access will be provided via 2 driveways on South Grove Avenue. The southern driveway would be restricted to passenger vehicles only. The northern driveway is 40 feet wide and designed to accommodate the wide turning radius of the heavy trucks.
The Project area is generally characterized by industrial uses. Traffic generated by the Project would be typical of a warehouse and be compatible with the type of traffic generated by the existing and surrounding development. In addition, all proposed improvements within the public right-of-way would be installed in conformance with City design standards. The City of Ontario Engineering Department reviewed the Project’s application materials and determined that no hazardous transportation design features would be introduced by the Project. At the time of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans; the City will further review project access points to ensure adequate sight distance. Accordingly, the Project would not create or substantially increase safety hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use and impacts would be a less than significant. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that a review of emergency access is included as part of the City’s Design Review process. According to the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, interstate highways would serve as major emergency response and evacuation routes. Additionally, the Ontario Fire Department reviews development applications to ensure that adequate emergency accessibility is provided based on local and state guidance.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and implementation of TOP 2050 would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
Discussion of Effects: The Project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and meet all applicable City of Ontario Fire and Police Department access requirements to ensure that adequate access would be provided for emergency vehicles at Project build out.
During construction activities that include road and sidewalk improvements, the Project would provide adequate emergency access along abutting roadways during temporary construction activities. As concluded in the Certified SEIR, the Ontario Fire Department reviews development applications to ensure that adequate emergency accessibility is provided based on local and state guidance. As a result, the Project would not a less than significant impact to emergency access. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that result of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) check conducted through the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) was negative. In accordance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements, the City sent invitation letters to the 2188
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
Native American contacts provided by the NAHC. Grading and construction activities in undeveloped areas or redevelopment that requires deeper soil excavation than in the past have the potential to disturb tribal cultural resources. Mitigation Measures 5-3 and 5-4 and new Mitigation Measures TCR-1 and TCR-2 would reduce potential impacts associated with tribal cultural resources to a level that is less than significant. Therefore, no significant unavoidable adverse impacts relating to tribal cultural resources remain. a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? Discussion of Effects: As analyzed in Response 5.a, there are no resources on the Project site that are eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined by Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). Implementation of the Project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a listed historical resource. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Discussion of Effects: As discussed in Response 5.a, no resources were recorded in the Project site or within one mile of the Project site. However, since the Project would require excavation for construction into previously undisturbed soils, there is a potential to uncover undiscovered prehistoric artifacts or tribal cultural resources during excavation. Therefore, while unlikely, the presence of subsurface tribal cultural resources on the Project site remains possible, and these could be affected by ground-disturbing activities associated with grading and construction at the Project site. As a result, consistent with the findings of the Certified SEIR, implementation of Mitigation Measures 5-3, 5-4, TCR-1 and TCR-2 would preclude potential impacts to tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code 5024.1(c). Therefore, the Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required. The following mitigation measure from the Certified SEIR is applicable to the Project:
MM 5-3 Upon receipt of an application for a proposed project subject to CEQA and within the City’s jurisdiction, the City’s representative shall consult with the relevant tribe(s)’ representative(s) to determine if the proposed project is within a culturally sensitive area to the tribe. If sufficient evidence is provided to reasonably ascertain that the site is within a tribal culturally sensitive area, an archaeologist shall prepare then a cultural resources assessment. The findings of the cultural resources assessment shall be incorporated into the CEQA documentation. A copy of the report shall be forwarded to the tribe(s). If mitigation is recommended in the CEQA document, the procedure described in Mitigation Measure 5-4 shall be 2189
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
followed.
MM 5-4 Prior to the issuance of grading permits for a proposed project for which the CEQA document defines cultural resource mitigation for potential tribal resources, the project applicant shall contact the designated tribe(s) to notify them of the grading, excavation, and monitoring program. The applicant shall coordinate with the City of Ontario and the tribal representative(s) to develop mitigation measures that address the designation, responsibilities, and participation of tribal monitors during grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities; scheduling; terms of compensation; and treatment and final disposition of any cultural resources, sacred sites, and human remains discovered on the site. The City of Ontario shall be the final arbiter of the conditions for projects within the City’s jurisdiction.
TCR-1 Tribal Cultural Resources Monitoring. The project archaeologist, in consultation with interested tribes, the developer, and the City of Ontario, shall develop an Archaeological Monitoring Plan (AMP) to address the details, timing, and responsibility of archaeological and cultural activities that will occur on the project site. Details in the AMP shall include:
1. Project-related ground disturbance (including, but not limited to, brush clearing, grading, trenching, etc.) and development scheduling;
2. The development of a rotating or simultaneous schedule in coordination with the developer and the project archeologist for designated Native American Tribal Monitors from the consulting tribes during grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site:
including the scheduling, safety requirements, duties, scope of work, and Native American Tribal Monitors’ authority to stop and redirect grading activities in coordination with all project archaeologists (if the tribes cannot come to an agreement on the rotating or simultaneous schedule of tribal monitoring, the Native American Heritage Commission shall designate the schedule for the onsite Native American Tribal Monitor for the proposed project);
3. The protocols and stipulations that the developer, City, Tribes, and project archaeologist will follow in the event of inadvertent cultural resources discoveries, including any newly discovered cultural resource deposits that shall be subject to a cultural resources evaluation.
At least 30 days prior to application for a grading permit and before any brush clearance, grading, excavation, and/or ground disturbing activities on the site, the developer shall retain a tribal cultural monitor to monitor all ground-disturbing activities in an effort to identify any unknown archaeological resources.
Pursuant to the AMP, a tribal monitor from the consulting tribe shall be present during the initial grading activities. If tribal resources are found during grubbing activities, the tribal monitoring shall be present during site grading activities.
2190
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
TCR-2 Treatment and Disposition of Cultural Resources. In the event that Native American cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during the course of any ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to brush clearance, grading, trenching, etc., for the proposed project, the following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:
1. Temporary Curation and Storage: During the course of construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location on-site or at the offices of the project archaeologist. The removal of any artifacts from the project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversight of the process;
2. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and nonhuman remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City of Ontario with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for on-site reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloging, basic analysis, other analyses as recommended by the project archaeologist and approved by consulting tribes, and basic recordation have been completed; all documentation should be at a level of standard professional practice to allow the writing of a report of professional quality;
b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository in San Bernardino County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79, and therefore the resource would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility in San Bernardino County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation;
c. For purposes of conflict resolution, if more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to an agreement as to the disposition of cultural materials, materials shall be curated at the San Bernardino County Museum by default;
d. At the completion of grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources 2191
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pregrade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, County Museum, and consulting tribes.
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that TOP 2050 would result in an overall increase in the number of residential dwellings and nonresidential square footage.
The TOP 2050 has policies in place to require improvements to sewer infrastructure as part of new development and redevelopment projects and has processes in place to ensure that any sewer improvement projects are implemented prior to or during new development. With funding from sewer connection/usage fees and the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) budget, the City would continue to expand and improve the sewer infrastructure to accommodate new development and future growth. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on wastewater infrastructure.
Due to the increase in demand for potable and recycled water, the City and the IEUA have made plans for infrastructure expansion and improvement. As part of the land development approval process, the City determines a project’s fair-share costs and connection fees. Through the use of connection fees and agreements, the City maintains and expands its water distribution system as necessary and is able to ensure that new developments pay their fair-share costs.
Therefore, impacts related to water infrastructure expansion and improvement caused by the implementation of TOP 2050 would be less than significant.
Potential future development and the change in land uses could result in an increase in impervious surfaces. Future developments would be required to comply with the City’s storm drain policies and the MS4 permit, which would require the preparation of hydrology reports and drainage plans for review and approval by the City to ensure that there are no adverse impacts to the City’s storm drain system. Also, the developers would need to prepare a WQMP that addresses stormwater runoff and requires the construction of stormwater treatment facilities for temporary on-site retention of stormwater runoff. These requirements would minimize the amount of stormwater runoff from potential future development. Compliance with the City’s policies and programs that ensure adequate infrastructure and the regulatory provisions in the MS4 permit that limit runoff from new development would ensure that implementation of TOP 2050 would not result in significant increases in runoff that would contribute to the construction or expansion of new storm drains beyond what is already planned. Therefore, impacts with respect to stormwater infrastructure would be less than significant.
Discussion of Effects:
Water and Wastewater
The Project would include the installation of water and wastewater lines within the Project site. Water would be accommodated via proposed water lines that would extend from the eastern portion of the building and proposed fire hydrants to an existing 6-inch water main on 2192
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
South Grove Avenue. Sewer would be accommodated via proposed sewer lines that would extend from the northwestern and northeastern corners of the building to an existing 10-inch sewer main on South Grove Avenue.
Although the Project would result in new water and wastewater line connections, these connections would occur on-site and would be part of the Project’s construction phase, which is evaluated throughout this Addendum. The construction of the Project’s water and wastewater lines necessary to serve the Project would not result in any significant physical effects on the environment that are not already identified and disclosed as part of this Addendum. Impacts would be less than significant.
Stormwater Drainage
Stormwater will be directed to the on-site underground infiltration/detention system between the parking stalls along the western boundary and the paved loading dock section. The overflow from the underground system will discharge through a proposed parkway drain onto South Grove Avenue. A system of catch basins laid around the site will collect and pre-treat stormwater before it enters the underground system via a network of PVC pipes. The existing drainage pattern of the rear bio-swale will be kept by including a pipe that runs along the west boundary of the site from north to south in order to collect stormwater from the northern property and convey it to the southern property.
Refer to the analysis under Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality Threshold c.ii, above.
As discussed, stormwater runoff would be treated on site and would not require relocation or construction of new or expanded storm water drainage infrastructure which could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant.
Dry Utilities
Electricity will be provided by Southern California Edison. Connections to the existing utility networks are available in the Project area and any offsite improvements would occur within improved rights-of-way, which are inherent to the Project’s construction phase and have been evaluated throughout this Addendum. Because the Project site has been previously developed with industrial uses that requires electric power and telecommunication services, implementation of the Project is not anticipated to limit the ability of service providers to provide service to Project.
Therefore, the Project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of new facilities, and impacts would be less than significant.
Based on the preceding, the Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that total water demand associated with TOP 2050 would result in a increase of approximately 6 percent compared to the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The 2020 UWMP states that there are sufficient water supplies through 2045 to meet projected demands in normal years, single dry years, and multiple dry years through 2045. Although TOP 2050 at buildout is estimated to generate a 6 2193
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
percent increase in water demand using conservative water demand factors, new State requirements and City policies and code requirements would result in enhanced water efficiency and conservation. Applying these measures would result in total water demand below the projections in the 2020 UWMP for year 2045. Therefore, there would be sufficient water supplies to meet the demand for TOP 2050 buildout. Impacts would be less than significant, and TOP 2050 would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
Discussion of Effects: OMUC is responsible for supplying potable water to the Project site.
The UWMP includes an analysis of water supply reliability projected through 2045 under normal years, single dry year, and multiple dry years. OMUC’s total water demand for 2020 was approximately 32,109 AF (OMUC, 2021). As stated above, the City is anticipated to have adequate water supplies to meet all its demands from the implementation of TOP 2050 at buildout until the year 2045 under a normal year, single dry year, and multiple dry years. The Project Applicant would demolish the existing structures and redevelop the site with an approximately 61,867 s.f. s.f. building. The proposed building would be approximately 47,950 s.f. less than the maximum allowed under TOP 2050. Therefore, the Project will result in less development of the site than the Certified SEIR analyzed at buildout (i.e., 61,867 s.f. vs. 109,817 s.f.) and require less water demand. Because the Project Applicant would redevelop the site with a use permitted under the Business Park land use designation, the Project would be consistent with TOP 2050 and UWMP and, therefore, the water demand associated with the Project was considered in the demand anticipated by the Certified SEIR and impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that IEUA has two facilities that serve the City of Ontario: RP-1 and RP-5. The current combined capacity of these two facilities is 60.3 mgd and would increase to 66.5 mgd once the expansion project that is currently under construction at RP-5 is completed. The additional flow rate from implementation of TOP 2050 would not exceed the capacity of the wastewater treatment providers. Therefore, there would be no significant impacts on wastewater collection and treatment. Impacts would be less than significant, and TOP 2050 would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
Discussion of Effects: The Project site is developed with two buildings (an office and a warehouse/maintenance building) and occupied by a telecommunication company with vehicle maintenance operations on-site (southern building) that requires wastewater treatment services. The Project Applicant would demolish the existing structures and redevelop the site with an approximately 61,867 s.f. building. The proposed building would be approximately 47,950 s.f. less than the maximum allowed under TOP 2050. Therefore, the Project will result in less development of the site than the Certified SEIR analyzed at buildout (i.e., 61,867 s.f. vs. 109,817 s.f.). The Project Applicant would redevelop the Project site with a use that is consistent with the site’s underlying land use designation; therefore, the wastewater generation associated with the Project was considered in the demand anticipated by the Certified SEIR and the City’s Sewer Master Plan and analyzed therein. As such, the IEUA’s existing wastewater treatment facilities are 2194
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
anticipated to have adequate capacity to serve the Project’s project demand in addition to its existing commitments. Impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that the increase in population under the TOP 2050 would result in more solid waste generation and could impact the capacity of the receiving landfills. TOP 2050 would result in a net increase in solid waste generation at buildout of 45,204 tons/year. This net increase is about 2 percent of the Badlands Sanitary Landfill and the El Sobrante Landfill’s excess capacity. Therefore, there is sufficient landfill capacity to serve future development pursuant to the TOP 2050. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and TOP 2050 would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
Discussion of Effects: Solid waste generated during the operation of the Project is anticipated to be collected by the City of Ontario and is anticipated to be hauled to Badlands Sanitary Landfill or El Sobrante Landfill. The Badlands Sanitary Landfill has a permitted disposal capacity of 5,000 tons per day with a remaining capacity of 7,800,000 cubic yards. The Badlands Sanitary Landfill is estimated to reach capacity, at the earliest time, in the year 2059. (CalRecycle, 2023a) The El Sobrante Landfill is permitted to receive 16,054 tons of solid waste per day with a remaining capacity of 143,977,170 ton. The El Sobrante Landfill is estimated to reach capacity, at the earliest time, in the year 2051 (CalRecycle, 2023b).
Based on the generation rate of 1.42 pounds per 100 s.f. per day, the proposed 61,867 s.f. building would result in approximately 879 pounds per day (0.44 tons per day). As previously stated, the Badlands Sanitary Landfill has a permitted disposal capacity of 5,000 tons per day and the El Sobrante Landfill has a permitted disposal capacity of 16,054 tons per day. The Project generated solid waste represents a nominal portion of the landfill’s capacity and would not contribute significantly to the daily landfill capacity, and the landfill facilities are sufficient.
Accordingly, impacts would be less than significant. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
e. Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that future development pursuant to TOP 2050 would comply with Section 4.408 of the 2019 CALGreen building code, which requires that at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Development would also comply with AB 341, which mandates recycling for commercial and multifamily residential land uses. Additionally, future businesses that generate organic waste in amounts over a certain threshold would be mandated to recycle organic matter in accordance with AB 1826. 2195
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
In addition, TOP 2050 policies ER-2.1, ER-2.2, and ER-2.3 describe waste diversion requirements, hazardous and electronic waste disposal, and purchasing of products made from recycled materials that would ensure that the City has a cost-effective integrated waste management system that meets or exceeds state and federal recycling and waste diversion mandates.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and TOP 2050 would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts compared to the Certified EIR.
Discussion of Effects: The following federal and state laws and regulations govern solid waste disposal:
• AB 939 (Chapter 1095, Statutes of 1989), the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 required each city, county, and regional agency to develop a source reduction and recycling element of an integrated waste management plan that contained specified components, including a source reduction component, a recycling component, and a composting component.
With certain exceptions, the source reduction and recycling components were required to divert 50 percent of all solid waste from landfill disposal or transformation by January 1, 2000, through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities.
• AB 32 (Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006), the California Global Warming Solutions Act, established mandatory recycling as one of the measures to reduce GHG emissions adopted in the Scoping Plan by the California Air Resources Board. • AB 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011) requires that all “commercial” generators of solid waste (businesses, institutions, and multifamily dwellings) establish recycling and/or composting programs. AB 341 goes beyond AB 939 and establishes the new recycling goal of 75 percent by 2020.
The Project would implement the requirements of the City’s Integrated Waste Department’s Refuse & Recycling Planning Manual on refuse and recycling storage and access for service, as well as addressing the City’s recycling goals. The requirements of Chapter 3, Integrated Waste Management, of the Municipal Code will also be implemented to ensure that the Project complies with all applicable state and federal laws. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
20. WILDFIRE.
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread 2196
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that substantial improvements in transportation infrastructure planned to accommodate the increase in population in the City in the event of an emergency. Additionally, a review of emergency access is included as part of the City’s Design Review process. According to the City’s LHMP, interstate highways would serve as major emergency response and evacuation routes. Additionally, the Ontario Fire Department reviews development applications to ensure that adequate emergency accessibility is provided based on local and state guidance. Therefore, impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.
Moreover, the City is located outside of a State Responsibility Area (SRA) and California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has determined that the City contains no areas subject to very high wildfire risk. However, the City recognizes that even though fuel loading is light in Ontario and fire risk comes primarily from urban fires, not wildfires, there is some risk related to wildfires. With adherence to the building practices in the CAL FIRE’s 2019 Strategic Fire Plan for California, the California Fire Code, County of San Bernardino Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and City’s LHMP, development and infrastructure associated with TOP 2050 would not exacerbate risk or result in post-wildfire hazards.
Discussion of Effects: As concluded in the Certified SEIR, the City is not located with a SRA.
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s fire hazard map for the Local Responsibility Area (LRA), the Project site is not within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE, 2008). Therefore, no impact would occur. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat or a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that TOP 2050 would result in less-than-significant impacts to sensitive plant and animal species as well as habitats.
Additionally, the Certified SEIR concluded that, with mitigation, TOP 2050 would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to Tier III historical resources. 2197
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
Discussion of Effects: The Project site is in a highly urbanized area of the City that is already Developed with industrial uses. As discussed in the Biological Resources Section of this Addendum, potentially significant biological impacts are not anticipated because the Project site is developed and there are no rare or endangered plants or animal species within the Project site.
Additionally, as indicated in the Cultural Resources section, the Project site is not included on the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, or a local register of historical resources, nor is it eligible for listing. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. The Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
f. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR addressed cumulative impacts for each of the environmental topics evaluated. The Certified SEIR concluded that TOP 2050 would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts regarding air quality, cultural resources (Historic), noise, and transportation (VMT).
Discussion of Effects: As identified through the analysis presented in this Addendum, with the implementation of Project-specific mitigation measures identified herein, the Project would not result in any new, increased or substantially different impacts, other than those previously considered and addressed in the Certified SEIR. No changes or additions to the Certified SEIR analyses are necessary. Therefore, there is no potential for the Project to result in cumulatively considerable effects to the environment beyond those previously disclosed in the Certified SEIR (and already disclosed throughout this analysis), and instead, the Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed and analyzed in the Certified SEIR.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
g. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Summary of Certified SEIR Finding: The Certified SEIR concluded that with the implementation of the recommended TOP Mitigation Measures, compliance with existing laws, plans and regulations, and the various TOP Implementation Actions outlined in the Project Description, TOP 2050 does not have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Discussion of Effects: The Project’s potential to result in environmental effects that could adversely affect human beings, either directly or indirectly, has been discussed throughout this Addendum. The Project would result in less than significant impacts related to air quality and associated effects on human health from air pollutants, GHG emissions, and noise. Additionally, with mandatory regulatory compliance, potential hazardous materials impacts associated with long-term operation of the Project is not expected to pose a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would the Project increase the potential for accident operations which could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Implementation of the Project would not result in 2198
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, beyond those disclosed in the Certified SEIR, and instead, the Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed by the Certified SEIR.
Mitigation: No additional mitigation required.
EARLIER ANALYZES
(Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D)):
1) Earlier Analyzes Used. Identify earlier analyzes used and state where they are available for review.
a) The Ontario Plan Final Environmental Impact Report
b) The Ontario Plan/Policy Plan
c) City of Ontario Zoning
All documents listed above are on file with the City of Ontario Planning Department, 303 East “B” Street, Ontario, California 91764, (909) 395-2036.
2) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of, and adequately analyzed in, an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards.
REFERENCES
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), 2008. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. November 13, 2008. Retrieved from https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6783/fhszl_map62.pdf
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2023a. SWIS Facility Detail - Badlands Sanitary Landfill. Retrieved from
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2245?siteID=2367 CalRecycle, 2023b. SWIS Facility Detail - El Sobrante Landfill. Retrieved from https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2022. California Road System - Functional Classification. Retrieved from
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=026e830c914c495 797c969a3e5668538
City of Ontario, 1993. Grove Avenue Specific Plan. September 7, 1993. Retrieved from https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/OntarioFiles/Planning/Maps/grove_introduction_.pdf City of Ontario, 2011. Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. April 19, 2011. 2199
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
Retrieved from https://www.ontarioplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/4/pdfs/ALUCP_FULL.pdf City of Ontario, 2022a. City of Ontario Policy Plan. August 2022. Retrieved from https://www.ontarioca.gov/Ontarioplan/Policyplan
City of Ontario, 2022b. The Ontario Plan 2050 Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report.
August 2022. Retrieved from https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/OntarioFiles/Planning/The%20Ontario%20Plann/EIR/Final_DraftSEIR_TOP2050.pdf California Department of Conservation (DOC), 2018. California Important Farmland Finder.
Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ Employment Development Department (EDD), 2022. Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places. February, 2022. Retrieved from https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-forcities-and-census-areas.html Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2016. FEMA Flood Map Service Center:
Search by Address. Retrieved from
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor
Huitt-Zollars, 2023a. Water Quality Management Plan. April 20, 2023. Technical Appendix G.1.
Huitt-Zollars, 2023b. Preliminary Hydrology Study. April 20, 2023. Technical Appendix G.2.
LSA, 2022. Biological Resources Assessment. November 2023. Technical Appendix B.
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC), 2021. 2020 UWMP. June 2021. Retrieved from https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf PaleoWest, 2022a. Cultural Resource Constraints Analysis. December 1, 2022. Technical Appendix C.
PaleoWest, 2022b. Paleontological Resource Assessment. May 12, 2022. Technical Appendix E.
Roux Associates, Inc. (Roux), 2022. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. December 14, 2022.
Technical Appendix F.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2020. Demographics and Growth Forecast. Retrieved from https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/fileattachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 Southern California Geotechnical, Inc. (SoCal Geo), 2022. Geotechnical Investigation. April 19, 2022. Technical Appendix D.
Urban Crossroads, 2023a. First Grove Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment. June 8, 2023.
Technical Appendix A.
Urban Crossroads, 2023b. First Grove Noise and Vibration Analysis. June 5, 2023. Technical Appendix H.
2200
Addendum to The Ontario Plan 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report File No(s).: PDEV22-040 & PSPA22-007
Urban Crossroads, 2023c. First Grove Addendum Trip Generation Assessment. November 9, 2023.
Technical Appendix I.1.
Urban Crossroads, 2023d. 2042 S Grove Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Evaluation. May 18, 2023. Technical Appendix I.2.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 2020. National Wetlands Inventory. October 1, 2020.
Retrieved from https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html 2201
RESOLUTION NO.________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING FILE NO. PSPA22-007, AN AMENDMENT TO
THE GROVE AVENUE SPECIFIC PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE
DESIGNATION OF 4.20 ACRES OF LAND FROM OFFICE/COMMERCIAL TO BUSINESS PARK FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2042 S. GROVE
AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 105- 049-111
WHEREAS, First Industrial Realty Trust (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant") has filed an Application for the approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, File No. PSPA22-007, as described in the title of this Resolution (hereinafter referred to as "Application" or "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Application applies to 4.20 acres of land generally located north of State Route 60 (Pomona Freeway) and south of Mission Boulevard, at 2042 S. Grove Avenue within the Office/Commercial land use designation of the Grove Avenue Specific Plan, and is presently improved with existing office and warehouse/storage building with surface parking; and
WHEREAS, the properties to the north and east of the Project site are within the Business Park land use designation of the Grove Avenue Specific Plan and are developed with industrial and business park land uses. The property to the south is within the Office/Commercial land use designation of the Grove Avenue Specific Plan and is developed with industrial buildings. The properties to the west are within the General Industrial (IG) land use designation, and are developed with industrial structures, outdoor storage yards and RV parking; and
WHEREAS, the Grove Avenue Specific Plan was adopted in 1993 to help facilitate development of the Grove Avenue corridor as a light industrial, limited commercial and business park. The specific plan covers approximately 250 acres of land along the east and west side of Grove Avenue between Mission Boulevard to the north and State Route 60 (Pomona Freeway) to the south. At the time of the specific plan’s establishment, there were several driving factors that helped form the specific plan, such as the direct connection to the Ontario Airport and the increasing growth of industrial development; and WHEREAS, the proposed Amendment to the Grove Avenue Specific Plan will change the land use designation on the subject site from Office/Commercial to Business Park. This Specific Plan Amendment will facilitate the future development of a new 61,867 square foot industrial building with associated site improvements on the 4.20-acre Project site. The requested land use change will coordinate well with the existing land uses to the north and east, as they are currently designated for Business Park; and are improved with business park industrial land uses; and
2202
WHEREAS, to analyze the traffic impacts of the requested land use change, a Trip Generation Assessment was prepared in accordance with the traffic study requirements of the City of Ontario and the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) Congestion Management Program (CMP). As a result, the Project is anticipated to generate 204 fewer two-way trips per day as compared to the adopted TOP 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) certified by the Ontario City Council on August 16, 2022; and WHEREAS, in conjunction with the proposed Specific Plan Amendment, the applicant has also submitted a Development Plan application (File No. PDEV22-040) to demolish an existing office and warehouse/storage building and construct a new 61,867 square-foot industrial building with associated site improvements within the 4.20-acre Project site located at 2042 S. Grove Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on February 21, 2024, the Development Advisory Board conducted a hearing regarding the related Development Plan (File No. PDEV22-040) and approved the Project, subject to City Council approval of this Specific Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, on March 26, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and voted unanimously (6-0) to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed Specific Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Ontario Plan (TOP) 2050 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2021070364) certified by City Council on August 16, 2022 (hereinafter referred to as "Certified EIR"), in which development and use of the Project site was discussed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director of the City of Ontario prepared and approved for attachment to the certified Environmental Impact Report, an Addendum to the Certified EIR (hereinafter referred to as "EIR Addendum") in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, together with State and local guidelines implementing said Act, all as amended to date (collectively referred to as "CEQA"); and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts of this project were thoroughly analyzed in the EIR Addendum, which concluded that implementation of the Project could result in a number of significant effects on the environment that were previously analyzed in the Certified EIR, and that the Certified EIR identified mitigation measures that would reduce each of those significant effects to a less-than-significant level; and WHEREAS, the City's "Local 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; and
WHEREAS, the Application is a project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act — Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. — (hereinafter referred to 2203
as "CEQA") and an EIR Addendum has been prepared to determine possible environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, Ontario Development Code Table 2.02-1 (Review Matrix) grants the City Council the responsibility and authority to review and act on the subject Application; and WHEREAS, the Project has been reviewed for consistency with the Housing Element of the Policy Plan component of The Ontario Plan, as State Housing Element law (as prescribed in Government Code Sections 65580 through 65589.8) requires that development projects must be consistent with the Housing Element, if upon consideration of all its aspects, it is found to further the purposes, principals, goals, and policies of the Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, the Project is located within the Airport Influence Area of Ontario International Airport, which encompasses lands within parts of San Bernardino, Riverside, and Los Angeles Counties, and is subject to, and must be consistent with, the policies and criteria set forth in the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (hereinafter referred to as "ALUCP"), which applies only to jurisdictions within San Bernardino County, and addresses the noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight impacts of current and future airport activity; and
WHEREAS, City of Ontario Development Code Division 2.03 (Public Hearings) prescribes the manner in which public notification shall be provided and hearing procedures to be followed, and all such notifications and procedures have been completed; and
WHEREAS, on March 26, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario conducted a hearing to consider the EIR Addendum and the Project, and concluded said hearing on that date, voting to issue Resolution No. PC24-008, recommending the City Council adopt the EIR Addendum, and voting to issue Resolution No. PC24-009, recommending the City Council approve the Application; and WHEREAS, as the first action on the Project, on March 26, 2024, the City Council issued a Resolution adopting the EIR Addendum, finding that the proposed Project introduces no new significant environmental impacts and applying all previously adopted mitigation measures to the Project, which were incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2024, the City Council of the City of Ontario conducted a hearing to consider the Project, and concluded said hearing on that date; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ontario, California, as follows:
2204
SECTION 1: Housing Element Compliance. Pursuant to the requirements of California Government Code Chapter 3, Article 10.6, commencing with Section 65580, as the decision-making body for the Project, the City Council finds that based upon the facts and information contained in the Application and supporting documentation, at the time of Project implementation, 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 Inventory contained in Tables B-1 and B-2 of the Housing Element Technical Report.
SECTION 2: 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.
(1) On April 19, 2011, the City Council of the City of Ontario approved and adopted the Ontario International Airport Land use Compatibility Plan, 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 the Project, the City Council 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 City Council, 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; and
SECTION 3: Concluding Facts and Reasons. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the City Council during the above-referenced hearing, and upon the specific findings set forth in Sections 1 and 2, above, the City Council hereby concludes as follows:
(1) The proposed Specific Plan, or amendment thereto, is consistent with the goals, policies, plans and exhibits of the Vision, Policy Plan (General Plan), and City Council Priorities components of The Ontario Plan. The proposed amendment to the Grove Avenue Specific Plan will change the land use designation on 4.20 acres of land from Office/Commercial to Business Park for property located at 2042 S. Grove 2205
Avenue. The proposed amendment is consistent with TOP’s Vision, which states “in order to take advantage opportunities or remove impediments to achieving our Vision, we need the ability to quickly respond to changing market needs,” and TOP’s Policy Plan (General Plan) goals and policies, which states “LU3-3 Land Use Flexibly. We consider uses not typically permitted within a land use category if doing so improves livability, reduces vehicular trips, creates community gathering places and activity nodes, and helps create identity;” and
(2) The proposed Specific Plan, or amendment thereto, would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City. With the proposed amendment to the Grove Avenue Specific Plan, the proposed land use change will be in conformance with The Ontario Plan (TOP) Policy Plan Land Use Plan and will comply with the Policy Plan goals and policies applicable to the Specific Plan. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City because it will provide a land use that is consistent with the surrounding area to the north and east, that is currently improved with business park and industrial developments; and
(3) In the case of an application affecting specific property(ies), the proposed Specific Plan, or amendment thereto, will not adversely affect the harmonious relationship with adjacent properties and land uses. The proposed amendment will modify the land use from Office/Commercial to Business Park, which aligns with surrounding land uses and allows for similar development intensities under the Business Park designation; and
(4) In the case of an application affecting specific property(ies), the subject site is physically suitable, including, but not limited to, parcel size, shape, access, and availability of utilities, for the request and anticipated development. The proposed amendment will allow for light industrial uses on the subject site under the Business Park land use designation of the Grove Avenue Specific Plan. The project site is suitable in size and shape and contains adequate street frontage along Grove Avenue for sufficient access and availability of utilities to accommodate a light industrial development that is similar in scale and intensity to other existing developments within the Specific Plan area and under the Business Park designation.
SECTION 4: City Council Action. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1 through 3, above, the City Council hereby APPROVES the herein described Application.
2206
SECTION 5: Indemnification. The Applicant shall agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless, the City of Ontario or its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City of Ontario or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul this approval. The City of Ontario shall promptly notify the applicant of any such claim, action, or proceeding, and the City of Ontario shall cooperate fully in the defense.
SECTION 6: Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings have been based are located at the City of Ontario City Hall, 303 East "B" Street, Ontario, California 91764. The custodian for these records is the City Clerk of the City of Ontario.
The City Clerk of the City of Ontario shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of April, 2024. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________________
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
2207
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. 2024- was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Ontario at their regular meeting held April 16, 2024 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. 2024- duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held April 16, 2024. _____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2208
ATTACHMENT A:
File No. PSPA22-007;
Grove Avenue Specific Plan Amendment-Land Use Map
(Document follows this page)
2209
G
R
O
V
E
AV
B
O
N
V
EI W
AV
FRANCIS ST
PHILADELPHIA ST
C
U
C
A
M
O
N
G
A
AV
BELMONT ST
ACACIA ST
WA
L
K
E
R
AV
MISSION BL
CEDAR ST
LOCUST ST
M
LI D
R
E
D
AV
SPRUCE ST
G
R
E
E
N
W
O
O
D
AV
WOODLAWN ST
MAITLAND ST
SPRUCE ST
±
q
Attachment A: Grove Avenue Specific Plan - Land Use Map 0 500 1,000 2,000
Feet
Legend
Land Use
Grove Avenue
Specific Plan Boundary
Parcels
Business Park
Commercial
Office/Commercial
APN: 1050-491-11
Change 4.2 acres from
Office/Commercial to
Business Park
2210