Agenda packet — Ontario City Council, October 17, 2023 (part 1 of 18)

CITY OF ONTARIO
Regular City Council/Housing Authority
Meeting
OCTOBER 17, 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 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

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council Member Bowman

INVOCATION
Heather Freeman, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints 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.

CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 2 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ATTACHMENT: 20230919 Minutes (Not Official Until Approved).pdf

2. BILLS & PAYROLL

3. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 4-6.1020 TO ARTICLE 10 OF CHAPTER 6 OF TITLE 4 OF THE ONTARIO

MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING ON PUBLIC STREETS

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.

INFORMATION RELATIVE TO POSSIBLE CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Agenda item contractors, subcontractors and agents may require member abstentions due to conflict of interests and financial interests. Council Member abstentions shall be stated under this item for recordation on the appropriate item.

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 September 19, 2023, and approving same as on file in the Records Management Department.

Bills September 15, 2023 through September 28, 2023, and Payroll August 28, 2023 through September 23, 2023.

That the City Council adopt an Ordinance to amend Section 4-6.1020 to Article 10 of Chapter 6 of Title 4 of the Ontario Municipal Code pertaining to standards for oversized vehicle parking on public streets.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 3 ATTACHMENT: Amendment to OMC Pertaining to Oversized Vehicle Parking^ORD^RM

4. A RESOLUTION FOR PLACEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON THE SAN BERNARDINO

COUNTY TAX ROLLS
ATTACHMENT: Comm Imp Special Assessments for County Tax Rolls^01^RESO^RM ATTACHMENT: Special Assessments^02 - Exhibit A.pdf
ATTACHMENT: Special Assessments^03 - Exhibit B.pdf
ATTACHMENT: Special Assessments^04 - Exhibit C.pdf

5. PURCHASE OF EXPLOSIVES STORAGE UNITS FROM KL SECURITY ENTERPRISES, INC. FOR

THE ONTARIO FIRE DEPARTMENT BOMB SQUAD

6. A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH CHAFFEY COMMUNITY ART ASSOCIATION

7. AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PARSONS CORPORATION FOR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE I-10 FREEWAY AT

GROVE AVENUE AND FOURTH STREET INTERCHANGE AND GROVE AVENUE CORRIDOR

PROJECT

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 4-6.1020 TO ARTICLE 10 OF CHAPTER 6 OF TITLE 4 OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING ON PUBLIC STREETS.

That the City Council adopt a Resolution for recovery of fees and costs incurred in abating property and dangerous building violations, as well as administrative citations and civil penalties associated with property maintenance violations and placing assessments on the San Bernardino County Tax Rolls.

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

REPORT REQUESTING THE PLACEMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY TAX BILLS

FOR CIVIL PENALTIES OR RECOVERY OF COSTS INCURRED FOR ABATEMENT OF VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODES AND ORDINANCES.

That the City Council authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the purchase of explosives storage units from KL Security Enterprises, Inc., of Lafayette, IN, in the amount of $170,000.

That the City Council authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute a Lease Agreement (on file with Records Management) with the Chaffey Community Art Association, dba Chaffey Community Museum of Art (CCAA), of Ontario, California, for use of a City-owned building and adjacent property located at 217 South Lemon for the purpose of exhibiting and promoting local art and artists.

That the City Council approve Amendment No. 9 to the Professional Services Agreement (on file in the Records Management Department) with Parsons Corporation (Parsons) of Illinois, for additional engineering and design services for the I-10 Freeway at Grove Avenue and Fourth Street Interchange and Grove Avenue Corridor Project in the amount of $485,507, for a total CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 4 8. A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF MOBILE SURVEILLANCE UNITS (MSUS) FROM ECAMSECURE

9. A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH CHAPMAN COAST ROOF CO., INC. FOR THE DOROTHY A. QUESADA COMMUNITY CENTER ROOF REPLACEMENT PROJECT

10. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BAY ALARM

COMPANY FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM DESIGN

11. AMENDMENTS TO THE DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HOLT ARCHITECTS, INC. FOR

ON-CALL ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE DEPARTMENT MASTER

PLAN, REAL TIME INFORMATION CENTER, AND TRAINING DIVISION not-to-exceed amount of $5,049,698; and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute said Agreement and future amendments within the authorization limits.

That the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents necessary for the sole source purchase of 15 Mobile Surveillance Units (MSUs) from ECAMSECURE, of Long Beach, California in the amount of $512,000.

That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to complete and execute Construction Contract No. D&C23-016 with Chapman Coast Roof Co., Inc., located in Fullerton, California, for the Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center Roof Replacement Project in the amount of $284,987;
B. Authorize a 10% contingency of $28,499 to address any unforeseen issues that arise during construction for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $313,486; and C. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 7 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Bay Alarm Company, located in Concord, California, for the Ontario Police Department Fire Notification System Design in an amount of $11,925 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $1,022,272; and B. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

That the City Council take the following actions:

VISUAL FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE DEPARTMENT GYM EXPANSION PROJECT

13. AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN THREAT ASSESSMENT CONSULTING INC. (A.T.A.C.)

14. ACCEPTANCE OF PRIORITY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET PROJECT (PLBP) EARMARK FUNDS FROM

THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) FOR THE DE ANZA

PARK LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, MISSION BOULEVARD MEDIAN

IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, AND RECREATION YOUTH ACTIVITIES AND YOUTH SPORTS

PROGRAM

15. AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF OUTDOOR FITNESS EQUIPMENT WITH GREENFIELDS

OUTDOOR FITNESS FOR VINEYARD PARK
Design Services Agreement with Holt Architects, Inc., located in Palm Desert, California, for the Ontario Police Department Master Plan Design for an amount of $143,582 for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $1,055,066; and
C. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Western Audio Visual, located in Orange, California, for the Ontario Police Department (OPD) Gym Expansion Project for an amount of $67,622; and
B. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

That City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 7 to the Professional Services Agreement (on file in the Records Management Department) with American Threat Assessment Consulting Inc. (A.T.A.C.) of Rancho Cucamonga, California to add the purchase of additional equipment for the Civic Center remodel project and the Real Time Information Center in the amount of $71,521, for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $1,604,021.

That the City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents necessary to accept the Priority Legislative Budget Project (PLBP) earmark funds in the amount of $4,500,000 from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the De Anza Park Lighting Improvements Project, Mission Boulevard Median Improvements Project, and Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program.

That the City Council authorize the cooperative purchase of Outdoor fitness equipment with CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 6 ATTACHMENT: Greenfields Outdoor Fitness -Exhibit A and B

16. A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT COFFEE & ASSOCIATES FOR THE

ANTHONY MUNOZ COMMUNITY CENTER GYMNASIUM

17. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE EUCLID WALNUT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (FILE NO. PUD22-004) TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 10.6-ACRE PROJECT SITE LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST

CORNER OF EUCLID AVENUE AND WALNUT STREET
Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for Vineyard Park in the amount of $171,081 plus a 10% contingency of $17,109 to mitigate any unforeseen issues with supply chain surcharges and manufactory price increases for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $188,190 from Greenfields Outdoor Fitness, of Anaheim, California, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 010721-GRN.

That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a Professional Services Agreement D&C23-015 Anthony Munoz Gymnasium (on file with the Records Management Department) to Robert Coffee & Associates, of Newport Beach, California, for the Anthony Munoz Community Center Gymnasium Project, for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $971,820; and
B. Authorize 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, reduction of retention accounts, contracts amendments within the authorization limits, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

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 the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the use of an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and introduce and waive further reading of an Ordinance approving the Euclid Walnut Planned Unit Development (File No.

PUD22-004).

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE USE OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT REPORT, PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, AS AMENDED, FOR FILE NOS. PUD22-004, PDEV22-027, AND PHP22-015.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING FILE CITY OF ONTARIO Regular City Council/Housing Authority Meeting CITY HALL 303 EAST B STREET, ONTARIO CA 91764 • www.OntarioCA.gov 7 ATTACHMENT: File PUD22-004 PC Back-up
ATTACHMENT: 20230919 File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^03 AR Attach A - Addendum^RESO^RM
ATTACHMENT: File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^04 Addendum Reso Attach A - Addendum Doc
ATTACHMENT: File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^05 Addendum Doc Appendices A-G
ATTACHMENT: File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^06 Addendum Doc Appendices - HRA Backup Data
ATTACHMENT: 20231017 File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^07 AR Attach B - PUD^ORD^RM
ATTACHMENT: File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^08 PUD Ordinance Attach A - PUD Doc
ATTACHMENT: File No. PUD22-004 Euclid Walnut Mixed Use CC^09 PUD Ordinance Attach B - COAs
NO. PUD22-004, THE EUCLID WALNUT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 10.6-ACRE PROJECT SITE

GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID AVENUE AND WALNUT STREET, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APNS: 1051-271-67, 1051-271-06, AND 1051-271-66.

STAFF MATTERS
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 8 ONTARIO CITY COUNCIL/

ONTARIO HOUSING AUTHORITY

MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 19, 2023
(Not Official Until Approved)
(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, September 19, 2023 at Ontario City Hall, 303 E. B Street Ontario, California.

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Leon called the joint meetings to order at 6:31 p.m.

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

Also present were Assistant City Manager / Assistant Executive Director Darlene Sanchez, Assistant City Attorney/Legal Counsel Ryan Guiboa, and City Clerk / Secretary Sheila Mautz.

INFORMATION RELATIVE TO POSSIBILE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest announced by the City Council.

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

INVOCATION
The invocation was led by Pastor Richard Hernandez, The Church of God Ontario

SPECIAL CEREMONIES

A PROCLAMATION RECOGNIZING CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN DAY The City Council proclaimed and recognized September 22, 2023, as California Native American Day.
9 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 2 of 9 ends

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

Loree Masonis, questions regarding Measure Q.

Mayor Leon called upon the first speaker:

Kiara Valdez Garcia, invited Council to participate in National Walk to School Day.

Ralph Linderman, spoke regarding oversized vehicles Ordinance.

Robert Luguori, spoke on homelessness in the community.

Maria Molina, spoke on homelessness in the community.

Ana Hernandez, spoke on homelessness in the community.

Leticia Rosales, spoke on homelessness in the community.

Mayor Leon continued public comment to the end of the meeting.

AGENDA REVIEW/ANNOUNCEMENTS
Assistant City Manager Sanchez announced Staff’s request to continue Item No. 15 of the consent calendar.

CONSENT CALENDAR
MOTION: Moved by Council Member Bowman seconded by Council Member Valencia and carried by a unanimous vote 5-0, to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item No. 15.

1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approved minutes for the regular meetings of the City Council and Housing Authority of August 15, 2023, approving same as on file in the Records Management Department.

2. BILLS & PAYROLL
Approved bills August 11, 2023 through August 31, 2023 in the amount of $27,180,777.89, and Payroll August 13, 2023 through August 26, 2023 in the amount of $4,815,109.08.
10 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 3 of 9 ends

3. AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JSB FIRE PROTECTION, LLC. FOR FIRE CODE PLAN REVIEW SERVICES The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Professional Services Agreement with JSB Fire Protection, LLC., of Downey, California, for a two year term extension for a new end term of June 30, 2027 and an increase to the existing Agreement by $30,000 annually, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $1,960,000.

4. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE MEASURE I FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024-25 TO 2028-29
The City Council considered and adopted a Resolution approving the Fiscal Year 2024-25 through Fiscal Year 2028-29 Measure I Five-Year Capital Project Needs Analysis (CPNA) and authorized the City Manager to approve changes to the plan as may be required by the City and/or San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA).

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-140 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE MEASURE I FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PROJECT NEEDS ANALYSIS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2024-25 TO 2028-29.

5. AN AMENDMENT TO THE DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RJM

DESIGN GROUP FOR ON-CALL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES

FOR THE ONTARIO SPORTS COMPLEX PROJECT
The City Council authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 4 to the Design Services Agreement for contract No. PM 1819-1 with RJM Design Group, of San Juan Capistrano, California, to provide on-call landscape architectural services for the Ontario Sports Complex Project in the amount of $160,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $425,000.

6. A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH CT&T CONCRETE PAVING, INC. FOR

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) CONCRETE RAMP

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
The City Council authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute a one-year Construction Contract with CT&T Concrete Paving, Inc., of Diamond Bar, California, for ADA Concrete Ramp Construction Services for a not-to-exceed contract amount of $175,000.

7. AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH

CAPO PROJECTS GROUP, LLC FOR INTEGRATED PROJECT CONTROLS,

ASSESSMENT, AND REPORTING SERVICES
The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager, or designee, to execute 11 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 4 of 9 ends

Amendment No. 3 to the Professional Services Agreement with CAPO Projects Group, LLC, of San Clemente, California, for integrated project controls, assessment, and reporting services for $47,976, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $347,811, and a term extension to September 30, 2024.

8. AUTHORIZE A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF FIRE APPARATUS AND

APPROVE A GOODS AND SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FIRE APPARATUS

SOLUTIONS
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Approved Fire Apparatus Solutions (FAS), of Rialto, California as the sole source provider for current and future procurements of Kovatch Mobile Equipment (KME) fire apparatus and fire equipment parts and services associated with the routine maintenance and repair of fire equipment; B. Authorized the sole source purchase and delivery of two (2) KME Fire Pumpers in the amount of $2,524,000 and one (1) KME Fire Aerial Tractor in the amount of $2,351,000 from FAS for a total not-to-exceed amount $4,875,000; and
C. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute a three-year Goods and Services Agreement with FAS for an annual cost of $300,000 for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $900,000 and authorize the City Manager or his designee to extend the agreement for one (1) additional two-year term.

9. A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH FLEMING ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. AND

AN AMENDMENT TO THE ON-CALL DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH

ROBERT BORDERS AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE SAM ALBA PARK

RESTROOM RENOVATION PROJECT
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Rejected bids from KNC Construction, Inc., HZS Engineering and Construction, and Wakeco, Inc. for the Sam Alba Park Restroom Renovation Project as being non-responsive;
B. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to complete and execute Construction Contract No. D&C20-017 with Fleming Environmental, Inc., of Fullerton, California, for the Sam Alba Park Restroom Renovation Project in the amount of $642,687 plus a 7% contingency of $44,989 to address any unforeseen issues that may arise during construction for a total contract notto-exceed amount of $687,676; C. Authorized the City Manager or his designee to complete and execute Amendment No. 17 to the On-Call Design Services Agreement with Robert Borders and Associates (Robert Borders), of Costa Mesa, California, for the Sam Alba Park Restroom Renovation Project in the amount of $12,373; 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, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention 12 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 5 of 9 ends

accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

10. AN AMENDMENT TO THE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RED HAWK SERVICES, INC. FOR ON-CALL FENCE REPAIR AND INSTALLATION

FOR LATIMER BALLFIELD AND PUBLIC WORKS CITY YARD
The City Council authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Maintenance Services Agreement for Contract No. PM 2023-3 with Red Hawk Services, Inc., of Perris, California, to provide fence repair and installation for the Latimer Ballfield and Public Works City Yard in the amount of $329,823 for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $479,823.

11. AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH

STOEL RIVES LLP FOR LEGAL AND TECHNICAL SERVICES PERTAINING TO

WATER MATTERS
The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager, or his designee, to execute Amendment No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with Stoel Rives LLP, of Sacramento, California, in the amount of $225,000 for Fiscal Year 2023-24 and $100,000, for Fiscal Year 2024-25, for a new total not-to-exceed amount of $714,000, and extend the term until June 30, 2025, for legal and technical services with respect to matters relating to water supply and water rights.

12. AUTHORIZE A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE OF AN INTEGRATED BALLISTIC IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM (IBIS) FROM FORENSIC TECHNOLOGY INC.

The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents necessary for the sole source purchase of an Integrated Ballistic Identification System (IBIS) from Forensic Technology Inc., of Largo, Florida, in the amount of $369,133.

13. AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WITH

INNOVATIVE PLAYGROUNDS FOR BON VIEW PARK
The City Council authorized the cooperative purchase of playground equipment for Bon View Park in the amount of $343,786 plus a 10% contingency of $34,379 to mitigate any unforeseen issues with supply chain surcharges and manufactory price increases for a total not to exceed amount of $378,165 from Innovative Playgrounds, of Whittier, California, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 010521-BUR.

14. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-11.02 OF CHAPTER 11 OF TITLE 5 OF

THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PUBLIC CONSUMPTION

AND POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON OR IN PUBLIC

FACILITIES
The City Council adopted an Ordinance amending Section 5-11.02 of Chapter 11 of 13 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 6 of 9 ends

Title 5 of the Ontario Municipal Code relating to the public consumption and possession of alcoholic beverages on or in public facilities. Introduction and first reading took place at a regular meeting on September 5, 2023.

ORDINANCE NO. 3260 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 5-11.02 OF CHAPTER 11 OF TITLE 5 OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PUBLIC

CONSUMPTION AND POSSESSION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES ON OR IN PUBLIC FACILITIES.

15. ACCEPTANCE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA HOMELESS HOUSING, ASSISTANCE AND PREVENTION ROUND 3 (HHAP-3) FUNDING

ADMINISTERED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO TO RAPIDLY

REHOUSE HOMELESS FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS
The City Council continued this item to a future meeting.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

16. A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY AND ADOPT THE

CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PERFORMANCE AND EVALUATION REPORT
(CAPER) FOR THE 2022-23 FISCAL YEAR
The City Council took the following actions:

A. Held a public hearing to receive testimony on the draft Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) for the Fiscal Year 2022-23; B. Directed Staff to prepare and transmit to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) the final CAPER, which will address all public comments received on the draft CAPER; and
C. Authorized the City Manager to revise for accuracy and execute any and all documents necessary and/or desirable to transmit the CAPER to HUD.

Notice of public hearing was duly given and affidavits of compliance are on file in the Records Management Department. There were no written communications.

Mayor Leon opened the public hearing and inquired if anyone was interested in speaking to the item. Hearing no one, Mayor Leon closed the public hearing and opened the item for Council discussion.

MOTION: Moved by Council Member Bowman seconded by Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada and carried by a unanimous vote 5-0, to adopt the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report for the 2022-23 Fiscal Year. 14 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 7 of 9 ends

17. A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL FOR FILE NO. PDEV21-035, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A 59,984 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING,

LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SULTANA AVENUE AND
BELMONT STREET (APNS: 1049-491-01, 1049-491-02, AND 1049-491-03) The City Council considered and adopted a Resolution upholding the Planning Commission’s approval of the Development Plan (File No. PDEV21-035) and denying the appeal.

RESOLUTION NO. 2023-141 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE FILE NO. PDEV21-035, A DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A 59,984 SQUARE FOOT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING ON 3.15 GROSS ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST

CORNER OF SULTANA AVENUE AND BELMONT STREET, WITHIN THE IL (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) ZONING DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APNS: 1049-491-01, 1049-491-02 AND 1049-491-03.

Notice of public hearing was duly given and affidavits of compliance are on file in the Records Management Department. There was one written communication in opposition from the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice.

Mayor Leon opened the public hearing and inquired if anyone was interested in speaking to the item.

Executive Director of Community Development Scott Murphy provided a presentation.

The appellant, Celina Lopez was given additional time to present her case and spoke in opposition of the Planning Commission’s decision.

Director of Development at Charter Real Estate Christine Ather presented the applicant’s case and spoke in support of the Planning Commission’s decision.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Raymond Smith, spoke in support of the appeal.

Tina Silva, spoke in support of the appeal.

Martha Aragon, spoke in support of the appeal.

Heleena Lopez, spoke in support of the appeal.

Juana Gamez, spoke in support of the appeal
Xochitl Escamilla, spoke in support of the appeal.

Maria Galvan, spoke in support of the appeal.
15 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 8 of 9 ends

Hearing no one else, Mayor Leon closed the public hearing and opened the item for Council discussion. City Council discussed the matter and came to the consensus to support the Planning Commission’s decision.

MOTION: Moved by Council Member Wapner seconded by Council Member Bowman and carried by a unanimous vote 5-0, to adopt Resolution No. 2023-141.

Mayor Leon continued Public Comments
Xochitl Escamilla, spoke on California Native American Day.

Maria Galvan, spoke on various issues.

Mario Huante, spoke on citizens’ civic responsibilities.

Stephanie, spoke on feral cats.

Jesse Fonseca, was not present when called upon.

Juana Gamez, spoke of her experience with the My Ontario application.

STAFF MATTERS

Assistant City Manager Sanchez provided alternative methods for reporting issues to the City of Ontario.

COUNCIL MATTERS
Mayor pro Tem Dorst-Porada expressed her condolences regarding Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy Ryan Clinkunbroomer and asked for Council concurrence to adjourn in his memory.

Council Member Wapner supported the consensus to adjourn in Deputy Clinkunbroomer’s memory.

Council Member Bowman made no comments.

Council Member Valencia supported the adjournment in memory of Deputy Clinkunbroomer.

Mayor Leon expressed concern regarding feral cats and expressed his excitement of drone laser shows in the future.
16 Ontario City Council/Ontario Housing
Regular Meeting Minutes – September 19, 2023

Page 9 of 9 ends

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Leon adjourned the meetings of the Joint Agencies at 7:02 p.m. in memory of Los Angeles Sheriff Deputy Ryan Clinkunbroomer and announced the next regular meeting was scheduled for October 3, 2023.

Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK/SECRETARY
APPROVED:
_____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR/CHAIRMAN
17 Department: Police Department
Prepared By: Peak Approver
Staff Member Presenting:

Mike Lorenz, Chief of Police
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 3
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 4-6.1020 TO ARTICLE 10 OF CHAPTER 6 OF TITLE 4 OF THE

ONTARIO MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING ON

PUBLIC STREETS

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt an Ordinance to amend Section 4-6.1020 to Article 10 of Chapter 6 of Title 4 of the Ontario Municipal Code pertaining to standards for oversized vehicle parking on public streets.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Maintain the Current High Level of Public Safety
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods FISCAL IMPACT: There is no direct fiscal impact associated with this action.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: On December 20, 2022, the City Council passed and adopted Ordinance No. 3231, adding Section 4-6.1020 to the Ontario Municipal Code to specifically address oversized vehicle parking on public streets. Since its adoption, the Ontario Police Department has found that OMC Section 4-6.1020 has inadvertently made certain large family sized vehicles (e.g.

Chevrolet Suburban, Ford Excursion, Toyota Sequoia, etc.) subject to the prohibitions and enforcement of Section 4-6.1020 of the Ontario Municipal Code.

Consequently, an amendment of Section 4-6.1020 of the Ontario Municipal Code is necessary to correct this unintended result.
18 ORDINANCE NO. _______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 4-6.1020 TO ARTICLE 10 OF
CHAPTER 6 OF TITLE 4 OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL CODE

PERTAINING TO OVERSIZED VEHICLE PARKING ON PUBLIC
STREETS.

WHEREAS, California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the City of Ontario (“City”) to restrict or prohibit the stopping, parking, or standing of vehicles on local streets during all or certain hours of the day; and
WHEREAS, the general provisions governing stopping, standing, or parking for certain purposes or in certain places within the City are set forth in Article 10 of Chapter 6 of Title 4 of the Ontario Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2022, the City Council passed and adopted Ordinance No. 3231, adding Section 4-6.1020 to the Ontario Municipal Code to specifically address oversized vehicle parking on public streets; and WHEREAS, the Police Department has found that the current regulations related to oversized vehicle parking have inadvertently made certain large family sized vehicles (e.g. Chevrolet Suburban, Ford Excursion, Toyota Sequoia, etc.) subject to the prohibitions and enforcement of Section 4-6.1020 of the Ontario Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to amend Section 4-6.1020 of the Ontario Municipal Code to correct this unintended result.

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. Section 4-6.1020(b)(1) of the Ontario Municipal Code is hereby amended to state, in full, as follows:
“(1) Oversized Vehicle: Any vehicle, motorized or non-motorized, that exceeds 25 feet in length, or exceeds 8.5 feet in width, or exceeds 7 feet in height. Oversized vehicles shall include all buses, truck tractors, semitrailers, motor trucks, trailers, campers, camp trailers, house cars, trailer coaches, and other equipment or machinery, regardless or width, length, or height.

Notwithstanding the length, width, and height requirements for an oversized vehicle, the following vehicles shall also be considered oversized vehicles subject to the prohibitions contained in § 4-6.1020(a) of this article:
19 (i) Buses as defined in the California Vehicle Code; (ii) Trailers, including boat trailers, and semitrailers, as these are defined in the California Vehicle Code, and standalone boats not connected to trailers; (iii) Trailer coaches as defined in the California Vehicle Code; and (iv) Recreational vehicles as defined in this article.” SECTION 3. Posting of Notice. Pursuant to California Vehicle Code Section 22507, and relevant case law, the City Traffic Engineer is hereby directed to place, or cause to be placed appropriate signs and/or markings giving adequate notice of the parking restrictions contained within this Ordinance.

SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, or phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid or ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any part thereof.

The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section irrespective of the fact that any one or more subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared unconstitutional, invalid or ineffective.

SECTION 5. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its adoption by the City Council.

SECTION 6. CEQA. The City Council finds that adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15358 (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Moreover, the City Council finds that this Ordinance is also exempt under CEQA pursuant to Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) (there exists no possibility that the activity will have a significant adverse effect on the environment).

SECTION 7. The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption and shall cause a summary thereof to be published at least once, in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ontario, California within fifteen (15) days of the adoption. The City Clerk shall post a certified copy of this Ordinance, including the vote for and against the same, in the Office of the City Clerk, in accordance with Government Code Section 36933.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of October 2023. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
20 ATTEST:
_________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

CITY ATTORNEY
21 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 Ordinance No. ____ was duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Ontario held October 3, 2023 and adopted at the regular meeting held _________, 2023 by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES: MAYOR/COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
_________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
I hereby certify that the foregoing is the original of Ordinance No. ____ duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held , 2023 and that Summaries of the Ordinance were published on _________, 2023 and _________, 2023, in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. __________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
22 Department: Community Improvement
Prepared By: Douglas J Sorel
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Approved By:

BERNARDINO COUNTY TAX ROLLS

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution for recovery of fees and costs incurred in abating property and dangerous building violations, as well as administrative citations and civil penalties associated with property maintenance violations and placing assessments on the San Bernardino County Tax Rolls.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods FISCAL IMPACT: The levy of special assessments will result in the recovery of $45,078.76 in costs that the City has expended for inspection or abatement of property violations, as well as the collection of $109,800.00 associated with civil penalties and/or fines for continued violations, for a total of $154,878.76 related to 119 parcels. When received, these reimbursements will be deposited into the General Fund. The special assessment revenue is included in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: As a result of Community Improvement activities, the costs for abatement of property and dangerous building violations are included in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Proposed Budget. Additionally, the City has established administrative citations and fines for property maintenance violations and fees and penalties associated with the Systematic Health and Safety Inspection Program, Abandoned and Distressed Property Program, and Weed and Refuse Abatement Program. These costs, fines, fees, and penalties are recovered through placement of special tax assessments upon the properties. The placement of special assessments and collection of revenue is done under Ordinance 3046, Property Appearance (Title 5, Chapter 22 of the Ontario Municipal Code); Chapter 9 of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings; and Ordinance 2920 for civil penalties for continued violations of the Ontario Municipal Code and fines associated with administrative citations (Title 1, Chapters 2 and 5 of the Ontario Municipal Code).

The City and County currently have a contractual agreement regarding implementation of special assessments; however, a Resolution authorizing the placement of the specific assessments is 23 required. During this assessment cycle, the Community Improvement Department has billed property owners for: the abatement of violations; the issuance of fines associated with administrative citation; the issuance of fees and penalties associated with the Systematic Health and Safety Inspection Program; the issuance of registration fees and civil penalties associated with the Abandoned and Distressed Property Program; the issuance of notice and re-inspection fees; and, civil penalties for the Weed and Refuse Abatement Program on 598 parcels. Of these, there are remaining amounts due on 119 parcels. Attached are itemized accounts of: 1) costs associated with inspection or abatement as shown in Exhibit A of the Resolution; 2) civil penalties and/or fines for continued violations as shown in Exhibit B of the Resolution; and 3) total amounts per parcel as shown in Exhibit C of the Resolution. All affected property owners were given notice of the imposition of special assessments via certified mail as provided in Ontario Municipal Code Section 1-4.05(a) and have either not requested an appeal or have exhausted the appellate procedure in Ontario Municipal Code Section 1-4.05(b).
24 RESOLUTION NO. ________

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

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A REPORT REQUESTING THE PLACEMENT

OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY TAX BILLS FOR CIVIL

PENALTIES OR RECOVERY OF COSTS INCURRED FOR ABATEMENT
OF VIOLATIONS OF CITY CODES AND ORDINANCES.

WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 3046, Property Appearance (Title 5, Chapter 22, of the Ontario Municipal Code) and Chapter 9 of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings provide for the abatement of property nuisances by repair, rehabilitation, demolition or removal; and
WHEREAS, under Resolution 94-112, Resolution ORA-499, and the Cooperation and Reimbursement Agreement entered into on the 15th day of November, 1994, by the City of Ontario and the Ontario Redevelopment Agency, the Ontario Redevelopment Agency made a one-time advance to the City of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) to repair or abate dangerous buildings and properties throughout the City; and WHEREAS, under a first amendment to the Cooperation and Reimbursement Agreement entered into on the 16th day of July 1996, by the City of Ontario and the Ontario Redevelopment Agency, the Ontario Redevelopment Agency made an additional advance to the City of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) to continue to repair or abate dangerous buildings and properties throughout the City; and WHEREAS, under Resolution 94-113, Resolution ORA-500, and the Cooperation and Reimbursement Agreement entered into on the 15th day of November 1994, by the City of Ontario and the Ontario Redevelopment Agency, the Ontario Redevelopment Agency made a one-time advance to the City of Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000) to repair or abate dangerous buildings and properties in the 6th and Grove area; and WHEREAS, under Resolution 94-12, Resolution ORA-464, and the Cooperation and Reimbursement Agreement entered into on the 22nd day of February 1994, by the City of Ontario and the Ontario Redevelopment Agency, the Ontario Redevelopment Agency made a one-time advance to the City of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000) to repair or demolish dangerous buildings throughout the City; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2894, Systematic Health and Safety Inspection Program (Title 8, Chapter 17, of the Ontario Municipal Code), provides for the collection of unpaid service fees, plus any penalties and accrued interest by Special Assessment; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2920, provides for the assessment of civil penalties for continued violations of the Ontario Municipal Code (Title 1, Chapter 2 of the Ontario Municipal Code), and for fines associated with administrative citations to be collected by Special Assessment (Title 1, Chapter 5 of the Ontario Municipal Code), and establishes a uniform procedure before imposing such Special Assessments (Title 1, Chapter 4 of the Ontario Municipal Code); and
25 WHEREAS, the above said ordinances, resolutions and agreements provide for recovery of costs incurred in the abatement of violations by means of a Special Assessment placed on the tax rolls; and
WHEREAS, the City has incurred costs involved in the abatement of violations under the Ontario Municipal Code and Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings, issuing Notices of Violation, and administering the Systematic Health and Safety Program and wishes to recover said costs; and
WHEREAS, the owners of all parcels listed in Exhibit A, B, and C were given notice of imposition of such Special Assessment as provided in Ontario Municipal Code Section 1-4.05(a), and either have not requested an appeal, or have exhausted the appellate procedure provided in Ontario Municipal Code Section 1-4.05(b); and WHEREAS, the City has an executed contract with the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors for collection of said assessments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ontario as follows:

SECTION 1. Confirmed the costs associated with inspection or abatement on the properties as set forth in the report in Exhibit A.

SECTION 2. Confirmed the civil penalties and/or fines for continued violations on the properties as set forth in the report in Exhibit B.

SECTION 3. Confirmed that Exhibit C contains the total amount assessed for both confirmed costs and confirmed civil penalties and/or fines for each of the properties.

SECTION 4. Found and determined that the report, and Exhibits contained therein are true and accurate.

SECTION 5. Adopts the above said report and finds that the costs of inspection or abatement on the properties listed are the costs set forth in Exhibit A, the civil penalties and/or fines for continued violations are the penalties and/or fines as set forth in Exhibit B, and the same are hereby charged and placed as special assessments upon the respective properties.

SECTION 6. Directs Exhibit C shall be sent to the Auditor-Controller of San Bernardino County and shall be collected on the County tax roll.

SECTION 7. The Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

The City Clerk of the City of Ontario shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.
26 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 17th day of October 2023. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________

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

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

CITY ATTORNEY
27 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 October 17, 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 October 17, 2023. _____________________________________

SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
28 City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit A - Costs Associated with Inspection or Abatement Parcel Number Address Amount Due
0108-511-37 1456 E FIFTH ST, Unit:3, Ontario, CA 91764 15.51 0110-061-01 1375 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 239.00
0110-161-19 903 N CALAVERAS AV, Ontario, CA 91764 699.00 0110-332-01 1802 E FOURTH ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91764 534.00 0110-332-02 1808 E FOURTH ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91764 438.00 0113-581-12 1710 E MONTICELLO CT, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 47.00 0210-041-58 1434 N SAN DIEGO PL, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00 0210-192-21 2955 E GUASTI RD, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0210-192-22 2975 E GUASTI RD, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0210-204-07 0 E CONCOURS ST, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00
0216-312-04 8455 E SCHAEFER AV, Ontario, CA 91761 4,331.50 0216-371-18 2522 S SANDPIPER PL, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 0218-101-03 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 148.00
0218-101-04 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 148.00
0218-101-05 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 148.00
0218-101-06 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 148.00
0218-202-03 3071 E SILVER SKY DR, Building:, Unit:, Ontario, CA 91762 2,402.85 0218-714-12 3104 E LAVENDER DR, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 0218-843-18 3501 S CLOVER WY, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0218-911-01 2943 E THOROUGHBRED ST, Ontario, CA 91761 2,890.22 0238-152-05 2025 S MILLIKEN AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1008-291-10 1553 N HELEN CT, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1008-431-23 1133 W SIXTH ST, Ontario, CA 91762 578.32
1008-503-04 947 W YALE ST, Ontario, CA 91762 46.00
1008-571-34 1550 W HARVARD PL, Ontario, CA 91762 69.00
1010-141-09 920 N MOUNTAIN AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 47.00 1010-151-14 914 W ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91762 282.00 1010-182-04 737 N PALMETTO AV, Ontario, CA 91762 48.75
1010-191-20 1048 W H ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1010-191-30 1025 W I ST, Ontario, CA 91762 321.56
1010-191-45 1048 W H ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1010-201-11 1119 W I ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1010-522-07 1131 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:1, Ontario, CA 91762 127.00 1010-531-04 1341 W D ST, Ontario, CA 91762 46.00
1010-551-13 1536 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 276.00 1010-552-21 1505 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 368.00 1011-111-21 1511 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Unit:O, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1011-122-22 1203 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 853.08
1011-141-06 967 W HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1011-361-19 1411 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1011-382-65 1045 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 3,197.80 1011-391-69 941 W MISSION BL, Building:2, Unit:G, Ontario, CA 91762 483.00 1011-421-11 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 148.00 1011-421-12 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 148.00

Page 1 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit A - Costs Associated with Inspection or Abatement Parcel Number Address Amount Due
1014-591-04 1608 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1014-591-05 1624 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1047-294-08 706 W SIXTH ST, Ontario, CA 91762 415.00
1047-311-23 609 W LA DENEY DR, Ontario, CA 91762 20.00
1047-321-72 667 W HAWTHORNE ST, Ontario, CA 91762 61.51 1047-411-20 1015 E FIFTH ST, Ontario, CA 91764 106.51
1047-473-15 1054 E PRINCETON ST, Ontario, CA 91764 3,243.00 1047-492-03 712 E YALE ST, Ontario, CA 91764 46.00
1048-091-01 1050 N SULTANA AV, Ontario, CA 91764 683.00 1048-093-04 622 E FOURTH ST, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00
1048-362-03 124 E F ST, Ontario, CA 91764 20.00
1048-392-14 647 E E ST, Building:1, Unit:101, Ontario, CA 91764 501.24 1048-471-22 1087 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1048-481-07 935 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 707.00
1048-481-27 907 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 747.77
1048-564-10 108 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1048-566-07 303 N EUCLID AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 367.00 1048-574-03 319 W B ST, Ontario, CA 91762 62.76
1049-021-08 555 W HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1049-101-31 815 E EMPORIA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-102-18 824 E EMPORIA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 491.00
1049-131-03 914 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-231-11 552 E STATE ST, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-232-20 560 E PARK ST, Ontario, CA 91761 1,143.00
1049-232-21 617 E SUNKIST ST, Ontario, CA 91761 688.05
1049-242-11 516 S LEMON AV, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-245-04 318 E STATE ST, Ontario, CA 91761 544.52
1049-246-08 514 S CHERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91761 7,192.53 1049-253-09 215 E NEVADA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 140.00
1049-303-29 601 S CYPRESS AV, Ontario, CA 91762 594.69
1049-312-05 745 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 148.00
1049-312-16 754 W CARLTON ST, Ontario, CA 91762 383.00
1049-334-03 919 S VINE AV, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1049-392-02 1026 S GROVE AV, Ontario, CA 91761 92.00
1049-442-06 1113 S GREENWOOD AV, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1049-481-12 698 E BELMONT ST, Ontario, CA 91761 46.00
1049-582-04 754 W BELMONT ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1049-591-29 622 W PHILLIPS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 230.00 1050-071-06 122 E DE ANZA CI, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1050-271-04 1628 S LAUREL AV, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1050-272-01 1658 S EUCLID AV, Ontario, CA 91762 231.00
1050-624-15 2115 S SAN ANTONIO AV, Ontario, CA 91762 300.88 1051-041-03 527 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 127.00 1051-051-72 2238 S EUCLID AV, Building:1, Unit:E, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00

Page 2 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit A - Costs Associated with Inspection or Abatement Parcel Number Address Amount Due
1051-171-44 2460 S GROVE AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 470.50 1051-271-66 2502 S EUCLID AV, Building:1, Unit:C, Ontario, CA 91762 821.57 1052-151-05 1162 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1073-051-19 2761 E WICKFORD ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1073-281-28 2717 E MURDOCK LN, Ontario, CA 91762 1,004.64 1083-061-05 2633 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1083-361-07 0 S MILLIKEN AV, Ontario, CA 91761 1,127.00 45,078.76

Page 3 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit B - Civil Penalties and/or Fines for Continued Violations Parcel Number Address Amount Due
0108-381-30 1347 E FOURTH ST, Building:3, Ontario, CA 91764 420.00 0110-061-01 1375 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 500.00
0110-101-12 1840 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
0110-152-19 815 N AMADOR AV, Ontario, CA 91764 220.00
0110-161-19 903 N CALAVERAS AV, Ontario, CA 91764 520.00 0110-261-14 425 N VINEYARD AV, Ontario, CA 91764 760.00 0113-564-27 1945 E RIVERSIDE DR, Building:1, Unit:19, Ontario, CA 91761 15,000.00 0210-211-36 3998 E INLAND EMPIRE BL, Building:1, Unit:400, Ontario, CA 91764 340.00 0216-082-05 1456 E PHILADELPHIA ST, Unit:10, Ontario, CA 91761 340.00 0216-173-02 13151 S WALKER AV, Ontario, CA 91761 760.00 0216-371-18 2522 S SANDPIPER PL, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 0218-101-03 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 500.00
0218-101-04 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 500.00
0218-101-05 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 500.00
0218-101-06 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 500.00
0218-444-37 3927 S TRINITAS WY, Ontario, CA 91761 20.00 0238-152-05 2025 S MILLIKEN AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 1010-191-30 1025 W I ST, Ontario, CA 91762 420.00
1010-201-11 1119 W I ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00 1010-482-05 839 W F ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00 1010-521-30 151 N MOUNTAIN AV, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00 1011-111-21 1511 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Unit:O, Ontario, CA 91762 340.00 1011-141-14 905 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00
1011-141-31 905 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00
1011-421-11 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 500.00 1011-421-12 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 500.00 1014-181-13 1710 S BRIAR AV, Ontario, CA 91762 760.00
1047-294-08 706 W SIXTH ST, Ontario, CA 91762 760.00
1047-511-08 558 E PRINCETON ST, Ontario, CA 91764 170.00 1048-061-15 131 E ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91764 220.00 1048-091-01 1050 N SULTANA AV, Ontario, CA 91764 520.00 1048-123-17 1023 E I ST, Ontario, CA 91764 320.00
1048-132-08 952 E ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91764 490.00 1048-211-20 859 E GRANADA CT, Ontario, CA 91764 520.00
1048-343-07 421 N FERN AV, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00
1048-362-03 124 E F ST, Ontario, CA 91764 100.00
1048-564-10 108 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00 1049-021-08 555 W HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00
1049-094-02 654 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
1049-095-05 225 S SULTANA AV, Building:3, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 1049-102-18 824 E EMPORIA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 640.00
1049-212-13 612 S HOPE AV, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
1049-312-05 745 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 500.00
1049-312-16 754 W CARLTON ST, Ontario, CA 91762 420.00

Page 1 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit B - Civil Penalties and/or Fines for Continued Violations Parcel Number Address Amount Due
1049-334-03 919 S VINE AV, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00
1050-071-06 122 E DE ANZA CI, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
1051-051-72 2238 S EUCLID AV, Building:1, Unit:E, Ontario, CA 91762 340.00 1073-281-28 2717 E MURDOCK LN, Ontario, CA 91762 77,800.00 1083-011-13 2550 S ARCHIBALD AV, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 109,800.00

Page 2 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit C - Total Amounts per Parcel
Parcel Number Address Amount Due
0108-381-30 1347 E FOURTH ST, Building:3, Ontario, CA 91764 420.00 0108-511-37 1456 E FIFTH ST, Unit:3, Ontario, CA 91764 15.51 0110-061-01 1375 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 739.00
0110-101-12 1840 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
0110-152-19 815 N AMADOR AV, Ontario, CA 91764 220.00
0110-161-19 903 N CALAVERAS AV, Ontario, CA 91764 1,219.00 0110-261-14 425 N VINEYARD AV, Ontario, CA 91764 760.00 0110-332-01 1802 E FOURTH ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91764 534.00 0110-332-02 1808 E FOURTH ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91764 438.00 0113-564-27 1945 E RIVERSIDE DR, Building:1, Unit:19, Ontario, CA 91761 15,000.00 0113-581-12 1710 E MONTICELLO CT, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 47.00 0210-041-58 1434 N SAN DIEGO PL, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00 0210-192-21 2955 E GUASTI RD, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0210-192-22 2975 E GUASTI RD, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0210-204-07 0 E CONCOURS ST, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00
0210-211-36 3998 E INLAND EMPIRE BL, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91764 340.00 0216-082-05 1456 E PHILADELPHIA ST, Unit:10, Ontario, CA 91761 340.00 0216-173-02 13151 S WALKER AV, Ontario, CA 91761 760.00 0216-312-04 8455 E SCHAEFER AV, Ontario, CA 91761 4,331.50 0216-371-18 2522 S SANDPIPER PL, Ontario, CA 91761 211.00 0218-101-03 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 648.00
0218-101-04 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 648.00
0218-101-05 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 648.00
0218-101-06 0 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 648.00
0218-202-03 3071 E SILVER SKY DR, Building:, Unit:, Ontario, CA 91762 2,402.85 0218-444-37 3927 S TRINITAS WY, Ontario, CA 91761 20.00 0218-714-12 3104 E LAVENDER DR, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 0218-843-18 3501 S CLOVER WY, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
0218-911-01 2943 E THOROUGHBRED ST, Ontario, CA 91761 2,890.22 0238-152-05 2025 S MILLIKEN AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 211.00 1008-291-10 1553 N HELEN CT, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1008-431-23 1133 W SIXTH ST, Ontario, CA 91762 578.32
1008-503-04 947 W YALE ST, Ontario, CA 91762 46.00
1008-571-34 1550 W HARVARD PL, Ontario, CA 91762 69.00
1010-141-09 920 N MOUNTAIN AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 47.00 1010-151-14 914 W ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91762 282.00 1010-182-04 737 N PALMETTO AV, Ontario, CA 91762 48.75
1010-191-20 1048 W H ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1010-191-30 1025 W I ST, Ontario, CA 91762 741.56
1010-191-45 1048 W H ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1010-201-11 1119 W I ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 211.00 1010-482-05 839 W F ST, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00 1010-521-30 151 N MOUNTAIN AV, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00 1010-522-07 1131 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:1, Ontario, CA 91762 127.00

Page 1 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit C - Total Amounts per Parcel
Parcel Number Address Amount Due
1010-531-04 1341 W D ST, Ontario, CA 91762 46.00
1010-551-13 1536 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 276.00 1010-552-21 1505 W STONERIDGE CT, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91762 368.00 1011-111-21 1511 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Unit:O, Ontario, CA 91762 431.00 1011-122-22 1203 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 853.08
1011-141-06 967 W HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1011-141-14 905 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00
1011-141-31 905 W BROOKS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 640.00
1011-361-19 1411 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1011-382-65 1045 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 3,197.80 1011-391-69 941 W MISSION BL, Building:2, Unit:G, Ontario, CA 91762 483.00 1011-421-11 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 648.00 1011-421-12 0 S ELDERBERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91762 648.00 1014-181-13 1710 S BRIAR AV, Ontario, CA 91762 760.00
1014-591-04 1608 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1014-591-05 1624 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1047-294-08 706 W SIXTH ST, Ontario, CA 91762 1,175.00
1047-311-23 609 W LA DENEY DR, Ontario, CA 91762 20.00
1047-321-72 667 W HAWTHORNE ST, Ontario, CA 91762 61.51 1047-411-20 1015 E FIFTH ST, Ontario, CA 91764 106.51
1047-473-15 1054 E PRINCETON ST, Ontario, CA 91764 3,243.00 1047-492-03 712 E YALE ST, Ontario, CA 91764 46.00
1047-511-08 558 E PRINCETON ST, Ontario, CA 91764 170.00 1048-061-15 131 E ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91764 220.00 1048-091-01 1050 N SULTANA AV, Ontario, CA 91764 1,203.00 1048-093-04 622 E FOURTH ST, Ontario, CA 91764 91.00
1048-123-17 1023 E I ST, Ontario, CA 91764 320.00
1048-132-08 952 E ROSEWOOD CT, Ontario, CA 91764 490.00 1048-211-20 859 E GRANADA CT, Ontario, CA 91764 520.00
1048-343-07 421 N FERN AV, Ontario, CA 91762 120.00
1048-362-03 124 E F ST, Ontario, CA 91764 120.00
1048-392-14 647 E E ST, Building:1, Unit:101, Ontario, CA 91764 501.24 1048-471-22 1087 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1048-481-07 935 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 707.00
1048-481-27 907 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 747.77
1048-564-10 108 W HOLT BL, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 211.00 1048-566-07 303 N EUCLID AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91762 367.00 1048-574-03 319 W B ST, Ontario, CA 91762 62.76
1049-021-08 555 W HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91762 211.00
1049-094-02 654 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
1049-095-05 225 S SULTANA AV, Building:3, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 1049-101-31 815 E EMPORIA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-102-18 824 E EMPORIA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 1,131.00 1049-131-03 914 E HOLT BL, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00

Page 2 ends

City of Ontario
Community Improvement Department
2024/2025 Tax Roll Year Special Assessments
Exhibit C - Total Amounts per Parcel
Parcel Number Address Amount Due
1049-212-13 612 S HOPE AV, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00
1049-231-11 552 E STATE ST, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-232-20 560 E PARK ST, Ontario, CA 91761 1,143.00
1049-232-21 617 E SUNKIST ST, Ontario, CA 91761 688.05
1049-242-11 516 S LEMON AV, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00
1049-245-04 318 E STATE ST, Ontario, CA 91761 544.52
1049-246-08 514 S CHERRY AV, Ontario, CA 91761 7,192.53 1049-253-09 215 E NEVADA ST, Ontario, CA 91761 140.00
1049-303-29 601 S CYPRESS AV, Ontario, CA 91762 594.69
1049-312-05 745 W MISSION BL, Ontario, CA 91762 648.00
1049-312-16 754 W CARLTON ST, Ontario, CA 91762 803.00
1049-334-03 919 S VINE AV, Ontario, CA 91762 211.00
1049-392-02 1026 S GROVE AV, Ontario, CA 91761 92.00
1049-442-06 1113 S GREENWOOD AV, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1049-481-12 698 E BELMONT ST, Ontario, CA 91761 46.00
1049-582-04 754 W BELMONT ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1049-591-29 622 W PHILLIPS ST, Ontario, CA 91762 230.00 1050-071-06 122 E DE ANZA CI, Ontario, CA 91761 211.00
1050-271-04 1628 S LAUREL AV, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00
1050-272-01 1658 S EUCLID AV, Ontario, CA 91762 231.00
1050-624-15 2115 S SAN ANTONIO AV, Ontario, CA 91762 300.88 1051-041-03 527 W PHILADELPHIA ST, Ontario, CA 91762 127.00 1051-051-72 2238 S EUCLID AV, Building:1, Unit:E, Ontario, CA 91762 431.00 1051-171-44 2460 S GROVE AV, Building:1, Ontario, CA 91761 470.50 1051-271-66 2502 S EUCLID AV, Building:1, Unit:C, Ontario, CA 91762 821.57 1052-151-05 1162 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1073-051-19 2761 E WICKFORD ST, Ontario, CA 91762 91.00 1073-281-28 2717 E MURDOCK LN, Ontario, CA 91762 78,804.64 1083-011-13 2550 S ARCHIBALD AV, Unit:A, Ontario, CA 91761 120.00 1083-061-05 2633 E RIVERSIDE DR, Ontario, CA 91761 91.00 1083-361-07 0 S MILLIKEN AV, Ontario, CA 91761 1,127.00 119 154,878.76

Page 3 ends

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: PURCHASE OF EXPLOSIVES STORAGE UNITS FROM KL SECURITY ENTERPRISES, INC. FOR THE ONTARIO FIRE DEPARTMENT BOMB SQUAD

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the purchase of explosives storage units from KL Security Enterprises, Inc., of Lafayette, IN, in the amount of $170,000.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Maintain the Current High Level of Public Safety
FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Operating Budget includes appropriations in the General Fund for the purchase of explosives storage units.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: For decades the Ontario Fire Department Bomb Squad has relied on regional bomb squad partners to securely store explosives and explosive tools used in the Fire Department's render safe operations. As a Federal Bureau of Investigations certified Bomb Squad, these explosives and explosive tools are vital to operations. Additionally, the large quantities of fireworks confiscated on a yearly basis are stored for future disposal with the California State Fire Marshall.

On July 2023, the City solicited proposals on PlanetBids for explosives storage units and notified 239 potential bidders. One bid was received from KL Security Enterprises, Inc., of Lafayette, IN. Staff recommends purchasing explosives storage units from KL Security Enterprises, Inc. for the storage of explosives, explosive tools, and fireworks. These explosives storage units will increase the Bomb Squad’s operational effectiveness by providing storage of small quantities of explosives used in daily operations at a location closer to the operational area. Lastly, the explosives storage units will provide a safe, secure, and rated storage location for explosives and fireworks. 37 Department: Management Services
Prepared By: Jordan T Villwock
Staff Member Presenting:

Darlene M. Sanchez, Assistant City Manager
Approved By:

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the City Manager, or designee, to execute a Lease Agreement (on file with Records Management) with the Chaffey Community Art Association, dba Chaffey Community Museum of Art (CCAA), of Ontario, California, for use of a City-owned building and adjacent property located at 217 South Lemon for the purpose of exhibiting and promoting local art and artists.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Encourage, Provide or Support Enhanced Recreational, Educational, Cultural and Healthy City Programs, Policies and Activities
FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended Agreement calls for a 30-year term. In return for the use of City-owned property, the Chaffey Community Museum of Art will make annual rental payments of $1.00.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The Chaffey Community Museum of Art (CCMA) was founded in 1941 and is among the oldest organization in the Inland Empire dedicated to stimulating and fostering an interest in art. CCMA has leased this facility from the City since 2011 and maintains a museum collection and displays the work of current artists who are well-known in the region. The mission of CCAA includes the display and restoration of the CCMA art collection, operation of a local Museum of Art; and the stimulation and fostering of art interest, education, and enjoyment for the general public by conducting, maintaining and establishing art exhibitions, programs and classes. 38 Department: Engineering
Prepared By: Jaime Maciel-Carrera
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 7
SUBJECT: AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PARSONS CORPORATION FOR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN SERVICES FOR THE I-10

FREEWAY AT GROVE AVENUE AND FOURTH STREET INTERCHANGE AND GROVE

AVENUE CORRIDOR PROJECT

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve Amendment No. 9 to the Professional Services Agreement (on file in the Records Management Department) with Parsons Corporation (Parsons) of Illinois, for additional engineering and design services for the I-10 Freeway at Grove Avenue and Fourth Street Interchange and Grove Avenue Corridor Project in the amount of $485,507, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $5,049,698; and authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute said Agreement and future amendments within the authorization limits.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Pursue City's Goals and Objectives by Working with Other Governmental Agencies Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Amendment No. 9 increases the Agreement amount by $441,370, plus an additional ten percent (10%) contingency of $44,137 for a revised not-to-exceed total of $5,049,698. The City’s share of the Intersection Project is 44.4%, funded from General City Street Development Impact Fees. The balance of 55.6% is funded from SBCTA’s Measure I Program. Upon approval, the appropriations from the General City Street Development Impact Fees and from Measure I Valley, will be included in the next Quarterly Budget Update as needed.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The scope of the I-10 Freeway at Grove Avenue and Fourth Street Interchange ("Interchange") and Grove Avenue Corridor ("Corridor") Projects includes widening of the intersection of Grove Avenue and Holt Boulevard. The existing agreement with Parsons covers the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA&ED) phase for the Interchange and Corridor, as well as the design of the Intersection improvements. The Interchange is currently in the PA&ED phase with completion of the Project Report and Environmental Document scheduled for 2026. The Corridor and Intersection PA&ED phase was completed in July 2021. The Intersection 39 currently operates at unacceptable levels of service during the morning and evening peak hours. In an effort to alleviate this current deficiency, improvements at the Intersection are being advanced ahead of the Interchange and Corridor Project. Amendment No. 9 will provide funding for final design of the Grove Ave/Holt Blvd intersection, additional construction coordination support, and right-of-way acquisition coordination.
40 Department: Police Department
Prepared By: Nicole Alvarez
Staff Member Presenting:

Mike Lorenz, Chief of Police
Approved By:

ECAMSECURE

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents necessary for the sole source purchase of 15 Mobile Surveillance Units (MSUs) from ECAMSECURE, of Long Beach, California in the amount of $512,000.

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 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations in the amount of $512,000 from the Capital Improvement Projects-Measure Q Fund for the purchase of pole cameras from ECAMSECURE of Long Beach, California.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: To ensure the safety of City Staff, La Verne students, residents and the downtown Civic Center project, the Ontario Police Department is requesting to purchase ECAMSECURE MSUs. The MSU pole cameras will be strategically placed throughout the project for an in-depth look at the corridors, parking, and project areas. The MSUs will provide a layer of security and awareness, helping deter crime and give Staff and residents peace of mind when parking and walking through the Civic Center area.

The MSUs are highly versatile and can be incorporated with existing security systems. In addition, a variety of lights and cameras can be used to create a custom security solution that will help Police Department staff monitor the Civic Center through the Real Time Information Center. They are also built to withstand extreme weather conditions and are solar-powered. 41 Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Adrian Escamilla
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Reviewed By: Bonnie Tam, Andrea Ampig
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 9
SUBJECT: A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH CHAPMAN COAST ROOF CO., INC. FOR THE DOROTHY A. QUESADA COMMUNITY CENTER ROOF REPLACEMENT PROJECT

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to complete and execute Construction Contract No. D&C23-016 with Chapman Coast Roof Co., Inc., located in Fullerton, California, for the Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center Roof Replacement Project in the amount of $284,987; B. Authorize a 10% contingency of $28,499 to address any unforeseen issues that arise during construction for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $313,486; and C. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Quesada Community Center is $284,987. Staff is requesting a 10% contingency of $28,499 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $313,486, funded by Measure Q. If additional appropriations are needed, they will be included at a future quarterly budget update.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The roof at the Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center has exceeded its recommended lifespan and has required increased maintenance due to multiple leaks and deterioration. The recommended repair is a topcoat thermoplastic roof with a 30-year warranty.

The re-roof will provide faster evaporation and lower roof-top temperatures to reduce interior building temperatures and increase product life cycle.

On September 7, 2023, five bids were received for Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center Roof 42 Replacement Project. The bid results are listed below.

VENDOR LOCATION AMOUNT
Chapman Coast Roof Co.,
Inc.

Fullerton, CA $284,987
Danny Letner, Inc. Orange, CA $298,900
Southland Roofing, Inc. Los Angeles, CA $334,000
Rite-Way Roof Corporation Fontana, CA $377,937
Best Contracting Services, Inc. Gardena, CA $434,570
Chapman Coast Roof Co., Inc., located in Fullerton, California, was the lowest responsive bidder that met all the required specifications with a cost of $284,987. Based on credentials, pricing, and favorable reference checks, Staff recommends awarding Construction Contract No. D&C23-016 to Chapman Coast Roof Co., Inc. The project’s estimated completion date is March 2024. 43 Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Adrian Escamilla
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Reviewed By: Bonnie Tam, Andrea Ampig
Approved By:

ALARM COMPANY FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE DEPARTMENT FIRE NOTIFICATION

SYSTEM DESIGN

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 7 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Bay Alarm Company, located in Concord, California, for the Ontario Police Department Fire Notification System Design in an amount of $11,925 for a total not-toexceed contract amount of $1,022,272; and B. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Amendment No. 7 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Bay Alarm Company increases the contract amount by $11,925, for a new total contract amount not-toexceed $1,022,272. The Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations in the Facilities and Parks Maintenance Fund for the design of the Ontario Police Department Fire Notification System.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The current fire alarm notification system at the Ontario Police Department located at 2500 S. Archibald Avenue is due for an upgrade based on its age, range of covers, and communication. The design services provided by Bay Alarm Company will add the appropriate devices per occupancy type and comply with the latest Fire Code Regulations for occupant safety.
44 Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Adrian Escamilla
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Reviewed By: Bonnie Tam, Andrea Ampig
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 11
SUBJECT: AMENDMENTS TO THE DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH HOLT ARCHITECTS, INC. FOR ON-CALL ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE

DEPARTMENT MASTER PLAN, REAL TIME INFORMATION CENTER, AND TRAINING

DIVISION

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 6 to the On-Call Design Services Agreement with Holt Architects, Inc., located in Palm Desert, California, for the Ontario Police Department Real Time Information Center and Training Division Design for an amount of $338,970;
B. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 7 to the On-Call Design Services Agreement with Holt Architects, Inc., located in Palm Desert, California, for the Ontario Police Department Master Plan Design for an amount of $143,582 for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $1,055,066; and
C. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations in the Capital Improvement Projects-Measure Q Fund and Law Enforcement Impact Fund for design services. The recommended actions will increase the contract amount by $482,552 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $1,055,066. The total contract amount of $1,055,066 includes on-call work performed for various citywide projects, including the Ontario Police Department Master Plan, Real Time Information Center, and Training Division design.
45 BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The Real Time Information Center and Training Division designs will include interior renovations for private offices, workstations, mechanical improvements, data, visual, audio communication, and a specialized training room. The Real Time Information Center will be a hub for the City of Ontario to bring together data, video, audio and real time information into one centralized place for monitoring. Staff recommends authorizing Amendment No. 6 to the existing Design Services Agreement with Holt Architects, Inc., in the amount of $338,970 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $911,484.

The Ontario Police Department Master Plan will be based upon facilitating the needs of each operational program. Facility improvements will be identified within the existing building. Holt Architects, Inc., will coordinate with other City Departments and any outside vendor whose efforts are currently in progress to ensure all facility improvements are identified and incorporated during the documentation as necessary. Staff recommends authorizing Amendment No. 7 to the existing Design Services Agreement with Holt Architects, Inc., in the amount of $143,582 for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $1,055,066.
46 Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Adrian Escamilla
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Reviewed By: Bonnie Tam, Andrea Ampig
Approved By:

AUDIO VISUAL FOR THE ONTARIO POLICE DEPARTMENT GYM EXPANSION

PROJECT

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

A. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Western Audio Visual, located in Orange, California, for the Ontario Police Department (OPD) Gym Expansion Project for an amount of $67,622; and B. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents required for the completion of the project including, but not limited to, contracts, agreements, assessments, easements, reduction of retention accounts, and filing a notice of completion at the conclusion of all construction related activities.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed Amendment No. 3 to the Maintenance Services Agreement with Western Audio Visual, will increase the contract amount by $67,622, for a new total contract amount not-to-exceed $151,322. The Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations in the Capital Projects Fund for this project.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The current Ontario Police Department locker and gym space plan needs remodeling and rehabilitation to accommodate operational and staffing needs. Western Audio Visual, will provide the audio-visual materials and installation for the OPD Gym Expansion project. The project’s estimated completion date is November 2023. 47 Department: Police Department
Prepared By: Nicole Alvarez
Staff Member Presenting:

Mike Lorenz, Chief of Police
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 13
SUBJECT: AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH AMERICAN THREAT ASSESSMENT CONSULTING INC. (A.T.A.C.)

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 7 to the Professional Services Agreement (on file in the Records Management Department) with American Threat Assessment Consulting Inc. (A.T.A.C.) of Rancho Cucamonga, California to add the purchase of additional equipment for the Civic Center remodel project and the Real Time Information Center in the amount of $71,521, for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $1,604,021.

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 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations from the Capital Projects Fund (Measure Q) for the purchase of CCTV Cameras for the Real Time Information Center from American Threat Assessment Consulting Inc. The proposed Amendment increases the authorized contract amount of $1,532,500 by $71,521 for a new not-to-exceed contract amount of $1,604,021.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: On June 6th, 2023, the City of Ontario and A.T.A.C entered Amendment No. 6 adding additional compensation and terms. Amendment No. 7 will increase funding for an additional $71,521 for the purchase of CCTV cameras to help with security around the Civic Center as well as establish more active cameras for the Real Time Information Center. 48 Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Bonnie Tam
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Approved By:

FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS)

FOR THE DE ANZA PARK LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, MISSION

BOULEVARD MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, AND RECREATION YOUTH

ACTIVITIES AND YOUTH SPORTS PROGRAM

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute all documents necessary to accept the Priority Legislative Budget Project (PLBP) earmark funds in the amount of $4,500,000 from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) for the De Anza Park Lighting Improvements Project, Mission Boulevard Median Improvements Project, and Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
Encourage, Provide or Support Enhanced Recreational, Educational, Cultural and Healthy City Programs, Policies and Activities
Pursue City's Goals and Objectives by Working with Other Governmental Agencies FISCAL IMPACT: The City has been awarded $4,500,000 in PLBP earmark funds from Caltrans to fund the De Anza Park Lighting Improvements and Mission Boulevard Median Improvements projects scheduled to be completed by the Public Works Agency during Fiscal Years 2023-25. The earmark funds also fund the programming costs of the Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program managed by the Community Life & Culture Agency for three years. The associated revenue and expenditure for the De Anza Park Lighting Improvements and Mission Boulevard Median Improvements projects are budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget in the Grants Fund. The Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program will need an increase of appropriations of $500,000 from the Grants Fund that will be included in the next quarterly budget update.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The California Legislature has authorized funding for PLBP. These projects have been authorized by State legislation, specifically Assembly Bill 179. Caltrans is the authorizing agency for the proper distribution of the funding provided by this legislation. On 49 December 14, 2022, the City was confirmed for the award of $4,500,000 in PLBP funds to fund the De Anza Park Lighting Improvements Project with a total project cost of $2,000,000, Mission Boulevard Median Improvements Project with a total project cost of $2,000,000, and Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program with a total programming cost of $500,000 to provide safety improvements for parks, road safety, and youth services in the City of Ontario.

De Anza Park Lighting Improvements
De Anza Park is located at 1405 South Fern Avenue, in west/central Ontario primarily within a residential neighborhood. The proposed project includes replacing 14 existing 50’ tall wooden sport field lights with new steel poles. The new sport field lighting will include lighting controls that provide 24/7 light monitoring and the ability to control and manage the lighting system remotely.

The sport field lighting will include directed LED lighting focused on the sport fields, reducing the amount of ambient light to the residential neighborhood neighboring the park. In addition to the sport field lighting improvements, the project will install additional King light standards and wall packs throughout the park to improve safety lighting. All new lighting will be energy efficient LED lighting.

Mission Boulevard Median Improvements
Mission Boulevard is a major east-west arterial that runs the length of the City of Ontario. Mission Boulevard is an important corridor that is heavily utilized by commuters and designated as one of the main truck routes in the City. The existing medians are an underutilized public space in an underserved community due to lack of shade trees and lack of features to represent the culture or history of the community. Filling in the existing empty spaces with decorative and natural materials will greatly enhance the appearance of the corridor. New shade trees will be planted in empty tree wells on the medians. These improvements will allow the medians on Mission Boulevard between Mountain Avenue and Grove Avenue to better serve as land area for water capture and infiltration, supporting groundwater recharge.

Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program
The Recreation Youth Activities and Youth Sports Program is a free program geared for youth ages 10-15. The program is managed by the Recreation & Community Services Department within the Community Life & Culture Agency and provides youths with an opportunity to experience lasting, positive relationships through mentoring. The earmark funds fund the expansion of the program, including staffing costs associated with planning, implementing, and executing all programmatic elements, program supplies, and expenses related to events and excursions. This program will offer specialized programs at the Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center multiple days a week.

Sports clinics and camps will occur once a year. Total program costs will cover a three-year program implementation period.
50 Department: Recreation & Community Services
Prepared By: Danielle Guevara
Staff Member Presenting:

Helen McAlary, Executive Director Community
Life and Culture
Reviewed By: Nicholas S Gonzalez
Approved By:

GREENFIELDS OUTDOOR FITNESS FOR VINEYARD PARK

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council authorize the cooperative purchase of Outdoor fitness equipment with Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for Vineyard Park in the amount of $171,081 plus a 10% contingency of $17,109 to mitigate any unforeseen issues with supply chain surcharges and manufactory price increases for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $188,190 from Greenfields Outdoor Fitness, of Anaheim, California, consistent with the terms and conditions of the Sourcewell Cooperative Contract No. 010721-GRN.

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Encourage, Provide or Support Enhanced Recreational, Educational, Cultural and Healthy City Programs, Policies and Activities
FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Budget includes appropriations of $100,000 from the Capital Projects-Measure Q Funds to purchase outdoor fitness equipment with Greenfields Outdoor Fitness for Vineyard Park. The total cost of the recommended fitness equipment is $188,190. If approved, the additional $88,190 will be paid from the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Adopted Operating Budget for Community Life & Culture.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The outdoor fitness equipment provides free, accessible fitness equipment to the public. It is designed for users of all ages and fitness levels. The outdoor fitness equipment includes a variety of exercise stations that can be used for strength training cardio workouts, and more. The equipment is easy to use and does not require special training, making it accessible to everyone in the community. It is a fun and exciting way to exercise and fosters a sense of community around fitness and wellness. The shade structure in the design ensures a comfortable environment regardless of weather or time of day. The selected fitness equipment vendor is Greenfields Outdoor Fitness (Exhibit A & B).
51 In general conformation with the provisions of Government Code Section 54201 through 54202, Ontario Municipal Code Section 2-6.29 allows for the purchase of supplies and equipment through cooperative purchasing programs. Cooperative purchasing allows the City to pool its procurement power with other public agencies to obtain lower pricing than otherwise might be possible.

On August 28, 2023, the Recreation & Parks Commission approved the design for the outdoor fitness equipment with Greenfields Outdoor Fitness to be installed at Vineyard Park with a vote of 6-0 and recommends that the City Council authorize the cooperative purchase. 52 53
Department: Public Works
Prepared By: Gil H Mars
Staff Member Presenting:

Tito Haes, Executive Director Public Works
Reviewed By: Bonnie Tam, Andrea Ampig
Approved By:

FOR THE ANTHONY MUNOZ COMMUNITY CENTER GYMNASIUM

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

CONSENT CALENDAR
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council take the following actions:

THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:

Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
Encourage, Provide or Support Enhanced Recreational, Educational, Cultural and Healthy City Programs, Policies and Activities
FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed amount for the design of the Anthony Munoz Community Center Gymnasium is $971,820. If approved, additional Capital Projects-Measure Q appropriations will be requested at the next quarterly budget update as needed.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: Adult and youth sports programs have maximized the use and capacity of the two (2) existing City gymnasiums, causing waitlists to form. Additional gymnasium space is needed due to the growth and expansion of the City in recent years.

In April of 2018, Robert Coffee & Associates was awarded the contract to design the Anthony Munoz Community Center Renovation project with construction being completed July 7, 2021. During the planning phase in February 2019, Robert Coffee & Associates was tasked to add this Gymnasium 54 scope. However, it was cut from the plans at that time for budgetary reasons. Because Robert Coffee & Associates had investigated the necessary site preparations, building costs, design, and planning, utilizing their services for the final design of this gymnasium would reduce the turnaround time since they have retained files and information on this project and already have conceptual plans.

Staff recommends awarding the Professional Services Agreement to Robert Coffee & Associates based on the expertise and design work they have already retained for the Anthony Munoz Community Center. The project has an estimated completion date of March 1, 2026. 55 Department: Planning
Prepared By: Alexis Vaughn
Staff Member Presenting:

Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Reviewed By: Edmelynne V Hutter, Kimberly
Ruddins, Rudy Zeledon
Approved By:

Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 17
SUBJECT: A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF THE EUCLID WALNUT PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (FILE NO. PUD22-004) TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 10.6-ACRE PROJECT SITE LOCATED

AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EUCLID AVENUE AND WALNUT STREET

CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
October 17, 2023
SECTION:

PUBLIC HEARINGS
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the use of an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and introduce and waive further reading of an Ordinance approving the Euclid Walnut Planned Unit Development (File No.

PUD22-004).

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: There is not a direct fiscal impact associated with this action. The proposed Euclid Walnut Planned Unit Development (PUD) establishes development standards and guidelines to facilitate a mixed-use commercial and residential development. Implementation of the PUD would result in an increase in property taxes from future development and the one-time payment to the City for plan check fees and development impact fees.

BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: On August 16, 2022, the Ontario City Council certified The Ontario Plan 2050 (TOP 2050) Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR, State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) in conjunction with File No. PGPA20-002. The SEIR analyzed the Project site and 5.4 acres of land to the north of the Project site, also located within the same mixed-use district, and established guidelines for development. These guidelines include, but are not limited to, general land use (mixed-use residential and commercial), maximum density and development intensity (20- 75 dwelling units per acre and 1.0 non-residential floor area ratio (FAR), respectively), and assumed dwelling units and commercial square footage (369 and 142,840, respectively). An Addendum to the SEIR was submitted in conjunction with the Project and is explained in detail within the 56 Environmental Review section of this report.

On May 25, 2022, the Applicant filed a Development Plan application (File No. PDEV22-027) to construct Phase 1 of the Planned Unit Development (PUD), consisting of 346 dwelling units and 5,400 square feet of ground-floor commercial space on 9.4 acres of the overall 10.6-acre Project site. The request was submitted in conjunction with a Certificate of Appropriateness application (File No. PHP22-015), to determine whether the Project site was a historic resource, and the subject PUD application (File No. PUD22-004) to establish the development standards and design guidelines for the Project site to facilitate its two phases of development.

PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: The MU-NH 8e zoning district and the Euclid Avenue (EA) Overlay district require the preparation and approval of a PUD to establish the development standards and design guidelines for the site. The proposed Euclid Walnut PUD, attached to the City Council Ordinance as Attachment A, identifies the following components:
(a) Chapter 2: Objectives – The Objectives component of the PUD outlines the Project’s consistency with The Ontario Plan, including its Vision, Governance Manual, and Policy Plan (General Plan). The PUD also outlines how the Project will be consistent with the EA Overlay district, which was established to recognize, protect, and enhance the visual character and quality of Euclid Avenue as a major scenic and historic resource in Ontario, as well as its position on the National Register of Historic Places;
(b) Chapter 3: Land Use Plan – The Land Use Plan chapter briefly describes the Project, including zoning and land use districts, development phasing, demolition activities, and permitted land uses.

The PUD aligns with the Project site’s zoning and TOP 2050 land use districts by allowing for horizontal and vertical mixed-use development and associated facilities. The chapter also outlines various permitted land uses, activities, and facilities for the PUD site, along with the process required to get certain uses approved;
(c) Chapter 4: Development Regulations – The Development Regulations chapter sets forth standards that govern development of the site, including the following topics: intensity; density; building envelope; vehicle access; parking facilities, supply, and design; residential open space and common amenities; service facilities; signs; landscape and hardscape; fences and walls; public rightof-way improvements; and infrastructure. Development standards for the Project site are also provided in a summary table (see Figure 4-1: Summary of Development Standards located on page 32 of the PUD, included herein as Attachment A of the City Council Ordinance for File No. PUD22- 004, attached to this report);
(d) Chapter 5: Design Criteria – New development implemented under the PUD will generate new uses and design aesthetics to fulfill the design goals and policies of TOP and will be guided by design criteria to provide articulation, dynamic materials and colors, and avoidance of bulky and monotonous elevations. The proposed development will be subject to and governed by policies and goals regarding building orientation, access and parking facilities, service facilities, pedestrian linkages, architectural character, massing and scale, articulation and fenestration, architectural details, storefronts, materials and colors, roofs and rooftop equipment, non-residential outdoor dining areas, residential outdoor spaces and common recreational amenities, and landscape and 57 hardscape elements; and
(e) Chapter 6: Administration – Lastly, the PUD establishes that applications for Development Plans and other entitlement proposals are subject to the Ontario Development Code submittal, review and processing requirements.

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 2050.

HOUSING ELEMENT COMPLIANCE: The Project is consistent with the Housing Element of the Policy Plan (General Plan) component of The Ontario Plan 2050, as the project site is not one of the properties in the Available Land Inventory contained in Table A-3 (Available Land by Planning Area) of the Housing Element Technical Report Appendix.

AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY: 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.

Ontario International Airport: On April 19, 2011, the Ontario City Council approved and adopted the Ontario International Airport Land use Compatibility Plan (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. The proposed Project is located within the Airport Influence Area of Ontario International Airport and was evaluated and found to be consistent with the policies and criteria of the ALUCP. Any special conditions of approval associated with uses in close proximity to the airport are included in the conditions of approval provided with the attached ordinance.

City Staff provided additional information to the community members at the meeting and considered their input during Project review. Further, a community member who provided contact information was added to the public notification list for the Project. 58 PUBLIC COMMENTS: As of the preparation of this Agenda Report, Planning Department Staff received the following written or verbal communications from the owners or occupants of properties surrounding the Project site or from the public in general:

At the neighborhood meeting described above, a community member requested additional information about the Project’s scope of work, conceptual site planning and building design, and traffic. The requested information was provided and the commenter was added to the public notification list.

James L. Camarillo, a representative of Caltrans, reviewed and provided preliminary comments and recommendations about the Project. He requested additional information to be able to provide a more in-depth review. His correspondence was forwarded to the appropriate Staff for review and response.

On August 7, 2023, Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney at Law, representing the Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters, submitted a letter (See Attachment A-1 of the attached Planning Commission Backup File, Mitchell M. Tsai letter) contesting the Project based on the following claims:

1. The City should require the use of a local workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment.

Staff Response: As discussed in the Addendum, the Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different air quality, GHG, or VMT impacts not previously considered and addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. Therefore, mitigation beyond what was required in TOP 2050 S EIR to further reduce air quality, GHG, and VMT impacts is not required for the proposed Project. The comment does not affect the analysis completed or conclusions provided in the Addendum, does not provide new information or evidence related to the analysis completed in the Addendum, and does not reflect on the adequacy or content of the Addendum. No changes to the Addendum are required.

2. The Project would be approved in violation of CEQA.

Staff Response: The commenter claims a Project-specific EIR should be prepared and that new mitigation measures, specifically related to EV-capable parking spaces, are required and were not considered in the prior environmental analysis of the Project site. The comment does not appear to recognize the City’s recent adoption of TOP 2050 and certification of TOP 2050 SEIR on August 16, 2022. As recognized in the Addendum, the Project will be required to comply with the CALGreen Building Code (CBC) commercial and residential requirements in effect at the time of development. Further, the Project will be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ 3-3 from TOP 2050 SEIR, which provides a list of potential mitigation measures which may be included as conditions of approval should operational air quality impacts exceed South Coast AQMD-adopted thresholds of significance. Such measures include, but are not limited to:

Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 of CALGreen (Residential Voluntary Measures); Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures); Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 and Section A5.106.8.2 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures; Residential Voluntary Measures).
59 3. CEQA requires the City to prepare a tiered EIR for the Project instead of an Addendum.

Staff Response: The City has properly prepared an Addendum to TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project and a tiered EIR, as claimed by the commenter, is not required. The City has discretion to determine whether a subsequent or supplemental EIR is necessary under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, so long as its decision is supported by substantial evidence. Similarly, whether an activity is within the scope of a program EIR "is a factual question that the lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record." (State CEQA Guidelines, §15168(c)(2)). The City has prepared an Addendum to the TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project, finding that all impacts of the Project have been adequately addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. The CEQA Guidelines provide that an agency may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. (State CEQA Guidelines, §15164(b), (e)). As such, the Addendum is appropriate in this case and no further environmental review is required.

The City has also followed all procedural requirements, including public disclosure requirements, in its preparation of the Addendum. While CEQA requires notice to the public and an opportunity to comment in connection with adoption of a negative declaration or preparation of an EIR, an addendum is not required to be circulated for public review (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164(c)). The Addendum, and all supporting technical studies, has been provided to the Planning Commission and the public prior to any decision by the City, in compliance with CEQA. The City has also complied with the requirements of the Public Records Act. The Project, along with the Development Advisory Board Staff Report and Addendum, was posted on the City’s website 72 hours prior to the meeting, consistent with the California Brown Act.

Regarding the Planning Commission hearing, the Project has been advertised in the newspaper, notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project and the Staff Report and Addendum was posted 72 hours prior to the hearing. Accordingly, a tiered EIR is not required for the Project.

4. The City cannot issue an Addendum because the Project was not addressed with the TOP 2050 Update SEIR and therefore an EIR must be prepared for the Project.

Staff Response: As discussed in the Addendum, the Project was addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR, and the commenter did not provide any evidence of Project impacts that are outside of the scope of TOP 2050 SEIR. TOP 2050 shows a total of five locations within the City with the MU-NH land use designation. The Future Buildout Projections Table of the Land Use Element provides further details for each of these five MU-NH sub-areas. The three parcels subject to this PUD Project make up 10.6 acres (“PUD site”) of the overall 16 acres that comprise the “MU-NH” sub-area. The remaining 5.4 acres of the MU-NH area include approximately 28,000 square feet of existing businesses (gas station, pre-school, and 2 small businesses) and 15 single family homes between the PUD site and the SR-60 Freeway to the north.

The Project proposes 369 units and approximately 12,000 square feet of non-residential development in Phases 1 and 2, leaving 130,840 square feet of non-residential development to be built in the remainder of the MU-NH area adjacent to the SR-60 Freeway. Development of the proposed Project would slightly exceed the total number of residential units for this area under TOP 2050 (369 proposed units +15 existing units = 384 total units vs. 369 TOP 2050 projected total units, or a 5 percent increase ). However, development of the Project would substantially reduce the amount of anticipated non-residential growth 60 in this sub-area (12,000 SF in the Project area plus 28,000 SF existing = 40,000 SF vs. 142,840 SF, or a 72 percent decrease). The Addendum analyzed the impacts of the new residential and commercial uses currently proposed under the Project, but included this analysis demonstrating that the anticipated impacts of growth in this MU-NH sub-area with the Project are considered to be equivalent or less than those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR for this sub-area. Accordingly, the Project is within the scope of TOP 2050 and the preparation of an Addendum is appropriate.

TOP 2050 SEIR did identify several significant and unavoidable impacts. However, as TOP 2050 SEIR contemplated the Project, the City properly applied the subsequent review provisions in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. The Project will not result in any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts identified in TOP 2050 SEIR, nor are there any changes in circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is also no new information that exists that shows the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in TOP 2050 SEIR; significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous SEIR; or 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 mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. As such, an Addendum is appropriate.

On August 16, 2023, Dale J. Goldsmith, on behalf of the applicant Legacy/Collier Residential LLC, submitted a letter in response to the comment letter submitted by Mitchell Tsai (see Attachment A2 of the attached Planning Commission Backup File: Applicant Response Letter).

The letter discussed the project and contested the claims made by Mr. Tsai.

On August 22, 2023, Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney at Law, representing the Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters, submitted a second letter (See Attachment A-3 of the attached Planning Commission Backup File, Mitchell M. Tsai Letter 2) contesting the Project based on the following claims:

1. The City should require the use of a local workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment.

Staff Response: The commenter reiterates comments made in its August 7, 2023, letter. As provided in Staff’s response above and discussed in the Addendum, the Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different air quality, GHG, or VMT impacts not previously considered and addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. Therefore, mitigation beyond what was required in the TOP 2050 S EIR to further reduce air quality, GHG, and VMT impacts is not required for the proposed Project. The comment does not affect the analysis completed or conclusions provided in the Addendum, does not provide new information or evidence related to the analysis completed in the Addendum, and does not reflect on the adequacy or content of the Addendum. No changes to the Addendum are required.

2. The Project would be approved in violation of CEQA.
61 Staff Response: After initially citing State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 which does not apply to the Project, the commenter now claims that the TOP 2050 SEIR and the Addendum fail to adequately address environmental impacts or provide adequate mitigation measures relating to the sensitive receptors close to the Project site. As acknowledged in the Addendum, the Project will require implementation of TOP 2050 SEIR Mitigation Measures AQ 3-1 through AQ 3-3, and therefore would not result in any new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR. (Addendum, p. 30.) In compliance with TOP 2050 SEIR Mitigation Measure AQ 3-1, MIG, Inc. prepared a memorandum which concludes the construction and operational emissions from proposed Project would not exceed any applicable SCAQMD-recommended CEQA thresholds of significance and is consistent with TOP 2050 with mitigation incorporated. As evidenced in the MIG memorandum, the Project would not result in a new or substantially greater significant air quality impact than identified in the TOP 2050 SEIR. As such, none of the factors listed in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 are satisfied and an Addendum is appropriate.

Additionally, the commenter claims there may be impacts on sensitive receptors related to the demolition of the structures on site and that there may be a significant impact related to cumulative GHG emissions from vehicle exhaust as well as other sources.

The Addendum notes the TOP 2050 SEIR determined that implementation of the policies in the Safety Element, in addition to existing regulations, would ensure less than significant impacts from transport, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials. It further concluded TOP 2050 would have less than significant direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts relating to transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, release of hazardous materials, and emission and handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. (Addendum, p. 40.) TOP 2050 SEIR analysis, cited in the Addendum, states “demolition activities that have the potential to expose construction workers and/or the public to asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint will be conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, including, but not limited to: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 1403; California Health and Safety Code (Section 39650 et seq.); California Code of Regulations (Title 8, Section 1529); California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1529 [Asbestos] and Section 1532.1 [Lead]); and Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Part 61 [asbestos], Title 40, Part 763 [asbestos], and Title 29, Part 1926 [asbestos and lead]”; concluding impacts related to disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. (TOP SEIR, p. 5.9-37.) Demolition of structures, such as those contemplated by the Project, were considered and analyzed in TOP 2050 SEIR and no subsequent or supplemental EIR is warranted.

MIG, Inc. prepared a memorandum evidencing the Project’s consistency with the City’s CCAP and the analysis in TOP 2050 SEIR. The Project would result in the net reduction of approximately 4,405 MTCO2e per year and is consistent with the CCAP. Therefore, the Project would not result in a new or substantially more adverse GHG impact than identified in the TOP 2050 SEIR or CCAP and no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required.

The commenter restates its prior claim that a Project-specific EIR should be prepared and that new mitigation measures, specifically related to EV-capable parking spaces, are required and were not 62 considered in the prior environmental analysis of the Project site. The comment does not recognize the City’s recent adoption of TOP 2050 and certification of TOP 2050 SEIR on August 16, 2022. As recognized in the Addendum, the Project will be required to comply with the CALGreen Building Code (CBC) commercial and residential requirements in effect at the time of development. Further, the Project will be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ 3-3 from TOP 2050 SEIR, which provides a list of potential mitigation measures that may be included as conditions of approval should operational air quality impacts exceed South Coast AQMD-adopted thresholds of significance. Such measures include, but are not limited to: Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 of CALGreen (Residential Voluntary Measures); Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures); Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 and Section A5.106.8.2 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures; Residential Voluntary Measures).

Finally, the commenter claims the Project description is inadequate. The Project description contains a clear statement of objectives, list of characteristics and list of approvals sought. (Addendum, pp. 1-9.)

3. CEQA requires the City to prepare a tiered EIR for the Project instead of an Addendum.

Staff Response: The City has properly prepared an Addendum to TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project and a tiered EIR, as claimed by the commenter, is not required. The City has discretion to determine whether a subsequent or supplemental EIR is necessary under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, so long as its decision is supported by substantial evidence. Similarly, whether an activity is within the scope of a program EIR "is a factual question that the lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record." (State CEQA Guidelines, §15168(c)(2)). The City has prepared an Addendum to TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project, finding that all impacts of the Project have been adequately addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. The CEQA Guidelines provide that an agency may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. (State CEQA Guidelines, §15164(b), (e)). As such, the Addendum is appropriate in this case and no further environmental review is required.

The City has also followed all procedural requirements, including public disclosure requirements, in its preparation of the Addendum. While CEQA requires notice to the public and an opportunity to comment in connection with adoption of a negative declaration or preparation of an EIR, an addendum is not required to be circulated for public review (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164(c)). The Addendum, and all supporting technical studies has been provided to the Planning Commission and the public prior to any decision by the City, in compliance with CEQA. The City has also complied with the requirements of the Public Records Act. The Project, along with the Development Advisory Board Staff Report and Addendum, was posted on the City’s website 72 hours prior to the meeting, consistent with the California Public Records Act. Regarding the Planning Commission hearing, the Project has been advertised in the newspaper, notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project and the Staff Report and Addendum were posted 72 hours prior to the hearing. Accordingly, a tiered EIR is not required for the Project.

4. The City cannot issue an Addendum because the Project was not addressed with TOP 2050 SEIR and therefore an EIR must be prepared for the Project.

Staff Response: As discussed in the Addendum, the Project was addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR, and the 63 commenter did not provide any evidence of Project impacts that are outside of the scope of TOP 2050 SEIR. The TOP 2050 shows a total of five locations within the City with the MU-NH land use designation.

The Future Buildout Projections Table of the Land Use Element provides details for each of these five MUNH sub-areas. The three parcels subject to this PUD Project make up 10.6 acres (“PUD site”) of the overall 16 acres that comprise the “MU-NH” sub-area. The remaining 5.4 acres of the MU-NH area include approximately 28,000 square feet of existing businesses (gas station, pre-school, and two small businesses) and 15 single family homes between the PUD site and the SR-60 Freeway to the north.

The Project proposes 369 units and approximately 12,000 square feet of non-residential development in Phases 1 and 2, leaving 130,840 square feet of non-residential development to be built in the remainder of the MU-NH area adjacent to the SR-60 Freeway. Development of the proposed Project would slightly exceed the total number of residential units for this area under TOP 2050 (369 proposed units +15 existing units = 384 total units vs. 369 TOP 2050 projected total units, or a 5 percent increase ). However, development of the Project would substantially reduce the amount of anticipated non-residential growth in this sub-area (12,000 SF in the Project area plus 28,000 existing = 40,000 SF vs. 142,840 SF, or a 72 percent decrease). The Addendum analyzed the impacts of the new residential and commercial uses currently proposed under the Project, but included this analysis demonstrating that the anticipated impacts of growth in this MU-NH sub-area with the Project are considered to be equivalent or less than those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR for this sub-area. Accordingly, the Project is within the scope of TOP 2050 and the preparation of an Addendum is appropriate.

TOP 2050 SEIR did identify several significant and unavoidable impacts. However, the commenter misstates the significant and unavoidable impacts included in TOP 2050 SEIR. TOP 2050 SEIR found significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, cultural resources (historic resources), noise and transportation (VMT) (TOP 2050 SEIR pp. 2-5 – 2-5.) The Addendum analyzes impacts at the Project level and for each of these areas concludes Project specific mitigation was not required. Notably, Projectspecific analyses, prepared by MIG, Inc., an expert consulting firm, found the Project’s air quality and GHG impacts to be less than significant with the mitigation imposed in TOP 2050 EIR (air quality) and, in the case of GHG emissions, Project emissions would actually be less than existing levels. In both instances, Project impacts were consistent (or less) than those analyzed for the site in TOP 2050 EIR. They are therefore properly addressed in the Addendum.

As TOP 2050 SEIR contemplated the Project, the City properly applied the subsequent review provisions in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. The Project will not result in any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts identified in TOP 2050 SEIR, nor are there any changes in circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is also no new information that exists that shows the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in TOP 2050 SEIR; significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous SEIR; or 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 mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous SEIR would substantially reduce one or more 64 significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. As such, an Addendum is appropriate.

On September 14, 2023, Dale J. Goldsmith, on behalf of the applicant Legacy/Collier Residential LLC, submitted a letter in response to the second comment letter submitted by Mitchell Tsai (see Attachment A4 of the attached Planning Commission Backup File: Applicant Response Letter 2). The letter discussed the project and contested the claims made by Mr. Tsai.

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: On September 26, 2023, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and voted 4-0 to recommend that the City Council consider and approve File No.

PUD22-004 and adopt an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, pursuant to the facts and reasons contained in the staff report and attached ordinance, and subject to the conditions of approval.
65 Case Planner: Alexis Vaughn Hearing
Body Date Decision Action
Planning Director
Approval:

DAB 08/07/2023 Approval Recommend
PC 09/26/2023
Recommend,
Final (PHP22-015,
PDEV22-027)
Submittal Date: May 25, 2022 CC 10/17/2023 Final (PUD22-004) FILE NOS: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
SUBJECT: A public hearing to consider the use of an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“Certified SEIR”) for the following: [1] a Planned Unit Development (File No. PUD22-004) to establish development standards and design guidelines for the overall 10.6-acre Project site; [2] a Certificate of Appropriateness (File No. PHP22-015) to determine whether the Project site is a historic resource; and [3] a Development Plan (File No. PDEV22-027) to construct 346 apartment units and 5,400 square feet of commercial space on 9.4 acres of the Project site, located at the northwest corner of Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street, within the Mixed Use – Neighborhood Hub 8e – Euclid and Walnut (MU-NH 8e) zoning district. Submitted by Legacy/Collier Residential LLC. City Council action is required for File No. PUD22-004.

PROPERTY OWNER: Series III, Ontario Enterprises, of the Wolf Family Series, LP RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the
Planning Commission, 1) consider and
approve File Nos. PHP22-025 and PDEV22-
027, and 2) recommend that the City
Council adopt File No. PUD22-004 and the
accompanying Addendum to the TOP
2050 Subsequent Certified Environmental
Impact Report, pursuant to the facts and
reasons contained in the staff report and
attached resolutions, and subject to the
conditions of approval appended to the
attached resolutions as "Attachment A”
for File No. PHP22-015, and as
“Attachment B” for File Nos. PUD22-004
and PDEV22-027. A summary of the
resolution attachments has been
provided in the Agency/Department
Reviews and Resolutions Section below.

PROJECT SETTING: The Project site is
comprised of 10.6 acres of land located
Figure 1: Project Location
303 East B Street, Ontario, California 91764 Phone: 909.395.2036 / Fax: 909.395.2420

PLANNING COMMISSION

AGENDA REPORT
September 26, 2023
Approval
Approved
66 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 2 of 32 ends

at the northwest corner of Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street, within the Mixed Use – Neighborhood Hub 8e – Euclid and Walnut (MU-NH 8e) zoning district and the Euclid Avenue (EA) Overlay district. The site is currently developed with commercial uses. The properties to the north of the Project site are within the Medium-Density Residential (MDR18), the MU-NH 8e zoning districts, and the EA Overlay district, and are developed with multi-family residential units, single-family dwellings, and commercial land uses. The properties to the east are within the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) zoning and EA Overlay districts and are developed with commercial land uses. The properties to the south are within the Low-Density Residential (LDR-5) zoning district and the EA Overlay district and are developed with single-family dwellings. The property to the west is within the MDR-18 zoning district and is developed with multi-family residential units. The existing surrounding land uses, zoning, and Policy Plan (general plan) and specific plan land use designations are summarized in the "Surrounding Zoning & Land Uses" table located in the Technical Appendix of this report.

PROJECT ANALYSIS:
(1) Background — On August 16, 2022, the Ontario City Council certified The Ontario Plan 2050 (“TOP 2050”) Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“SEIR”, State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) in conjunction with File No. PGPA20-002. The SEIR analyzed the Project site and 5.4 acres of land to the north of the Project site, also located within the same mixed-use district, and established guidelines for development. These guidelines include, but are not limited to, general land use (mixed-use residential and commercial), maximum density and development intensity (20-75 dwelling units per acre and 1.0 non-residential floor area ratio (“FAR”), respectively), and assumed dwelling units and commercial square footage (369 and 142,840, respectively). An Addendum to the SEIR was submitted in conjunction with the Project and is explained in detail within the Environmental Review section of this report.

On May 25, 2022, the Applicant filed a Development Plan application (File No. PDEV22- 027) to construct 346 dwelling units and 5,400 square feet of ground-floor commercial space on 9.4 acres of the overall 10.6-acre Project site. The request was submitted in conjunction with a Certificate of Appropriateness application (File No. PHP22-015), to determine whether the Project site was a historic resource, and a Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) application (File No. PUD22-004), to establish the development standards and design guidelines for the Project site to facilitate its two phases of development.

On August 7, 2023, the Development Advisory Board considered the subject Development Plan application and recommended approval to the Planning Commission with the Project conditions of approval.

On August 9, 2023, the Historic Preservation Subcommittee considered the subject Certificate of Appropriateness and recommended approval to the Planning/Historic Preservation Commission.
67 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 3 of 32 ends

On August 22, 2023, the Planning Commission continued the item to the September 26, 2023, public hearing to allow staff and the Applicant appropriate time to address a public comment received.
(2) Planned Unit Development (File No. PUD22-004) – The MU-NH 8e zoning district and the EA Overlay district require the preparation and approval of a PUD to establish the development standards and design guidelines for the site. The proposed Euclid Walnut PUD, appended to the attached resolution as “Attachment A,” identifies the following components:
(a) Chapter 1: Introduction – A brief introduction of the Project site and intent of the Planned Unit Development document.
(b) Chapter 2: Objectives – The Objectives component of the PUD outlines the Project’s consistency with The Ontario Plan, including its Vision, Governance Manual, and Policy Plan (General Plan).
(i) Vision – The Ontario Vision was adopted by the City Council envisioning a sustained, community-wide prosperity which continuously adds value and yields benefits. Value is expressed in land, revenue, infrastructure, businesses, education, employment, health, community services, recreation, and more. The PUD helps the City realize its specific Points of Vision for the Project site and beyond, as outlined in the Distinctive Development section, by means of contributing to:
• A system of vibrant retail, town, and neighborhood centers responsive to market demands and woven into the fabric of the community.
• A demonstrated ability to attract housing in pursuit of our acknowledged responsibility to balance housing with the job growth that drives our quality of life. • Superior quality and design of the built environment and open spaces through careful attention to detail at every scale, including public and private spaces and structures.

Additionally, from an economic development standpoint, the City of Ontario views this as a critical project to further serve the Ontario Vision and boost economic development activity in the City. The City has been taking a targeted approach to revitalize underutilized shopping centers in an effort to bring in much needed housing units as well as high-quality retail for our residents. The Project will replace dated retail space and provide a high-quality housing product with in-line retail spaces to provide the residents and surrounding community with premier food, beverage, service, and miscellaneous retail.
(ii) Policy Plan (General Plan) – The Policy Plan (General Plan) includes the Land Use Element, which designates the subject parcels within the PUD as “MU – Mixed-Use” to facilitate a horizontal and/or vertical mix of retail, service, office, restaurant, entertainment, cultural, and residential uses. The MU – Mixed-Use designation 68 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 4 of 32 ends

is further broken down into sub-categories to refine the type of mixed-use development desired by the City. The Project site is located within sub-area MU-NH – Mixed Use Neighborhood Activity Hub. This designation envisions low-rise buildings (three to five stories) with a mix of retail and residential land uses that will create identity and place and serve surrounding residents. This category allows for residential densities ranging from 20 to 75 dwelling units per acre and non-residential development intensity of 1.00 FAR.

The build-out of the full 16-acre sub-area is projected to be 369 dwelling units and 142,840 square feet of non-residential development.

The PUD regulates the redevelopment of 10.6 acres of this sub-area with the intent to create a mixed-use project providing a total of 369 dwelling units and 12,000 nonresidential square feet. The remaining 5.4 acres of the sub-area is located north of the PUD’s boundary and is currently developed with 15 single-family dwelling units and approximately 28,000 square feet of non-residential development. The PUD would allow the total number of residential units to exceed the 369 units identified in the TOP 2050 build-out projection within this sub-area, resulting from the combination of existing singlefamily units and the proposed units within the boundaries of this PUD. However, the exceedance is offset by a significant reduction in the build-out of non-residential square footage should the existing uses/buildings north of the Project site remain unchanged.

Implementation of this PUD would still allow for redevelopment of the 5.4-acre portion of the sub-area, of up to 130,000 non-residential square footage, consistent with the TOP 2050 build-out projections for this sub-area.

Implementation of the PUD will achieve numerous City goals and policies as outlined in the Policy Plan (General Plan). Briefly, these goals are listed in the “Compliance with the Ontario Plan” section of the report, below.

The PUD also outlines how the Project will be consistent with the EA Overlay district, which was established to recognize, protect, and enhance the visual character and quality of Euclid Avenue as a major scenic and historic resource in Ontario as well as its position on the National Register of Historic Places. More information about the Project’s integration to the Euclid Avenue corridor is provided in section “(3) Certificate of Appropriateness (File No. PHP22-015),” below.

The PUD lists the following objectives that will facilitate redevelopment of the Project site with structures and related improvements that support residential and non-residential land uses within the same Project site:
• Develop and provide new, high-quality rental housing combined with a mixeduse component. • Provide transition between new mixed-use development and surrounding residential neighborhoods and commercial properties.
• Provide areas of private and passive open space for each residential unit, as well as community gathering and active open spaces.
69 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 5 of 32 ends

• Promote development that is consistent with the MU-NH – Mixed Use Neighborhood Activity Hub land use designation.
• Promote revitalization of commercial uses on the Project site by establishing new ground-floor retail and similar uses that serve on-site residents and those in surrounding neighborhoods.
• Provide outdoor gathering places adjacent to commercial storefronts, such as outdoor patio or bench seating with inviting/attractive landscape elements. • Orient non-residential, ground-floor uses towards Euclid Avenue. • Incorporate site design solutions to allow for phased development. • Satisfy the build-out projections for residential dwelling units within the MU-NH (Euclid-Walnut) sub-area, as defined in TOP 2050.
(c) Chapter 3: Land Use Plan – The Land Use Plan chapter briefly describes the Project, including zoning and land use districts, development phasing, demolition activities, and permitted land uses. The PUD aligns with the Project site’s zoning and TOP 2050 land use districts by allowing for horizontal and vertical mixed-use development and associated facilities. Development will occur in two phases. The first phase will be developed with two four-story and six three-story buildings, providing a combined total of 346 dwelling units and 5,400 square feet of commercial space. Phase 2 will implement the remaining build-out for the PUD, with an additional 23 dwelling units and up to 6,600 square feet of ground-floor commercial. While no details are available yet on the specific design of Phase 2, development will be required to meet all PUD and Ontario Development Code standards. Phase 1 will retain the existing 4,100 square-foot fast food drive-thru building (Carl’s Jr.), which will be demolished in the future as part of Phase 2.

Demolition of approximately 100,950 square feet of older commercial buildings will occur prior to Phase 1 construction (see Exhibit 3-2: Phase 1 Conceptual Site Plan located on page 23 of the PUD, included herein as “Attachment A” of the Planning Commission Resolution for File No. PUD22-004, attached to this report). The chapter outlines various permitted land uses, activities, and facilities for the PUD site, along with the process required to get certain uses approved.
(d) Chapter 4: Development Regulations – The Development Regulations chapter sets forth standards that govern development of the site, including the following topics: intensity; density; building envelope; vehicle access; parking facilities, supply, and design; residential open space and common amenities; service facilities; signs; landscape and hardscape; fences and walls; public right-of-way improvements; and infrastructure. Development standards for the Project site are also provided in a summary table (see Figure 4-1: Summary of Development Standards “Attachment A” of the Planning Commission Resolution for File No. PUD22-004, attached to this report). The PUD proposes a maximum FAR of 0.50 and density of 20.1-40 dwelling units per acre; a maximum building height of 60 feet for four-story buildings and 50 feet for three-story buildings; minimum building street setbacks of 10 feet to the street, 50 feet to adjacent residential, 5 feet to non-residential, and 5 feet to carports or trash enclosures; minimum

1.2 parking spaces per bedroom for residential uses and 1 space per 250 square feet of non-residential uses; a minimum 50 square feet of private open space and 175 square 70 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 6 of 32 ends

feet of common amenities per dwelling unit; and a minimum 150 cubic-foot storage area per dwelling unit.
(e) Chapter 5: Design Criteria – New development implemented under the PUD will generate new uses and design aesthetics to fulfill the design goals and policies of TOP and will be guided by design criteria to provide articulation, dynamic materials and colors, and avoidance of bulky and monotonous elevations. Street trees and landscaped street setback areas will provide opportunities to frame the street, create and prioritize safe, attractive, and well-shaded pedestrian access from the public rightsof-way, and minimize building bulk from the public right-of-way. The proposed development will be subject to and governed by policies and goals regarding building orientation, access and parking facilities, service facilities, pedestrian linkages, architectural character, massing and scale, articulation and fenestration, architectural details, storefronts, materials and colors, roofs and rooftop equipment, non-residential outdoor dining areas, residential outdoor spaces and common recreational amenities, and landscape and hardscape elements.
(f) Chapter 6: Administration – The PUD establishes that applications for Development Plans and other entitlement proposals are subject to the Ontario Development Code submittal, review and processing requirements. (3) Certificate of Appropriateness (File No. PHP22-015) – Section 6.01.035 (Overlay Zoning Districts) of the Ontario Development Code requires Certificate of Appropriateness approval for Development Plans located within the EA Overlay district.

The intent of the EA Overlay district is not to create a false sense of history with any new development along the Euclid Avenue corridor, but rather to ensure that new development does not cause an adverse effect on the character-defining features of the Euclid Avenue Historic District. Additionally, all new construction should be compatible with the surrounding developments in site design, massing, and scale.

The public right-of-way of Euclid Avenue from Philadelphia Street to the I-10 was designated as Local Landmark No. 67 on January 16, 2001. On August 10, 2005, the public right-of-way of Euclid Avenue from Philadelphia Street in Ontario to 24th Street in Upland was listed on the National Register of Historic Places as a cultural landscape historic district. Contributing character-defining features of the historic district includes the 60- foot wide median, historic rock curb, scored sidewalks, King standard light posts, double planting of California pepper trees (Schinus molle), silk oaks trees (Grevillea robusta), and other mature vegetation such as deodar trees (Cedrus deodara) and Canary Island palms (Phoenix canariensis). Non-contributing features include the bridge which crosses the I-10 freeway and the bridge railroad crossings at Emporia and State Streets.

Commercial properties located on Euclid Avenue adjacent to the Project site have been developed with landscape planters or parking lots along the corridor, with the building placement setback from Euclid Avenue. The Project is consistent with that of the surrounding area. The design, site configuration and landscaping of the mixed-use 71 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 7 of 32 ends

building is appropriate in scale and massing for the infill construction and will not detract or adversely affect the historic character of Euclid Avenue. Impacts to the Euclid Avenue Historic District are not likely to occur because the Project site is located approximately one-half mile south of the designated historic district. Furthermore, the Project site does not contain historic resources, is not located adjacent to any historic properties, and does not propose any alterations to the designated-historic portions of Euclid Avenue.

In reviewing a Certificate of Appropriateness, certain findings must be met. The Project meets each of these findings, as follows:
 The proposed alteration, restoration, relocation, or construction, in whole or in part, will not:
• Detrimentally change, destroy, or adversely affect any significant architectural feature of the historic resource - because no significant architectural feature exists on or adjacent to the Project site. While the Project site has frontage along Euclid Avenue and is within the EA Overlay district, there are no identified historic resources within the immediate surrounding area of the proposed Project.
• Detrimentally change, destroy, or adversely affect the historic character or value of the resource - because no notable historical resource is located on or adjacent to the Project site and, although the Project fronts Euclid Avenue, the Project is separated by one-half mile from the southernmost boundary (Philadelphia Street) of the designated historic portion of Euclid Avenue. The Project does not propose to alter or affect character-defining features of the historic district.
• Be incompatible with the exterior character-defining features of other improvements within the historic district - because, although the parcels within the Project site have Euclid Avenue frontage and are subject to requirements of the EA Overlay district, the site is separated from the closest boundary of an historic district by a distance of approximately one-half mile. The Project’s exterior features and other improvements will be regulated under a Planned Unit Development that includes criteria to ensure that site and building design is appropriate generally to the site’s relationship, location, and the overall compatibility with the Euclid Avenue corridor.
• Adversely affect or detract from the character of the historic district - because, while the Project is located within the EA Overlay district, it is physically separated from the nearest historic district boundary by a distance of one-half mile to the north. Further, there are no modifications proposed as part of this Project that would alter the predominant character of the 60-foot-wide median within Euclid Avenue. Through enhanced architectural elements and design complementary to the existing residential and commercial neighboring development, and through 72 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 8 of 32 ends

compliance with the proposed PUD and Ontario Development Code, the proposed Project will not detract from the character of Euclid Avenue. (4) Development Plan (File No. PDEV22-027) – A Development Plan was submitted in conjunction with the PUD to facilitate construction of Phase 1 of the Project. A comprehensive Development Plan set, including the site plan, elevations, floor plans, landscape plan, renderings, colors and materials, and development summary sheet, is attached to this report as “Attachment A – Development Plan Set.” (a) Site Design/Building Layout — The Project proposes the construction of eight buildings consisting of 346 apartment units, at a density of 36.7 dwelling units per acre and 5,400 square feet of ground-floor commercial, at an intensity of 0.01 FAR.

Buildings 1 and 2 are four-stories and will be oriented toward Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street, respectively, and Buildings 3 through 8 are three-story buildings and will be located interior to the site. The buildings are largely oriented in a linear north-south direction, aside from Building 1, which is an L-shaped building and Building 2, which is a C-shaped building. Four of the three-story buildings face onto a courtyard/paseo with active and passive recreational facilities such as cornhole and patio furniture. The major recreational facilities are located within or adjacent to Building 1, toward the northeast corner of the Project site. The Project will provide a range of dwelling types, including studio, onebedroom, and two-bedroom apartments. See Attachment A – Development Plan Set, page 1 for the site plan; pages 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12 for the floor plans; and pages 13 and 14 for the landscape plan and courtyard/paseo sample. (b) Site Access/Circulation — The commercial portion of the Project will have direct access from Euclid Avenue, and the residential portion of the Project will have gated entry access points for both vehicles and pedestrians from Euclid Avenue and Walnut Street. Pedestrian circulation is provided throughout the Project site via sidewalks and decorative drive aisle crossings. Vehicular circulation is provided throughout the site to serve both the residential and commercial land uses. Residents and their guests will have access to assigned private parking facilities, including garages, carports, and uncovered spaces. Commercial circulation is limited to the easterly Project boundary, along Euclid Avenue, and includes shared vehicular access to the existing Carl’s Jr. drivethru restaurant located at the Project site’s southeast corner. (c) Parking —The number of off-street parking spaces provided exceeds the minimum parking requirement for the Project. The off-street parking calculations and provisions for the Project are provided in detail in the table located on page 19 of Attachment A – Development Plan Set and are summarized below.

Table 1: Parking Summary
Type of Use Number of
Bedrooms
Building
Area (in SF) Parking Ratio Spaces Required Spaces Provided Residential Units 483 N/A 1.2 spaces per bedroom
(inclusive of guest spaces) 580 582
73 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 9 of 32 ends

Table 1: Parking Summary
Type of Use Number of
Bedrooms
Building
Area (in SF) Parking Ratio Spaces Required Spaces Provided Commercial N/A 5,400 SF 1 space/250 sq. ft. 22 24
TOTAL 602 606
The Project is designed to provide a total of 582 private residential parking spaces on-site (including 18 tandem uncovered spaces behind garage spaces for assignment to the same user), and 24 retail public spaces. The tandem spaces provided account for 3 percent of the total required parking, which is substantially less than the 12 percent maximum allowed by the Development Code. No on-street parking is permitted adjacent to the Project site. Per the provisions of the PUD, a parking management plan shall be submitted for Planning Department review and approval, to accompany a rental/lease agreement for the site’s residents and businesses. (d) Architecture — The buildings are designed in a contemporary architectural style, as depicted in the elevations, renderings, and materials summary provided in Attachment A – Development Plan Set on sheets 2, 3, 7, 9 (elevations), 15 through 17 (renderings), and 18 (materials summary). An assortment of complementary colors, materials, and textures are proposed, including exterior plaster, fiber cement lap siding, fiber cement trim boards, stone veneer, metal awnings and trellises, and aluminum storefront windows. The color palette largely consists of neutral earth tones but also includes a pop of vibrant color accent panels for each building in orange, yellow, or green. The residential units feature balconies and a rooftop deck will be provided for Building 1, located at the northeast corner of the Project site.

Building 1, which fronts onto Euclid Avenue, will be unique in that it will feature groundfloor retail storefronts. The storefronts will include metal awnings and trellises to provide visual interest at the retail tenant entries. Buildings 2 through 8 will be consistent with and complementary to Building 1, featuring stone veneer accents along the ground floor and stucco and fiber cement siding along the upper floors. The residential balconies will also feature contemporary metal railings.
(e) Common Open Space, Amenities, and Landscaping — Approximately 67,404 square feet of common open space and indoor and outdoor recreation amenities are provided throughout the site, including a pool court, dog park, landscaped paseos, courtyards, club, fitness room, sports lounge, roof deck, and leasing lounge. Additional on-site amenities for residential tenants include private open space (minimum of 50 square feet per dwelling unit for a total of 21,156 square feet) and private storage units (minimum of 150 cubic feet per dwelling unit). Common and private open space exceed the minimum requirements with 67,404 square feet of common open space and 21,156 square feet of private open space.
74 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 10 of 32 ends

Pursuant to Ontario Development Code Sections 6.01.010 and 6.05, all areas of a multiple-family development project not covered by structures, drive aisles, off-street parking facilities, or hardscape shall be fully landscaped and provided with a permanent automatic irrigation system prior to Certificate of Occupancy issuance. As such, landscaping is provided for these unpaved areas, including the full length of the Project street frontages, along pedestrian walkways and recreation areas, and throughout the parking lot where possible, for a total of 52,971 square feet (12.9 percent) of landscape coverage for the Project site. A variety of accent and shade trees in 24- to 60-inch box sizes, as well as one- to five-gallon shrubs, groundcovers, and vines, will be planted throughout the site. Decorative paving and lighting will be provided at entries, pedestrian walkways, and other key locations throughout the Project site, as depicted in Attachment A – Development Plan Set, pages 13 and 14.
(f) Signage — All Project signage is required to comply with the sign regulations provided in Ontario Development Code Division 8.1 as well as in the PUD. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the installation of any new on-site signage, the Applicant is required to submit a Master Sign Program for the Project site and Sign Plans for the proposed signs for Planning Department review and approval. (g) Utilities (drainage, sewer) — Public utilities (water and sewer) are available to serve the Project. Furthermore, the Applicant has submitted a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan ("PWQMP"), which establishes the Project's compliance with storm water discharge/water quality requirements. The PWQMP includes site design measures that capture runoff and pollutant transport by minimizing impervious surfaces and maximizes low impact development ("LID") best management practices ("BMPs"), such as retention and infiltration, biotreatment, and evapotranspiration. The PWQMP proposes the minimized use of impervious hardscape in conjunction with on-site biotreatment basins/trenches with underdrains, where the soil type is poorly draining. Any overflow drainage will be conveyed to the public street by way of parkway drains and culverts.

NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING: A neighborhood meeting regarding File No. PZC22-001, a Policy Plan (General Plan) zoning consistency project that included the Project site, was held on February 22, 2023. Several members of the public attended and requested additional information about the Project, including the Project’s scope of work, conceptual site planning and building design, and traffic. City staff provided additional information to the community members at the meeting and considered their input during Project review. Further, a community member who provided contact information was added to the public notification list for the Project.

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, the Project site was posted with one or more large public notification signs and notices were mailed to all owners of real property located within a 75 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 11 of 32 ends

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.

CORRESPONDENCE: As of the preparation of this Agenda Report, Planning Department staff received the following written or verbal communications from the owners or occupants of properties surrounding the Project site or from the public in general:
• At the neighborhood meeting described above, a community member requested additional information about the Project’s scope of work, conceptual site planning and building design, and traffic. The requested information was provided, and the commenter was added to the public notification list. • James L. Camarillo, a representative of Caltrans, reviewed and provided preliminary comments and recommendations about the Project. He requested additional information to be able to provide a more in-depth review. His correspondence was forwarded to the appropriate staff for review and response. • On August 7, 2023, Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney at Law, representing the Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters, submitted a letter (See Attachment A-1, Mitchell M. Tsai letter) contesting the Project based on the following claims:

1. The City should require the use of a local workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment.

Therefore, mitigation beyond what was required in TOP 2050 SEIR to further reduce air quality, GHG, and VMT impacts is not required for the proposed Project. The comment does not affect the analysis completed or conclusions provided in the Addendum, does not provide new information or evidence related to the analysis completed in the Addendum, and does not reflect on the adequacy or content of the Addendum. No changes to the Addendum are required.

2. The Project would be approved in violation of CEQA.

Staff Response: The commenter claims a Project-specific EIR should be prepared and that new mitigation measures, specifically related to EVcapable parking spaces, are required and were not considered in the prior environmental analysis of the Project site. The comment does not appear to recognize the City’s recent adoption of TOP 2050 and certification of TOP 2050 SEIR on August 16, 2022. As recognized in the Addendum, the Project will be required to comply with the CALGreen Building Code (CBC) 76 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 12 of 32 ends

commercial and residential requirements in effect at the time of development. Further, the Project will be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ 3-3 from TOP 2050 SEIR, which provides a list of potential mitigation measures which may be included as conditions of approval should operational air quality impacts exceed South Coast AQMDadopted thresholds of significance. Such measures include, but are not limited to: Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 of CALGreen (Residential Voluntary Measures); Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures); Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 and Section A5.106.8.2 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures; Residential Voluntary Measures).

3. CEQA requires the City to prepare a tiered EIR for the Project instead of an Addendum.

Page 13 of 32 ends

Commission hearing, the Project has been advertised in the newspaper, notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project and the Staff Report and Addendum was posted 72 hours prior to the hearing. Accordingly, a tiered EIR is not required for the Project.

4. The City cannot issue an Addendum because the Project was not addressed with the TOP 2050 Update SEIR and therefore an EIR must be prepared for the Project.

TOP 2050 SEIR evaluated the development of a maximum of 369 residential units and approximately 142,840 square feet of non-residential development on the Overlay Planning Area (including the PUD site). The Project proposes 369 units and approximately 12,000 square feet of nonresidential development in Phases 1 and 2, leaving 130,840 square feet of non-residential development to be built in the remainder of the MU-NH area adjacent to the SR-60 Freeway. Development of the proposed Project would slightly exceed the total number of residential units for this area under TOP 2050 (369 proposed units +15 existing units = 384 total units vs. 369 TOP 2050 projected total units, or a 5 percent increase). However, development of the Project would substantially reduce the amount of anticipated nonresidential growth in this sub-area (12,000 SF in the Project area plus 28,000 existing = 40,000 SF vs. 142,840 SF, or a 72 percent decrease). The Addendum analyzed the impacts of the new residential and commercial uses currently proposed under the Project, but included this analysis demonstrating that the anticipated impacts of growth in this MU-NH subarea with the Project are considered to be equivalent or less than those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR for this sub-area. Accordingly, the Project is within the scope of TOP 2050 and the preparation of an Addendum is appropriate.

TOP 2050 SEIR did identify several significant and unavoidable impacts.

However, as TOP 2050 SEIR contemplated the Project, the City properly 78 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 14 of 32 ends

applied the subsequent review provisions in Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164. The Project will not result in any new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts identified in TOP 2050 SEIR, nor are there any changes in circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is also no new information that exists that shows the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in TOP 2050 SEIR; significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous SEIR; or 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 mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. As such, an Addendum is appropriate.
• On August 16, 2023, Dale J. Goldsmith, on behalf of the applicant Legacy/Collier Residential LLC, submitted a letter in response to the comment letter submitted by Mitchell Tsai (see Attachment A2: Applicant Response Letter). The letter discussed the project and contested the claims made by Mr. Tsai.
• On August 22, 2023, Mitchell M. Tsai, Attorney at Law, representing the Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters, submitted a second letter (See Attachment A-3, Mitchell M. Tsai Letter 2) contesting the Project based on the following claims:

1. The City should require the use of a local workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment.

Staff Response: The commenter reiterates comments made in its August 7, 2023 letter. As provided in Staff’s response above and discussed in the Addendum, the Project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different air quality, GHG, or VMT impacts not previously considered and addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. Therefore, mitigation beyond what was required in the TOP 2050 SEIR to further reduce air quality, GHG, and VMT impacts is not required for the proposed Project. The comment does not affect the analysis completed or conclusions provided in the Addendum, does not provide new information or evidence related to the analysis completed in the Addendum, and does not reflect on the adequacy or content of the Addendum. No changes to the Addendum are required. 79 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 15 of 32 ends

2. The Project would be approved in violation of CEQA.

Staff Response: After initially citing State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 which does not apply to the Project, the commenter now claims that the TOP 2050 SEIR and the Addendum fail to adequately address environmental impacts or provide adequate mitigation measures relating to the sensitive receptors close to the Project site. As acknowledged In the Addendum, the Project will require implementation of TOP 2050 SEIR Mitigation Measures AQ 3-1 through AQ 3-3, and therefore would not result in any new impacts beyond those identified in TOP 2050 SEIR. (Addendum, p. 30.) In compliance with TOP 2050 SEIR Mitigation Measure AQ 3-1, MIG prepared a memorandum which concludes the construction and operational emissions from proposed Project would not exceed any applicable SCAQMD-recommended CEQA thresholds of significance and is consistent with TOP 2050 with mitigation incorporated. As evidenced in the MIG memorandum, the Project would not result in a new or substantially greater significant air quality impact than identified in the TOP 2050 SEIR. As such, none of the factors listed in State CEQA Guidelines section 15162 are satisfied and an Addendum is appropriate.

The Addendum notes the TOP 2050 SEIR determined that implementation of the policies in the Safety Element, in addition to existing regulations, would ensure less than significant impacts from transport, use, and/or disposal of hazardous materials. It further concluded TOP 2050 would have less than significant direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts relating to transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, release of hazardous materials, and emission and handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste. (Addendum, p. 40.) The TOP 2050 SEIR analysis, cited in the Addendum, states “demolition activities that have the potential to expose construction workers and/or the public to asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint will be conducted in accordance with applicable regulations, including, but not limited to: South Coast Air Quality Management District’s Rule 1403; California Health and Safety Code (Section 39650 et seq.); California Code of Regulations (Title 8, Section 1529); California Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1529 [Asbestos] and Section 1532.1 [Lead]); and Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Part 61 [asbestos], Title 40, Part 763 [asbestos], and Title 29, Part 1926 [asbestos and lead]”; concluding impacts related to disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. (TOP SEIR, p. 5.9-37.) Demolition of structures, 80 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 16 of 32 ends

such as those contemplated by the Project, were considered and analyzed in the TOP 2050 SEIR and no subsequent or supplemental EIR is warranted.

As to GHG emissions, the commenter has provided no evidence to support its claim that any substantial impacts related to GHG emissions or global climate change would occur as a result of Project implementation. The Addendum found developing the site with mixed residential and commercial uses will not create significantly greater impacts than were identified in TOP 2050 SEIR. (Addendum, p. 39.) MIG, Inc. prepared a memorandum evidencing the Project’s consistency with the City’s CCAP and the analysis in the TOP 2050 SEIR. The Project would result in the net reduction of approximately 4,405 MTCO2e per year and is consistent with the CCAP. Therefore, the Project would not result in a new or substantially more adverse GHG impact than identified in the TOP 2050 SEIR or CCAP and no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required.

The commenter restates its prior claim that a Project-specific EIR should be prepared and that new mitigation measures, specifically related to EVcapable parking spaces, are required and were not considered in the prior environmental analysis of the Project site. The comment does not recognize the City’s recent adoption of TOP 2050 and certification of TOP 2050 SEIR on August 16, 2022. As recognized in the Addendum, the Project will be required to comply with the CALGreen Building Code (CBC) commercial and residential requirements in effect at the time of development. Further, the Project will be required to implement Mitigation Measure AQ 3-3 from TOP 2050 SEIR, which provides a list of potential mitigation measures that may be included as conditions of approval should operational air quality impacts exceed South Coast AQMD-adopted thresholds of significance.

Such measures include, but are not limited to: Provide bicycle parking facilities per Section A4.106.9 of CALGreen (Residential Voluntary Measures); Provide preferential parking spaces for low-emitting, fuelefficient, and carpool/van vehicles per Section A5.106.5.1 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures); Provide facilities to support electric charging stations per Section A5.106.5.3 and Section A5.106.8.2 of CALGreen (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures; Residential Voluntary Measures).

3. CEQA requires the City to prepare a tiered EIR for the Project instead of an Addendum.
81 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 17 of 32 ends

Staff Response: The City has properly prepared an Addendum to TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project and a tiered EIR, as claimed by the commenter, is not required. The City has discretion to determine whether a subsequent or supplemental EIR is necessary under Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, so long as its decision is supported by substantial evidence. Similarly, whether an activity is within the scope of a program EIR "is a factual question that the lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record." (State CEQA Guidelines, §15168(c)(2)). The City has prepared an Addendum to TOP 2050 SEIR for the Project, finding that all impacts of the Project have been adequately addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. The CEQA Guidelines provide that an agency may prepare an addendum to a prior EIR to document its decision that a subsequent EIR is not required. (State CEQA Guidelines, §15164(b), (e)). As such, the Addendum is appropriate in this case and no further environmental review is required.

The City has also followed all procedural requirements, including public disclosure requirements, in its preparation of the Addendum. While CEQA requires notice to the public and an opportunity to comment in connection with adoption of a negative declaration or preparation of an EIR, an addendum is not required to be circulated for public review (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15164(c)). The Addendum, and all supporting technical studies has been provided to the Planning Commission and the public prior to any decision by the City, in compliance with CEQA. The City has also complied with the requirements of the Public Records Act. The Project, along with the Development Advisory Board Staff Report and Addendum, was posted on the City’s website 72 hours prior to the meeting, consistent with the California Public Records Act. Regarding the Planning Commission hearing, the Project has been advertised in the newspaper, notices have been sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the project and the Staff Report and Addendum were posted 72 hours prior to the hearing. Accordingly, a tiered EIR is not required for the Project.

4. The City cannot issue an Addendum because the Project was not addressed with TOP 2050 SEIR and therefore an EIR must be prepared for the Project.

Staff Response: As discussed in the Addendum, the Project was addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR, and the commenter did not provide any evidence of Project impacts that are outside of the scope of TOP 2050 SEIR. The TOP shows a total of five locations within the City with the MU-NH land use designation. The Future Buildout Projections Table of the Land Use Element provides details for each of these five MU-NH sub-areas. The three parcels subject to this PUD Project make up 10.6 acres (“PUD site”) of the overall 16 acres that comprise the “MU-NH” sub-area. The remaining 5.4 acres of the 82 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 18 of 32 ends

MU-NH area include approximately 28,000 square feet of existing businesses (gas station, pre-school, and two small businesses) and 15 single family homes between the PUD site and the SR-60 Freeway to the north.

TOP 2050 SEIR did identify several significant and unavoidable impacts.

However, the commenter misstates the significant and unavoidable impacts included in the TOP 2050 SEIR. The TOP 2050 SEIR found significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, cultural resources (historic resources), noise and transportation (VMT) (TOP 2050 SEIR pp. 2-5 – 2-5.) The Addendum analyzes impacts at the Project level and for each of these areas concludes Project specific mitigation was not required. Notably, Project-specific analyses, prepared by MIG, Inc., an expert consulting firm, found the Project’s air quality and GHG impacts to be less than significant with the mitigation imposed in the TOP 2050 EIR (air quality) and, in the case of GHG emissions, Project emissions would actually be less than existing levels. In both instances, Project impacts were consistent (or less) than those analyzed for the site in the TOP 2050 EIR. They are therefore properly addressed in the Addendum.

Page 19 of 32 ends

circumstances under which the Project is undertaken that would result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is also no new information that exists that shows the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in TOP 2050 SEIR; significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous SEIR; or 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 mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous SEIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. As such, an Addendum is appropriate.
• On September 14, 2023, Dale J. Goldsmith, on behalf of the applicant Legacy/Collier Residential LLC, submitted a letter in response to the second comment letter submitted by Mitchell Tsai (see Attachment A4: Applicant Response Letter 2). The letter discussed the project and contested the claims made by Mr. Tsai.

AGENCY/DEPARTMENT REVIEWS AND RESOLUTIONS: Each City agency/department has been provided the opportunity to review and comment on the subject application and recommend conditions of approval to be imposed upon the application. At the time of the Resolution preparation, recommended conditions of approval were provided and a summary of attachments to the attached Resolutions, including supplemental documents and Project Conditions of Approval is as follows:
- Addendum to the SEIR:
• “Attachment A” – Addendum
- Planned Unit Development:
• "Attachment A" – Euclid Walnut Planned Unit Development • “Attachment B” – File No. PUD22-004 Conditions of Approval - Certificate of Appropriateness:
• “Attachment A” – File No. PHP22-015 Conditions of Approval - Development Plan:
• “Attachment A” – Development Plan Set
• “Attachment B” – File No. PDEV22-027 Conditions of Approval 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. 84 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 20 of 32 ends

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 decision-making body for File Nos. PHP22-015 and PDEV22-027, and as the recommending body for File No. PUD22-004 for the Project, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the facts and information 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 Impact 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 conjunction 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 2050”).

More specifically, the goals and policies of TOP 2050 that are furthered by the proposed Project are as follows:
(1) City Council Goals.
 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 (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. 85 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 21 of 32 ends

 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:
 Goal LU-1 Balance. A community that has a spectrum of housing types and price ranges that match the jobs in the City and that make it possible for people to live and work in Ontario and maintain a quality of life.
 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-1.5 Jobs-Housing Balance. We coordinate land use, infrastructure, and transportation planning and analysis with regional, county, and other local agencies to further regional and sub-regional goals for jobs-housing balance.  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.
 LU-2.1 Land Use Decisions. We minimize adverse impacts on adjacent properties when considering land use and zoning requests.  LU-2.2 Buffers. We require new uses to provide mitigation or buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur. Additional mitigation is required when new uses could negatively impact environmental justice areas.  LU-2.6 Infrastructure Compatibility. We require infrastructure to be aesthetically pleasing and in context with the community character.  Goal LU-4 Phased Growth. Development that provides short-term value only when the opportunity to achieve our Vision can be preserved.  LU-4.2 Interim Development. We allow development in urban, mixed use, and transit-oriented Place Types that is not immediately reflective of our ultimate Vision for the Place Type, provided it can be modified or replaced when circumstances are 86 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 22 of 32 ends

right to support development aligned with the Place Type Vision. We will not allow development that impedes, precludes, or compromises our ability to achieve our Vision.  LU-4.3 Infrastructure Timing. We require that the necessary infrastructure and services be in place prior to or concurrently with development.  LU-4.4 Shared Infrastructure. We encourage and facilitate the use of shared infrastructure (including shared or managed parking) in urban, mixed use, and transitoriented Place Types.

Housing Element:
 Goal H-2 Housing Supply & Diversity. Diversity of types of quality housing that are affordable to a range of household income levels, accommodate changing demographics, and support and reinforce the economic sustainability of Ontario.  H-2.1 Corridor Housing. We revitalize transportation corridors by encouraging the production of higher density residential and mixed-uses that are architecturally, functionally, and aesthetically suited to corridors.  H-2.5 Housing Design. We require architectural excellence through adherence to City design guidelines, thoughtful site planning, environmentally sustainable practices, and other best practices.
 H-2.6 Infill Development. We support the revitalization of neighborhoods through the construction of higher-density residential developments on underutilized residential and commercial sites.
 Goal H-3 Governmental Regulations. A City regulatory environment that balances the need for creativity and excellence in residential design, flexibility and predictability in the project approval process, and the provision of an adequate supply and prices of housing.
 H-3.2 Flexible Standards. We allow flexibility in the application of residential and mixed-use development standards in order to gain benefits such as exceptional design quality, economic advantages, sustainability, or other benefits that would otherwise be unrealized.
 Goal H-5 Special Needs. A full range of housing types and community services that meet the special housing needs for all individuals and families in Ontario, regardless of income level, age, or other status.
 H-5.2 Family Housing. We support the development of larger rental apartments that are appropriate for families with children, including, as feasible, the provision of services, recreation, and other amenities. 87 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 23 of 32 ends

Environmental Resources Element:
 Goal ER-1 Water & Wastewater. A reliable and cost-effective system that permits the City to manage its diverse water resources and needs.  ER-1.4 Supply-Demand Balance. We require that available water supply and demands be balanced.
 ER-1.6 Urban Run-off Quantity. We encourage the use of low impact development strategies, including green infrastructure, to intercept run-off, slow the discharge rate, increase infiltration, and ultimately reduce discharge volumes to traditional storm drain systems.
 ER-1.7 Urban Run-off Quality. We require control and management of urban run-off, consistent with Regional Water Quality Control Board regulations.  ER-1.8 Wastewater Management. We require the management of wastewater discharge and collection consistent with waste discharge requirements adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Energy Element:
 Goal ER-3 Energy. Cost-effective and reliable energy system sustained through a combination of low-impact buildings, site and neighborhood energy conservation, and diverse sources of energy generation that collectively helps to minimize the region’s carbon footprint.
 ER-3.3 Building and Site Design. We require new construction to incorporate energy-efficient building and site design strategies, which could include appropriate solar orientation, maximum use of natural daylight, passive solar, and natural ventilation.  Goal ER-4 Air Quality. Improved indoor and outdoor air quality and reduced locally-generated pollutant emissions.
 ER-4.1 Land Use. We reduce GHG and other local pollutant emissions through compact, mixed use, and transit-oriented development and development that improves the regional jobs-housing balance.

Community Economics Element:
 Goal CE-1 Complete Community. A complete community that provides for all incomes and stages of life.
 CE-1.6 Diversity of Housing. We collaborate with residents, housing providers, and the development community to provide housing opportunities for every 88 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 24 of 32 ends

stage of life; we plan for a variety of housing types and price points to encourage the development of housing supportive of our efforts to attract business in growing sectors of the community while being respectful of existing viable uses.  CE-1.7 Retail Goods and Services. We seek to ensure a mix of retail businesses that provide the full continuum of goods and services for the community.  Goal CE-2 Placemaking. A City of distinctive neighborhoods, districts, corridors, and centers where people choose to be.
 CE-2.1 Development Projects. We require new development and redevelopment to create unique, high-quality places that add value to the community.  CE-2.2 Development Review. We require those proposing new development and redevelopment to demonstrate how their projects will create appropriately unique, functional, and sustainable places that will compete well with their competition within the region.
 CE-2.4 Protection of Investment. We require that new development and redevelopment protect existing investment by providing architecture and urban design of equal or greater quality.
 CE-2.5 Private Maintenance. We require adequate maintenance, upkeep, and investment in private property because proper maintenance on private property protects property values.

Safety Element:
 Goal S-1 Seismic & Geologic Hazards. Minimized risk of injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by earthquake-induced and other geologic hazards.
 S-1.1 Implementation of Regulations and Standards. We require that all new habitable structures be designed in accordance with the most recent California Building Code adopted by the City, including provisions regarding lateral forces and grading.  S-1.2 Entitlement and Permitting Process. We follow state guidelines and the California Building Code to determine when development proposals must conduct geotechnical and geological investigations.
 Goal S-2 Flood Hazards. Minimized risk of injury, loss of life, property damage, and economic and social disruption caused by flooding and inundation hazards.  S-2.5 Stormwater Management. We maintain the storm drain system to convey a 100-year storm, when feasible, and encourage environmental site design 89 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 25 of 32 ends

practices to minimize flooding and increase groundwater recharge, including natural drainage, green infrastructure, and permeable ground surfaces.  Goal S-3 Fire & Rescue Hazards. Reduced risk of death, injury, property damage, and economic loss due to fires, accidents and normal everyday occurrences through prompt and capable emergency response.
 S-3.1 Prevention Services. We proactively mitigate or reduce the negative effects of fire, hazardous materials release, and structural collapse by implementing the regularly-adopted California Fire Code and California Building Code.  S-3.8 Fire Prevention. through Environmental Design. We require new development to incorporate fire prevention consideration in the design of streetscapes, sites, open spaces, and buildings.
 Goal S-4 Noise Hazards. An environment where noise does not adversely affect the public’s health, safety, and welfare.
 S-4.1 Noise Mitigation. We utilize the City’s Noise Ordinance, building codes, and subdivision and development codes to mitigate noise impacts.  Goal S-5 Wind-Related Hazards. Minimize the risk of injury, property damage, and economic loss resulting from windstorms and wind-related hazards.  S-5.1 Dust Control Measures. We require the implementation of Best Management Practices for dust control at all excavation and grading projects.  Goal S-7 Law Enforcement. Residential neighborhoods, commercial areas, and industrial districts that are kept safe through a multi-faceted approach of prevention, suppression, and community involvement in public safety.  S-7.4 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED). We require new development to incorporate CPTED in the design of streetscapes, sites, open spaces, and buildings.

Community Design Element:
 Goal CD-1 Image & Identity. A dynamic, progressive city containing distinct and complete places that foster a positive sense of identity and belonging among residents, visitors, and businesses.
 CD-1.1 City Identity. We take actions that are consistent with the City being a leading urban center in Southern California while recognizing, enhancing, and preserving the character of our existing viable neighborhoods. 90 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 26 of 32 ends

 CD-1.2 Place Types. We establish Place Types in urban, mixed use, and transit-oriented areas to foster the City's identity as a premier community and require new development within each Place Type to incorporate prescribed urban patterns, forms, and placemaking priorities.
 CD-1.3 Existing Neighborhoods. We require the existing character of viable residential and non-residential neighborhoods be preserved, protected, and enhanced.  Goal CD-2 Design Quality. A high level of design quality resulting in neighborhoods, public spaces, parks, and streetscapes that are attractive, safe, functional, human-scale, and distinct.
 CD-2.1 Quality Building Design and Architecture. We encourage all development projects to convey visual interest and character through:
• Building volume, massing, and height to provide context-appropriate scale and proportion;
• A true architectural style which is carried out in plan, section, and elevation through all aspects of the building and site design and appropriate for its setting; and
• Exterior building materials that are articulated, high quality, durable, and appropriate for the architectural style.
 CD-2.2 Neighborhood Design. We create distinct residential neighborhoods that promote a sense of community and identity by emphasizing access, connectivity, livability, and social interaction through such elements as:
• A pattern of smaller, walkable blocks that promote activity, safety, and access to nearby amenities and services;
• Varied parcel sizes and lot configurations to accommodate a diversity of housing types;
• Traffic calming measures to slow traffic and promote walkability while maintaining acceptable traffic flows and emergency evacuation access; • Floor plans that encourage views onto the street and de-emphasize the visual and physical dominance of garages (introducing the front porch as the "outdoor living room"), as appropriate; and
• Landscaped parkways, with sidewalks separated from the curb and designed to maximize safety, comfort, and aesthetics for all users.  CD-2.4 Urban, Mixed Use, and Transit-oriented Areas. We establish Place Types to require mixed use, urban, and transit-oriented areas to be designed and developed as pedestrian-oriented areas that are integrated with adjacent neighborhoods and promote a vibrant, comfortable, and functional environment, as defined for each Place Type.
91 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 27 of 32 ends

 CD-2.7 Sustainability. We collaborate with the development community to design and build neighborhoods, streetscapes, sites, outdoor spaces, landscaping, and buildings to reduce energy demand through solar orientation, maximum use of natural daylight, passive solar and natural ventilation, building form, mechanical and structural systems, building materials, and construction techniques.  CD-2.8 Safe Design. We incorporate defensible space design into new and existing developments to ensure the maximum safe travel and visibility on pathways, corridors, and open space and at building entrances and parking areas by avoiding physically and visually isolated spaces, maintaining visibility and accessibility, and using lighting.
 CD-2.9 Landscape Design. We encourage durable, sustainable, and drought-tolerant landscaping materials and designs that enhance the aesthetics of structures, create and define public and private spaces, and provide shade and environmental benefits.
 CD-2.10 Parking Areas. We require all development, including single-family residential, to minimize the visual impact of surface, structured, and garage parking areas visible from the public realm in an aesthetically pleasing, safe and environmentally sensitive manner. Examples include:
• Surface parking: Shade trees, pervious surfaces, urban run-off capture and infiltration, and pedestrian paths to guide users through the parking field; • Structured parking: facade articulation, screening, appropriate lighting, and landscaping; and
• Garage parking: providing access to single-family residential garages through alley access, recessing garages from the frontage to emphasize front doors or active living spaces.
 CD-2.11 Entry Statements. We encourage the inclusion of amenities, signage, and landscaping at the entry to neighborhoods, commercial centers, mixed use areas, industrial developments, and public places that reinforce them as uniquely identifiable places.
 CD-2.12 Site and Building Signage. We encourage the use of sign programs that utilize complementary materials, colors, and themes. Project signage should be designed to effectively communicate and direct users to various aspects of the development and complement the character of the structures.  CD-2.13 Entitlement Process. We work collaboratively with all stakeholders to ensure a high degree of certainty in the efficient review and timely processing of all development plans and permits.
92 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 28 of 32 ends

 Goal CD-3 Urban, Mixed Use, and Transit-Oriented Place Types. Vibrant urban environments that are organized around intense buildings, pedestrian and transit areas, public plazas, and linkages between and within developments that are conveniently located, visually appealing and safe during all hours.
 CD-3.1 Unique Identity. We promote development that heightens the unique character and identity of each Place Type by requiring compatible land uses and land planning, site design, and building design that promotes an active public realm.  CD-3.4 Context-Aware and Appropriate Design. We require appropriate building and site design that complements existing development, respects the intent and identity of the Place Type, and provides appropriate transitions and connections between adjacent uses to ensure compatibility of scale, maintain an appropriate level of privacy for each use, and minimize potential conflicts.  CD-3.5 Active Frontages. We create lively pedestrian streetscapes by requiring primary building, business, and residential entrances, outdoor dining, and storefronts be located on ground floors adjacent to sidewalks or public spaces and designed to maximize safety, comfort, aesthetics, and the intended functionality (as defined by the Place Type).
 Goal CD-5 Protection of Investment. A sustained level of maintenance and improvement of properties, buildings, and infrastructure that protects the property values and encourages additional public and private investments.  CD-5.1 Maintenance of Buildings and Property. We require all public and privately-owned buildings and property (including trails and easements) to be properly and consistently maintained.
 CD-5.2 Maintenance of Infrastructure. We require the continual maintenance of infrastructure.

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 reviewed in conjunction with an Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364, certified by the Ontario City Council on August 16, 2022, in conjunction with File No. PGPA20-002). TOP 2050 SEIR, certified by the City Council on August 16, 2022, was prepared as a Program EIR in accordance with CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines section 15121(a), and the City’s Rules for the Implementation of CEQA. TOP 2050 SEIR considered the direct physical changes and reasonably foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment that would be 93 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 29 of 32 ends

caused by implementation of TOP 2050. Consequently, TOP 2050 SEIR focused on impacts from changes to land use associated with buildout of the City and impacts from the resulting population and employment growth in the City. The proposed Project is consistent and compatible with existing and planned uses in the surrounding area and would only differ by having 5 percent more units but 72 percent less non-residential square footage with the PUD. While no additional specific information on Phase 2 construction is presented at this time, overall development and construction of the 10.6- acre MU-NH sub-area would be similar with or without the PUD in terms of land area developed. The overall construction of the PUD project is generally consistent with the level of development outlined in TOP 2050 and its SEIR. The amount of development anticipated at PUD project buildout as shown in the previous Table 1 and outlined in the Project Description will be equivalent to the development analyzed in TOP 2050 SEIR.

The proposed PUD differs from the TOP 2050’s assumptions for this project site, so this addendum and supplemental studies are required to ensure the project introduces no new significant environmental impacts that were identified in TOP 2050 SEIR. 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. Should no new significant environmental impacts arise as a result of this project and related analyses, all previously adopted mitigation measures shall be a condition of project approval.

Accordingly, and based on the conclusions of the previously certified TOP 2050 SEIR, the analysis in this document, CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, including Sections 15164 and 15162, the PUD project will not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts not previously considered and addressed in TOP 2050 SEIR. No changes or additions to TOP 2050 SEIR analyses are necessary, nor is there a need for additional mitigation with implementation of the number of conditions of approval required by the City based on the results of the site-specific technical studies, All previously adopted mitigation measures of TOP 2050 SEIR are a condition of Project approval and are incorporated herein by this reference. 94 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 30 of 32 ends

TECHNICAL APPENDIX:

Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:

Existing
Land Use
Policy Plan
Designation
Zoning
Designation
Specific Plan
Land Use
Site Commercial
Mixed Use –
Neighborhood Activity
Hub, 20.0 – 75.0 du/ac;

1.0 FAR office/retail
(MU-NH)
Mixed Use –
Neighborhood Hub 8e –
Euclid and Walnut (MUNH 8e) and Euclid
Avenue Overlay
N/A
North
Single-family and multifamily residential, and
commercial
Mixed Use –
Neighborhood Activity
Hub, 20.0 – 75.0 du/ac;

1.0 FAR office/retail
(MU-NH); Medium
Density, 11.1-25 du/ac
(MDR)
Mixed Use –
Neighborhood Hub 8e –
Euclid and Walnut (MUNH 8e) and Euclid
Avenue Overlay
N/A
South Single-family residential Low-Density Residential, 2/1-5.0 du/ac (LDR)
Low-Density Residential
(LDR-5) N/A
East Commercial
Neighborhood
Commercial, 0.4 FAR
(NC)
Neighborhood
Commercial (CN) N/A
West Multi-family residential Medium Density, 11.1-25
du/ac (MDR)
Medium-Density
Residential (MDR-18) N/A
General Site & Building Statistics
Item Required Min./Max. Provided (Ranges) Meets
Y/N
Project area (in acres): None 10.6 acres (PUD);

9.4 acres (PDEV) Y
Floor Area Ratio (commercial
land use): 0.50 maximum 0.01 Y
Maximum project density
(dwelling units/ac): 20.1 – 40 du/ac 36.7 du/ac Y
Right-of-Way setback (in FT): 10 ft. minimum 10-76 feet Y Interior setback at buildings
adjacent to non-residential
land uses (in FT):
5 ft. minimum 71 ft. Y
Interior setback at buildings
adjacent to residential land
uses (in FT):
50 ft. minimum 54-57 ft. Y
Interior setbacks to carports or
trash enclosures 5 ft. minimum 5-6.5 ft. Y
Maximum dwelling
units/building: None 32-81 units Y
95 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 31 of 32 ends

Item Required Min./Max. Provided (Ranges) Meets
Y/N
Maximum height (in FT): 60 ft. (4 stories); 50 ft. (3 stories) 39 ft. (3-story) – 55 ft. (4-story) max
Y
Parking – resident/guest: 580 stalls minimum 582 stalls Y Parking – commercial: 22 stalls minimum 24 stalls Y
Open space – private: 17,300 sf. minimum 21,156 sf. Y
Open space – common: 60,550 sf. minimum 67,404 sf. Y
Dwelling Unit Count (Development Plan):

Item Required Min./Max. Provided (Ranges) Meets
Y/N
Total no. of units 189 – 376 units 346 units Y
Total no. of buildings N/A 8 Y
No. units per building N/A 32-81 units Y
Dwelling Unit Statistics:

Unit Type Unit Size (in SF) No. Bedrooms No. Bathrooms No. Stories Private Open Space (in SF)
Studio 596 sf. 0 1 1 54 sf.
1-bedroom 637-991 sf. 1 1 1 56-71 sf.
2-bedroom 989-1,284 sf. 2 2 1 50-71 sf.
96 Planning Commission Agenda Report
File Nos.: PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
September 26, 2023

Page 32 of 32 ends

File No. PDEV22-027
Attachment A: Development Plan Set
(Attachment to follow this page)
97 STOR. 151 C.F.

WATER
UP 21R
UP 18R
SLOPE 8.33% MAX.

16.92'
F.F.
-9.0"
DOWN17.67'
F.F.

SLOPE 8.33% MAX.

16.17'
F.F.
-9.0"
DOWN16.92'
F.F.
71'-4" 92'-4" 67'-8"

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE
JAN
CAST IRON SINKSBROOKFIELD K-5942-5
CAST IRON SINKSBROOKFIELD K-5942-5

LAVATORY
CAST IRON SINKSBROOKFIELD K-5942-5
CAST IRON SINKSBROOKFIELD K-5942-5
Custom
Custom Custom
5 x 5
5 x 5
Custom Custom
5 x 5
Custom Custom
HVAC

LOW RETURN
SDSD
SDSD
WATER
UP 10R
UP 12R
UP 12R
UP 14R
2S2P
LIN
DW
W/D 1S1P
CB
FIXED
ISLAND
SD
EP
2S2P
LIN
DW
W/D 1S1P
CB
FIXED
ISLAND
SD
EP
WATER
I.P.L.

I.P.L.

UP 10R
UP 12R

WATER GAS
EP HUB
SD
BATH 1
EP HUB
SD
BATH 1
W.I.C.
2S2P
1S1P
2S2P
LIN
GARAGE
E
D.1
D
RESI. MAINS MAIN
UGPS
MSA-2R MSA-2R 1000A

HOUSE METER/MAIN
HOUSE DIST.

MSR-A - 3000A
208/120V, 3Ø, 4W
MSA-1R 1000A
MSA-1R

8.0KVA INVERTER
208120V, 1Ø
UGPS
LARGE

TENANT METER
LARGE

TENANT METER WIRE WAY MAIN
MSR - 800A
208/120V, 3Ø, 4W 3 METER
STACK

WH WH E
DW
UP 18R
UP 18R UP 18R

E WH WH
DW
UP 18R
UP 18R UP 18R

WH WH E
DW
UP 18R
UP 18R UP 18R

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE PASSAGE

E WH WH
DW
UP 18R
UP 18R UP 18R

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE PASSAGE

E WH WH
DW
UP 18R
UP 18R UP 18R

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE PASSAGE

PROJECT

GATE ENTRY
USPS
WALNUT ST.

GATE
GATE

PROJECT
ENTRY
EUCLID AVE.

POOL COURT

PROPERTY LINE CALL BOX
E.V.A.

SIDEWALK SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
ADD-ON

40.5" x 25" x 75.75"
ADD-ON40.5" x 25" x 75.75"
ADD-ON

40.5" x 25" x 75.75"
ADD-ON

40.5" x 25" x 75.75" ADD-ON40.5" x 25" x 75.75" ADD-ON40.5" x 25" x 75.75" ADD-ON40.5" x 25" x 75.75" ADD-ON

40.5" x 25" x 75.75"
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P
4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
10T 2P4CADD-10CS
FRONT

TRANSFORMER
FRONT

TRANSFORMER
2 B
3 C1
4 C
5 C1
8 C
6 C 1
A
7 C1
RETAIL
TRASH

RESIDENT
TRASH

SPORTS LOUNGE

LEASING LOUNGE

BREAK OFFICE OFFICE
CLUB

FITNESS

RETAILRETAIL
25'-10"
DENOTES 250' RADIUS FROM

TRASH CHUTE ROOM FOR
BLDG 1
DENOTES 250' RADIUS FROM

TRASH CHUTE ROOM FOR
BLDG 2
DENOTES 250' RADIUS FROM

TRASH ENCLOSURE
DENOTES 250' RADIUS FROM

TRASH ENCLOSURE

EXTERIOR MAIL AREA

SECURED FOR RESIDENT ONLY

DOG PARK
26'-0"
55'-2"
26'-0" 25'-0"
33'-8"26'-0"
78'-4"
24'-0"
24'-0"
50'-11"
24'-0"
75'-8"
25'-4"
25'-4"
24'-0"
24'-0" 24'-0"
38'-1"
10'-0"

SETBACK
11'-9"

SIDEWALK
11'-1"
12'-8"
11'-11"
5'-0"

SETBACK

TO PARKING
11'-8"
24'-0"
76'-0"
17'-10"

SIDEWALK
10'-8"
20'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
26'-0"
71'-1"
6'-5"

SETBACK

TO WALL
54'-8"
54'-7"
26'-0"
33'-8"
7'-11"
80'-3"
24'-0"
5'-0"

SETBACK

ALL STRUCTURES AND FOOTINGSARE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THESCE EASEMENT 1'-0"
SCE

EASEMENT ALL STRUCTURES AND FOOTINGS

ARE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THESCE EASEMENT
1'-0"
SCE

EASEMENT
19'-0"
TYP.
9'-0"
TYP.
26'-0"
57'-11"
26'-0"
7'-11"
3'-10"
25'-9"
25'-9"
123'-2"
3'-10" 3'-10"
11'-7"
8'-6"
3'-4"
7"
3'-0"
7'-5"
3'-10"
26'-0"
3'-10"
Tuesday, July 11, 2023 11:46:40 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A1.2 SITE PLAN.DWG SITE PLAN A1.2 NORTH LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1"=40'-0"0 20' 40' 80' 120' SITE PLAN SHALL MEET ALL ENGINEERING & NPDES REQUIREMENTS

CARPORT
LEGEND

TRANSFORMER
98 5
52'-0"
9 10 2 1 10 3 6 4 7 9 2
± 52'-0"
3 4 5 9 10 1 3 6 1 4 7 2 4 1 9 10
1/16"=1'-0"
0 8' 16' 32' 48'

KEY MAP
NORTH
N.T.S.
3 EUCLID AVE
2 1
4 EAST ELEVATION 1
SOUTH ELEVATION 2

MATERIAL / COLOR LEGEND

EXTERIOR PLASTERMETAL AWNING

VINYL WINDOW

METAL RAILINGFIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
12345678 SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

FOAM TRIM
9 STOREFRONT GLAZING SYSTEM
10 STONE VENEER

FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS
BUILDING "A" ELEVATIONS A2.3
LEGACY PARTNERS5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS
EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:39:35 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.3 - A2.4 BUILDING A ELEVATIONS.DWG 99 52'-0"
1 9 6 2 10 5 1 8 7 1 3
55'-0"
8 7 1 1 6 7 1 3 10 9 4 6 2
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:39:45 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.3 - A2.4 BUILDING A ELEVATIONS.DWG LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 BUILDING "A" ELEVATIONS A2.4 1"=30'-0"0 15' 30' 60' 90' KEY MAP NORTH N.T.S. 3

EUCLID AVE
2 1
4 WEST ELEVATION 3
NORTH ELEVATION 4

MATERIAL / COLOR LEGEND

EXTERIOR PLASTERMETAL AWNING

VINYL WINDOW

METAL RAILINGFIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
12345678 SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

FOAM TRIM
9 STOREFRONT GLAZING SYSTEM
10 STONE VENEER

FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS
100
STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE
SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE 2%":FT SLOPE
2%":FT SLOPE
2%":FT SLOPE STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE 2%":FT SLOPE
2%":FT SLOPE
2%":FT SLOPE STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT
SLOPE 2%":FT STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F.

STORAGE 162 C.F.

GARAGE GARAGE GARAGE SLOPE 2%":FT SLOPE 2%":FT SLOPE 2%":FT STORAGE 162 C.F. STORAGE 162 C.F. JAN WOMENS RESTROOM 116 MENS RESTROOM 115 FITNESS CENTER 119 STRETCH/YOGA BARRE ROOM 119 LEASING PARCEL STORAGE BREAK/ WORK ROOM SECURITY CLOSET UNISEX RESTROOM SOCIAL LOUNGE KITCHEN/ BAR AREA MEDIA LOUNGE CO-WORK ZOOM ROOM ZOOM ROOM CONFERENCE ROOM COLLABORATION ROOM OFFICE OFFICE SPORTS LOUNGE CH:±14'-6" JANITOR SHOWERS STORAGE 2 117 TBD. CORRIDOR 118 Custom
Custom Custom
5 x 5
5 x 5 Custom Custom
5 x 5 Custom Custom HVAC LOW RETURN SDSD SDSD STOR. 222 C.F. WATER UP 10R
UP 12R 7 - UP 12R
UP 14R7 - 2S2P LIN
DW
W/D 1S1P

CB FIXED ISLAND SD
EP
2S2P
LIN DW
W/D 1S1P CB
FIXED
ISLAND
SD EP WATER STAIR A1 A3.5.1 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5 125 126 127 121 101 102 106 113 115.3 119.1 STAIR A2 A3.5.1 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5 111 123 122 121 120 119 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 115.2 115.1 115 102.1 102.2 104.1 123.1 STAIR A1 A3.5.1 126.1 128 STAIR A3 A3.5.2 114.1 114.2 111.1 101.2 101.1 102.3 102.3 104 113.2 113.1 113.3 113.4 119 STOR. 1 A3.4.16 126.2 I.D.F. A3.4.16 126.3 114.3 114.4 TRASH 1 A3.4.13 114.5 104.2 115.4 UP 10R
UP 12R 7 - WATER GAS
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P 1S1P CB CB
DW
4) SH
EP HUB
SD
BATH 1
LIN
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P 1S1P CB CB
DW
4) SH
EP HUB
SD
BATH 1
W.I.C.
2S2P 1S1P
2S2P
LIN
STORAGE 162 C.F.

GARAGESLOPE 2% MAX IN ANY DIRECTION
STORAGE 162 C.F.

PARKING
VAN SLOPE 2%":FT
223'-5"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 6'-9 1/2" 38'-8" 43'-7" 73'-6" 42'-4 1/2" 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 1 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 ABCDEHJ BCDEJ 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 36'-10" 37'-9"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 7 F G ED.1D RESI. MAINS MAIN
UGPS
MSA-2R MSA-2R 1000A

HOUSE METER/MAIN
HOUSE DIST. MSR-A - 3000A
208/120V, 3Ø, 4W MSA-1R 1000A MSA-1R

8.0KVA INVERTER
208-120V, 1Ø
UGPS
LARGE

TENANT METER
LARGE
TENANT METER WIRE WAY MAIN MSR - 800A
208/120V, 3Ø, 4W 3 METER
STACK
2'-2" 1'-0" 8" 1'-6" A A EXTERIOR MAIL AREA SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:55:47 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.0 - A2.2 BUILDING A COMPOSITE PLANS.DWG BUILDING "A" COMPOSITE PLANS A2.0 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' 1ST FLOOR NORTH 101
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P STOR. 222 C.F. STOR. 222 C.F. STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. 64 GAL. CART STOR. 234 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F.

DN 23R
UP 18R 7 - UP 18R
DN 26R LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P
1S1P
2S2P
LIN DW
W/D 1S1P CB
FIXED
ISLAND
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P
1S1P
2S2P
LIN DW
W/D 1S1P CB
FIXED
ISLAND
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN 1S1P W/D
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN 1S1P W/D
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P 1S1P 2S2P LIN
DW
W/D 1S1P
CB FIXED ISLAND 1S1P 2S2P LIN
DW 1S1P W/D

CB FIXED ISLAND
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P
LIN W/D 1S1P DW FIXED ISLANDCB CB 1S1P 1S1P
2S2P DESK P
LIN W/D 1S1P DW FIXED ISLANDCB CB 1S1P 1S1P
2S2P DESK P STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P UNIT B3-R A3.1.15 201 UNIT B3 A3.1.15 202 UNIT A2.2 A3.1.4 203 UNIT B1 A3.1.11 204 UNIT A2.1 A3.1.4 205 UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4 206 UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4 207 UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4 209 UNIT B2.1 A3.1.13 211 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 210 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 212 UNIT A1-R A3.1.2 213 UNIT A4.1 A3.1.8 214 UNIT B2.2 A3.1.13 215 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 216 UNIT B2.2 A3.1.13 217 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 218 UNIT B2.2-R A3.1.13 219 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 220 221 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 222 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 223 STOR. 2 A3.4.16 224 STAIR A1 A3.5.1 225 UNIT B1-R A3.1.11 226 UNIT B2 A3.1.12 227 UNIT B3 A3.1.13 228 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5STOR. A3XX 208 UNIT A1 A3.1.2 UNIT B1-R A3.1.11 STAIR A2 A3.5.1 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5 STAIR A1 A3.5.1 STAIR A3 A3.5.2 STOR. 1 A3.4.16 I.D.F. A3.4.16 TRASH 1 A3.4.13 UNIT A2-R A3.1.3 UNIT B2 A3.1.12 226.2 226.3 STOR. 1 A3.4.16 I.D.F. A3.4.16 226.2 226.3 214.5 LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
4) SH STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P
DN 23R
UP 18R 11 13 7 -
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN
LIN1S1P
2S2P
223'-5"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 6'-9 1/2" 38'-8" 43'-7" 73'-6" 42'-4 1/2" 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 1 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 ABCDEHJ BCDEJ 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 36'-10" 37'-9"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 7 F G ED.1D Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:56:03 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.0 - A2.2 BUILDING A COMPOSITE PLANS.DWG BUILDING "A" COMPOSITE PLANS A2.1 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR NORTH 102
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P STOR. 222 C.F. STOR. 222 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. 64 GAL. CART DN 18R OPEN TO BELOW
7" 3'-8" 4'-3" 3"
2'-4" 2'-4" 5'-0"
1'-10" 6" 6" 1'-10" N
F.NEAM 7 - 13
7'-2" 2'-6"
UP 21R
DN 18R N
F.N
F.
1'-10" 6" 6" 1'-10"
2'-4" 5'-0" 2'-4"
2'-6" 7'-2"7 - LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P STOR. 234 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 154 C.F. 1S1P
2S2P
LIN DW
W/D 1S1P CB
FIXED
ISLAND
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P
1S1P
2S2P
LIN DW
W/D 1S1P CB
FIXED
ISLAND
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN 1S1P W/D
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN 1S1P W/D
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P
LIN W/D 1S1P DW FIXED ISLANDCB CB 1S1P 1S1P
2S2P DESK P 1S1P 2S2P LIN
DW
W/D 1S1P
CB FIXED ISLAND 1S1P 2S2P LIN
DW 1S1P W/D

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P UNIT B3 A3.1.15 UNIT A2.2 A3.1.4 UNIT B1 A3.1.11 UNIT A2.1 A3.1.4 UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4 UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4UNIT A2.1-R A3.1.4 UNIT B2.1 A3.1.13 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 UNIT A1-R A3.1.2 UNIT A4.1 A3.1.8 UNIT B2.2 A3.1.13 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 UNIT B2.2 A3.1.13 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 UNIT B2.2-R A3.1.13 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 UNIT A4-R A3.1.7 UNIT A4 A3.1.7 STOR. 2 A3.4.16 STAIR A1 A3.5.1 UNIT B1-R A3.1.11 UNIT B2 A3.1.12UNIT B3 A3.1.13 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5STOR. A3XX UNIT A1 A3.1.2 UNIT B1-R A3.1.11 ELEV. 1 A3.5.5 428 427 425 424 423 422 426 421 419420 418 416 414 408 410 412 411 409 407 406 405 403 402 404 413 417 415 STAIR A3 A3.5.2 ROOF DECK A3.1.15 401 STOR. 1 A3.4.16 I.D.F. A3.4.16 TRASH 1 A3.4.13 UNIT A2-R A3.1.3 UNIT B2 A3.1.12 426.2 426.3 STOR. 1 A3.4.16 I.D.F. A3.4.16 426.2 426.3 414.5 LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN
LIN1S1P
2S2P
DN 18R OPEN TO BELOW
7" 3'-8" 4'-3" 3"
AM
9'-8"
1'-4" 1'-4" 7'-0" 7 -
F.
7'-2" 2'-6"
LIN W/D 1S1P DW FIXED ISLANDCB CB 1S1P 1S1P
2S2P DESK P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
SLOPE 8.33% MAX. UP +14" 1097 S.F.

SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12
1/2:12 SLOPE RIDGE
SLOPE 1/2:12
SLOPE 1/4:12
SLOPE 1/4:12
223'-5"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 6'-9 1/2" 38'-8" 43'-7" 73'-6" 42'-4 1/2" 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 1 7 8 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 ABCDEHJ BCDEJ 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 36'-10" 37'-9"
81'-2" 26'-6" 6'-8" 34'-6" 57'-0 1/2" 17'-6 1/2" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16'-10" 21'-10" 38'-6" 9'-4" 7 F G ED.1D Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:56:18 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.0 - A2.2 BUILDING A COMPOSITE PLANS.DWG BUILDING "A" COMPOSITE PLANS A2.2 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' 4TH FLOOR NORTH 103
10 5 6 3 7 1
51'-11"
1 8
7 47'-8"
8 7 1 1 3 5 1 6 1 3 4 5 1 10
51'-11"
6 10 5 6 1 3 7 4
47'-8"
4 NORTH ELEVATION 2 EAST ELEVATION 1
SOUTH ELEVATION 4 WEST ELEVATION 3
LEGACY PARTNERS5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS
EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 BUILDING "B" ELEVATIONS A2.6
1/16"=1'-0"
0 8' 16' 32' 48'

KEY MAP

WALNUT ST NORTH
N.T.S.
1 4
3 2

MATERIAL / COLOR LEGEND

EXTERIOR PLASTERMETAL AWNING

VINYL WINDOW

METAL RAILINGFIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
12345678 SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

FOAM TRIM
9 STOREFRONT GLAZING SYSTEM
10 STONE VENEER

FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:55:37 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.6 BUILDING B ELEVATIONS.DWG 104
2'-2"
1'-0"
1'-0"
STOR. 151 C.F. LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
STOR. 151 C.F. STOR. 166 C.F. STOR. 151 C.F. STOR. 151 C.F.

STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F.

STOR. 151 C.F. WATER 9'-8" 5'-0" 4'-8" UP 21R 4'-3" 3" 3'-8" 7" ING UP 18R 4'-10" 4'-10" 7'-2" 2'-6" 7" 3'-8" 3" 4'-3" ING F. ( 9'-8"

STORAGE
1S1P 2S2P 1S1P
1S1P
2S2P 2S2P W/D CB
DW
CB P
FIXED
ISLAND 2S2P LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P
UNIT B3-R
A3.1.15 119
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G101
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G102
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G103
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G104
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G105
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G106
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G107
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G108
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G109
ELECTRICAL 1
A3.4.15 107
108 GARAGE
A3.4.11 G110 GARAGEA3.4.11 G111 GARAGEA3.4.11 G112 GARAGEA3.4.11 G113 GARAGEA3.4.11 G114 GARAGEA3.4.11 G115 GARAGEA3.4.11 G116 GARAGE
A3.4.11 G122
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G121
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G120
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G119
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G118
GARAGE
A3.4.11 G117
UNIT B2.3-R
A3.1.13 101
UNIT A2-R
A3.1.3
106
104
UNIT B2.4
A3.1.13 109
UNIT B3
A3.1.15 110
UNIT A2.1
A3.1.4 111 UNIT B2.5A3.1.14 113 UNIT B2.5A3.1.12 115 UNIT A2-RA3.1.3 116 UNIT A2.1A3.1.4 117 UNIT B2.4
A3.1.13 120
UNIT B3-R
A3.1.15 122
STAIR B1
A3.5.3
STAIR B2
A3.5.3
UNIT A2
A3.1.3
ELEC. 3
A3.1.16
ELEV.1
A3.5.5
STORAGE 4
A3.4.16
A3.4.15 107.1
IDF

UTILITY
A3.4.16 108.1
A3.4.16 118.1
IDF
STOR.

A3.4.16 118.2
A3.4.13 TR.1
118.3
118
SLOPE 8.33% MAX. 16.92' F.F. -9.0" DOWN 17.67' F.F.SLOPE 8.33% MAX. 16.17' F.F. -9.0" DOWN 16.92' F.F. 231'-4"
71'-4" 92'-4" 67'-8" 172'-6" 67'-8" 66'-6" 38'-4"
231'-4" 1 2 3 4 DCBA
71'-4" 92'-4" 67'-8" 67'-8" 66'-6" 38'-4" 1 2 3 4 DCBA 1 2 3 4 LIN W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P STORAGE 1S1P
2S2P
1S1P 1S1P 2S2P
2S2P W/D

CB DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P
STOR. 277 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. IDF
STOR. 150 C.F.

STOR. 190 C.F. STOR. 180 C.F. STOR. 228 C.F.

STOR. 150 C.F.

STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 150 C.F.

STOR. 180 C.F. 9'-8" 1'-10" 6'-0" 1'-10" DN 21R UP 18R 4'-3" 3" 3'-8" 7" 64 GAL. CART LIN 1S1P W/D DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN 1S1P W/D
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P LIN W/D 1S1P
DW
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P
LIN W/D 1S1P DW FIXED ISLAND CB CB1S1P 1S1P
2S2P DESK P P DW 1S1P
LIN
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P
1S1P 2S2P 2S2P CB
LIN

CB P W/D
STOR. 195 C.F.

STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 177 C.F.

STOR. 150 C.F.

STORAGE
1S1P 2S2P 1S1P
1S1P
2S2P 2S2P W/D CB
DW
CB P
FIXED
ISLAND 2S2P LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
2S2P
LIN 1S1P LIN
2S2P
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P LIN
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P

CB CB DW
1S1P (4) SH 2S2P LIN LIN
1S1P 2S2P LIN W/D 1S1P
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P
DW LIN W/D 1S1P
FIXED
ISLAND
CB CB
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
DESK P
DW
LIN
W/D
LIN
2S2P 1S1P CB CB
DW 1S1P
(4) SH
219 UNIT B3-R
A3.1.15
201 UNIT B2.3-R
A3.1.13
204 UNIT A2-R
A3.1.3
209 UNIT B2.4
A3.1.13
210 UNIT B3
A3.1.15
211 UNIT A2.1
A3.1.4 213 UNIT B2.5A3.1.14 215 UNIT B2.5A3.1.12 216 UNIT A2-RA3.1.3 217 UNIT A2.1A3.1.4 220 UNIT B2.4
A3.1.13
222 UNIT B3-R
A3.1.15
202 UNIT A4.2
A3.1.8
203 UNIT A4-R
A3.1.7
205 UNIT A4
A3.1.7
206 UNIT A2
A3.1.3
207 STORAGE 5B
A3.4.16
208 STORAGE 5A
A3.4.16
212 UNIT A4
A3.1.7 214 UNIT B4A3.1.16
221 UNIT A4.3
A3.1.8
223 UNIT A4.2-R
A3.1.8
A3.4.15 207.1
IDF
A3.4.16 218.1
IDF
A3.4.13 TR.1
218.3
STOR. 6
A3.4.16 218 SING 7'-2" 2'-6" SING F.O. DN 18R UP 18R 7" 3'-8" 3" 4'-3" F.O. 9'-8" 1'-10" 6'-0" 1'-10" 231'-4"
71'-4" 92'-4" 67'-8" 172'-6" 67'-8" 66'-6" 38'-4"
231'-4" 1 2 3 4 DCBA
71'-4" 92'-4" 67'-8" 67'-8" 66'-6" 38'-4" 1 2 3 4 DCBA 1 2 3 4 BUILDING "B" COMPOSITE PLAN A2.5 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' 2ND - 4TH FLOOR 1ST FLOOR NORTH 105
37'-2"
5 6 7 1 3 8 1
39'-2"
4 7 4 6 5 1 3 4
39'-2"
7 8 3 1 5 1
39'-2"
1 5 6 1 10 3 7
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 2:19:50 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.8 BUILDING C ELEVATIONS.DWG BUILDING "C" ELEVATIONS A2.8 FRONT ELEVATION 1 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' KEY MAP 3 2 1 4 SIDE ELEVATION 2 SIDE ELEVATION 4 REAR ELEVATION 3

MATERIAL / COLOR LEGEND

EXTERIOR PLASTERMETAL AWNING

VINYL WINDOW

METAL RAILINGFIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
12345678 SECTIONAL GARAGE DOOR

FOAM TRIM
9 STOREFRONT GLAZING SYSTEM
10 STONE VENEER

FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS
LEGACY PARTNERS5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS
EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 106
1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB 1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB 1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
W/D

LINEN SHELVES CB CB P DW
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
CB CB
DW P
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
CB CB
DW P
W/D LIN 2S2P
1S1P
1S1P 2S2P
CB CB
DW P 1S1P
2S2P
2S2P
W/D
1S1P 1S1P
2S2P
2S2PCB
DW CB P FIXED ISLAND 1S1P
2S2P
W/D
1S1P 1S1P
2S2P
2S2PCB

DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
W/D

LINEN SHELVES CB CB P DW
DW CB
LIN LIN W/D 1S1P CB 2S2P
1S1P
1S1P
1/2:12 SLOPE 1S1P
2S2P
W/D
1S1P 1S1P
2S2P
2S2PCB

DW CB P FIXED ISLAND
2S2P UP 18R DN 18R 7" 3'-8" 5'-6"
- 7 3" UP 18R DN 18R 7" 3'-8" 5'-6"
- 7 3" UP 18R DN 18R 5'-6" 3'-8" 7" 7
- 3" 204 UNIT A6 A3.1.7 203 UNIT B5.1-R A3.1.18 202 UNIT B6-R A3.1.9 201 UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 205 UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 206 UNIT B6-R A3.1.9 207 UNIT B5-R A3.1.17 208 UNIT A3.1-R A3.1.5 209 UNIT A3.2 A3.1.6 210 UNIT B5.1 A3.1.18 211 UNIT B6 A3.1.19 212 UNIT A5 A3.1.9 STORAGE 2 A3.4.16 S112 STAIR C3 A3.5.4 STAIR C2 A3.5.4 STAIR C1 A3.5.4 2 AB 211'-2" 63'-0" 1 2 AB 211'-2"63'-0" 1 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
LINEN SHELVES CB CB P TV T MR TV T MR TV T MR 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
LINEN SHELVES CB CB P UNIT A6 A3.1.7 304 UNIT B5.1-R A3.1.18 UNIT B6-R 303 A3.1.9 302 305 301 UNIT B6-R A3.1.9 306 UNIT B5-R A3.1.17 307 308 309 UNIT B5.1 A3.1.18 310 UNIT B6 A3.1.19 311 312 STORAGE 2 A3.4.16 S112 DN 18R BELOW
OPEN TO 7" 3'-8" 5'-6" 3" DN 18R
BELOW
OPEN TO 7" 3'-8" 5'-6" 3" DN 18R

OPEN TO
BELOW 5'-6" 3'-8" 7" 3" 304 303 302 UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 301 UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 305 306 307 UNIT A3.1-R A3.1.5 308 UNIT A3.2 A3.1.6 309 310 311 UNIT A5 A3.1.9 312 STORAGE 2 A3.4.16 S112 STAIR C3 A3.5.4 STAIR C2 A3.5.4 STAIR C1 A3.5.4 KICKER 12:12
1/2:12 SLOPE 1/2:12 SLOPE +7'-0" T.O.P. +0" T.O.R. +7'-0" +5'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +4'-11" +4'-0" T.O.P. +2'-8" +1'-4" T.O.R. +5'-0" T.O.P. +0" T.O.R. +5'-0" +4'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +3'-11" SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 SLOPE SLOPE 1/4:12 1/4:12 SLOPE 1/4:12 1/2:12 SLOPE 1/2:12 SLOPE 1/2:12 SLOPE 1/2:12 SLOPE +0" T.O.R. +0" T.O.R. +7'-0" T.O.P. +7'-0" +7'-0" T.O.P. +7'-0" +4'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +3'-11" +4'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +3'-11" +5'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +4'-11" +6'-0" T.O.P. +0" T.O.R. +6-0" +5'-0" T.O.P. +0" T.O.R. +5'-0" +4'-0" T.O.P. +1" T.O.R. +3'-11" KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER 12:12 KICKER
12:12
KICKER
12:12
KICKER
12:12 2 AB
63'-0" 1
WH WH E 1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB 1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB 1S1P 1S1P LIN W/D DW
CB 2S2PCB LIN
CB
W/D P 1S1P 2S2P
CB DW (4) SH LIN
CB
W/D P 2S2P 1S1P
CB DW (4) SH LIN
CB
W/D P 2S2P 1S1P
CB DW (4) SH 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
W/D
LINEN SHELVES CB CB P DW 2S2P
1S1P 1S1P
W/D
LINEN SHELVES CB CB P DW STOR. 150 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. STOR. 152 C.F. UP 18R 7" 3'-8" 5'-6" 3" UP 18R 7" 3'-8" 5'-6" 3" UP 18R 5'-6" 3'-8" 7" 3" UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 101 UNIT A5-R A3.1.9 105 UNIT A3.1-R A3.1.5 108 UNIT A3.2 A3.1.6 109 UNIT A5 A3.1.9 112 GARAGE A3.4.12 G101 GARAGE A3.4.12 G102 GARAGE A3.4.12 G103 STORAGE 1 A3.4.16 S104 ELEC. 5 A3.4.16 104 GARAGE A3.4.11 G105 GARAGE A3.4.11 G106 GARAGE A3.4.11 G107 GARAGE A3.4.11 G108 GARAGE A3.4.11 G109 GARAGE A3.4.12 G110 GARAGE A3.4.12 G111 GARAGE A3.4.12 G113 GARAGE A3.4.12 G121 GARAGE A3.4.12 G120 GARAGE A3.4.12 G119 GARAGE A3.4.12 G118 GARAGE A3.4.11 G114 GARAGE A3.4.11 G115 GARAGE A3.4.11 G116 GARAGE A3.4.11 G117 STORAGE 2 A3.4.16 S112 STAIR C3 A3.5.4 STAIR C2 A3.5.4 STAIR C1 A3.5.4 UNIT S1-R A3.1.9 102 UNIT S1-R A3.1.9 106 UNIT S1 A3.1.9 111 IDF A3.4.16 104.1 UTILITY A3.4.16 113 AB 63'-0" 2 211'-2" 1 STOR. 171 C.F. STOR. 171 C.F. STOR. 171 C.F. STOR. 171 C.F. STOR. 171 C.F.

Wednesday, June 28, 2023 1:59:50 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A2.7 BUILDING C COMPOSITE PLANS.DWG BUILDING "C" COMPOSITE PLAN A2.7 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/16"=1'-0"0 8' 16' 32' 48' FIRST FLOOR SECOND & THIRD FLOOR ROOF PLAN 107
L W/D
CB CB UNIT S1: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 596 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 54 SQ. FT. P LIVING 11'-6" X 9'-6" BALCONY 11'-6" X 5'-2" SLEEPING 10'-0" X 7'-9" KITCHEN BATH ENTRY DINING W/D L REF CB CB UNIT A5: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 637 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 56 SQ. FT. LIVING 11'-0" X 13'-4" BALCONY 10'-10" X 5'-2" BEDROOM 11'-6" X 11'-0" KITCHEN BATH ENTRY UNIT A6A: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 781 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 61 SQ. FT. W/D COAT REF P CB CB LIVING 9'-9" X 13'-6" BALCONY 9'-7" X 6'-4" BEDROOM 10'-3" X 12'-0" KITCHEN W.I.C.BATH ENTRY DINING W/D COAT REF L P L CB CB UNIT A6B: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 818 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 59 SQ. FT. LIVING 12'-3" X 13'-6" BALCONY 9'-3" X 6'-4" BEDROOM 11'-0" X 12'-0" KITCHEN W.I.C.BATH ENTRY DINING P. L. HUB E.P. UNIT A1: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 707 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 69 SQ. FT. LIVING 11'-8" X 13'-8" BALCONY 9'-0" X 6'-10" BEDROOM 11'-4" X 11'-2" KITCHEN W.I.C.BATH COAT DINING STG P. L. HUB E.P. UNIT A2: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 749 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 71 SQ. FT. BALCONY 11'-0" X 5'-8" BEDROOM 11'-2" X 11'-7" KITCHEN W.I.C. BATH COAT L LIVING 12'-11 X 12'-0" DINING UNIT A3: 1BR + DEN / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 1051 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 65 SQ. FT. BALCONY 7'-9" X 7'-10" DEN 14'-6" X 11'-6" HUB P. L. LIVING 12'-0" X 12'-0" BEDROOM 11'-9" X 13'-0" KITCHEN W.I.C. BATH DEN 14'-6" X 15'-6" DINING COAT UNIT A4: 1BR / 1BA LIVABLE AREA: 806 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 65 SQ. FT.

HUB LIVING 12'-0" X 12'-0" BALCONY 7'-9" X 8'-4" BEDROOM 11'-9" X 13'-0" W.I.C. KITCHEN DINING BATH Wednesday, June 28, 2023 2:00:06 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A3.0 - A3.1 UNIT PLANS.DWG CONCEPTUAL UNIT PLANS A3.0 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/8"=1'-0"0 8'4' 16' 24' 108
P W/D REF 36" SHOWER 36" TUB
5 Mdf SHELVES UNIT B5: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1011 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 50 SQ. FT. BEDROOM 11'-0" X 12'-0" LIVING 11'-8" X 15'-2" DINING 8'-0" X 8'-4" BALCONY 7'-10" X 5'-2" BEDROOM 11'-0" X 12'-6" W.I.C. KITCHEN BATH ENTRY BATHW.I.C. W/D FIXED ISLAND UNIT B6: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1130 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 58 SQ. FT. P L W.I.C. W.I.C. BATH BATH BEDROOM 11'-6" X 12'-0" BEDROOM 11'-0" X 12'-0" DINING 11'-8" X 11'-8" LIVING 11'-8" X 14'-0" KITCHEN ENTRY BALCONY 11'-0" X 5'-4" P. L. HUB E.P. LIVING 11'-8" X 13'-8" BALCONY 9'-0" X 6'-10" BEDROOM 11'-4" X 11'-2" KITCHEN W.I.C.BATH COAT DINING STG UNIT B1: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 989 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 69 SQ. FT. BEDROOM 11'-0" X 13'-0" W.I.C.BATH P. L. HUB E.P. BALCONY 11'-0" X 5'-8" BEDROOM 11'-2" X 11'-7" KITCHEN W.I.C. BATH COAT L LIVING 12'-11 X 12'-0" DINING L. L. UNIT B2: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1128 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 71 SQ. FT. BEDROOM 11'-4" X 13'-3" W.I.C. BATH W/D PATIO/BALC. 6'-4" X 9'-6" BATH 2 ENTRY W.I.C. W.I.C. M. BATH M. BEDROOM 14'-0" X 12'-0" BEDROOM 2 12'-0" X 12'-0" KITCHEN LIVING 13'-4" X 12'-11" DINING 11'-0" X 9'-8" COAT ST. UNIT B3: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1284 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 60 SQ. FT. L.

HUB
E.P. P. L. UNIT B4: 2BR / 2BA LIVABLE AREA: 1101 SQ. FT. PATIO/ BALCONY AREA: 61 SQ. FT. W.I.C. W.I.C. BATH BATH KITCHEN COAT DINING 8'-0" X 7'-8" LIVING 12'-0" X 11'-4" BEDROOM BEDROOM 11'-8" X 11'-0" 11'-2" X 13'-0" BALCONY 7'-4" X 8'-4" Wednesday, June 28, 2023 2:00:10 PM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A3.0 - A3.1 UNIT PLANS.DWG CONCEPTUAL UNIT PLANS A3.1 LEGACY PARTNERS 5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617 949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866 (714) 639-9860 AO ARCHITECTS EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 1/8"=1'-0"0 8'4' 16' 24' 109
2 43
1 56
78 110
111
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:43:00 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A1.0 A1.1 PERSPECTIVES.DWG CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE A1.0
VIEW FROM MAIN ENTRY OFF EUCLID LOOKING NORTHWEST 1

LEGACY PARTNERS
5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617
949.930.7712
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS

EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA
DATE: 06-29-23
JOB NO.: 2021-544
112
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:34:27 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A1.0 A1.1 PERSPECTIVES.DWG CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE A1.1

LEGACY PARTNERS
5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617
949.930.7712
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS

EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA
DATE: 06-29-23
JOB NO.: 2021-544
VIEW FROM ENTRY OFF WALNUT LOOKING NORTHEAST 1
113
Wednesday, June 28, 2023 11:34:12 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\21-544_A1.0 A1.1 PERSPECTIVES.DWG CONCEPTUAL PERSPECTIVE A1.11
VIEW FROM WALNUT ST LOOKING NORTHWEST 1

LEGACY PARTNERS
5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617
949.930.7712
144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS

EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA
DATE: 06-29-23
JOB NO.: 2021-544
114

BUILDING A - EUCLID ELEVATION

EXTERIOR PLASTER
20/30 SAND FINISH

TO MATCH PAINT SPECS
1 8
2 3 4 5
6 7

FOAM TRIMS

SHAPES AND SIZES WILL VARY

TO MATCH PAINT SPECS F

FIBER CEMENT TRIM BOARDS
SMOOTH

TO MATCH PAINT SPEC F

ALUMINUM STOREFRONT

PAINT SPEC E

METAL AWNING

STYLE AND DESIGN MAY VARY

TO MATCH PAINT SPEC E

FABRICATED METAL RAILING

TO MATCH PAINT SPEC E

VINYL WINDOWS

FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING
SMOOTH

TO MATCH PAINT SPECS C & D
9 10 STONE VENEER METAL TRELLIS
PAINT SPEC D A4.1

A B C D E
PACER WHITE SW6098
(OR SIMILAR)
MYSTERIOUS MAUVE SW6262
(OR SIMILAR)
STARRY NIGHT SW6540
(OR SIMILAR)

TRICORN BLACK
SW6258(OR SIMILAR)
IRON ORE SW7069
(OR SIMILAR)
HIGH REFLECTIVE WHITE SW7004
(OR SIMILAR)
FORSYTHIA SW6907
Bldg. B Accent Color
CENTER STAGE SW6920
Bldg. C Accent Color
NAVEL SW6887
Bldg. A Accent Color
9 10 1 3 1 1 1 7 1 6 9 2 1 1 1 4 2 1 5 1 8 6
A G
H
I

D C D E B E D A F D B D A E F E
F
G H I
115
Thursday, July 06, 2023 10:06:03 AM
R:\2021\2021-544 LEGACY EUCLID & WALNUT ONTARIO\03 DESIGN\SCHEMATIC\CAD\~21-544_G1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION.DWG THESE CONCEPTUAL ARCHITECTURAL PLANS ARE FOR PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES ONLY.

REVISIONS MAY BE REQUIRED DUE TO FURTHER REQUIREMENTS, INVESTIGATION FROM GOVERNING AGENCIES AND BUILDING CODE ANALYSIS. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND ARE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION AND SURVEYS AVAILABLE. PLEASE REFER TO CIVIL SURVEYS, DRAWINGS AND EXHIBITS FOR TECHNICAL INFORMATION AND MEASUREMENTS. PLEASE REFER TO THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT'S DRAWINGS AND EXHIBITS FOR ALL LANDSCAPE PLANTING, IRRIGATION,DESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS.

GENERAL DISCLAIMER
LEGACY PARTNERS5141 CALIFORNIA AVENUE, SUITE 100, IRVINE, CA 92617949.930.7712 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CA 92866
(714) 639-9860

AO ARCHITECTS
EUCLID AND WALNUT ONTARIO, CA DATE: 06-29-23 JOB NO.: 2021-544 PROJECT SUMMARY, INFORMATION G1.1
116
File Nos. PUD22-004, PHP22-015, and PDEV22-027
Attachment A1: Mitchell M. Tsai Letter
(Attachment to follow this page)
117
P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: [email protected]
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101

VIA EMAIL
August 7, 2023
Alexis Vaughn, Associate Planner
303 East “B” Street
Ontario, CA 91764
Ph: (909) 395-2416
Em: [email protected]
RE: Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters’ Comments Regarding the City of Ontario’s Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project (Agenda Item D).

Dear Ms. Vaughn and Development Advisory Board Members:

On behalf of the Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenters (SWMSRCC), my Office is submitting these comments ahead of the City of Ontario’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) August 7, 2023, Development Advisory Board (DAB) pubic hearing for the Euclid and Walnut Mixed Use project (“Project”).

Submitted by Legacy/Collier Residential LLC (“Applicant”), the Project involves a Development Plan (File No. PDEV22-027) to construct 346 apartment units and 5,400 square feet of commercial space on 9.4 acres of land located at the northwest corner of Euclid Avenue and Walnut Avenue (“Site”) within the Mixed Use – Neighborhood Hub 8e – Euclid and Walnut (MU-NH 8e) zoning district. The Site is located within the Airport Influence Area of Ontario International Airport and was evaluated and claimed to have been found to be consistent with the policies and criteria of the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. In conjunction with the Project, an Addendum (“Addendum”) to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (SCH No. 2021070364) was prepared and certified by the City Council on August 16, 2022. The application before the City is claimed to introduce no new significant environmental impacts. 118
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 2 of 23 ends

The DAB will review the Project and make two recommendations to the Planning Commission—to approve or deny the Addendum and to approve or deny the Development Plan.

According to the Staff Report, the Project has been submitted in conjunction with two other applications, namely, the Euclid Walnut Planned Unit Development (PUD) (File No. PUD22-004) to establish the development standards and design guidelines for an overall 10.6-acre Project site (subject to recommendation by the Planning Commission to the City Council); and a Certificate of Appropriateness (PHP22-015) to determine whether the Project Site is an historic resource subject to recommendation by the Historic Preservation Subcommittee to the Planning Commission/Historic Preservation Commission.

SWMSRCC is a labor union representing over 63,000 union carpenters in 10 states, including California, and has a strong interest in well-ordered land use planning and in addressing the environmental impacts of development projects. Some SWMSRCC members live, work, and recreate in the City and the surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s environmental impacts.

SWMSRCC expressly reserves the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearing and proceeding related to this Project.

Gov. Code, § 65009, subd. (b); Pub. Res. Code, § 21177, subd. (a); see Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1184, 1199-1203; see also Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1121.

SWMSRCC incorporates by reference all comments raising issues regarding the Project and its environmental review and associated documents and reports (including the City’s Staff Report), or lack thereof. See Citizens for Clean Energy v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties).

Moreover, SWMSRCC requests that the City provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under CEQA (Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.), and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”) (Gov. Code, §§ 65000–65010). California Public Resources Code, sections 21092.2 and 21167(f) and California Government Code, section 65092 require agencies to mail 119
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 3 of 23 ends

such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s governing body.

I. THE CITY SHOULD REQUIRE THE USE OF A LOCAL
WORKFORCE TO BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY’S ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT.

The City should require that the Project be built using local workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor-Management Apprenticeship Program approved by the State of California, have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a program, or are registered apprentices in such a program.

Community benefits such as local hire can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive economic impacts of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and provide localized economic benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.

March 8, 2021, SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.

Workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce Development Board and the University of California, Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded:
[L]abor should be considered an investment rather than a cost—and investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words, 120
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 4 of 23 ends

well-trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and moving California closer to its climate targets.1
Furthermore, workforce policies have significant environmental benefits given that they improve an area’s jobs-housing balance, decreasing the amount and length of job commutes and the associated greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In fact, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program” can result in air pollutant reductions.2

Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits.

As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:

People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled.3
Moreover, local hire mandates and skill-training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael Duncan have noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions given that the skill requirements of available local jobs must match those held by local residents.4 Some municipalities have even tied local hire and 1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/defaultsource/Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10. 3 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobshousing.pdf 4 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: JobsHousing Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT825.pdf. 121
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 5 of 23 ends

other workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. Cervero and Duncan note that:

In nearly built-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing. The city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents, especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational training to ensure residents are employment-ready. While the program is voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than 3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of approval for development permits.

Recently, the State of California verified its commitment towards workforce development through the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022, otherwise known as Assembly Bill No. 2011 (AB2011). AB2011 amended the Planning and Zoning Law to allow ministerial, by-right approval for projects being built alongside commercial corridors that meet affordability and labor requirements.

The City should consider utilizing local workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and to mitigate GHG emissions, improve air quality, and reduce transportation impacts.

II. THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

A. Background Concerning Environmental Impacts Reports.

The California Environmental Quality Act is a California statute designed to inform decision-makers and the public about the potential significant environmental effects of a project. CEQA Guidelines, § 15002, subd. (a)(1).5 At its core, its purpose is to “inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made.” Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.
5 The CEQA Guidelines, codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 15000 et seq., are regulatory guidelines promulgated by the state Natural Resources Agency for the implementation of CEQA. Pub. Res. Code, § 21083. The CEQA Guidelines are given “great weight in interpreting CEQA except when . . . clearly unauthorized or erroneous.” Center for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 217. 122
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 6 of 23 ends

CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage, when possible, by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines, § 15002, subd. (a)(2)-(3); see also Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Committee v. Board of Port Comes (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Assn., 47 Cal.3d at p. 400. The EIR serves to provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines, § 15002, subd. (a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns” specified in Public Resources Code section 21081. See CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15092, subds. (b)(2)(A), (B).

While the courts review an EIR using an ‘abuse of discretion’ standard, the reviewing court is not to uncritically rely on every study or analysis presented by a project proponent in support of its position. Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 1355 (quoting Laurel Heights Improvement Assn., 47 Cal.3d at pp. 391, 409 fn. 12) (internal quotations omitted). A clearly inadequate or unsupported study is entitled to no judicial deference. Id. Drawing this line and determining whether the EIR complies with CEQA’s information disclosure requirements presents a question of law subject to independent review by the courts. Sierra Club v. County of Fresno (2018) 6 Cal.5th 502, 515; Madera Oversight Coalition, Inc. v. County of Madera (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 48, 102, 131. As the court stated in Berkeley Jets, prejudicial abuse of discretion occurs if the failure to include relevant information precludes informed decision-making and informed public participation, thereby thwarting the statutory goals of the EIR process. 91 Cal.App.4th at p. 1355 (internal quotations omitted).

The preparation and circulation of an EIR is more than a set of technical hurdles for agencies and developers to overcome. Communities for a Better Environment v. Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 70, 80 (quoting Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 449-450). The EIR’s function is to ensure that government officials who decide to build or approve a project do so with a full understanding of the environmental consequences and, equally important, that the public is assured those consequences have been considered. Ibid. For the EIR to 123
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 7 of 23 ends

serve these goals it must present information so that the foreseeable impacts of pursuing the project can be understood and weighed, and the public must be given an adequate opportunity to comment on that presentation before the decision to go forward is made. Ibid.

A strong presumption in favor of requiring preparation of an EIR is built into CEQA.

This presumption is reflected in what is known as the “fair argument” standard under which an EIR must be prepared whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment. Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v. City of Encinitas (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1597, 1602; Friends of “B” St. v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.3d 988, 1002.

The fair argument test stems from the statutory mandate that an EIR be prepared for any project that “may have a significant effect on the environment.” Pub. Res. Code, § 21151; see No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.App.3d 68, 75; accord Jensen v. City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 877, 884. Under this test, if a proposed project is not exempt and may cause a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR. Pub. Res. Code, §§ 21100, subd. (a), 21151; CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15064, subds. (a)(1), (f)(1). An EIR may be dispensed with only if the lead agency finds no substantial evidence in the initial study or elsewhere in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Parker Shattuck Neighbors v. Berkeley City Council (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 768, 785. In such a situation, the agency must adopt a negative declaration. Pub. Res. Code, § 21080, subd. (c)(1); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063, subd. (b)(2), 15064, subd. (f)(3). “Significant effect upon the environment” is defined as “a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment.” Pub. Res. Code, § 21068; CEQA Guidelines, § 15382. A project may have a significant effect on the environment if there is a reasonable probability that it will result in a significant impact. No Oil, Inc., 13 Cal.3d at p. 83 fn. 16; see Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 309. If any aspect of the project may result in a significant impact on the environment, an EIR must be prepared even if the overall effect of the project is beneficial. CEQA Guidelines, § 15063, subd. (b)(1); see County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v.

County of Kern (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1580.

This standard sets a “low threshold” for preparation of an EIR. Consolidated Irrigation Dist. v. City of Selma (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 187, 207; Nelson v. County of Kern (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 252; Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 124
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 8 of 23 ends

928; Bowman v. City of Berkeley (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 572, 580; Citizen Action to Serve All Students v. Thornley (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 748, 754; Sundstrom, 202 Cal.App.3d at p. 310. If substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may have a significant environmental effect, the lead agency must prepare an EIR even if other substantial evidence before it indicates the project will have no significant effect. See Jensen, 23 Cal.App.5th at p. 886; Clews Land & Livestock v. City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal.App.5th 161, 183; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 150; Brentwood Assn. for No Drilling, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 491; Friends of “B” St., 106 Cal.App.3d 988; CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (f)(1).

B. Background Concerning Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, and Mitigated Negative Declarations.

CEQA and CEQA Guidelines are strict and unambiguous about when an MND may be used. A public agency must prepare an EIR whenever substantial evidence supports a “fair argument” that a proposed project “may have a significant effect on the environment.” Pub. Res. Code, §§ 21100, 21151; CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15002, subds. (f)(1), (2), 15063; No Oil, Inc., supra, 13 Cal.3d at 75; Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98, 111-112. Essentially, should a lead agency be presented with a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR even though it may also be presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect. CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15064, subds. (f)(1), (2); see No Oil Inc., supra, 13 Cal.3d at 75 (internal citations and quotations omitted). Substantial evidence includes “enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.” CEQA Guidelines, § 15384, subd. (a).

The fair argument standard is a “low threshold” test for requiring the preparation of an EIR. No Oil Inc., supra, 13 Cal.3d at 84; County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 of Los Angeles County v. County of Kern (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1579. It “requires the preparation of an EIR where there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial[.]” County Sanitation, supra, 127 Cal.App.4th at 1580 (quoting CEQA Guidelines, § 15063, subd. (b)(1)). A lead agency may adopt an MND only if “there is no substantial evidence 125
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 9 of 23 ends

that the project will have a significant effect on the environment.” CEQA Guidelines, § 15074, subd. (b).

Evidence supporting a fair argument of a significant environmental impact triggers preparation of an EIR regardless of whether the record contains contrary evidence.

League for Protection of Oakland’s Architectural and Historical Resources v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896, 904-905. “Where the question is the sufficiency of the evidence to support a fair argument, deference to the agency’s determination is not appropriate[.]” County Sanitation, 127 Cal.App.4th at 1579 (quoting Sierra Club v. County of Sonoma (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1307, 1317-1318).

Further, it is the duty of the lead agency, not the public, to conduct the proper environmental studies. “The agency should not be allowed to hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data.” Sundstrom, supra, 202 Cal.App.3d at 311. “Deficiencies in the record may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences.” Ibid; see also Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359, 1382 (lack of study enlarges the scope of the fair argument which may be made based on the limited facts in the record).

Thus, refusal to complete recommended studies lowers the already low threshold to establish a fair argument. The court may not exercise its independent judgment on the omitted material by determining whether the ultimate decision of the lead agency would have been affected had the law been followed. Environmental Protection Information Center v. Cal. Dept. of Forestry (2008) 44 Cal.4th 459, 486 (internal citations and quotations omitted). The remedy for this deficiency would be for the trial court to issue a writ of mandate. Ibid.

Both the review for failure to follow CEQA’s procedures and the fair argument test are questions of law, thus, the de novo standard of review applies. Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal.4th 412, 435. “Whether the agency’s record contains substantial evidence that would support a fair argument that the project may have a significant effect on the environment is treated as a question of law. Consolidated Irrigation Dist., supra, 204 Cal.App.4th at 207; Kostka and Zischke, Practice Under the Environmental Quality Act (2017, 2d ed.) at § 6.76.

In the MND context, courts give no deference to the agency. The agency or the court should not weigh expert testimony or decide on the credibility of such evidence—this is the EIR’s responsibility. As stated in Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento:
126
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 10 of 23 ends

Unlike the situation where an EIR has been prepared, neither the lead agency nor a court may “weigh” conflicting substantial evidence to determine whether an EIR must be prepared in the first instance.

Guidelines section 15064, subdivision (f)(1) provides in pertinent part: if a lead agency is presented with a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR even though it may also be presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not have a significant effect. Thus, as Claremont itself recognized, [c]onsideration is not to be given contrary evidence supporting the preparation of a negative declaration.
(2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 935 (internal citations and quotations omitted).

In cases where it is not clear whether there is substantial evidence of significant environmental impacts, CEQA requires erring on the side of a “preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review.” Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 322, 332. The foremost principle under CEQA is that the Legislature intended the act to be interpreted in such manner as to afford the fullest possible protection to the environment within the reasonable scope of the statutory language.

Friends of Mammoth v. Bd. of Supervisors (1972) 8 Cal.3d 247, 259.

C. Background Concerning CEQA Exemptions.

Where a lead agency chooses to dispose of CEQA by asserting a CEQA exemption, it has a duty to support its CEQA exemption findings by substantial evidence, including evidence that there are no applicable exceptions to exemptions. This duty is imposed by CEQA and related case law. CEQA Guidelines, § 15020 (lead agency shall not knowingly release a deficient document hoping that public comments will correct the defects); see Citizens for Environmental Responsibility v. State ex rel. 14th Dist. Agriculture Assn. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 555, 568 (lead agency has the burden of demonstrating that a project falls within a categorical exemption and must support the determination with substantial evidence); accord Assn. for Protection etc. Values v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720, 732 (lead agency is required to consider exemption exceptions where there is evidence in the record that the project might have a significant impact).

The duty to support CEQA and exemption findings with substantial evidence is also required by the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and case law on administrative or traditional writs. Under the CCP, an abuse of discretion is established if the decision is 127
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 11 of 23 ends

unsupported by the findings, or the findings are unsupported by the evidence. CCP, § 1094.5, subd. (b). In Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community v. County of Los Angeles, our Supreme Court held that implicit in CCP section 1094.5 is a requirement that the agency which renders the challenged decision must set forth findings to bridge the analytic gap between the raw evidence and ultimate decision or order. (1977) 11 Cal.3d 506, 515 (internal citations and quotations omitted). The lead agency’s findings may be determined to be sufficient if a court has no trouble under the circumstances discerning the analytic route the administrative agency traveled from evidence to action. West Chandler Blvd. Neighborhood Assn. vs. City of Los Angeles (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 1506, 1521-1522 (internal citations and quotations omitted). However, “mere conclusory findings without reference to the record are inadequate.” Id. at p. 1521 (finding city council findings conclusory, violating Topanga Assn. for a Scenic Community, supra).

Further, CEQA exemptions must be narrowly construed to accomplish CEQA’s environmental objectives. Cal. Farm Bureau Federation v. Cal. Wildlife Conservation Bd. (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 173, 187; accord Save Our Carmel River v. Monterey Peninsula Water Management Dist. (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 677, 697 (these rules ensure that in all but the clearest cases of categorical exemptions, a project will be subject to some level of environmental review).

Finally, CEQA procedures reflect a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review. See Pub. Res. Code, § 21080, subd. (c) (an EIR may be disposed of only if there is no substantial evidence, in light of the entire record before the lead agency, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment or revisions in the project); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15061, subd. (b)(3) (common sense exemption only where it can be seen with certainty); 15063, subd. (b)(1) (prepare an EIR if the agency determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial]; 15064, subd. (h) (the agency must consider cumulative impacts of past, current, and probable future projects); 15070 (a negative declaration may be prepared only if there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the project may have a significant effect on the environment, or project revisions would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record, that the 128
City of Ontario – Euclid & Walnut Mixed Use Project
August 7, 2023

Page 12 of 23 ends

Ontario City CouncilOctober 17, 2023

Ontario City Council
October 17, 2023