ day of _______________ 2023 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the City of Ontario , a California municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”) and Prologis L.P. , a Delaware Limited Partnership or its affiliates (hereinafter referred to as “Developer”).

2. RECITALS.

2.1 On February 16, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3178, approving the Merrill Commerce Center Specific Plan (File No. PSP18-011) (the “MCC Specific Plan”), which area covers approximately 376.3 acres in the southern portion of the City (the “Property”).

The MCC Specific Plan calls for development of a contemporary employment center laid out in a master-planned, campus-like setting, comprising six Industrial planning areas and five Business Park planning areas, with the Business Park areas concentrated along Eucalyptus Avenue in the northern portion of the MCC Specific Plan area (the “Project”).

2.2 City approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 20273 (referred to herein as “Parcel Map No. 20273”) for the MCC Specific Plan area. Developer’s predecessor submitted to the City for its approval and recordation Parcel Map No. 20273, which was prepared on behalf of Developer.

2.3 Developer has not completed all of the work required by Chapter 2 of Title 9 of the City’s Municipal Code, or such other ordinances, resolutions or policies of the City requiring construction of improvements in conjunction with land divisions, subdivisions and the like (hereinafter collectively referred to as “City Ordinances”) or by conditions to the approval of Parcel Map No. 20273 in accordance with the City Ordinances. 34 46700.90308\34353187.3
2 2.4 On or about May 4, 2021, the City and Developer entered into that certain Development Agreement (File No. PDA18-004) for the Project (the “Development Agreement”), which was approved by the City Council by Ordinance No. 3183 on May 4, 2021 and recorded in the Official Records of the County of San Bernardino as Document No. 2021-0214563 on May 10, 2021.

2.5 Pursuant to Section 5.1 of the Development Agreement, Developer must form a Community Facilities District, pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (commencing with Government Code Section 53311) for Parcel Map No. 20273 (the “Project CFD”) prior to recordation of any Parcel Map and issuance of building permits. Developer has not yet formed the Project CFD for parcels in Parcel Map No. 20273.

2.6 In February 2021, Developer requested to initiate formation of the Project CFD and deposited funds with the City for that purpose.

2.7 In connection therewith, in its review of voter registration records, the City discovered multiple voters registered within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273 and were advised not to proceed with formation of the Project CFD until the voters were no longer recognized by the San Bernardino County Registrar of Voters (the “County Registrar”) as being registered within the property boundaries.

2.8 Due to the lack of confirmation from the County Registrar that no registered voters were within the property boundaries of Parcel Map No. 20273, on November 23, 2021, the City and Developer entered into that certain Agreement re: Community Facilities District Formation for Parcel Map No 20273 and Fee In-Lieu (the “Agreement”), which required Developer to pay to the City what otherwise would have been the special tax levy on permitted parcels in the Project CFD for the Fiscal Year 2022-23 levy period if the Project CFD was not formed by May 1, 2022 (the “Original CFD Deadline”).

2.9 The Project CFD was not formed by the Original CFD Deadline, and as of the Effective Date has not yet been formed.

2.10 City does not wish to delay Project development and City and Developer now desire to amend the Agreement pursuant to the terms of this First Amendment.

3. AGREEMENT.

3.1 Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein as if set forth in their entirety. All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement.

3.2 Amendments.
(a) Section 3.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:

3.1 CFD Formation Deadline; Fee In-Lieu.
(a) Developer shall endeavor to form the Project CFD by no later than May 1, 2022 (the “Initial CFD Formation Deadline”). If 35 46700.90308\34353187.3
3 the Project CFD is not formed by the Initial CFD Formation Deadline, then Developer shall pay to the City, by no later than July 1, 2022, what otherwise would have been the special CFD tax levy on permitted parcels in Parcel Map No. 20273 for the FY 2022-23 levy period (the “2022-23 CFD Fee In-Lieu”). The City shall calculate the 2022-23 CFD Fee In-Lieu and deliver the figure (and method of calculation) to Developer by no later than fourteen (14) days after the Initial CFD Formation Deadline. Developer shall pay the 2022-23 CFD Fee In-Lieu in immediately available funds – either by check or by wire transfer.
(b) If the Project CFD is not formed by August 1, 2023 (the “2023 CFD Formation Deadline”), then, in addition to the 2022-23 CFD Fee In-Lieu, Developer shall pay to the City, by no later than September 1, 2023, what otherwise would have been the special CFD tax levy on permitted parcels in Parcel Map No. 20273 for the FY 2023-24 levy period (the “2023-24 CFD Fee In-Lieu”). The City shall calculate the 2023-24 CFD Fee In-Lieu and deliver the figure (and method of calculation) to Developer by no later than fourteen (14) days after the 2023 CFD Formation Deadline.

Developer shall pay the 2023-24 CFD Fee In-Lieu in immediately available funds – either by check or by wire transfer.
(b) A new Section 3.15 is hereby added to the Agreement as follows:

3.15 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended in a
writing signed by the parties hereto.

3.3 Binding Effect. This First Amendment shall inure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon the City and Developer and their respective successors and assigns.

3.4 Full Force and Effect. Except as amended by this First Amendment, all provisions of the Agreement, including without limitation the indemnity provision, shall remain in full force and effect, shall govern the actions of the parties under this First Amendment, and the Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects. All references to the “Agreement,” “hereunder,” “hereof,” “herein,” or other words of like import, and all references to the Agreement in any other agreement or document shall hereafter be deemed to refer to the Agreement as amended by this First Amendment.

3.5 Governing Law. This First Amendment shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in San Bernardino County.

3.6 Counterparts. This First Amendment may be signed in several counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original and all of which shall constitute but one of the same instrument.
(SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS)
36 46700.90308\34353187.3
4 IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this First Amendment to be executed by their duly-authorized representatives as of the Effective Date.

CITY

CITY OF ONTARIO

DEVELOPER
PROLOGIS L.P., a Delaware Limited
Partnership
By:

Scott Ochoa, City Manager
By:

Name:

Title:

Attest
By:

Sheila Mautz, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

By:

Best Best & Krieger, City Attorney
NOTE: DEVELOPER’S SIGNATURE SHALL BE DULY NOTARIZED, AND

APPROPRIATE ATTESTATIONS SHALL BE INCLUDED AS MAY BE REQUIRED

BY THE BY LAWS, ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OR OTHER RULES OR REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO DEVELOPER’S BUSINESS ENTITY.
37 46700.90308\34353187.3

ATTACH NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT
38 Department: Fire Department
Prepared By: Janny Phan
Staff Member Presenting:

Ray Gayk, Fire Chief
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 5
SUBJECT:

AN AGREEMENT FOR AUTOMATIC AID AND MUTUAL AID BETWEEN TWO FIRE

DISTRICTS AND CITY OF ONTARIO

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
May
2, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR

RECOMMENDATION:

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Maintain the Current High Level of Public Safety
Pursue City's Goals and Objectives by Working with Other Governmental Agencies FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Year 2022-23 Adopted Budget includes appropriations in the General Fund for Automatic Aid and Mutual Aid. Approval of this Agreement may have a minimal indirect ﬁscal impact to the City according to the fundamentals of the California Master Mutual Aid System.

Requests for mutual aid will be provided with no ﬁnancial reimbursement; however, based on the duration and complexity of an incident, agencies receiving mutual aid are responsible for logistical support to all mutual aid personnel and equipment. There are also reciprocity beneﬁts to the parties.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:

Automatic Aid Agreements
provide a valuable public safety service by
providing rapid dispatch of the closest ﬁre resource to life-threatening emergencies or ﬁres. The computer aided dispatch (CAD) upgrades currently being made at the Ontario Fire Department Dispatch Center will allow for this Agreement to be fully implemented beneﬁting the citizens within each participating agency’s jurisdiction.

If approved, Staﬀ recommends the eﬀective date of each Agreement shall be the date on which the following conditions are met: (A)
It is approved by the legislative bodies of both parties; and (B) the
Operating Plan in each Agreement is negotiated and executed by both parties to the Agreement.

The Fire Chief of each agency will be provided the authority on behalf of the parties to negotiate and serve as the designated signatory on the Operating Plan, without requiring this agreement to return to either party’s legislative body.
39 Department: Utilities
Prepared By: Christopher Quach
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Burton, Utilities General Manager
Reviewed By: Dennice Raygoza, Albert G
Gastelum, Michael Sigsbee
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 6
SUBJECT:

AMENDMENTS TO DESIGN SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL WATER SUPPLY

STUDIES

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
May
2, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council take the following actions:

A
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee to execute Amendment No. 5 to the Design Services Agreement (on ﬁle in the Records Management Department) with Albert A.

Webb Associates of Riverside, California, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, a total not-to-exceed amount of $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, and a term from June 16, 2020, to June 16, 2025, for on-call as needed services in preparing Water Supply Assessments (WSA’s) and Written Verifications (WV's).

B
.

Approve and authorize the City Manager, or his designee to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Design Services Agreement (on file in the Records Management Department) with PlaceWorks Inc. of Santa Ana, California, for a total not-to-exceed $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, a total not-to-exceed $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, and a term from June 16, 2020, to June 16, 2025, for on-call as needed services in preparing WSA’s and WV’s.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Invest in the Growth and Evolution of the City's Economy Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed Amendment No. 5 to Albert A. Webb Associates increases the existing Agreement amount by $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, and $50,00 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, for a total revised Agreement amount of not-to-exceed $177,000. The proposed Amendment No. 3 to PlaceWorks Inc. increases the existing Agreement amount by $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24, and $50,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-25, for a total revised Agreement amount of not-to-exceed $113,765.

40 Both ﬁrms have agreed to ﬁxed billing rates set forth in their respective Agreements and any increases will not exceed 3 percent per year. Consultants will be compensated for on-call, as- needed services at the billing rates set forth in their respective Agreements.

The Proposed Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget will include appropriations from the Water Operating Fund for these services. WSA’s and WV’s are prepared by the City on behalf of the various development projects and are reimbursable by the respective applicant. There is no impact to the General Fund.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:

Every year, the City receives various proposed development projects for review. Each project is evaluated to determine whether there is a need for a WSA or WV consistent with California Water Code Section 10910. The WSA’s and WV’s evaluate whether the City’s total projected water supplies available during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years over a 20-year projection will meet the projected water demand of the proposed project, in addition to the City’s existing and planned future uses.

In order to facilitate the workload associated with these projects, Staﬀ identiﬁed a need to contract with ﬁrms to provide on-call design services. On June 16, 2020, City Council approved the original Agreements with Albert A. Webb Associates and PlaceWorks Inc. for this task, based on their broad range of expertise as demonstrated by their services provided to municipal agencies and capability to perform the work in a timely manner. The proposed Amendments will ensure continued service in dealing with these matters critical to Ontario’s growing developments and services to the community.

The terms on both Agreements were from June of 2020 to June of 2023, with the option to extend the Agreements for up to two (2) successive one-year periods, for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and Fiscal Year 2024-25.
41 Department: Planning
Prepared By: Robert Morales
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 7
SUBJECT:

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS ON 95 PROPERTIES

LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE CITY

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
May
2, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council adopt
an Ordinance approving a Zone Change (File No.

PZC22-001) amending the zoning designations on 95 parcels located citywide to make the Oﬃcial Zoning Map consistent with The Ontario Plan 2050 Policy Plan (General Plan) Land Use Plan (Exhibit LU-01).

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the Growth and Evolution of the City's Economy Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods FISCAL IMPACT:

No ﬁscal impacts are anticipated with the adoption of the Zone Change application. Any potential long-term ﬁscal impact and anticipated expenditures to the City would be offset by development impact fees and property tax revenues from the future development.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS:

On April 18, 2023, the City Council introduced and waived further reading of an Ordinance Approving the Zone Change of 95 of 107 properties, removing the proposed zone changes to 12 properties located in Areas A1 and C2.

On August 16, 2022, the City Council adopted The Ontario Plan 2050 (“TOP 2050”) which updated the City’s Policy Plan (General Plan), establishing the land use pattern for the City to achieve its Vision. TOP 2050 focused on technical updates to the Policy Plan to comply with State housing mandates and conform with new State laws related to community health, environmental justice, climate adaption, resiliency, and mobility. After the adoption of TOP 2050, staﬀ initiated the City zoning consistency project to ensure that the Zoning Map is consistent with TOP 2050 Policy Plan Official Land Use Plan, as required by Government Code Section 65860.

Zoning Map Amendment:

To implement the goals of the Policy Plan (including the 2021-2029 Housing Element), staﬀ has identiﬁed 107 parcels that require to be rezoned. As part of TOP 2050 Policy Plan update, the City adopted additional mixed-use land use designations in special areas of 42 the City, including the northeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Fourth Street, the northeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Holt Boulevard, the northwest corner of Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street, and the southeast corner of Turner Avenue and Old Guasti Road. Other key sites include Holt Boulevard, between Sultana Avenue and Campus Avenue, and the northeast and northwest corners of the Holt Boulevard and Imperial Avenue intersection. These areas are currently zoned for non-residential land uses, such as commercial or industrial, but were identiﬁed as areas to include residential land uses because of its accessibility to future bus rapid transit. Other non- mixed-use sites will require zone changes as well, to ensure that the City meets its 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) obligation to add additional residential capacity and have an inventory of sites suitable to accommodate the City’s housing need based on the updated land use designations adopted as part of TOP 2050.

The following Zoning Map amendments will establish consistency with the Policy Plan Component of TOP and include:

City Council removed AREA A1
- Rezoning six parcels from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential –

2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to MDR-18 (Medium Density Residential – 11.1 to 18.0 du/ac) to be consistent with TOP Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs: 1008-551-01,1008-551-13, 1008-551-12 ,1008-551-11, and 1008-561-06 (See Exhibit A, Area A1);
AREA A2
-
Rezoning ﬁve parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.40 FAR) to MU-8B (Mountain/Fourth Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1008-522-04, 1008-522-011, 1008-522-02, 1008-522-03, and 1008-513-16 (See Exhibit A, Area A2); AREA
B
-
Rezoning one parcel from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to HDR- 45 (High-Density Residential – 25.1 to 45.0 du/ac) to be consistent with TOP High-Density Land Use Designation. Affected property is APN 1008-441-01 (See Exhibit A, Area B); AREA C1
-
Rezoning two parcels from CC (Community Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to MU-8C (West Holt Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1010-502-08 and 1010-502-09 (See Exhibit A, Area C1);
City Council removed AREA C2
-
Rezoning six parcels from MDR-25 (Medium-High Density
Residential) to HDR-45 (High-Density Residential) to be consistent with TOP High-Density Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1048-604-13, 1048-604-14, 1048-604-15, 1010-491-16, 1010-491-02, and 1010-491-03 (See Exhibit A, Area C2); AREA C3
-
Rezoning six parcels from CIV (Civic) to MU-1 (Mixed Use – Downtown) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Downtown Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1048-556-01, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-04, 1048-556-05, and 1048- 556-14 (See Exhibit A, Area C3);
AREA C5
-
Rezoning: 47 parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to MU-1 (Mixed Use – Downtown) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Downtown Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1048-525-12, 1049-094-07, 1049-094-10, 1049- 094-08, 1049-094-09, 1048-525-14, 1048-525-13, 1048-525-15, 1048-523-15, 1048-523-16, 1048-523-18, 1048-522-08, 1048-522-09, 1048-522-10, 1048-522-11, 1048-524-14, 1048-524- 43 15, 1048-524-16, 1048-524-17, 1048-525-16, 1048-525-17, 1048-525-18, 1048-525-19, 1048- 525-20, 1048-523-17, 1049-094-04, 1049-094-14, 1049-094-02, 1049-094-01, 1049-093-10, 1049-093-09, 1049-093-07, 1049-093-06, 1049-093-04, 1049-093-03, 1049-093-02, 1049-093- 01, 1049-091-04, 1049-091-03, 1049-091-02, 1049-091-01, 1049-094-13, 1049-094-05, 1049- 094-11, 1049-094-06, 1049-093-08, and 1049-093-05 (See Exhibit A, Area C5); AREA D2
-
Rezoning seven parcels from BP (Business Park (0.60 FAR)) to MU-6 (East Holt Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Holt Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 0110-061-01, 0110-071-01, 0110-071-02, 0110-071-06, 0110-071-07, 0110-072-10, and 0110-072-11 (See Exhibit A, Area D2);
AREA E1
-
Rezoning three parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.40 FAR) to HDR-45 (High-Density Residential – 25.1 to 45.0 du/ac) to be consistent with TOP High-Density Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1050-272-01, 1050-272-20, and 1050-272- 21 (See Exhibit A, Area E1);
AREA E2
-
Rezoning one parcel from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.40 FAR) to MU-8D (Euclid/Frances Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected property is APN 1050-284-01; AREA E3
- Rezoning:

Fifteen (15) parcels from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to MU-8E (Euclid/Walnut Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1051-221-07, 1051-221-08, 1051-221-09, 1051-221-10, 1051-221-11, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051- 221-15, 1051-221-16, 1051-222-08, 1051-222-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-222-11, and 1051- 222-12 (See Exhibit A, Area E3);
Six parcels from CC (Community Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to MU-8E (Euclid/Walnut Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Aﬀected properties include APNs 1051-221-20, 1051-222-01, 1051-222-13, 1051-271-06, 1051-271-66, and 1051-271-67 (See Exhibit A, Area E3); and AREA F1
-
Rezoning two parcels from OH (High-Intensity Oﬃce) to MU-3 (Centrelake Southwest Mixed Use) to be consistent with TOP Mixed Use – Guasti Land Use Designation.

Affected properties include APNs 0210-551-02 and 0210-551-03 (See Exhibit A, Area F1).

On March 28, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed Zone Change, consistent with TOP 2050 Update Land Use Plan adopted on August 16, 2022. During the public hearing, staﬀ provided an overview of the 107 eﬀected properties, consolidated into seven areas for presentation purposes, and expressed that the changes were to support mixed use, Housing Element (RHNA) and address underutilized properties along the Holt Boulevard Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route. Following the staﬀ’s presentation, twelve neighborhood residents spoke in opposition to the proposed zone change for Area A1, located along south side of 5 th
Street between
Helen Avenue and Elderberry Court, and Area C2, located along the north side of Holt Boulevard between San Antonio Avenue and Boulder Avenue. Concerns expressed by residents included increase in traﬃc, future project parking spill over into the neighborhoods, and lack of privacy with development of higher density residential adjacent to single family homes. After much deliberation, the Planning Commission concluded the hearing and voted unanimously (6-0) 44 recommending the City Council approve the zone changes.

While the action by the Planning Commission provides for consistency with TOP, the Planning Commission expressed some concern about Areas A1 and C2. The Commission requested the City Council consider these two areas and determine if the current zoning designation should be preserved in light of comments provided by the public. In the case of Area A1, the existing zoning is LDR-5 (Low Density Residential
– 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) and the area is developed with two single family residences and three churches. The residents were concerned that the proposed MDR-18 (Medium Density Residential – 11.1 to 18.0 du/ac)
density would result in increased traﬃc in the area,
especially on Fifth Street which is already impacted by traﬃc from Walmart, the existing multi- family development on the north side of Fifth Street, and the elementary school to the west. The majority of vehicle trips would travel east on Fifth Street to Mountain Ave.

Area C1 is currently zoned as MDR-25 (11.1-25.0 du/acre) and is developed with a couple of fast- food establishments and several automotive-related businesses (sales, repair, etc.). Concerns raised during the Planning Commission meeting focused on three main issues. The ﬁrst issue was increased traﬃc. The proposed zoning designation would result in increased vehicle trips, but the sites are located adjacent to Holt Boulevard, a four-lane arterial that includes plans for a bus rapid transit (BRT) line with a stop at Holt Boulevard and San Antonio Avenue, adjacent to the site. The street width is suﬃcient to accommodate the anticipated vehicle trips. The second concern raised centered on potential impacts to privacy from taller buildings. The current zoning would allow multi-family development up to 60 feet in height. The proposed HDR-45 zoning would allow for a maximum height of 75 feet. In either scenario, the building height proposed could potentially impact privacy issues to the single-family homes to the north. The interface between the existing homes and any new development would be considered with any application submitted to address/minimize privacy impacts.

The third area of concern was impacts from homeless individuals occupying the alley along the south side of the single-family residences. As most of the residences do not use the alley and have block walls running along the alley. This, coupled with the businesses being closed at night, creates an area that is not monitored and susceptible to loitering. Development of the property along Holt Boulevard could be designed to provide "eyes" on the alley or possibly allow for the vacation of the alley, thereby minimizing loitering opportunities and more defensible space.

The Ordinance before Council is to approve the Zone Change of 95 of 107 properties, removing the proposed zone changes to 12 properties located in Areas A1 and C2.

Environmental Review:

An Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364), which was certiﬁed by the City Council on August 16, 2022, was prepared. This application introduces no new signiﬁcant environmental impacts.
45 Case Planner: Robert Morales, Assistant Planner

Hearing Body Date Decision Action
Planning Director
Approval:

DAB
PC 3/28/2023 Approval Recommend
Submittal Date: March 1, 2023 CC 4/18/2023
5/2/2023 Final

FILE NO: PZC22-001

SUBJECT: A City initiated request to change the zoning designations on 107 properties located throughout the City to make the Official Zoning Map consistent with The Ontario Plan 2050 Policy Plan (general plan) Land Use Plan (Exhibit LU -01). City initiated.

City Council action is required.

PROPERTY OWNER: Various

RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the Planning Commission consider and adopt the following:

(1) The resolution recommending the City Council approve the use of an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) adopted by the City Council on August 16, 2022; and

(2) The resolution recommending the City Council approve the Zone Change, File No.

PZC22-001, pursuant to the facts and reasons contained in the staff report and attached resolution.

PROJECT ANALYSIS:

(1) Background — On August 16, 2022, The Ontario Plan 2050 (“ TOP 2050” ) was adopted, which updated the City’s Policy Plan (general plan), establishing the land use pattern for the City to achieve its Vision. TOP 2050 focuse d on technical updates to the Policy Plan to comply with state housing mandates and conform with new state laws related to community health, environmental justice, climate adaption, resiliency, and mobility. After the adoption of TOP 2050, staff initiated the City zoning consistency project to ensure that the Zoning Map is consistent with the TOP 2050 Policy Plan Official Land Use Plan, as required by Government Code Section 65860.

(2) Zoning Map Amendment — To implement the goals of the Policy Plan ( including the 2021 -2029 Housing Element ), s taff has identified 107 parcels that require to be rezoned. As part of the TOP 2050 Policy Plan update, the City adopted additional mixed- use land use designations in special areas of the City , including the northeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Fourth Street, the northeast corner of Mountain Avenue and Holt Boulevard, the northwest corner of Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street, and the southeast 303 East B Street, Ontario, California 91764 Phone: 909.395.2036 / Fax: 909.395.2420

PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA REPORT

March 28, 2023
46 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 2 of 15 ends

corner of Turner Avenue and Ol d Guasti Road. Other key sites include Holt Boulevard, between Sultana Avenue and Campus Avenue , and the northeast and northwest corners of the Holt Boulevard and Imperial Avenue intersection. These areas are currently zoned for non-residential land uses, such as commercial or industrial, but were identified as areas to include residential land uses because of its accessibility to future bus rapid transit. Other non-mixed-use sites will require zone changes as well, to ensure that the City meets its 2021-2029 Regional Housing Needs A ssessment (“RHNA”) obligation to add additional residential capacity and have an inventory of sites suitable to accommodate the City’s housing need based on the updated land use designations adopted as part of TOP 2050.

The following Zoning Map amendment s will establish consistency with the Policy Plan Component of the TOP, and includes:

 Rezoning six parcels from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to MDR- 18 (Medium Density Residential – 11.1 to 18.0 du/ac) to be consistent with the TOP Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation . Affected properties include APNs: 1008-551-01,1008-551-13, 1008-551-12 ,1008-551-11, 1008-561-06, and 1008 - 551-07 (See Exhibit A, Area A1);

 Rezoning five parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.4 0 FAR) to MU-8B (Mountain/Fourth Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1008-522-04, 1008- 522-011, 1008 -522-02, 1008- 522-03, and 1008- 513-16 (See Exhibit A, Area A2);

 Rezoning one parcel from LDR -5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac ) to HDR-45 (High-Density Residential – 25.1 to 45.0 du/ac ) to be consistent with the TOP High-Density Land Use Designation. Affected property is APN 1008-441-01 (See Exhibit A, Area B);

 Rezoning two parcels from CC (Community Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to MU- 8C (West Holt Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1010-502-08 and 1010-502-09 (See Exhibit A, Area C1);

 Rezoning six parcels from MDR -25 (Medium-High Density Residential) to HDR -45 (High-Density Residential ) to be consistent with the TOP High-Density Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1048-604-13, 1048-604-14, 1048-604- 15, 1010-491-16, 1010-491-02, and 1010-491-03 (See Exhibit A, Area C2);

 Rezoning six parcels fro m CIV (Civic ) to MU -1 (Mixed Use – Downtown) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Downtown Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1048-556-01, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-04, 1048- 556-05, and 1048-556-14 (See Exhibit A, Area C3);
47 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 3 of 15 ends

 Rezoning: 47 parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to MU-1 (Mixed Use – Downtown) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Downtown Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1048-525-12, 1049-094-07, 1049-094-10, 1049 -094-08, 1049 -094-09, 1048- 525-14, 1048- 525-13, 1048- 525-15, 1048-523-15, 1048 -523-16, 1048 -523-18, 1048- 522-08, 1048- 522-09, 1048- 522-10, 1048-522-11, 1048 -524-14, 1048 -524-15, 1048- 524-16, 1048- 524-17, 1048- 525-16, 1048-525-17, 1048 -525-18, 1048 -525-19, 1048- 525-20, 1048- 523-17, 1049- 094-04, 1049-094-14, 1049 -094-02, 1049 -094-01, 1049- 093-10, 1049- 093-09, 1049- 093-07, 1049-093-06, 1049 -093-04, 1049 -093-03, 1049- 093-02, 1049- 093-01, 1049- 091-04, 1049-091-03, 1049 -091-02, 1049 -091-01, 1049- 094-13, 1049-094-05, 1049- 094-11, 1049-094-06, 1049-093-08, and 1049-093-05 (See Exhibit A, Area C5);

 Rezoning seven parcels from BP (Business Park (0.60 FAR)) to MU-6 (East Holt Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Holt Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 0110-061-01, 0110-071-01, 0110-071-02, 0110-071-06, 0110- 071-07, 0110-072-10, and 0110-072-11 (See Exhibit A, Area D2);

 Rezoning three parcels from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.40 FAR) to HDR-45 (High-Density Residential – 25.1 to 45.0 du/ac) to be consistent with the TOP High- Density Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1050-272-01, 1050- 272-20, and 1050-272-21 (See Exhibit A, Area E1);

 Rezoning one parcel from CN (Neighborhood Commercial 0.40 FAR) to MU-8D (Euclid/Francis Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected property is APN 1050-284-01 (See Exhibit A, Area E1);

 Rezoning 15 parcels from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to MU- 8E (Euclid/Walnut Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1051-221-07, 1051-221-08, 1051-221-09,1051-221-10, 1051-221-11, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051-221-15, 1051-221-16, 1051-222-08, 1051-222-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-222-11, and 1051-222-12 (See Exhibit A, Area E2);

 Rezoning six parcels from CC (Community Commercial (0.40 FAR)) to (Euclid/Walnut Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Neighborhood Activity Hub Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 1051-221-20, 1051-222-01, 1051-222-13, 1051-271-06, 1051-271-66, and 1051-271-67 (See Exhibit A, Area E3); and

 Rezoning two parcels from OH (High-Intensity Office) to MU-3 (Centrelake Southwest Mixed Use) to be consistent with the TOP Mixed Use – Guasti Land Use Designation. Affected properties include APNs 0210-551-02 and 0210 -551-03 (See Exhibit A, Area F1).

48 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 4 of 15 ends

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: On February 22, 2023, t he Planning Department held an in - person community meeting to present the Project to affected property owners and interested members of the public. Fifty community members attended the meeting and an additional 6 community members sent email correspondence inquiring about the Project. At the community meeting, staff presented the Project and discussed the Zone Change review process. Following the presentation, members of the audience had the opportunity to have their questions answered by staff. Concerns and opposition to the West Holt Avenue zone changes regarding High Density Residential were expressed (See Exhibit A, Area C2). The concerns expressed included increased density, lack of on-street parking, existing traffic issues, delinquency, and loitering. Below is a summary of the most frequently asked questions and comments that were received, along with staff responses:

(1) Approval of the Project will lead to the development of high -rise multiple-family units, which will negatively impact existing neighborhoods and reduce privacy for the existing neighborhoods.

Staff Response: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Exhibit 1) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, will provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. City staff explained any future development project will be subject to the City’s Development Review process and meet all applicable residential development standards to ensure high -quality development and maintain neighborhood compatibility.

(2) Approval of the Project would result in more on-street parking spillover to existing residential neighborhoods.

Staff Response: City staff explained that any future development will be subject to the City’s Development Review process and meet all applicable residential developm ent standards, which includes adequate on-site parking for residents and guests.

(3) Approval of the Project will increase density, which would result in more traffic and congestion.

Staff Response: During the development review process the City has the discretion to require a traffic study to evaluate potential traffic impacts from vehicle traffic and require safeguards to mitigate possible adverse effects on the existing roadway system.

(4) Residents shared that the Project would lead to an increase to delinquency and loitering:

Staff Response : During the development review process the Planning Department coordinates with the Ontario Police Department and Community Improvement 49 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 5 of 15 ends

Department to address design concerns and assist in addressing security and loitering issues within the community.

After the community meeting, the Planning Department received 6 follow-up emails from community members not supporting the proposed West Holt Avenue High Density Residential zone changes. All emails, letters, and responses are included in Attachment A (Community Member Comments) of this report.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: The subject application was advertised as a public hearing in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ontario (the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper). In addition, notices were mailed to all owners of real property located within a minimum of 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property that is the subject of the hearing, as shown on the records of the County Assessor.

AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN (ALUCP) COMPLIANCE: The California State Aeronautics Act (Public Utilities Code Section 21670 et seq.) requires that an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan be prepared for all public use airports in the State; and requires that local land use plans and individual development proposals must be consistent with the policies set forth in the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.

On April 19, 2011, the City Council of the City of Ontario approved and adopted the ONT ALUCP, establishing the Airport Influence Area for Ontario International Airport, which encompasses lands within parts of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties, and limits future land uses and development within the Airport Influence Area, as they relate to noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts of current and future airport activity. As the recommending body for the Project, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the facts and in formation contained in the Application and supporting documentation against the ONT ALUCP compatibility factors, including [1] Safety Criteria (ONT ALUCP Table 2-2) and Safety Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2-2), [2] Noise Criteria (ONT ALUCP Table 2 -3) and Noise Im pact Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2 -3), [3] Airspace protection Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2 -4), and [4] Overflight Notification Zones (ONT ALUCP Map 2 -5). As a result, the Planning Commission, therefore, finds and determines that the Project , when implemented in conjun ction with the conditions of approval, will be consistent with the policies and criteria set forth within the ONT ALUCP.

COMPLIANCE WITH THE ONTARIO PLAN: The proposed Project is consistent with the principles, goals and policies contained within the Vision, Governance, Policy Plan (general plan), and City Council Priorities components of The Ontario Plan ("TOP"). More specifically, the goals and policies of TOP that are furthered by the proposed Project are as follows:

(1) City Council Goals.

 Operate in a Businesslike Manner.
 Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods. 50 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 6 of 15 ends

(2) Vision.

Distinctive Development:

 Commercial and Residential Development.

 Development quality that is broadly recognized as distinctive and not exclusively tied to the general suburban character typical of much of Southern California.

(3) Governance.

Decision Making:

 Goal G1: Sustained decision-making that consistently moves Ontario towards its Vision by using The Ontario Plan as a framework for assessing choices.

 G 1-2. Long-term Benefit . We require decisions to demonstrate and document how they add value to the community and support the Ontario Vision.

(4) Policy Plan (General Plan)

Land Use Element:

 LU-1.1 Strategic Growth. We concentrate growth in strategic locations that help create place and identity, maximize available and planned infrastructure, foster the development of transit, and support the expansion of the active and multimodal transportation networks throughout the City.

 LU-1.6 Complete Community. We incorporate a variety of land uses and building types in our land use planning efforts that result in a complete community where residents at all stages of life, employers, workers, and visitors have a wide spectrum of choices of where they can live, work, shop and recreate within Ontario.

 Goal LU-2 Compatibility: Compatibility between a wide range of uses and a resultant urban patterns and forms.

Community Economics Element:

 Goal CE-1 Complete Community: A complete community that provides for all incomes and stages of life.

 Goal CE-2 Placemaking: A City of distinctive neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and centers where people choose to be.

51 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 7 of 15 ends

HOUSING ELEMENT COMPLIANCE: The Project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Policy Plan (general plan) component of The Ontario Plan, as the Project site is not one of the properties in the Housing Element Sites contained in Tables B- 1 and B-2 (Housing Element Sites Inventory) of the Housing Element Technical Report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The environmental impacts of this Project were previously reviewed in conjunction with The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) which was adopted by the City Council on August 16, 2022, in conjunction with File No. PGPA20-002. An Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 SEIR was prepared to address the environmental effects of the project.

52 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 8 of 15 ends

Exhibit A: PROPOSED ZONE CHANGES

AR-2, Residential-
Agricultural
PUD, Planned Unit
Development
BP, Business Park

OS-R, Open Space -
Recreation
RE-2, Rural Estate

MU, Mixed Use
1 – Downtown,
3 – Centrelake West,
6 – East Holt,
8b – Mountain/Fourth
8c – West Holt
8d – Euclid/Francis
8e – Euclid/Walnut

IP, Industrial Park

OS-C, Open Space-
Cemetery

RE-4, Residential Estate

CS, Corner Store

IL, Light Industrial

UC, Utilities Corridor

LDR-5, Low Density
Residential
CN, Neighborhood
Commercial
IG, General
Industrial
SP, Specific Plan

MDR-11, Low-Medium
Density Residential
CC, Community
Commercial
IH, Heavy
Industrial

SP(AG), Specific Plan
with Agricultural
Overlay

MDR-18, Medium Density
Residential
CCS, Convention
Center Support

ONT, Ontario Int'l
Airport
ES, Emergency Shelter
Overlay

MDR-25, Medium-High
Density Residential
OL, Low Intensity
Office

CIV, Civic

MTC, Multimodal Transit
Center Overlay

HDR-45, High Density
Residential
OH, High Intensity
Office
RC, Rail Corridor

ICC, Interim Community
Commercial Overlay

MHP, Mobile Home Park

AH – Affordable
Housing

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
A1

TOP: Low-Density Residential Medium Density
Zoning: LDR-5 Low-Density Residential MDR-18 Medium Density Residential Parcels: 1008-551-01,1008-551-13, 1008-551-12 ,1008-551-11, 1008-561-06, and 1008-551-07 53 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 9 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
A2

TOP: Commercial Neighborhood Mixed-Use (Mountain and Fourth) Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial 0.4 FAR Mixed-Use 8b (Mountain/Fourth) Parcels: 1008-522-04, 1008-522-011, 1008-522-02, 1008-522-03, and 1008-513-16

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
B

TOP: Low-Density Residential High-Density Residential Zoning: LDR-5, Low-Density Residential HDR-45, High-Density Residential Parcels: 1008-441-01
54 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 10 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C1

TOP: General Commercial (0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 8c (West Holt) Zoning: Community Commercial (0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 8c (West Holt) Parcels: 1010-502-08 and 1010-502-09

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C2

TOP: Medium-Density Residential High-Density Residential Zoning: MDR-25, Medium-High Density
Residential HDR-45, High-Density Residential
Parcels: 1048-604-13, 1048-604-14, 1048-604-15, 1010-491-16, 1010-491-02, and 1010-491-03 55 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 11 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C3

TOP: Public Facility Mixed-Use (Downtown)
Zoning: CIV (Civic) Mixed-Use 1 (Downtown)
Parcels: 1048-556-01, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-04, 1048-556-05, and 1048-556-14

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C5

TOP: Commercial Neighborhood
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use (Downtown)
Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 1 (Downtown)
Parcels
1048-525-12, 1049-094-07, 1049-094-10, 1049-094-08, 1049-094-09, 1048-525-14, 1048-525-13, 1048-525-15, 1048-523-15, 1048-523-16, 1048-523-18, 1048-522-08, 1048-522-09, 1048-522-10, 1048-522-11, 1048-524-14, 1048-524-15, 1048-524-16, 1048-524-17, 1048-525-16, 1048-525-17, 1048-525-18, 1048-525-19, 1048-525-20, 1048-523-17, 1049-094-04, 1049-094-14, 1049-094-02, 1049-094-01, 1049-093-10, 1049-093-09, 1049-093-07, 1049-093-06, 1049-093-04, 1049-093-03, 1049-093-02, 1049-093-01, 1049-091-04, 1049-091-03, 1049-091-02, 1049-091-01, 1049-094-13, 1049-094-05, 1049-094-11, 1049-094-06, 1049-093-08, and 1049-093-05

56 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 12 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
D2

TOP: Business Park (0.60 FAR) Mixed-Use (East Holt)
Zoning: Business Park (0.60 FAR) Mixed-Use 6 (East Holt) Parcels 0110-061-01, 0110-071-01, 0110-071-02, 0110-071-06, 0110-071-07, 0110-072-10, and 0110-072-11

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E1

TOP: Commercial Neighborhood
(0.40 FAR) High-Density Residential
Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial
(0.40 FAR) HDR-45, High-Density Residential
Parcels 1050-272-01, 1050-272-20, and 1050-272-21

57 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 13 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E2

TOP: Neighborhood Commercial
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use (Euclid and Francis)
Zoning: Commercial Neighborhood
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use (Euclid and Francis)
Parcels 1050-284-01

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E3

TOP: General Commercial (0.40 FAR) &
Low-Density Residential Mixed-Use (Euclid and Walnut)
Zoning: Community Commercial (0.40 FAR) &
LDR-5 Low-Density Residential Mixed-Use 8e (Euclid and Walnut) Parcels
1051-221-07, 1051-221-08, 1051-221-09, 1051-221-10, 1051-221-11, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051-221-15, 1051-221-16, 1051-221-20, 1051-222-01, 1051-222-08, 1051-222-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-222-11, 1051-222-12, 1051-222-13, 1051-271-06, 1051-271-66, and 1051-271-67

58 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 14 of 15 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
F1

TOP: Office Commercial (0.75 FAR) Mixed-Use (Centrelake Southwest) Zoning: High-Intensity Office (0.75 FAR) Mixed-Use (Centrelake Southwest) Parcels 0210-551-02 and 0210-551-03

59 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File No.: PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 15 of 15 ends

ATTACHMENT A:

Community Member Comments

(Document follows this page)

60 From: Robert Morales
To: Daniel Olivos; Luis Batres
Cc: Kimberly Ruddins; Thomas Grahn
Subject: RE: Daniel Olivos
Date: Thursday, March 16, 2023 2:10:00 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Good afternoon Daniel,

Thank you for providing me with your comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

Best,

Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]

To see the status of your permit, visit the Citizen Portal Access: https://automation.ontarioca.gov/onlinePermits/Default.aspx The Planning Department counter is open for appointments. Click here to book your appointment.

We appreciate your business and your patience.

From: Daniel Olivos <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2023 2:07 PM
To: Luis Batres <[email protected]>
Cc: Robert Morales <[email protected]>
Subject: Daniel Olivos

Mr Batres and Mr Morales
This is to let you know that we do not agree with the proposal of change of zoning . . 527 e holt blvd Ontario 91761

please respond to this message thank you
61 From: Robert Morales
To: nestor garcia
Cc: Thomas Grahn; Kimberly Ruddins
Subject: RE: Project PZC22-001/AREA C2
Date: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 5:10:00 PM
Good afternoon Nestor,
Thank you for providing me with your comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

Best,
Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]
To see the status of your permit, visit the Citizen Portal Access:

https://automation.ontarioca.gov/onlinePermits/Default.aspx COVID-19 PLANNING DEPARTMENT UPDATES
• The Planning Department counter is open for appointments.

Click here to book your appointment.
• Contact us by phone at (909) 395-2036 or by email at [email protected] for general Planning- related information.
• Face coverings, and social distancing are recommended inside City facilities •

We appreciate your business and your patience.
-----Original Message-----
From: nestor garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 1:33 PM
To: Robert Morales <[email protected]>
Subject: Project PZC22-001/AREA C2
My name is Nestor García resident and home owner on B street, we have lived here for 34 years, the proposed project would have a lot of impact on our daily lives, our back yard including a swimming pool where we spend the majority of our time, the proposed project would directly impact many of us in many different ways , specially the violation of our privacy, property devastation, parking and the safety of our neighborhood, there for I want to say that we’re strongly oppose to the proposed project.

Sincerely
Nestor garcia
62 From: Robert Morales
To: angelica garcia
Cc: Kimberly Ruddins; Thomas Grahn
Subject: RE: Procect PZC22-001/AREA C2
Date: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 5:08:00 PM
Good afternoon Angelica,
Thank you for providing me with your comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

https://automation.ontarioca.gov/onlinePermits/Default.aspx COVID-19 PLANNING DEPARTMENT UPDATES
• The Planning Department counter is open for appointments.

We appreciate your business and your patience.
-----Original Message-----
From: angelica garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2023 1:46 PM
To: Robert Morales <[email protected]>
Subject: Procect PZC22-001/AREA C2
My nane is Angelica resident and homeowner on the south side of B street, I have lived here for 24 years Iam very concerned about the proposed project, being that I live right next to the alley where the proposed project would take place I want to say that iam with no doubt opposed to the mention project Thank
B street resident
63 From: Robert Morales
To: "Lisa Pore"
Cc: Thomas Grahn; Kimberly Ruddins
Subject: RE: Rezoning C2
Date: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 8:12:00 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Good Morning Roy and Lisa,

Best,

Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]

To see the status of your permit, visit the Citizen Portal Access: https://automation.ontarioca.gov/onlinePermits/Default.aspx COVID-19 PLANNING DEPARTMENT UPDATES
The Planning Department counter is open for appointments. Click here to book your appointment.

Face coverings, and social distancing are recommended inside City facilities We appreciate your business and your patience.

From:

Lisa Pore <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2023 12:13 PM
To: Robert Morales <[email protected]>
Subject: Rezoning C2

My husband and I attended the February 22 meeting for the zoning change for C2 area. We highly oppose the new zoning proposal to have it changed to a high density residential zone for multiple family development. We, along with other B Street neighbors Will be attending the March 28 meeting as well to express our concerns. Roy and Lisa Pore Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone [overview.mail.yahoo.com] 64 From: Robert Morales
To: "[email protected]"
Cc: Kimberly Ruddins; Thomas Grahn
Subject: FW: Rezone Holt Blvd
Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 10:44:00 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Good Morning Pamela,

Best,

Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]

Face coverings, and social distancing are recommended inside City facilities We appreciate your business and your patience.

From:

Gwen Berendsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 1:51 PM
To: Kimberly Ruddins <[email protected]>; Robert Morales <[email protected]>; Thomas Grahn <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Rezone Holt Blvd

From:

Pamela Trejo corona <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 12:24 PM
To: Planning Director <[email protected]>
Subject: Rezone Holt Blvd

Whom it may concern ,
65 We are residents of holt blvd Ontario. We have heard the news that they are planning to rezone holt blvd by building apartments units. I desire to speak regarding the situation as it will affect my family and our neighborhood. we are against this measure. This measure will affect the value of our house. We experienced a negative loss of value with the new opening of apartments recently. As a resident of Ontario this will affect us in a negative manner such as higher rates of crime and other aspects. We demand that we stop such bill.

66 From: Robert Morales
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: against the rezoning
Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 10:40:00 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Good Morning Syed,

Thank you for providing me with your comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s

Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and
Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

Best,

Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]

Face coverings, and social distancing are recommended inside City facilities We appreciate your business and your patience.

From:

Gwen Berendsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 8:42 AM
To: Kimberly Ruddins <[email protected]>; Robert Morales <[email protected]>; Thomas Grahn <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: against the rezoning

From:
syed sami <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 8:02 AM
To: Planning Director <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: against the rezoning

67 Hi this is The resident on B Street Ontario informing you about the new planning that I really condemn because that would ruin the neighborhood and it will increase traffic and that will cause more accidents.And the most important part is the privacy of the neighborsThat will be compromised

byBuilding the complex

unit.The second most
important part is the security of the neighborhood will be compromised and it will increase traffic in our neighborhood and the pedestrians won't be saved walking around due to more cars and more traffic. This will also devalue our properties. I am against this project and also being the resident of the neighborhood I really don't want the project to be built over here in this Zone.

68 From: Robert Morales
To: [email protected]
Cc: Kimberly Ruddins; Thomas Grahn
Subject: FW: AGAINST THE REZONING ON HOLT
Date: Thursday, February 23, 2023 10:38:00 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Good Morning Shan,

Thank you for providing me with your comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s

Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and
Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

Best,

Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]

Face coverings, and social distancing are recommended inside City facilities We appreciate your business and your patience.

From:

Gwen Berendsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 8:41 AM
To: Kimberly Ruddins <[email protected]>; Robert Morales <[email protected]>; Thomas Grahn <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: AGAINST THE REZONING ON HOLT

From:
shan sami <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 8:48 PM
To: Planning Director <[email protected]>
Subject: AGAINST THE REZONING ON HOLT

Hi this is The resident on B Street Ontario informing you about the new planning that I 69 really condemn because that would ruin the neighborhood and it will increase traffic and that will cause more accidents.And the most important part is the privacy of the neighborsThat will be compromised

byBuilding the complex

aaa
70 From: Robert Morales
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE Rezoning
Date: Wednesday, February 22, 2023 7:58:00 AM
Good Morning Ms. Alejo,
Thank you for providing comments. Your comments will be included in the Project record and presented to the Project’s

Recommending Authority (Planning Commission) and Approving Authority (City Council) for consideration of their decision.

Thank you,
Robert Morales
Assistant Planner
City of Ontario| Planning Department
303 East B Street, Ontario CA 91764
P: (909) 395 – 2432| E: [email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Gwen Berendsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 12:01 PM
To: Kimberly Ruddins <[email protected]>; Robert Morales <[email protected]>; Thomas Grahn <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Rezoning
-----Original Message-----
From: irene alejo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 11:54 AM
To: Planning Director <[email protected]>
Subject: Rezoning
Hello my name is Irene Alejo
I live on B street between San Antonio and Bolder.

I don’t want to see our neighborhood go from bad to worse my Father lived here for 35 years till he passed my Mother lived here for 30 years tiller she passed.

They could no longer walk to the store or go for a walk do to the fact that the prostitution and drugs coming from the hookers coming from holt and to do there business in parked car’s parking in front of our house. There has been drug trafficking we here women screaming help me and not to mention the drug addicts braking in to houses with your rezoning will tripping all the garage and thieves a green light to do what ever they want.

I ask you with a heavy heart please please don’t don’t do this I have great grandchildren and grandchildren that come to visit I don’t want them seeing any of that trash.

Respectfully yours
Irene Alejo

Sent from my iPhone
71 72
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 80
81 82
83 RESOLUTION NO. PC23-020

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, RECOM MENDING THE PLANNING

COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN
ADDENDUM TO THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 CERTIFIED

SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ( STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2021070364), FOR WHICH AN INITIAL STUDY

WAS PREPARED, ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT , AS AMENDED , FOR FILE NO S.

PZC22-001.

WHEREAS, in August 2022, the City Council certified The Ontario Plan 2050 (“TOP 2050”) Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”) (State Clearinghouse No.2021070364), adopted an update to The Ontario Plan Policy Plan (general plan) and the Preferred Land Use Plan, and adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and

WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of this Resolution, the Planning Director of the City of Ontario prepared and approved for attachment to the C ertified Supplemental Environmental I mpact Report, an addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ( State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) for
File No. PZC22-001, (hereinafter referred to as "SEIR Addendum"), all in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, together with State and local guidelines implementing said Act, all as amended to date (collectively referred to as "CEQA"); and

WHEREAS, Planning File No. PZC 22-001 (the “Project”) analyzed under the Addendum consists of Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure 3 of the Addendum) in order to be consistent with The Ontario Plan ( “TOP”). In addition, the proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Section 65860 of the Government Code, provides consistency between zoning ordinances and general plans; and

WHEREAS, the S EIR Addendum concluded that implementation of the Project could result in a number of significant effects on the environment and identified mitigation measures that would reduce each of those significant effects to a less -than-significant level; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines Section 15164(a), a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary to a project, but the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR is not required; and

84 Planning Commission Resolution
File No. PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, the City determined that none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR would occur from the Project, and that preparation of an Addendum to the Certified SEIR was appropriate; and

WHEREAS, the City of Ontario is the lead agency on the Project, and the Planning Commission is the recommending authority for the Zone Change ( File No. PZC22-001) application; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is the recommending body for the Zone Change (File No. PZC22- 001) and the Zone Change approval will not be final and complete until it has been approved by the City Council; and

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the S EIR Addendum for the Project, has concluded that none of the conditions requiring preparation of a subsequent of supplemental Environmental Impact Report have occurred, and intends to take actions on the Project in compliance with CEQA and state and local guidelines implementing CEQA; and

WHEREAS, the SEIR Addendum for the Project is on file in the Planning Department, located at 303 East B Street, Ontario, CA 91764, and is available for inspection by any interested person at that location and are, by this reference, incorporated into this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; and

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

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario, as follows:

SECTION 1: Environmental Determination and Findings. As the recommending authority for the Project, t he Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in the administrative record for the Project . Based upon the facts and information contained in the administrative record, including all written and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission finds as follows:

(1) T he environmental impacts of this project were reviewed in conjunction with an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) adopted by City Council on August 16, 2022 , in conjunction with File No. PGPA20-002; and

(2) The SEIR Addendum and administrative record have been completed in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Ontario Local CEQA Guidelines; and
85 Planning Commission Resolution
File No. PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 3 ends

(3) The City 's " Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) " provide for the use of a single environmental assessment in situations where the impacts of subsequent projects are adequately analyzed. This Application introduces no new significant environmental impacts; and

(4) All previously adopted mitigation measures shall be a condition of project approval, as they are applicable to the Project, and are incorporated herein by this reference; and

(5) T he SEIR Addendum contains a complete and accurate reporting of the environmental impacts associated with the Project , and reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and

(6) There is no substantial evidence in the administrative record supporting a fair argument that the project may result in significant environmental impacts.

SECTION 2: Additional Environmental Review Not Required. Based on the Addendum, all related information presented to the Planning Commission, and the specific findings set forth in Section 1, above, the Planning Commission finds that the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report is not required for the Project, as the Project:

(1) Does not constitute substantial changes to the Certified SEIR that will require major revisions to the Certified SEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; and

(2) Does not constitute substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Certified SEIR was prepared, that will require major revisions to the Certified SEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified significant effects; and

(3) Does not contain new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the Certified EIR was certified/adopted, that shows any of the following:

(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Certified SEIR; or

(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the Certified SEIR; or

86 Planning Commission Resolution
File No. PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 4 ends

(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the City declined to adopt such measures; or

(d) Mitigation measures or alternatives considerably different from those analyzed in the Certified SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but which the City declined to adopt.

SECTION 3: Planning Commission Action. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1 and 2, above, the Planning Commission hereby finds that based upon the entire record of proceedings before it, and all information received, that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will consti tute substantial changes to the Certified EIR, and does hereby recommend that the City Council APPROVES the SEIR Addendum, attached hereto as " Attachment A," and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4: Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings have been based are located at the City of Ontario City Hall, 303 East "B" Street, Ontario, California 91764. The custodian for these records is the City Clerk of the City of Ontario.

SECTION 5: Certification to Adoption. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of the Resolution.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

87 88
89 Planning Commission Resolution
File No. PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 7 ends

ATTACHMENT A:

Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 (TOP 2050)
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report

(Addendum to follow this page)

90 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 1 of 54 ends

1. Project Title/File No.: PZC22-001 – TOP Policy Plan (general plan) - Zoning Consistency

2. Lead Agency: City of Ontario, 303 East B Street, Ontario, California 91764, (909) 395-2036

3. Contact Person: Robert Morales, Assistant Planner, Phone: (909) 395-2432

4. Project Sponsor: City of Ontario, 303 East B Street, Ontario, California 91764, (909) 395-2036

5. Project Location: The Project site is located in southwestern San Bernardino County, within the City of Ontario. The City of Ontario is located approximately 40 miles from downtown Los Angeles, 20 miles from downtown San Bernardino, and 30 miles from Orange County. As illustrated on Figures 1 and 2, below, the Project site is located at various properties located throughout the City.

Figure 1: REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
Project Site
91 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 2 of 54 ends

Figure 2: AERIEL MAP
Project Site
92 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 3 of 54 ends

Figure(s) 3: PROPOSED ZONING CHANGES

AR-2, Residential-
Agricultural
PUD, Planned Unit
Development
BP, Business Park

OS-R, Open Space -
Recreation
RE-2, Rural Estate

MU, Mixed Use
1 – Downtown,
3 – Centrelake West,
6 – East Holt,
8b – Mountain/Fourth
8c – West Holt
8d – Euclid/Francis
8e – Euclid/Walnut

IP, Industrial Park

OS-C, Open Space-
Cemetery

RE-4, Residential Estate

CS, Corner Store

IL, Light Industrial

UC, Utilities Corridor

LDR-5, Low Density
Residential
CN, Neighborhood
Commercial
IG, General
Industrial

SP, Specific Plan

MDR-11, Low-Medium
Density Residential
CC, Community
Commercial
IH, Heavy
Industrial
SP(AG), Specific Plan
with Agricultural
Overlay

MDR-18, Medium Density
Residential
CCS, Convention
Center Support

ONT, Ontario
Int'l Airport

ES, Emergency Shelter
Overlay

MDR-25, Medium-High
Density Residential
OL, Low Intensity
Office

CIV, Civic

MTC, Multimodal
Transit Center Overlay

HDR-45, High Density
Residential
OH, High Intensity
Office
RC, Rail Corridor

ICC, Interim
Community
Commercial Overlay

MHP, Mobile Home Park

AH – Affordable
Housing

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
A1

93 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 4 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
A2

TOP: Commercial Neighborhood Mixed-Use (Mountain and Fourth) Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial 0.4 FAR Mixed-Use 8b (Mountain and Fourth) Parcels: 1008-522-04, 1008-522-011, 1008-522-02, 1008-522-03, and 1008-513-16

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
B

TOP: Low-Density Residential High-Density Residential Zoning: LDR-5, Low-Density Residential HDR-45, High-Density Residential Parcels: 108-441-01

94 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 5 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C1

TOP: General Commercial (0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 8c (West Holt) Zoning: Community Commercial (0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 8c (West Holt) Parcels: 1010-502-08 and 1010-502-09

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C2

95 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 6 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C3

TOP: Public Facility Mixed-Use (Downtown)
Zoning: CIV (Civic) Mixed-Use 1 (Downtown)
Parcels: 1048-556-01, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-04, 1048-556-05, and 1048-556-14

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
C5

96 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 7 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
D2

TOP: Business Park (0.60 FAR) Mixed-Use (East Holt)
Zoning: Business Park (0.60 FAR) Mixed-Use 6 (East Holt) Parcels 110-061-01, 110-071-01, 110-071-02, 110-071-06, 110-071-07, 110-072-10, and 110-07-211

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E1

TOP: Commercial Neighborhood
(0.40 FAR) High-Density Residential
Zoning: Neighborhood Commercial
(0.40 FAR) HDR-45, High-Density Residential
Parcels 1050-272-01, 1050-272-20, and 1050-272-21

97 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 8 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E2

TOP: Neighborhood Commercial
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use (Euclid and Francis)
Zoning: Commercial Neighborhood
(0.40 FAR) Mixed-Use 8d (Euclid and Francis)
Parcels 1050-284-01

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
E3

TOP: General Commercial (0.40 FAR) &
Low-Density Residential Mixed-Use (Euclid and Walnut)
Zoning: Community Commercial (0.40 FAR) &
LDR-5 Low-Density Residential Mixed-Use 8e (Euclid and Walnut) Parcels
1051-221-07, 1051-221-08, 1051-221-09, 105-122-110, 1051-221-11, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051-221-15, 1051-221-16, 1051-22-120, 1051-222-01, 1051-222-08, 1051-222-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-222-11, 1051-222-12, 1051-222-13, 1051-271-06, 1051-271-66, and 1051-271-67

98 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 9 of 54 ends

Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning
F1

TOP: Office Commercial (0.75 FAR) Mixed-Use (Centrelake Southwest) Zoning: High-Intensity Office (0.75 FAR) Mixed-Use 3 (Centrelake Southwest) Parcels 210-551-02 and 210-551-03

6. Policy Plan (General Plan) Designation: Various

7. Zoning Designation: Various

8. Description of Project: The Ontario Plan (TOP) was adopted by the City Council on January 27, 2010, and the technical update to the TOP (TOP 2050), which includes the City’s Policy Plan (general plan), was adopted on Aug ust 16, 2022. The Ontario Plan (TOP) serves as the framework for the City's business plan and provides a foundation for the City to operate as a municipal corporation that consists of six (6) distinct components: 1) Vision; 2) Governance Manual; 3) Policy Plan (General Plan); 4) Council Priorities; 5) Implementation; and 6) Tracking and Feedback. The Policy Plan component of TOP meets the functional and legal mandate of a General Plan. It contains nine elements: Land Use, Housing, Parks and Recreation, Environmental Resources, Community Economics, Safety, Mobility, Community Design, Social Resources, and Environmental Justice is woven throughout the Policy Plan. The online version of The Ontario Plan can be found at Ontarioca.gov/Ontarioplan.

The City is proposing Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) to make the zoning map consistent with the TOP 2050 general plan update. In addition, the proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map that reflect policies and implementation measures specified in the TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP.

On August 16, 2022, the Ontario City Council certified the Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH # 2021070364), (“TOP SEIR”) adopted an update to the Ontario Policy Plan and Land Use Plan, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA. The Ontario Plan 2050 SEIR contains an analysis of the environmental setting of the entire City focusing on changes to land use to establish the framework associated with the City’s development over the next 30 years.

99 Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 10 of 54 ends

9. Project Setting: As illustrated in Figure 1, the Project site is located is located in southwestern San Bernardino County, within the City of Ontario.

10. Analysis: According to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum to a previously Certified EIR may be used if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 requiring the preparation of a subsequent Negative Declaration or EIR have occurred. The CEQA Guidelines require that a brief explanation be provided to support the findings that no subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration are needed for further discretionary approval. These findings are described below:

1) R
equired Finding : Substantial changes are not proposed for the project that will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new, significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified effects.

S
ubstantial changes are not proposed by the Project and project implementation will not require revisions to TOP 2050 SEIR. TOP 2050 SEIR analyzed the direct and physical changes in the environment that would be caused by TOP; focusing on changes to land use associated with the final buildout of the Official Land Use Plan. TOP 2050 SEIR assumes the same overall development at buildout as shown below.

TOP Buildout Analysis Units Population Non-Residential
Square Footage Jobs
Buildout per current TOP
2050 SEIR 129,562 410,492 261,491,779 296,002
Buildout per approved
TOP 2050 SEIR and the
proposed zone
change(s)
129,562 410,492 261,491,779 296,002
Since the anticipated buildout will remain the same, no revisions to TOP 2050 SEIR are required. In addition, all previously adopted mitigation measures are a condition of project approval and are incorporated herein by reference. The attached Initial Study provides an analysis of the Project and verification that the Project will not cause environmental impacts such that any of the circumstances identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present.

2) R
equired Finding : Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, t hat would require major revisions of the previous Environmental Impact Report due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

Substantial changes have not occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the pr
oject was undertaken, that would require major revisions to TOP 2050 SEIR in that the proposed zoning changes are consistent with what was analyzed under the TOP 2050 SEIR; t herefore, no proposed changes or revisions to the SEIR are required. In addition, all previously adopted mitigation measures are a condition of project approval and are incorporated herein by reference. The attached Initial Study provides an analysis of the Project and verification that the Project will not cause environmental impacts such that any of the circumstances identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present.

3) R
equired Finding : No new information has been provided that would indicate that the proposed project would result in one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR. 100
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 11 of 54 ends

No new information has been provided that would indicate the proposed Project would result in any new significant effects not previously discussed in TOP 2050 SEIR; t herefore, no proposed changes or revisions to the EIR are required. In addition, all previously adopted mitigation measures are a condition of project approval are incorporated herein by reference. The attached Initial Study provides an analysis of the Project and verification that the Project will not cause environmental impacts such that any of the circumstances identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 are present.

CEQA Requirements for an Addendum: If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency may:
(1) prepare a subsequent EIR if the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a) are met, (2) prepare a subsequent negative declaration, (3) prepare an addendum, or (4) prepare no further documentation. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(b)). When only minor technical changes or additions to the negative declaration are necessary and none of the conditions described in section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred, CEQA allows the lead agency to prepare and adopt an addendum. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(b).)

Under CEQA Section 15162, no subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:

1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;

2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certifi ed as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; or

ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; or

iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or

iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Thus, if the Project does not result in any of the circumstances listed in Section 15162 (i.e., no new or substantially greater significant impacts), the City may properly adopt an addendum to the Certified SEIR.

101
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 12 of 54 ends

Conclusion: TOP 2050 SEIR was prepared as a Supplemental EIR in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, the City’s Rules for the Implementation of CEQA , and in accordance with Section 15121(a) of the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3). The SEIR considered the direct physical changes and reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment that would be caused by T OP. Consequently, the SEIR focused on impacts from changes to land use associated with buildout of the City’s Official Land Use Plan and impacts from the resulting population and employment growth. The proposed land use designation changes coordinate with the existing uses of the properties and uses within the surrounding areas. T he Project will not result in a change in the final buildout projections (TOP Buildout Analysis, page 10) . Subsequent activities within TOP 2050 SEIR have been evaluated to determine whether an additional CEQA document needs to be prepared.

Accordingly, and based on the findings and information contained in the previously certified TOP 2050 SEIR, the analysis above, the attached Initial Study, and CEQA statute and State CEQA Guidelines, including Sections 15164 and 15162, the Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in TOP SEIR.

No changes or additions to TOP SEIR analyses are necessary, nor is there a need for any additional mitigation measures. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, the City Council hereby adopts this Addendum to TOP SEIR.

11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement): None

12. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? ☒Yes ☐ No

If “yes”, has consultation begun? ☐ Yes ☐ No ☒ Completed

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED

The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

☐ Aesthetics ☐ Agriculture/Forestry
Resources
☐ Air Quality
☐ Biological Resources ☐ Cultural Resources ☐ Geology / Soils ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
☐ Hydrology/Water Quality
☐ Land Use / Planning ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Noise
☐ Population / Housing ☐ Public Services ☐ Recreation
☐ Transportation ☐ Utilities / Service Systems ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
☐ Tribal Cultural Resources ☐ Wildfire ☐ Energy

102
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 13 of 54 ends

DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency)

On the basis of this initial evaluation:

☐ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, b ut it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

☒ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Certified The Ontario Plan 2050 (TOP 2050) Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Certified TOP 2050 SEIR, including revisions or mitigation measur es that are imposed upon the proposed project, the analysis from the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR prepared for this project was used as a basis for this Addendum, nothing further is required.

Signature:

Date: February 27, 2023
Printed Name: Robert Morales, Assistant Planner For: City of Ontario

EVALU

ATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. , the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).

2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on - site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.

3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than 103
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 14 of 54 ends

significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.

4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from the "Earlier Analyses” Section may be cross-referenced).

5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration.

Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

a. Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.

b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for poten tial impacts (e.g. , general plans, zoning ordinances) . Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.

7. Supporting Information Sources. A source list should be attached, and other sources used, or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.

8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.

9. The explanation of each issue should identify:

a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and

b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

1. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code section 21099, would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
104
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 15 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) In non- urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?)
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

2. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining
whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy
Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement
methodology provided in Forest protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non -agricultural
use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

3. AIR QUALITY . Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management
district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
105
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 16 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) 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 California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural communit y
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife s pecies or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§ 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to § 15064.5?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

6. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?

☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
106
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 17 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, 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.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iv) Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒ c) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) 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 wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of
greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
107
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 18 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) 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 off- site;
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
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;
or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) 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?

☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
108
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 19 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact

12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

13. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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 expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

14. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of road or other
infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the constr
uction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:

i) Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
ii) Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iii) Schools? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
iv) Parks? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
v) Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

16. 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
109
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 20 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

17. TRANSPORTATION. Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined i n terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register o f historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead
agency shall consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native American tribe.
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) 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 which could cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Result in a determination by the 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
110
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 21 of 54 ends

Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

20. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Require the installation or maintenance of 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) Expose people or structure s to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post- fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒

21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE . (State CEQA
Guidelines section 15065(a).)

a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -
sustaining levels, threaten
to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term environmental goals to the disadvantage of
long-term environmental goals?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively consider able” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects.)
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Note: Authority cited: Public Resources Code sections 21083, 21083.05, 21083.09.

Reference: Gov. Code section 65088.4 ; Public Resources Code sections 21073, 21074, 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21080.3.1, 21080.3.2, 21082.3, 21083, 21083.3, 21083.5, 21084.2, 21084.3, 21093, 21094, 21095 and 21151; Sundstrom v.

County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296; Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for Responsible Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.

111
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 22 of 54 ends

EXPLANATION OF ISSUES

The project under consideration only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP Official Land Use Plan. In addition, the proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Here, the project does not permit construction of new structures, nor the introduction of any new uses that were not part of the project description in TOP 2050 SEIR. Therefore, the project will not introduce any impacts beyond those previously analyzed in TOP 2050 SEIR.

1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:

a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Discussion of Effects : T
he proposed Project will not have a significant adverse effect aesthetically. As provided in TOP 2050 SEIR, the City of Ontario’s physical setting lends opportunities for many views of the community and surrounding natural features, including panoramic views of the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountains and stretches of open space and undeveloped land south of Riverside Drive. TOP 2050 SEIR provides that compliance with TOP Policy CD-1.5 in the Community Design Element will avoid significant impacts to scenic vista by making it the policy of the City to protect public views of the San Gabriel Mountains.

Th
e Project under consideration only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP. In addition, the proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The Project does not permit construction of new buildings and so does not conflict with Policy CD-1.5 in the Community Design Element as it will not alter existing public views of the San Gabriel Mountains. Since no adverse aesthetic impacts are expected, no mitigation is necessary.

b. Su
bstantially damage scenic resources, including , but not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

Discussion of Effects : A s provided in TOP 2050 SEIR, the City of Ontario is served by three freeways: I-10, I-15, and SR-60. I-10 and SR-60 traverse the northern and central portion of the City, respectively, in an east–west direction. I-15 traverses the northeastern portion of the City in a north– south direction. These segments of I -10, I-15, and SR -60 have not been officially designated as scenic highways by the California Department of Transportation. Remnants of native vegetation are virtually absent. The general aesthetic character of this project area within OMC is urban and within Ontario Ranch is predominantly agricultural. The Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP, it will not disturb historic buildings, or any scenic resources identified on or in the vicinity of the Project area.

Th
e proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. No impact on scenic resources would occur as a result of implementation of the Project and no mitigation measures 112
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 23 of 54 ends

would be required. In addition, the TOP 2050 SEIR provides that compliance with TOP Policy CD -

1.5, CD-2.5, and CD-4.2 in the Community Design Element will avoid significant impacts to scenic vista by making it the policy of the City to protect scenic resources.

c. S
ubstantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings?

Discussion of Effects: A s concluded in TOP 2050 SEIR, implementation of TOP would change the existing visual character but the impacts are not considered significant because T OP policies of the Community Design Element have the common goal of improving the visual quality of the area by developing guidelines to improve future development projects. In addition, Title 9:

Development Code of the City’s Municipal Code, requires that individual development projects submit to site -specific review pursuant to the City of Ontario processes. These design guidelines and standards would regulate the features of buildings and streets that affect the public realm and would guide the physical development of any development project within the City’s boundaries. Therefore, TOP would not substantially degrade the visual character or quality of the City of Ontario. Implementation of the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, as the Project only proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP. In addition, the TOP 2050 SEIR provides that compliance with TOP Community Design Element will avoid significant impacts to the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

d. Cr
eate a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Discussion of Effects: Th e proposed Project will not increase the amount of light and glare within the City, since it only proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) in order to be consistent with TOP. In addition, as concluded in TOP 2050 SEIR, adherence to the design standards of the City of Ontario Development Code would ensure that light and glare from new developments would be minimized and that significant impacts would not occur. Therefore, the Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts.

2. A
GRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including 113
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 24 of 54 ends

the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:

a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

Discussion of Effects : Th
e Proposed Project does not contain any agricultural uses. As a result, no adverse environmental impacts are anticipated.

b. C
onflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

Discussion of Effects: Th e sites in the Project are not zoned for agricultural use. There is no Williamson Act contract in effect on any of the subject sites. Therefore, no impacts to agricultural uses are anticipated, nor will there be any conflict with existing or Williamson Act contracts.

c. C
onflict 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)?

Discussion of Effects : T he City of Ontario does not have any land zoned for forest, timberland, or timberland production.

d. R
esult in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Discussion of Effects: T here is currently no land in the City of Ontario that qualifies as forest land as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). Neither The Ontario Plan nor the City’s Zoning Code provide designations for forest land. The proposed project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land.

114
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 25 of 54 ends

e. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland to non -agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Dis cussion of Effects : No land in the City of Ontario that qualifies as forest land as defined in Public Resources Code S ection 12220(g). Neither TOP nor the City’s Zoning Code provide designations for forest land. The Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The TOP 2050 SEIR provides that compliance with TOP Environmental Resources Element will avoid significant impacts to loss of farmland. Thus, the proposed Project would not result in conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

Mitigation Required : N o additional mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR . No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

3. AI
R 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. Would the project:

a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

Discussion of Effects: Th
e Project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality plan. As noted in TOP 2050 SEIR (Section 5.3 (Air Quality)), pollutant levels in the Ontario area already exceed Federal and State standards. To reduce pollutant levels, the City of Ontario is actively participating in efforts to enhance air quality by implementing Control Measures in the Air Quality Management Plan for local jurisdictions within the South Coast Air Basin.

Th
e Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) in order to be consistent with TOP. In addition, the proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. TOP 2050 SEIR has addressed short -term construction impacts, however, and adequate mitigation (Mitigation Measure (s) MM 3-1 and AQ-1) have been adopted by the City that will help reduce emissions and air quality impacts. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

The proposed Project is consistent with The Ontario Plan, for which the SEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the City's participation in the Air Quality Management Plan and, because of the project's limited size and scope, will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the plan.

Mitigation: No
new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

b. Re
sult 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?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality because of the scope of the project. Although no impacts are 115
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 26 of 54 ends

anticipated, the project will still comply with the air quality standards of the TOP 2050 SEIR and the SCAQMD resulting in impacts that are less than significant.

Short term air quality impacts will result from construction related activities associated with construction activity, such as excavation and grading, machinery and equipment emissions, vehicle emissions from construction employees, etc. The daily emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulates from resulting grading and vehicular emissions may exceed threshold levels of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).

c. Ex
pose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

Discussion of Effects: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Adequate mitigation ( Mitigation Measure(s) MM 3 -1 and AQ -1) have been adopted by the City that w ill reduce emissions and air quality impacts to a less -than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

d. Re
sult in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people)?

Discussion of Effects: A s discussed in Section 5.3 of TOP 2050 SEIR , the proposed Project is within a non-attainment region of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) and any new contribution of emissions into the SCAB would be considered significant and a dverse. The Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Adequate mitigation (Mitigation Measure (s) MM 3-1 and AQ-1) have been adopted by the City that will reduce air pollutants to a less-than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation

4. BI
OLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. 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, 116
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 27 of 54 ends

policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

Discussion of Effects: The Project site is located within an area that has not been identified as containing species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

b. H
ave a substantial adverse effect 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?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified by the California Department of Fish & Wildlife or the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Therefore, no adverse environmental impacts are anticipated.

c. H
ave a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

Discussion of Effects: N o wetland habitat is present on the Project area . Therefore, Project implementation would have no impact on these resources.

d. I
nterfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

TO
P 2050 SEIR requires implementation of regulatory and standard conditions of approval to mitigate for impacts to species and project specific CEQA review will be undertaken at the appropriate time. Policy ER -5.1 in the Environmental Resources Element encourages efforts to protect biological resources through the establishment, restoration, and conservation of high - quality habitat areas. Consequently, impacts would be less than significant.

117
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 28 of 54 ends

e. C
onflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

f. C
onflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

Discussion of Effects:

5. C
ULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5?

Discussion of Effects: I mplementation of the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5.

The Project proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. In addition, Title 9, Division 4.02.050. Historic Preservation - Certificate of Appropriates and Demolition of Historic Resources of the City of Ontario Municipal Code protects sensitive historical resources of local interest. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

Page 29 of 54 ends

addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?

Discussion of Effects: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. TOP 2050 SEIR (Section 5.5) indicates no archeological sites or resources have been recorded in the City with the Archeological Information Center at San Bernardino County Museum. While no adverse impacts to archeological resources are anticipated at th ese sites due to their urbanized nature, standard conditions will be imposed on future development that in the event of unanticipated archeological discoveries, construction activities will not continue or will moved to other parts of the project site and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted to determine significance of these resources. If the find is discovered to be historical or unique archaeological resources, as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, avoidance or other appropriate measures shall be implemented.

c. D
isturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

Discussion of Effects: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Changing zoning does not impact whether human remains may be discovered during future development and the proposed project is in an area that has been previously disturbed by development. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. Human remains are not expected to be encountered during any construction activities; however, in the unlikely event that human remains are discovered, existing regulations, including the California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, would afford protection for human re mains discovered during development activities. Furthermore, standard conditions will be imposed on future development that in the event that unanticipated discoveries of human remains are identified during excavation, construction activities, the area shall not be disturbed until any required investigation is completed by the County Coroner and/or Native American consultation has been completed, if deemed applicable.

6. EN
ERGY. Would the project:

a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?

119
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 30 of 54 ends

b. C
onflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

7. G
EOLOGY & SOILS. Would the project:

a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, 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. Discussion of Effects: T here are no active faults known on the site and the Project site is located outside the Fault Rapture Hazard Zone (formerly Alquist -Priolo Zone). TOP SEIR (Section

5.7/Figure 5.7-2) identifies eight active or potentially active fault zones near the City. Given that the closest fault zone is located more than ten miles from the project site, fault rupture within the project area is not likely. All development will comply with the Uniform Building Code seismic design standards to reduce geologic hazard susceptibility. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

ii. St
rong seismic ground shaking?

120
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 31 of 54 ends

Discussion of Effects : The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. There are no active faults known on the site and the project site is located outside the Fault Rapture Hazard Zone (formerly Alquist -Priolo Zone). The Land Use Plan (Figure LU -6) of the Policy Plan (General Plan) SEIR (Section 5.7/Figure 5.7-2) identifies eight active or potentially active fault zones near the City. The closest fault zone is located more than ten miles from the project site. The proximity of the site to the active faults will result in ground shaking d uring moderate to severe seismic events. All construction will be in compliance with the California Building Code, the Ontario Municipal Code, The Ontario Plan and all other ordinances adopted by the City related to construction and safety. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

iii. Sei
smic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. As identified in th e TOP 2050 SEIR (Section 5.7), ground water saturation of sediments is required for earthquake induced liquefaction. In general, groundwater depths shallower than 10 feet to the surface can cause the highest liquefaction susceptibility. Depth to ground water at the project site during the wint er months is estimated to be between 250 to 4 50 feet below ground surface. Therefore, the liquefaction potential within the project area is minimal. Implementation of TOP strategies, Uniform Building Code, and the Ontario Municipal code would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

iv
. Landslides?

Implementation of TOP strategies, Uniform Building Code, and the Ontario Municipal Code would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

121
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 32 of 54 ends

b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Discussion of Effects: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between th e Development Code and TOP. The Project will not result in significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil because of the scope of the Project. Grading increases the potential for erosion by removing protective vegetation, changing natural drainage patterns, and constructing slopes. C ompliance with the California Building Code and review of grading plans by the City Engineer will ensure no significant impacts will occur. In addition, the City requires an erosion/dust control plan for projects located within this area. Implementation of a NPDES program, the Environmental Resource Element of the Policy Plan (General Plan) strategies, Uniform Building Code, and the Ontario Municipal code would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

c
. 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?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project would not result in the location of development on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable because as previously discussed, the potential for liquefaction and landslides associated with the project is less than significant. T OP 2050 (Section 5.7 ) indicates that subsidence is generally associated with large decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. The P roject would not withdraw water from the existing aquifer. Further, implem entation of T OP strategies, Uniform Building Code , and the Ontario Municipal code would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

d. 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?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The majority of Ontario, including the Project sites, are located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

e. H
ave soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewa ter? 122
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 33 of 54 ends

8. G
REENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:

a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

As part of TOP 2050 SEIR, The City updated the Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) .

The CCAP serves as the programmatic tiering document for review of the climate change impacts of projects under CEQA. The 2022 CCAP is included in the TOP 2050 SEIR. The CCAP includes a greenhouse gas inventory baseline for the Year 2019, a future "business -as-usual" projection of greenhouse gas emissions for the Year 2030 and Year 2050, an emissions reduction target consistent with the State's emissions reduction goals , an implementation plan identifying specific measures, and a timeline for implementation of said measures to reach the reduction targets for Year 2030 and Year 2050.

The CCAP is consistent with the CEQA Guidelines for the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (California Code of Regulations Section 15183.5). This allows the 2022 CCAP to support and streamline environmental review of GHG emissions for future development projects in the City. Therefore, the Project will not introduce new GHG emissions beyond those previously analyzed in TOP 2050 SEIR.

Mitigation Required : N
o additional mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously c onsidered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR . No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

b. Co
nflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Discussion of Effects : Implementation of the Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The proposed project is consistent with T OP Goal ER-4 (Air Quality) of improving air qualit y. The implementation of Policy ER -4.3, regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is in accordance with regional, State, and federal regulations. 123
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 34 of 54 ends

9. HAZ
ARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:

a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials?

b. C
reate a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?

Discussion of Effects: Th
e Project proposes th Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The Project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

c. Em
it hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

Page 35 of 54 ends

d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

Discussion of Effects: Th e proposed Project site is not listed on the hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the Project would not create a hazard to the public or the environment and no impact is anticipated.

e. For
a project located within the safety zone of the airport land use compatibility plan for ONT or Chino Airports, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

Discussion of Effects: A ccording to Land Use Element (Exhibit LU -06 Airport Safety Zones & Influence Areas) of TOP, the proposed site is located within the airport land use plan ; however, the Project will not result in a safety hazard for people working or residing in the Project area because it will not obstruct aircraft maneuvering. The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3 ) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Additionally, the ALUCP identifies the Project area to maintain uses as normally accepted in the 60 -65 and 65-70 CNEL. It is the policy of the City to coordinate with the airport authorities to ensure that the Proposed Land Use Plan is consistent with the adopted master land use plans and land use compatibility plans for the Chino Airport and Ontario International Airport ( ONT) pursuant to Land Use Element Policy LU -5.2. Therefore, the Project will not result in adverse impacts.

f. F
or a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

Discussion of Effects : Th e project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.

Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

g. I
mpair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Page 36 of 54 ends

Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The City's Safety Element , as contained within T OP, includes policies and procedures to be administered in the event of a disaster. TOP seeks interdepartmental and inter -jurisdictional coordination and collaboration to be prepared for, respond to and recover from every day and disaster emergencies. In addition, the project will comply with the requirements of the Ontario Fire Department and all City requirements for fire and other emergency access. Because the project is required to comply with all applicable City codes, any impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

h. E
xpose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project site is not located in or near wildlands. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

10. H
YDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY. Would the project:

a. Violate any other water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or potential for discharge of storm water pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous material s handling or storage, delivery areas or loading docks, or other outdoor work areas ?

Discussion of Effects: T
he project area is currently served by City water and sewer service and its use will not result in new affects to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.

The project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Implementation of the Project would conform to all local, State, and federal regulations concerning water quality and waste discharge requirements. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation (See TOP Policies ER-1.5, ER-1.6, and ER-1.7).

b. S
ubstantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre -existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

126
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 37 of 54 ends

Discussion of Effects: No increases in the current amount of water flow to the project site would occur under the pr oject, and the project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge. The project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Adequate Policy Measures (ER -1.5, ER-1.6 and ER -1.7) have already been adopted by the City that would reduce impacts to groundwater to a less -than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

c. S
ubstantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site or volume of storm water runoff to cause environmental harm or potential for significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas ?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. However, Policy Measures (ER-1.5, ER-1.6 and ER-1.7) have already been adopted by the City that would reduce impacts to existing hydrology patterns to a less -than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

Mitigation: N o additional mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR . No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.
d. S ubstantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on - or off-site or potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff to cause environmental harm?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, prov ide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Therefore, the Project in itself would not involve conversion of permeable soils to an impermeable surface, resulting in an increase in surface runoff. Policy Measures (ER-1.5, ER-1.6 and ER-1.7) have already been adopted by the City that would reduce impacts to existing hydrology patterns to a less-than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

127
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 38 of 54 ends

e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff (a&b) during construction and/or post-construction activity?

f. O
therwise substantially degrade water quality or potential for discharge of storm water to affect the beneficial uses of receiving water?

g. P
lace housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

h. P
lace within a 100-year flood hazard area, structures that would impede or redirect flood flows?

Discussion of Effects : A s identified in the Safety Element (Exhibit S -2) of TOP, the site lies outside of the 100-year flood hazard area. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

128
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 39 of 54 ends

i. Ex
pose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?

Discussion of Effects : A
s identified in the Safety Element (Exhibit S -2) of TOP, the site lies outside of the 100 -year flood hazard area. No levees or dams are located near the project site.

Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.

j. Ex
pose people or structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow?

Discussion of Effects : T here are no lakes or substantial reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche are not anticipated. The City of Ontario has relatively flat topography, less than two percent across the City, and the chance of mudflow is remote.

Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

11. L
AND USE & PLANNING. Would the project:

a. Physically divide an established community?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project proposes th Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP.

I
mplementation of the Project would not result in physical improvements that would divide an established community. In addition, Land Use Policies LU -2.3, LU-2.4, LU-2.5, and LU -2.6 would reduce the amount of conflict between contradicting land uses. Therefore, no impacts would result.

b. C
onflict with applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of agencies with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to general plan, airport land use compatibility plan, specific plan, or development code) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigation an environmental effect?

129
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 40 of 54 ends

c. C
onflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?

Discussion of Effects: T here are no adopted habitat conservation plans in the Project area.

As such no conflicts or impacts are anticipated.

12. M
INERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:

a. 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?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project site is located within a mostly developed area surrounded by urban land uses. There are no known mineral resources in the area. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

b. Re
sult in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery s ite delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

Discussion of Effects : T here are no known mineral resources in the area. No impacts are anticipated.

13. NO
ISE. Would the project result in:

a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

130
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 41 of 54 ends

b. Ex
posure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

Discussion of Effects: T he Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Section 65860 of the Government Code, provide consistency between zoning ordinances and general plans. Therefore, the proposed Project in itself would not expose people to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Appropriate mitigation (Mitigation Measures 12 -1, 12-2, 12-3, and 12- 4) that have been adopted by the City that would reduce severe noise levels to a less -than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

c. A
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

d. A
substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?

Page 42 of 54 ends

Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Therefore, implementation of the Project in itself would not create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Adequate mitigation (Mitigation Measures 12 -1, 12-2, 12-3, and 12- 4) has already been adopted by the City that would reduce noise impacts to a less -than-significant level. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

e. F
or a project located within the noise impact zones of the airport land use compatibility plan for ONT and Chino Airports , would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

f. F
or a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip.

Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

14. P
OPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project:

a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirec tly (for example, through extension of road or other infrastructure)?

Page 43 of 54 ends

environmental conditions. At that time, the population growth for the entire City was included in the baseline conditions and analyzed in the TOP 2050 SEIR. The Project will not induce substantial population growth directly, nor indirectly beyond those previously analyzed in the TOP 2050 SEIR.

b. D
isplace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Discussion of Effects: T he project will not displace existing housing and will not create any impact on residential housing beyond those that would occur under the current land use designation. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.

c. D
isplace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Discussion of Effects: The Project will not displace existing housing, and will not create any impact on residential housing beyond those that would occur under the current land use designation. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of this project.

15. P
UBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:

a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

i. Fire protection?

Discussion of Effects : Th
e Project area is in a developed area currently served by the Ontario Fire Department. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

133
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 44 of 54 ends

ii. Police protection?

Discussion of Effects: T he Project area is in a developed area, currently served by the Ontario Police Department. The Project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

iii. Sch
ools?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project area is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Ontario. The Project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

iv
. Parks?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project area is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Ontario. The Project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the ne ed to construct new facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

v. O
ther public facilities?

16. REC
REATION. Would the project:

a. 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?

134
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 45 of 54 ends

Therefore, the Project will not introduce new demands for other recreational facilities beyond those previously analyzed in the TOP SEIR.

b. D
oes the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Discussion of Effects : T his Project is not proposing any new significant housing or large employment generator that would require the construction of neighborhood parks or other recreational facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

17. TR
ANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:

a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited?

b. C
onflict with an applicable congestion management program, including , but not limited to, level of service standard and travel demand measures , or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?

Discussion of Effects: Th e project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning 135
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 46 of 54 ends

Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency betw een the Development Code and TOP. The Project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The Project will not conflict with an applicable congestion management program or negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials, as the number of trips to be generated are minimal in comparison to existing capacity in the congestion management program. Less than significant impacts are anticipated.

c. R
esult in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?

Discussion of Effects : I mplementation of the Project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, as the Project only proposes the Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) in order to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map in order to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Therefore, these impacts would be considered less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.

d. Su
bstantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

e. Re
sult in inadequate emergency access?

Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. Future 136
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 47 of 54 ends

roadway construction would increase access into areas that were previously void of them. Details of road placement are given in section 5.1 7-3 in TOP 2050 SEIR. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.

f. R
esult in inadequate parking capacity?

g. C
onflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?

Discussion of Effects: Th e Project does not conflict with any transportation policies, plans or programs. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

18. T
RIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landsca pe that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:

a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Reso urces, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?

Discussion of Effects : N
one of the subject sites in the Project area are in the California Register of Historic Resources. Changing the and zoning on the sites will not create greater impacts than were identified in the Certified TOP EIR. However, as part of TOP SEIR Mitigation Measure 5-4, prior to the issuance of grading permits for a project that requires a General Plan amendment which the CEQA document defines cultural resource mitigation for potential tribal resources, the project applicant shall contact the designated tribe(s) to notify them of the grading, excavation, and monitoring program. The applicant shall coordinate with the City of Ontario and the tribal representative(s) to develop mitigation measures that address the designation, responsibilities, and participation of tribal monitors during grading, excavation, a nd ground-disturbing activities; 137
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 48 of 54 ends

scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Ontario shall be the final arbiter of the conditions for projects within the City’s jurisdiction. Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed Project will not impact Tribal Cultural Resources (TRC) or Native America artifacts relating to TCRs and as such, no mitigation measures are recommended.

Mitigation: No n
ew mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

b. A
resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Discussion of Effects : N one of the subject sites in the Project area are in the California Register of Historic Resources. No impacts are anticipated through Project implementation.

Mitigation: No new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

19. UT
ILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:

a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?

b. Re
quire or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Therefore, the proposed Project will not require or result in the construction of new water o r wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects.

138
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 49 of 54 ends

c. Re
quire or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effe cts?

d. H
ave sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? In making this determination, the City shall consider whether the project is subject to the water supply assessment requirements of Water Code Section 10910, et seq. (SB 610), and the requirements of Government Code Section 664737 (SB 221).

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. The Project site is served by the City of Ontario water system. There is currently sufficient water supply available to the City of Ontario to serve this Project as per the findings of TOP 2050 SEIR. No impacts are anticipated.

e. Re
sult in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that 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?

Discussion of Effects:

The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency betw een the Development Code and TOP. No intensification of uses would occur that could result in increased demand for sewer facilities other than those previously considered and addressed in the TOP 2050 SEIR. Therefore, the Project will not increase demands on wastewater. No impacts would result. 139
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 50 of 54 ends

f. Be
served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?

No intensification of uses would occur that could result in increased demand for waste disposal other than those previously considered and addressed in the TOP EIR. No new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR would result from Project implementation.

g. C
omply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Discussion of Effects : I mplementation of the Project complies with all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. No impacts are anticipated, and therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.

20. W
ILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:

a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Discussion of Effects: T he Project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area nor is it located in or near lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: N
o new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

b. D
ue 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?

140
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 51 of 54 ends

Discussion of Effects: The Project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area nor is it located in or near lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: N o new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

c
. 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?

Discussion of Effects: T he Project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area nor is it located in or near lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: N o new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

d. Ex
pose 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?

Discussion of Effects: T he Project site is not located in or near a state responsibility area nor is it located in or near lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

Mitigation: N o new mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary.

21. M
ANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Discussion of Effects: Th
e proposed Project does not have the potential to reduce wildlife habitat and threaten a wildlife species; therefore, no environmental impacts resulting from the Project are anticipated.

Mitigation: N
o additional mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP SEIR analyses are necessary. b. D oes the project have the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals?
Discussion of Effects : T he Project does not have the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.

Page 52 of 54 ends

c. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects.) Discussion of Effects : T he Project does not have impacts that are cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation: N o additional mitigation required. The Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified TOP SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP SEIR analyses are necessary. d. D oes the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Discussion of Effects : T he Project does not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

22. M
ANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.

a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

Discussion of Effects: Th e proposed Project does not have the potential to reduce wildlife habitat and threaten a wildlife species. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.

b. D
oes the project have the potential to achieve short -term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals?

Discussion of Effects: The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TO P.

Th
e Project in itself does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long -term environmental goals. The proposed Project is being pursued pursuant to TOP. Therefore, the Project will not result in adverse impacts.

142
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 53 of 54 ends

When the TOP 2050 SEIR was prepared, the impacts associated with the Project area were included in the baseline conditions. Here, the P roject is being proposed to be consistent with the established land use pursuant to the TOP. T he Project will not result in any new cumulatively considerable impacts beyond what was previously analyzed in the TOP S EIR. Therefore, the Project will not result in adverse impacts.

d. D
oes the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Discussion of Effects : Th e Project does not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

EARLIER ANALYZES

(Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration.

Section 15063(c)(3)(D)):

1. Earlier analyzes used. Identify earlier analyzes used and state where they are available for review.

(a) The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (b) The Ontario Plan
(c) The Ontario Land Use Plan
(d) The Ontario Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (e) The Ontario Plan CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Consideration

All documents listed above are on file with the City of Ontario Planning Department, 303 East “B” Street, Ontario, California 91764, (909) 395-2036.

2. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards.
143
Addendum to Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050 File No.: PZC22-001

Page 54 of 54 ends

Most of the checklist items were analyzed in the TOP 2050 SEIR. The Project proposes Zone Changes throughout the City (as shown in Figure(s) 3) to be consistent with TOP. The proposed Zone Changes will amend the City’s Zoning Map to reflect policies and implementation measures specified in TOP and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65860, provide consistency between the Development Code and TOP. Here, the Project does not permit the introduction of any new uses that were not part of the Project description in TOP 2050 SEIR.

Therefore the Project will not result in any new impacts beyond what was previously analyzed in TOP 2050 SEIR.

MITIGA TION MEASURES

(For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project

The Mitigation Measures contained in the Certified TOP 2050 SEIR adequately mitigate the impacts of the pr oposed Project. These mitigation measures are contained in the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program.

No additional mitigation beyond that previously imposed is required. 144
RESOLUTION NO. PC23-021

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL
APPROVE FILE NO. PZC-22-001, TO CHANGE THE ZONING
DESIGNATIONS ON 107 PROPERTIES LOCATED THROUGHOUT THE

CITY TO MAKE THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP CONSISTENT WITH THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 POLICY PLAN (GENERAL PLAN) LAND USE PLAN (EXHIBIT LU -01), AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF — APNS: 1008-522-04, 1008-522-01, 1008-522-02, 1008-522-03, 1008-513-16, 1008-551-01, 1008-551-13, 1008-551-12, 1008-551-11, 1008-561-06, 1008-551-07, 1008-441-01, 1048-525-12, 1049-094-07, 1049-094-10, 1049-094-08, 1049-094-09, 1048-525-14, 1048-525-13, 1048-525-15, 1048-523-15, 1048-523-16, 1048-523-18, 1048-522-08, 1048-522-09, 1048-522-10, 1048-522-11, 1048-524-14, 1048-524-15, 1048-524-16, 1048-524-17, 1048-525-16, 1048-525-17, 1048-525-18, 1048-525-19, 1048-525-20, 1048-523-17, 1049-094-04, 1049-094-14, 1049-094-02, 1049-094-01, 1049-093-10, 1049-093-09, 1049-093-07, 1049-093-06, 1049-093-04, 1049-093-03, 1049-093-02, 1049-093-01, 1049-091-04, 1049-091-03, 1049-091-02, 1049-091-01, 1049-094-13, 1049-094-05, 1049-094-11, 1049-094-06, 1049-093-08, 1049-093-05, 1010-502
-08, 1010- 502-09, 1048-604-13, 1048-604-14, 1048-604-15, 1010-491-16, 1010-491-02, 1010-491-03, 0210-551-02, 0210-551-03, 1050-272-20, 1050-272-01, 1050-272-21, 1050-284-01, 1051-221-07, 1051-222-13, 1051-222-12, 1051-222-01, 1051-221-08, 1051-222-11, 1051-221-09, 1051-222-10, 1051-221-10, 1051-222-09, 1051-221-11, 1051-222-08, 1051-221-12, 1051-221-13, 1051-221-14, 1051-221-16, 1051-221-15, 1051-221-20, 1051-271-66, 1051-271-67, 1051-271-06, 1048-556-05, 1048-556-04, 1048-556-03, 1048-556-02, 1048-556-01, 1048-556-14, 0 110-071-01, 0110-061-01, 0110-071-06, 0110-071-02, 0110-072-11, 0110-072-10, AND 0110-071-07
W
HEREAS, On August 16, 2022, The Ontario Plan 2050 ( "TOP 2050 ") was adopted which contains the Policy Plan (general plan) which sets forth the land use pattern for the City to achieve its Vision. After the adoption of TOP 2050, staff initiated the City zoning consistency project to ensure that the Zoning Map is consistent with the TOP 2050 Official Land Use Plan pursuant to Government Code Section 65860.

W
HEREAS, The Zoning Map amendment includes the following:
(1
) Rezoning 6 parcels from LDR-5 (Low-Density Residential – 2.1 to 5.0 du/ac) to MDR-18 (Medium Density Residential – 11.1 to 18.0 du/ac ) to be consistent with the Medium Density Residential Land Use Designation of the Policy Plan component of TOP; and
145
Planning Commission Resolution
File No. PZC22-001
March 28, 2023

Page 2 ends

Ontario City CouncilMay 2, 2023

Ontario City Council
May 2, 2023