Rancho Cucamonga City Council
November 5, 2025

3 1
2 9
550 unsheltered individuals, underscoring the urgent need for a regional response that no single jurisdiction can address alone.

Although Rancho Cucamonga’s numbers remain lower than many neighboring jurisdictions, the upward trend—driven by regional factors such as housing affordability, economic challenges, behavioral health system gaps, and discharges from institutional settings without stable housing— emphasizes the importance of sustained collaboration. The City’s outreach and public safety teams routinely encounter individuals experiencing homelessness who lack immediate access to safe shelter, behavioral health care, or recovery supports. Existing emergency housing resources within the region remain limited and are often at capacity, resulting in barriers to stabilization and recovery.

To address these regional challenges, the County of San Bernardino and participating West Valley cities - including Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland - are collaborating to develop the West End Navigation Center (“Center”). The Center, located at 10785 Laurel Street in Fontana, will expand the region’s capacity to provide temporary shelter and supportive services, serving as a key resource to help individuals transition from crisis to stability.

ANALYSIS:

The West End Navigation Center represents a regional, housing-focused solution designed to strengthen the coordinated response to homelessness across the West Valley. It is designed as a low-barrier, housing-focused service hub that will provide stability, connection to services, and direct pathways to permanent housing.

The West End Navigation Center goes beyond traditional emergency shelters by integrating case management, behavioral health care, medical oversight, coordinated social services, housing navigation, and workforce development within a single, coordinated facility. The Center will operate with a trauma-informed and person-centered approach, delivering comprehensive services that address the complex needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness.

The Center will provide 200 beds and operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days per year as a referral-only, managed-access facility serving participating jurisdictions in the West Valley.

The Center will provide three integrated components:
Emergency Shelter Services: Low-barrier accommodations with meals, hygiene and laundry facilities, intensive case management, behavioral health services, housing navigation, transportation assistance, and benefits enrollment. Recuperative Care Services: Temporary residential accommodations, medical oversight, and case management for individuals discharged from hospitals who require continued medical recovery but lack stable housing.
Sobering Center Services: A monitored space for individuals under the influence of alcohol or other substances who do not require hospitalization, providing medical monitoring, crisis intervention, and referrals to substance use treatment.

The Center will be staffed by multidisciplinary teams that include case managers, behavioral health professionals, and County service providers. Clients will be referred through approved channels such as participating jurisdictions, law enforcement, hospitals, and outreach teams— ensuring a coordinated and secure intake process.

3 1
2 9
Operational Overview

Total of 200 beds – 100 emergency shelter beds, 100 recuperative medical care beds, plus a sobering center
24/7 operations – Round-the-clock staffing, case management, and security; residents remain in place with an emphasis on stability and continuity. Referral-only admissions – No walk-ins/walk-offs; all entries and exits coordinated for safety and care continuity
One-stop service model – On-site services include Behavioral Health, Substance Use Services, Public Health, Transitional Assistance, Workforce Development, and the Office of Homeless Services (OHS) for housing navigation and Continuum of Care coordination. Low-barrier design – Guests may bring pets, partners, and personal belongings, reducing barriers to entry.
Comprehensive supports – Meals, case management, benefits enrollment, transportation, and employment services provided on-site.

Transportation coordination will also play a key role in connecting individuals to the Center. The West Valley Detention Center is located in Rancho Cucamonga, and individuals from multiple jurisdictions are released there daily, some without stable housing. The City will work with the County and local partners to establish safe and consistent transportation between the detention facility and the Center. This approach ensures that individuals exiting custody have immediate access to shelter, services, and stabilization supports rather than returning to unsheltered homelessness.

The project is currently in the design phase, with construction anticipated to take approximately 9 to 12 months and an expected opening in summer 2026. Once complete, the Center will serve as a vital extension of Rancho Cucamonga’s local homelessness response—providing outreach and public safety teams with a structured, regional facility where individuals can stabilize, access care, and transition toward permanent housing. This resource will help fill a critical gap for individuals who might otherwise cycle between encampments, emergency rooms, or the criminal justice system without access to long-term solutions.

Financial Structure

The development and operation of the West End Navigation Center are supported through a shared regional investment model designed to ensure long-term sustainability and equitable cost distribution among participating partners. The County of San Bernardino has committed a $20 million capital investment to acquire the fully improved building from the City of Fontana, along with an additional $5 million Capitalized Operating Subsidy Reserve (COSR) to stabilize operations. Annual operating costs are projected at approximately $3 million, shared between the County and participating cities.

Each city’s contribution is based on a tiered, pro rata cost-sharing structure that reflects population size, the estimated number of unhoused individuals within its jurisdiction, and access to existing local shelter resources. This approach ensures that costs and available beds are allocated equitably in proportion to each city’s level of investment and service needs. Emergency bed allocations are tied to funding levels, with a $200,000 contribution corresponding to five beds, a $250,000 contribution corresponding to seven beds, and contributions of $300,000 or more corresponding to ten beds. Contribution levels will be evaluated every two years and adjusted as

3 1
2 9
needed based on population changes and available grant funding, to maintain fairness and fiscal sustainability.

Based on the County’s tiered cost-sharing structure, Rancho Cucamonga’s annual contribution is $300,000, which secures ten dedicated beds for City residents and provides access to comprehensive wraparound services. This funding level reflects the City’s relative population size as one of the largest cities in the West End, as well as its local resource capacity within the broader regional system. While other West End cities operate dedicated emergency or navigation- level shelters in their communities, Rancho Cucamonga currently does not, making this investment a practical approach to ensure reliable local access to beds and integrated services for our residents - resources that would otherwise require significant local investment to develop and sustain independently. Participation in this regional initiative represents a strategic investment that enhances service capacity, strengthens interagency coordination, and improves outcomes for Rancho Cucamonga residents experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Rancho Cucamonga’s participation in the West End Navigation Center will require an annual operating contribution of $300,000, as established in the Memorandum of Understanding. Staff recommends an additional allocation of $100,000 to support transportation services between the West Valley Detention Center and the West End Navigation Center, ensuring individuals released from custody have direct access to shelter and supportive services.

Council authorization would allow staff to fund these costs utilizing any combination of eligible funding sources, including Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA), Prohousing Incentive Program (PIP), other state and federal homelessness programs, and National Opioid Settlement Funds. To the extent that such funds are unavailable or insufficient, the remaining balance will be funded from the General Fund using funds appropriated in the approved FY 2025/26 Budget.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This initiative helps realize the City Council’s core values of “Providing and nurturing a high quality of life for all” and “Promoting and enhancing a safe and healthy community for all” by supporting the well-being and stability of the community’s most vulnerable residents.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) - West End Navigation Center

PAGE 1 OF 26

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
between

THE CITIES OF CHINO, CHINO HILLS, FONTANA, MONTCLAIR, ONTARIO, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, RIALTO, and UPLAND
and

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
for the

OPERATION OF A REGIONAL NAVIGATION CENTER
This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is entered into as of December 16 , 2025 (“Effective Date”) by and between the Cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, and Upland, each of which is a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ( referred to individually as “City Party” and collectively as “the City Parties”), and San Bernardino County, a political subdivision of the State of California (“County”). The City Parties and the County may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as “the Parties.” Recitals
WHEREAS, the Parties, like many regions throughout California, have experienced significant growth in their unhoused population in recent years , presenting complex challenges driven by untreated substance use and mental health disorders, rising housing costs, and insufficient emergency, transitional, and affordable housing resources; and
WHEREAS, this growth in the unhoused population has resulted in increased incidents of camping and loitering on public rights -of-way, parks, and other public property within the Parties' jurisdictions, creating public health and safety concerns while straining municipal resources; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to cooperate to address homelessness through collaborative, evidence- based approaches that prioritize both public safety and the dignified treatment of unhoused individuals; and
WHEREAS, the Parties seek to implement comprehensive solutions to balance enforcement with meaningful support services; and
WHEREAS, the Parties recognize that addressing homelessness effectively requires collaborative regional efforts and hereby commit to establishing an emergency housing facility that offers integrated support services—including case management, behavioral health care, medical oversight, coordinated social services, transportation support, and housing placement assistance—designed to help residents successfully transition to permanent, stable housing; and WHEREAS, the Parties further commit to establishing clear pathways from emergency housing to permanent housing solutions by providing coordinated access to transitional housing, permanent supportive housing, and affordable housing opportunities within their respective jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Parties recognize the need for professional expertise in delivering trauma -informed, comprehensive services that address the complex needs of unhoused individuals and families; and ATTACHMENT 1

PAGE 2 OF 26
WHEREAS, this collaborative approach represents the Parties' commitment to addressing homelessness through shared resources, coordinated planning, and evidence -based practices that serve both unhoused individuals and the broader community; and WHEREAS, the Parties' respective governing bodies have reviewed and approved this MOU, finding that this regional partnership advances the health, safety, and welfare of all residents within their jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to cooperate in good faith to operate a new regional emergency housing and services center; and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to define the responsibilities of each Party with respect to the funding and operation of a new Regional Navigation Center.

PAGE 3 OF 26

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. RECITALS ............................................................................... 4 II. PURPOSE ............................................................................... 4 III. TERM ...................................................................................... 4 IV. TERMINATION ....................................................................... 4 V. COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES ....................................... 5 VI. SCOPE OF SERVICES .........................................................10 VII. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY PARTIES ......................12 VIII. PRINCIPAL REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICE ............. 14 IX. MISCELLANEOUS ................................................................15

PAGE 4 OF 26
I. RECITALS
The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and made a substantive part of this MOU by this reference.

II. PURPOSE
A. The Parties desire to work together cooperatively and in good faith towards funding and operating a Regional Navigation Center (“Facility”). The Facility will operate as a referral- only facility with managed access protocols designed to ensure safety and security for all participants. The Facility will serve individuals who meet established eligibility criteria for each program component, providing comprehensive in -house services, case management, medical oversight, and coordinated service delivery within an environment optimized for successful outcomes.

B. This MOU is intended to define the rights and responsibilities of the Parties with respect to the establishment, funding, and operation of the Facility for homeless individuals as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the State of California, including individual adults (persons 18 -years of age or older), individual adults (parent or guardian) with children, and families (married or unmarried adult partners with children) experiencing homelessness within the referring Party's respective jurisdiction, as further described herein.

III. TERM
A. Initial Term, Extension. This MOU shall be effective as of the Effective Date and shall remain in force and effect for ten (10) years unless terminated earlier by mutual agreement of the Parties pursuant to Section IV of this MOU. Thereafter, this MOU shall automatically renew for one additional five (5) year term unless any Party provides written notice of non-renewal to all other Parties at least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the initial term, or the Parties may mutually agree in writing to a renewal term of two (2), three (3), or four (4) years instead.

B. Renewal. After the initial term and first extension, as provided for in Section III.A of this MOU, lapse, the terms of t his MOU may be renegotiated between the Parties, for a successor MOU , or the Parties may agree, upon written approval of their respective governing Boards or Councils, to extend this Agreement for consecutive one-year terms.

IV. TERMINATION
A. Mutual Termination. Notwithstanding the term set forth in Section III.A of this MOU, this MOU may be terminated at any time upon the written agreement of at least six (6) City Parties and the County to this MOU. Such termination shall be evidenced by a written instrument executed by the authorized representatives of at least six (6) participating city jurisdictions and the County, and shall specify the effective date of termination.

B. Individual Party Withdrawal. Beginning in the ninth (9th) year after the Effective Date of this MOU, any City Party may withdraw from this MOU by providing twelve (12) months advance written notice to all other Parties. The withdrawing Party must continue all obligations, including timely payment of costs and any applicabl e termination fees,

PAGE 5 OF 26
through the effective date of withdrawal. Notwithstanding the above, beginning in the third (3rd) year after the Effective Date of this MOU, the City of Ontario may withdraw from this MOU by providing three (3) months advance written notice to all other Parties.

C. Termination Fee Prior to End of Ten -Year Term. The termination fee payable by any City Party terminating its participation pursuant to Section IV.B of this MOU shall be equal to the unpaid portion of the ten (10) year commitment as calculated from the effective date of termination through the end of the Term. The termination fee shall be paid by the terminating City Party to the County not later than six (6) months before the effective date of termination, unless another agreeable date is reached and agreed to by the County.

Failure to timely remit the termination fee shall render a City Party's notice of termination ineffective. Notwithstanding the above, the City of Ontario shall not be subject to the termination fee regardless of whether Ontario terminates the agreement upon three (3) years of Facility operations or later.

V. COUNTY RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Facility. The County shall be responsible for the acquisition and operation of the Facility, to be located at 11109 Jasmine Street, Fontana, California 92337.

B. Host City. The City of Fontana agrees to serve as the host city for the Facility and to allow the Facility to be located and operated within its jurisdiction for the purposes set forth in this MOU for such term as the MOU remains in force and effect. As host city, the City of Fontana shall provide or facilitate necessary municipal services, permits, zoning approvals, and regulatory compliance required for the Facility's operation, notwithstanding any possible termination of the City of Fontana's participation in the MOU pursuant to Section IV of this MOU. The County agrees to coordinate with the City of Fontana in its role as host city and to support Fontana in fulfilling its host city responsibilities.

C. Establishment of Facility . The County agrees to be responsible for the acquisition of the Facility, property start-up costs, and its identified portion of operational costs as set forth in Section VII of this MOU. The County shall pay all costs and expenses associated with the operation and maintenance of the Facility and the provision of services at the Facility, except for the amounts set forth in Section VII of this MOU for which the City Parties shall be responsible. Annual operating costs that exceed the agreed -upon threshold established in Section VII shall be subject to negotiation among all Parties prior to the County's obligation to pay such excess costs.

D. Vendor of Choice. The operation and management of the Facility and the provision of the services at the Facility, as described in Section VI of this MOU, shall be performed by a vendor selected by the County through a County-directed procurement process.

1. Operations Agreement. The County and Facility Operator, and other vendors and sub-vendors as determined necessary and appropriate by the County, shall enter into agreement for operation and management of the Facility, such duties to encompass, among other things, the matters described in Section VI of this MOU.

2. Vendor Oversight. The County shall, at all times, have the duty and responsibility to oversee the conduct and performance of any vendor and sub-vendors, and take appropriate measures to ensure vendors are, at all times, in compliance with the

PAGE 6 OF 26
provisions of this MOU and any operations agreements between the County and such vendors.

E. Mission Oversight . The County shall oversee the successful achievement of the Facility’s mission to serve the unhoused population and a chieve a short- and long-term reduction in the unhoused population within the jurisdictions of the Parties.

F. Service Outcomes. The County shall oversee service outcomes related to the sheltering, care, and treatment of Facility clients.

G. County Insurance . The County shall obtain and maintain appropriate policies of insurance or self-insured retention in accordance with the minimum requirements for the types and amounts of coverage established by the County’s risk management standards, or as otherwise esta blished in policies established by the County for operation of the Facility.

H. Indemnification and Insurance Requirements

1. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, County shall indemnify and hold harmless City Parties, and each of them (individually, a “City Party”), together with their officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against any and all claims, actions, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and costs, caused in whole or in part by the negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of County, its officers, agents, employees, consultants, subconsultants, vendors, or sub-vendors (including the officers, employees, agents, contractors and volunteers of any vendor or sub-vendor performing work or services at, or in connection with, the Facility or its operation) in the performance of services under this MOU or the performance of any work or service at or in connection with the Facility or its operation. County’s duty to indemnify and hold harmless a City Party shall not extend to that City Party’s sole or active negligence.

In the event a City Party is made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the performance of the services contemplated by this MOU, or the performance of work or services at or in connection with the Facility by any individual or entity, and upon demand by the City Party, County shall defend the City Party at County’s cost to the extent the matters arise from, relate to or are caused by County’s negligent acts, errors or omissions in connection with the performance of services under this MOU or the negligent acts, errors, or omissions of any County officer, official, employee, consultant, subconsultant, vendor, or sub -vendor (including the officers, employees, agents, contractors and volunteers of any vendor or sub -vendor) in the performance of any work or service at or in connection with the Facility or its operation.

In the event of any dispute between County and a City Party, as to whether liability arises from the sole or active negligence of the City Party or its officers, employees, or agents, County will be obligated to pay for City Party’s defense until such time as a final judgment has been entered adjudicating the City Party as solely or actively negligent. County will not be entitled in the absence of such a determination to any reimbursement of defense costs including but not limited to attorneys’ fees, expert fees and costs of litigation.

2. Insurance. County and City Parties are authorized self -insured or partially self-insured public entities for purposes of Professional Liability, General Liability, Automobile Liability and Worker's Compensation and warrant that through their respective programs of self- insurance and insurance, they have adequate coverage or resources to protect against

PAGE 7 OF 26
liabilities arising out of performance of the terms, conditions or obligations of this Agreement.

I. Licenses. The County shall be responsible for obtaining and maintaining , at all times while this MOU is operational and in effect, all business licenses, professional licenses or certifications, and permits, if any, determined by the County to be necessary for operating and providing services at the Facility pursuant to this MOU.

1. Vendor Licenses. The County shall ensure that each party providing services or otherwise engaged in the delivery of services to the Facility , including but not limited to the Facility Operator, shall obtain and maintain, at all times, all business licenses, professional licenses or certifications, and permits, if any, determined by the County to be necessary for operating and providing services at the Facility pursuant to this MOU.

J. Records. The County shall be responsible for maintaining complete and accurate records with respect to all services and programs performed at the Facility and all costs and expenses incurred pursuant to this MOU. Such records shall be retained during the term of this MOU and for five (5) years after the termination of the MOU. The County shall also be responsible for establishing and maintaining on a curr ent basis an adequate accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting princ iples. The County shall further be responsible during the term of this MOU for the preparation of an annual report to the City Parties, in a format approved by the City Parties, with respect to all services and programs performed at the Facility and all costs and expenses incurred pursuant to this MOU.

1. Vendor Records . The County shall ensure that all vendors under contract to provide services to the Facility maintain complete and accurate records with respect to all services and programs performed at the Facility, including records related to all costs and expenses incurred pursuant to their operational agreement with the County. To that end, County must ensure that each of its vendor operating agreements requires the vendor to:
a) Retain all records during the term of their respective operational agreement and, in the event of termination of the operational agreement, provide and turn over all records maintained by the vendor in relation to services provided under the operational agreement to the County. In the event of dispute related to providing and turning over records to the County, the vendor shall retain such records indefinitely until such matters of dispute are resolved either through mutual agreement, dispute resolution, mediation, or by order of a court of competent jurisdiction. b) Be responsible for establishing and maintaining on a current basis an adequate accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
c) Be responsible during the term of th eir operational agreement, for the preparation of annual reports required by the County, in a format approved by the County, with respect to all services and programs performed at the Facility and all costs and expenses incurred pursuant to th eir respective operational agreement.

2. Data-Sharing. The County shall provide the City Parties with Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) project-level data on a quarterly basis.

The data submission shall include, at a minimum, information on client demographics; services provided; bed utilization records by jurisdiction; project

PAGE 8 OF 26
enrollments and exits; recidivism rates within six (6) to twelve (12) months; housing outcomes and cost incurred per outcome. Data shall be submitted in a format approved by the City Parties and within fifteen (15) days following the end of each quarter. The City Parties reserve the right to request additional HMIS data or performance reports as necessary to evaluate program outcomes and compliance with funding requirements.

K. Financial Audit. The County shall annually conduct a financial audit of Facility Operator’s financial records related to the performance of this MOU.

1. Frequency of Audit . Such audits may be conducted by the County or its authorized representatives at reasonable times during normal business hours upon providing reasonable written notice to vendors. Additional audits may be conducted upon reasonable request by the Parties o r in response to security incidents.

2. Scope and Methodology. The purpose of such audits is to ensure compliance with the terms of this MOU and to verify the accuracy of vendors’ performance.

The audit shall be conducted in accordance with industry best practices and any relevant standards specified in this MOU.

3. Access and Documentation. Vendors shall provide the County or its authorized representatives with access to all relevant records, documents and facilities necessary to conduct each annual audit. Documents to be audited shall include, but not be limited to invoices, contracts, quality control records, and any other documentation pertinent to the audit scope.

4. Reporting and Remediation . Following completion of each annual audit, the County shall report to the Oversight Committee regarding the performance of the vendor, including any identified discrepancies, non -compliance issues, or areas for improvement.

5. Vendor Compliance/Non -compliance. The County shall be responsible for addressing issues of non -compliance with the vendor and ensuring timely implementation of corrective actions. The County shall work with the vendor to develop and monitor corrective action plans and take enforcement measures as necessary to ensure full compliance with this MOU and applicable operational agreements.

6. Confidentiality of Records . Parties agree to maintain confidentiality of any proprietary, sensitive, confidential, or patient/client information disclosed during the annual audit. All audit -related findings and communications shall be treated as confidential, unless otherwise required by law or regulating authorities.

7. Costs.
a. Audit Costs. The County shall bear all costs associated with the annual audit described in this Section V.K. The County shall not charge the City Parties for any expenses directly related to conducting or procuring the annual audit of the Facility Operator’s financial records. b. Administrative Fee. Separately, the County may assess an administrative fee to recover reasonable costs associated with its management and oversight of the Facility, including fiscal administration, contract management, compliance monitoring, and coordination of reporting

PAGE 9 OF 26
requirements. Any such administrative fee shall not exceed a reasonable percentage of total operating costs and shall be disclosed annually to the Oversight Committee as part of the County’s presentation of the Facility’s annual operating budget.

8. Dispute Resolution. Any disputes arising from audit findings or related matters shall be resolved in accordance with dispute resolutions agreed to between the County and vendors, and consistent with the broader dispute resolution process set forth in Section IX.J of this MOU. The County shall make reasonable efforts to mediate and resolve audit -related concerns in collaboration with the Facility Operator and the affected City Parties prior to escalation L. Oversight Committee. An Oversight Committee is hereby established, comprised of one (1) leadership representative from each participating jurisdiction, who shall be either the City Manager, Chief Executive Officer, or an Elected Official from such jurisdiction. The Oversight Committee shall provide high -level oversight of this MOU and ensure the effective deliverance of the mission. The Oversight Committee shall have the authority to review overall program performan ce, strategic direction, and compliance wi th the terms of this MOU. The Oversight Committee shall meet at least once annually to fulfill its duties under this MOU.

M. Operations Committee. An Operations Committee is hereby established, comprised of one (1) representative from each participating jurisdiction who has technical knowledge of homeless and/or housing issues. The Operations Committee shall provide guidance on policy matters, regional collaboration efforts, and referral processes. The Operations Committee shall review statistical reports on a monthly basis and shall meet monthly to fulfill its duties under this MOU. The Operations Committee may make recommendations to the Oversight Committee regarding operational improvements, policy adjustments, and program effectiveness measures.

1. Committee Representation . Each participating jurisdiction shall designate its representatives to both the Oversight Committee and Operations Committee within thirty (30) days of executing this MOU. Jurisdictions may change their designated representatives upon written notice to a ll other Parties, provided that replacement representatives meet the qualifications set forth in this MOU.

2. County Responsibilities. In addition to producing and delivering the agenda to the City Parties and conducting meetings of the Committees, the County shall be tasked with the following:
a) Facilitate communication and discussion during Committee meetings. b) Serve as public information officer related to actions of the Committees and matters related to the operation and management of the Facility. c) Provide research as needed for the Committees.
d) Recommend policies for review or development, and ensure existing policies comply with all local, state and federal laws and guidelines by staying up to date with relevant laws and regulations.
e) Administer a grants program for management and operation of the Facility, report to the Committees on available grants, oversee application for state and federal grants, and retain, disburse or seek reimbursement of grant funds as applicable.

PAGE 10 OF 26
f) Require the Facility vendor for operations and management to submit an annual budget and present the annual budget to the Oversight Committee for review and consideration.

3. City Parties Responsibilit ies. In addition to serving in an advisory role to the County, the City Parties shall be tasked with the following:
a) Review Operations Committee agenda materials and participate in meetings.
b) Provide policy recommendations and review current policies as recommended by the County.
c) Provide grant recommendations.
d) Review and consider the Facility vendor for operations and management’s annual budget.
e) Serve as ambassadors to further the Facility’s mission and vision.

VI. SCOPE OF SERVICES

The Facility will operate as a referral -only, low-barrier emergency shelter with comprehensive services designed to support individuals experiencing homelessness in stabilizing and transitioning to permanent housing. The Facility will be open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days per year, and will include three core program components: Emergency Shelter Services, Recuperative Care Services, and Sobering Center Services.

A. Emergency Shelter Services
The Facility will provide congregate and non-congregate emergency shelter accommodations for unhoused individuals referred by participating jurisdictions. Services will include meals, hygiene and laundry facilities, intensive case management, housing navigation, access to public benefits, life sk ills development, transportation assistance, and coordination with the Coordinated Entry System (CES).

B. Recuperative Care Services
Recuperative care addresses the critical gap between hospital discharge and safe housing for homeless individuals who require continued medical recovery but do not need acute hospital -level care. The Facility shall operate as a recuperative care facility providing temporary residential accommodations, basic medical oversight, medication management, wound care, assistance with activities of daily living, case management, and care coordination. These services are designed for homeless individuals recovering from illness, injury, surgery, or other acute medical conditions who cannot safely recover in traditional shelter environments or on the streets, with the goal of supporting complete medical recovery and facilitating transition to appropriate long-term housing solutions.

C. Sobering Center Services
The Facility will include a monitored space for individuals under the influence of alcohol or other substances who do not require hospitalization. Services will include medical monitoring, crisis intervention, substance use disorder referrals, and coordination with law enforcement and emergency services.

D. Operations and Access Protocols

PAGE 11 OF 26

The Facility will not accept walk-ins. All guests must be referred by an approved entity. A bed reservation system will be maintained to manage referrals and ensure capacity coordination. Upon discharge —whether voluntary or involuntary —the Facility Operato r will coordinate alternate housing placement or provide return transportation to the originating city , except in cases involving individuals deemed violent or dangerous, in which case coordination with appropriate agencies (e.g., law enforcement, behavio ral health, probation/parole) will occur.

E. Commercial Kitchen and Support Services
The Facility will have a commercial kitchen capable of preparing up to 600 meals daily, accommodating dietary needs and complying with applicable food safety regulations.

Guests will also have access to medical and behavioral health services, substance use disorder treatment ref errals, discharge planning, aftercare coordination, and benefits enrollment. Services will be delivered in accordance with an Operations Plan developed by the County and the Facility Operator, reviewed by the Operations Committee, and approved by the host jurisdiction.

F. Compliance and Oversight

1. Low Barrier . The Facility shall operate as a low -barrier navigation center accessible to homeless individuals and families regardless of income, mental health status, or substance use disorders. The Facility shall accommodate residents' personal belongings, pets, and partners within operational capacity.

Barriers to entry shall be minimal, and case managers will provide individualized assessments and service plans based on each person's needs and available resources to support housing stability.

2. Facility Operations Parameters. The Operations Plan shall establish the Facility as a coordinated entry navigation center with the following operational requirements:
a) Admissions Process. The Facility shall not accept walk-in admissions. All prospective residents must be referred through a participating jurisdiction, law enforcement or approved healthcare provider and transported by an agency, department, or organization that has been authorized by the County or a participating City Party to conduct outreach and make referrals to the Facility, before admission can occur.
b) Resident Movement. Residents may leave the premises for activities that support their housing stability and personal well -being, including but not limited to healthcare appointments, employment opportunities, educational programs, family reunification efforts, faith -related activities, and other case plan objectives, subject to coordination with Facility staff and available transportation arrangements. For school -age children at the Facility, the Facility Operator shall coordinate with the appropriate local education agency, in accordance with the federal McKinney -Vento Homeless Assistance Act, to ensure safe and reliable transportation to and from school and related educational activities.
c) Discharge and Transport. When a resident is discharged for non - compliance with facility requirements or voluntarily chooses to leave, the

PAGE 12 OF 26
Facility Operator shall coordinate an alternative housing placement if possible. If not available, the Facility Operator will arrange transportation back to the city of origin. Discharges of residents who are deemed violent or otherwise dangerous shall be coordinated with appropriate agencies including law enforcement, behavioral health services, and/or probation or parole officers as necessary for public safety.
d) Resident Agreement. Prior to admission, all residents must acknowledge and agree in writing to Facility requirements and applicable provisions of the Operations Plan.
e) Plan Modifications. The operational provisions required by this section may not be modified or deleted without advance written approval of all Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the “No Walk-In / No Walk-Out” requirement described in Section VI.F.2(a) and the “Return to City of Origin” provision described in Section VI.F.2(c) are mandatory and shall not be amended, modified, or eliminated under any circumstances.

G. Referral Policies and Protocols. Each Party agrees to develop comprehensive policies and protocols for referral of unhoused persons for their respective jurisdiction to the Facility. Policies and protocols developed by the City Parties shall comply with referral standards established by the County, the Continuum of Care’s Coordinated Entry System (CES) and may be subject to review and approval by the Operations Committee.

1. Bed Reservation System . A bed reservation system shall be established and maintained to coordinate Facility capacity and ensure efficient placement of referred individuals and families. Referring entities must secure a bed reservation through the CES prior to transportation to the Facility. Access to the bed reservation system may also be granted to prior identified entities, as approved by the County and the Operations Committee, for the purpose of coordinating referrals and monitoring placement activity. Bed reservations shall be valid for a period not to exceed twenty-four (24) hours from the time of confirmation.

2. Transportation Responsibility . Transportation to the Facility shall be coordinated by the referring entity (which may include an approved outreach entity). The referring entity shall also coordinate arrival times with Facility staff and shall ensure timely delivery of referred persons within the bed reservation timeframe.

3. Waivers and Documentation. Waivers releasing and absolving the Parties of any and all liabilities shall be provided prior to admission to the Facility.

VII. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY PARTIES
A. The City Parties agree to a pro rata share of costs related to Facility management as detailed in Sections VII.C and VII.D.

B. Bed Allocation Based on Investment Level. Emergency bed allocations per investment level are as follows:

1. Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00): five (5) beds

PAGE 13 OF 26

2. Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00): seven (7) beds

3. Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00) and above: ten (10) beds

4. The balance of general beds shall be equally allocated to the County and City of Fontana. The County beds will be utilized via referrals from County departments.

5. Investments below Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) will not receive a bed allocation and will have access to unused beds if available.

6. Additional bed capacity may be purchased by City Parties at a rate of one hundred twenty-five dollars ($125.00) per bed, per night. Charges will be invoiced monthly by the Facility Operator and must be paid in full within thirty (30) days of receipt.

C. The contributions of the City Parties for the first year of the operation of the Facility, payable to the County on or before the Effective Date, shall total Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) and shall be allocated among the City Parties on the basis g enerally of the size and population of each City Party and the estimated unhoused population within each jurisdiction for the year prior to the Effective Date. The prorated payment allocations for the initial operational year shall be as follows:

1. Chino: Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00)

2. Chino Hills: Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00)

3. Fontana: One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00)

4. Montclair: Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00)

5. Ontario: Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00) annually for the first three (3) operational years

6. Rancho Cucamonga: Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000.00)

7. Rialto: Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00)

8. Upland: Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00)

9. County: Four Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($475,000.00) D. For the City of Ontario, this contribution shall be fixed at $250,000 per year for the first three (3) years of Facility operations. After the conclusion of the third year, Ontario shall have no further obligation to provide funding and shall not be entitled to refer or utilize the Facility thereafter, unless Ontario elects to extend the Agreement beyond three (3) years in accordance with Section III.A.

E. Prior to payment, City Parties shall identify the source of funds for payment to ensure the eligible use.

F. Thereafter, the contributions of the City Parties, payable to the County prior to each fiscal year in semi-annual amounts or an annual lump sum payment at the election of each City Party shall be adjusted in July of each fiscal year for the duration of this MOU by the value of the immediately preceding January Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, not to exceed five percent (5%) annually. Following

PAGE 14 OF 26
the second (2nd) year of the operation of the Facility, the annual prorated payment allocations of each City Party for subsequent fiscal years shall be adjusted in accordance with the information provided by the most recent Point-in-Time Count, provided that the total annual contributions of all City Parties shall not be less than Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) per year. Agreed upon adjustments, if any, shall be based on good faith negotiations and written agreements between the Parties after review and audit of the actual usage by each Party and the actual cost of operation of the facility for the prior two- year period.

For purposes of this section, a “fiscal year” means the twelve -month period beginning July 1 and ending June 30 of the following year.

G. An annual evaluation of City Party cost allocations shall include a review of grant funds obtained for the Facility during the prior two -year period, and adjustments to City Party contributions shall reflect the impact of such grant funds. The annual evaluation shall also include a utilization review of Facility services by each City Party, and adjustments to contributions may be considered in light of actual usage levels.

H. In the event that the County secures state, federal, or private grant funding that reduces the net operating costs of the Facility, the Parties agree that the annual prorated payment allocations of the City Parties shall be reanalyzed in good faith and adj usted downward to reflect the reduced costs. Any such adjustments shall be applied proportionally based on each City Party’s contribution level, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by all Parties.

I. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this MOU, t he responsibilities of the City Parties, and each of them, shall be limited to the foregoing monetary contributions. The City Parties shall not be responsible for any of the costs and expenses associated with the establishment, management and operation of the Facility and the provision of services at the Facility in excess of the annual contribution amounts set forth in this Section VII.

In addition, none of the City Parties shall be responsible for the provision of any services at the Facility.

VIII. PRINCIPAL REPRESENTATIVES AND NOTICE
A. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Chino for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

B. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Chino Hills for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

C. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Fontana for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

D. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Montclair for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with

PAGE 15 OF 26
the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

E. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Ontario for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

F. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Rancho Cucamonga for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

G. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Rialto for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

H. City Manager or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the City of Upland for purposes of communicating with said city on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties, or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

I. Chief Executive Officer (CEO) or his/her designee is designated as the principal representative of the County for purposes of communicating with the County on any matter associated with the performance of the services set forth in this MOU and for purposes of any notice provided to the Parties or any of them, in connection with this MOU.

J. Any Party may designate another individual as its principal representative by giving written notice of such designation to the other Parties.

K. Notice. All written notices shall also be sent to the City Clerk of the respective City Party or the Clerk of the Board of Supervisor s for the County. Notice shall be deemed communicated two (2) County working days from the date of mailing.

IX. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Compliance with Laws. The Parties agree to be bound by all applicable, federal, state, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and directives as they pertain to the performance of this MOU.

B. Governing Law. This MOU has been negotiated and executed in the State of California, and its validity and any of its terms or provisions, as well as the rights and duties of the Parties under the MOU, shall be governed by and construed under the laws of the State of California. This MOU is intended by each Party hereto to be deemed and construed to have been jointly prepared by the Parties, and the Parties hereby expressly agree that any uncertainty or ambiguity existing herein shall not be interpreted against any of them.

C. Entire Agreement . This MOU supersedes any and all prior or contemporary agreements, either oral or written, between the Parties or any of them with respect to the subject matter of this MOU. This MOU contains all of the covenants and agreements

PAGE 16 OF 26
between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this MOU, and each Party hereto acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements have been made by or on behalf of any Party, except those covenants and agreements in this MOU.

D. Amendment. No agreement, statement or promise with respect to the subject matter of this MOU which is not contained in this MOU shall not be valid or binding on any Party without a valid modification or amendment to this MOU in accordance with the approval of the governing bodies of each Party and pursuant to a written instrument signed by all Parties.

E. Cooperation of the Parties . The Parties shall cooperate fully in the execution of any other documents and the performance of any other actions required to effectuate and implement this MOU and its terms and intent.

F. Venue. In the event of any legal action , suit or proceeding to enforce or interpret this MOU, the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in San Bernardino County , California, and the Parties agree to and hereby submit to the jurisdiction of such court, notwithstanding California Code of Civil Procedure section 394.

Furthermore, the Parties specifically agree to waive any and all rights to request that an action be transferred for trial to another county.

G. Assignment. This MOU shall not be assigned by any Party without the prior written consent of all other Parties.

H. Relationship of the Parties. Nothing herein is intended or shall be construed as creating the relationship of employer and employee, or principal and agent, between any Party, or any Party’s employees or agents. Each Party shall retain all authority for the rendition of services, standards of performance, control of personnel, and other matters incident to the performance of services pursuant to this MOU.

I. Severability. If any one or more of the sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections contained herein is declared invalid, void or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the same shall be deemed severable from the remainder of this MOU and shall not affect, impair or invalidate any of the remaining provisions contained herein.

J. Informal Dispute Resolution. In the event the County determines that service is unsatisfactory, or in the event of any other dispute, claim, question or disagreement arising from or relating to this Contract or breach thereof, the parties hereto shall use their best efforts to settle the dispute, claim, question or disagreement. To this effect, they shall consult and negotiate with each other in good faith and, recognizing their mutual interests, attempt to reach a just and equitable solution satisfactory to both parties.

K. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. If any legal action is instituted to enforce any party’s rights hereunder, each party shall bear its own costs and attorney’s fees, regardless of who is the prevailing party. This paragraph shall not apply to those costs and attorney’s fees directly arising from a third-party legal action against a party hereto and payable under Indemnification and Insurance Requirements.

L. Review by Attorneys. Each Party hereto has had its attorney(s) review this MOU. Each Party hereto has consulted with its attorney(s) and has negotiated the terms of this MOU based on such consultation.

PAGE 17 OF 26
M. Authorization of Persons Executing MOU . Each of the Parties to this MOU hereby represent that all necessary and appropriate actions of their governing bodies have been taken to make this MOU a binding obligation of the Parties hereto. The persons executing this MOU warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this MOU on behalf of and bind the Parties each purports to represent.

N. Time is of the Essence . Time is of the essence in the performance of the obligations under this MOU.

O. Counterpart Execution. This MOU may be executed in counterparts. Said counterparts shall together constitute one and the same MOU. This MOU shall have the same force and effect as if the original had been signed by all Parties.

PAGE 18 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY

Dawn Rowe, Chair, Board of Supervisors
Dated:

SIGNED AND CERTIFIED THAT A COPY OF THIS

DOCUMENT HAS BEEN DELIVERED TO THE

CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
Lynna Monell
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of the San Bernardino County

By
Deputy

PAGE 19 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF CHINO

By:

(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 13220 Central Avenue

Chino, CA 91710
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 20 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF CHINO HILLS

By:

(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 14000 City Center Drive

Chino Hills, CA 91709
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 21 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF FONTANA

By:

(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 8353 Sierra Avenue

Fontana, CA 92335
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 22 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF MONTCLAIR

By:

(Authorized signature – sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 5111 Benito Street

Montclair, CA 91763
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 23 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF ONTARIO

By:

(Authorized signature – sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 303 E B Street

Ontario, CA 91764
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 24 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA

By:

(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 10500 Civic Center Drive

Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 25 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF RIALTO

By:

(Authorized signature – sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 150 S Palm Avenue

Rialto, CA 92376
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

PAGE 26 OF 26
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each caused this MOU to be executed as of the dates set forth below by its duly authorized officers, on its behalf.

CITY OF UPLAND

By:

(Authorized signature - sign in blue ink)
Name:
(Print or type name of person signing contract)

Title:

Dated:
(Print or Type)

Address: 460 N Euclid Avenue

Upland, CA 91786
Approved as to form:
(City Attorney)

DATE: November 5, 2025
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: John R. Gillison, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director Sean McPherson, AICP, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to Consider a Request to Redevelop and Expand an Existing Beverage Distribution Facility Over Two Phases to Include Production, Bottling and Distribution Operations and Other Site Improvements, Including a Parking Garage and New Water Well, on Approximately 30.1 Acres of Land Generally Bounded by Haven Avenue to the West, 7th Street to the North, Utica Avenue to the East, and 6th Street to the South within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) Zone. APN:
0209-411-002. -003, -004, -023, -024, -032, -034, -035. An Environmental Impact Report Has Been Prepared for This Project (SCH2023080369). (Related Records: a Design Review (DRC2023- 00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068) and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070). (RESOLUTION NO. 2025-086) (CITY)
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, make findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality, adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, adopt the corresponding Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve the following: Design Review (DRC2023-00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00088), and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070) through the adoption of the attached resolution.

BACKGROUND:

The 30.11-acre project site currently comprises 8 parcels of land which are bounded by Haven Avenue to the west, 7th Street to the north, Utica Avenue to the east, and 6th Street to the south.

To be clear, the project does not include the parcel at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street (APN 0209-41-101). The project area has a general plan land use designation of 21 st Century Employment and is located within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME-2) zone. The project area also has a Corridor Frontage Overlay of Commercial and Retail along the Haven Avenue frontage extending to the corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street.

The project area is currently improved with 4 existing buildings which total approximately 208,575 square feet. This includes two office buildings located near the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street (9227 Haven Avenue and 9267 Haven Avenue), an existing beverage distribution

3 1
1 0
warehouse facility near the northwest corner of Utica Avenue and 6th Street (10670 6th Street), and an existing industrial building near the southwest corner of Utica Avenue and 7th Street (10655 7th Street). Other existing improvements include parking areas, truck loading areas, drive aisles and existing landscaping. There is a large unused area at the center of the site which is currently vacant covered in native and nonnative shrubs and grasses. Of these existing buildings, 9227 Haven Avenue and 10670 6 th Street will be demolished. 9267 Haven Avenue will be renovated, and 10655 7 th Street is to be determined to remain or be demolished as part of a proposed “Phase 2” at a later date.

Figure 1: Vicinity/Aerial Photograph
On October 8, 2025, the Planning Commission considered the item at a duly noticed public hearing. All commissioners expressed excitement and support for the project and were all in favor, however two commissioners did note that the project frontage along Haven Avenue did appear too industrial in its aesthetic and recommended that the developer consider additional architectural enhancements which might better integrate the project’s Haven Avenue frontage to the General Plan vision for the Haven Avenue corridor. Also, commissioners noted and concurred that the project achieves a critical economic development goal of attracting and retaining a Food Processing and Manufacturing Use, which has been identified as a target industry for the City.

3 1
1 0
After deliberation, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, adopt the corresponding Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve the associated entitlements. The Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes are included with this staff report as Attachment 6.

ANALYSIS:

Project Design and Layout
The applicant proposes a two-phase redevelopment and expansion of an existing beverage distribution facility as described above. Phase 1 includes the construction of approximately 959,441 square feet of new building area which includes a new beverage Production Center (PC), Distribution Center (DC), an Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS), an elevated truck deck, and associated parking and landscaped areas, new fences and walls. In addition, a new 4- story parking structure totaling approximately 208,444 square feet is also proposed to be built at the southerly end of the project area adjacent to 6th Street. The existing 32,890 square foot office building at 9267 Haven Avenue will remain and is proposed to be renovated into office space as part of Phase 1. The existing office building at 9227 Haven Avenue will be demolished. Lastly, Phase 1 also includes the construction of a ground water supply well located at the northwest corner if Utica Avenue and 6 th Street. Currently, the applicant proposes to enclose this water infrastructure with a wrought iron fence.

Phase 2 of the project includes two options wherein the developer proposes to either maintain the existing 62,210 square foot building at 10655 7th Street or demolish this building and replace it with a new 40,085 square foot building at the same location. This decision has not yet been made by the developer and the eventual option selected will depend on operational needs once the new facility is in operation. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzed both Phase 2 scenarios. Lastly, Phase 2 will also include the construction and operation of a co-generation facility, which is an interior element of the primary building and is a component of the processing of beverages.

The following images depict the proposed site plan, and various elevations and renderings which highlight the architectural theme of the development. For a full discussion on design and architecture, please reference the October 8, 2025 Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes included with this report as Attachment 6.

3 1
1 0
Figure 2: Proposed site plan noting location of referenced buildings.

Fig. 3: South elevation of proposed project, representative of color scheme and massing.

Fig. 4: West elevation of Haven Avenue office building, representative of office façade theme.

3 1
1 0
Fig. 5: Detail of Haven Avenue elevation of PC/DC/ASRS building. Fig. 6: Detail of Haven Avenue frontage looking south.

Compliance with General Plan, Development Standards and Master Plan In addition to the Design Review application, the project applicant has applied for a Master Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit and Tree Removal Permit. The Project has been reviewed by City staff to conform to all relevant standards and regulations upon approval of the master plan. The Project is also required to meet public art requirements. For a full discussion on the above items, please reference the October 8, 2025 Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes.

As proposed, and given the unique nature of the “campus-style” development, and in order to meet all necessary development regulations, the applicant has requested establishing site- specific development standards as permitted through the Master Plan process to address the following development standards:
Building Typology, Facades, and Articulation standards; Ground Floor Entrance requirements and Other Ground Floor Treatments (i.e. percentage of window openings);
Corridor Fronting Ground Floor Use Restrictions;
Build-to-Line and Frontage Area;
Parking and Bicycle Parking Standards;
Landscaping and Open Space Standards;
Walls and Fences standards.

A full description of requested site-specific development standards is included with this report as Attachment 3 (Master Plan).

Staff notes that Development Code Section 17.22.020 establishes that the purpose of a Master Plan is to “allow for the coordinated comprehensive planning of a subarea of the city in order to accomplish certain objectives, which include but are not limited to: 1) allowing development of an exceptional project design that cannot be built under an existing zone or due to constraints of existing development standards; and 2) provide flexibility for developments beyond conventional zoning regulations to address special or unique needs or characteristics.” In this case, the developer is proposing to expand an existing beverage distribution facility which has been in operation in the city since the 1980s. Further, approving the project also achieves a critical Economic Development goal of expanding food and beverage manufacturing uses in the City, which is an identified “Target Industry.” Further, the expansion of existing clean industrial uses is

3 1
1 0
expressly permitted with the 21 st Century Employment District pursuant to the General Plan (Volume 2, Page 87).

In summary, approval of the master plan to allow for the developer’s requested site-specific development standards would allow the existing business to remain in the city, provide additional jobs to the benefit of the community, and further our economic development goals to expand food and beverage manufacturing uses.

Environmental Review
Pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2023080369) has been prepared for this project. Under CEQA, the purpose of an EIR is to inform the public about any significant impacts to the physical environment resulting from a project, identify ways to avoid or lessen the impacts, identify alternatives and promote public participation.

The intent of the EIR is to address and evaluate potentially significant impacts of the proposed projects and identify feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate these impacts. A summary of all project- related impacts and the recommended mitigation measures is provided in the Final EIR which is included with this staff report, along with all other environmental documentation, as Attachment 4. The following summarizes key points in the environmental review process:

Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting
The Notice of Preparation (NOP) serves as public notification that an EIR is being prepared and requests comment and input from responsible agencies and other interested parties regarding environmental issues to be addressed in the document. In addition to the NOP, CEQA recommends conducting a scoping meeting for the purpose of identifying the range of potential significant impacts that should be analyzed within the scope of the Draft EIR. The public scoping meeting is to receive public testimony on those issues that the public would like to have addressed in the EIR as it relates to the project and environment.

Accordingly, a notice advertising both the NOP and Public Scoping Meeting notice was prepared for the project and circulated on August 17, 2023, to the State Clearinghouse, public agencies, Native American tribes, and those interested parties who had previously requested notification.

However, the NOP was subsequently cancelled to address a scheduling conflict regarding the Scoping Meeting; a revised NOP was prepared and issued on September 14, 2023. On September 28th, 2023, the City conducted a Scoping Meeting on the proposed project, the NOP and the EIR process but there were no attendees at the scoping meeting.

The public comment period to respond to the NOP closed on October 13, 2023, and comment letters were received from the following: California Department of Justice, California Native American Heritage Commission, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER), Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenter (SWMSRCC), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Californians Allied for Responsible Economy (CARECA).

Written responses to all significant environmental issues raised were prepared and made available in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).

AB 52 Compliance
Formal notification in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 was sent on August 30, 2023, to tribal communities from a list of six tribes that have requested notification by the city. In response to these notices, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) responded and engaged in

3 1
1 0
consultation. SMBMI requested the inclusion of specific cultural resource protection language, which has been incorporate into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation formally responded to the AB 52 notification on September 29, 2023, during which the tribe requested the presence of a tribal monitor during all grading activities. Although no known tribal cultural resources were identified within the project area, mitigation measures have been added to ensure protection in the event of unexpected discoveries during site disturbance. Thus, the CEQA document prepared for the project reflects the requested language/mitigation measures.

Draft EIR Preparation and Circulation
The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIR was distributed on April 24, 2024, and the DEIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period beginning April 29, 2025, and concluding on June 13, 2025, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines The NOA included links to the full DEIR and technical appendices and was posted with the San Bernardino County Clerk, published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and mailed to property owners within 660 feet of the project site as well as to individuals and organizations that requested notification. The DEIR was also submitted via CEQAnet to the California Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation for distribution to relevant state agencies. The documents were also posted to the City’s website for public review during the same period. Hard copies of the DEIR and all technical appendices were provided for public review at the following locations:
Archibald Library – 7368 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730; Paul A Baine Library – 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739; Planning Department Public Counter at City Hall – 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.

Written comments on the DEIR were received from the following agencies and organizations:
California Office of Planning and Research
California Air Resources Board
State Water Resources Control Board
Southern California Gas Company
Cucamonga Valley Water District
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Lozeau Drury LLP, on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility Blum, Collin & Ho LLP, on behalf of Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance and SWAPE
Advocates for the Environment
City of Ontario Traffic/Transportation Manager
California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans)
These comments and the City’s responses have been incorporated into the Final EIR. The DEIR, FEIR, technical appendices, and mitigation are available on the City’s website under the “CEQA Documents Available for Review” section, located at: https://www.cityofrc.us/community- development/planning
Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP)
In compliance with CEQA, a mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been prepared. The MMRP is a reporting program that identifies each adopted mitigation measure or project design feature that reduces the significance level of a particular impact. The MMRP indicates responsibility and timing milestones for each mitigation measure.

3 1
1 0
Findings of Fact in Support of Determinations Related to Significant Environmental Impacts The EIR concludes that upon implementation of the project and all recommended mitigation measures, impacts associated with the project would remain significant and unavoidable for certain issue areas. These impacts include air pollutant emissions which exceed SCAQMD daily Nox thresholds specifically for project operations, as well as an exceedance of regional construction thresholds even with implementation of all mitigations. Also, the project will result in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) which exceed SCAQMD daily thresholds. These impacts will remain after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. As part of project approval, the City Council will be required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations (included with the draft City Council resolution in Attachment 7), which acknowledges these unavoidable impacts.

In addition to the project benefits which are highlighted in the Draft Statement of Overriding Considerations, the applicant has also provided a list of additional project benefits which is being included with this report as Attachment 5.

In accordance with CEQA, the Final EIR, including responses to comments, was provided to all commentors on October 24, 2025, at least 10-days prior to the Council’s decision date. Also on October 24, 2025, staff was made aware of an email from Caltrans District 8 dated June 13, 2025, which included a misspelled email address. Due to this error, this June 13th letter from Cal Trans was inadvertently omitted from the Responses to Comments in the draft Final EIR document that was reviewed by the Planning Commission on October 8, 2025. When this error was realized, responses to comments were provided to this commentor on October 24, 2025, in compliance with relevant CEQA guidelines and the conditions of approval have been updated accordingly.

Staff notes that none of the comments provided by Cal Trans result in any additional impacts or substantive changes which were not already considered by the Planning Commission. For reference, this letter and the City’s responses (titled “Addendum Memorandum to PC Draft FEIR”) are included with this staff report as Attachment 4, along with all other environmental documentation for the project.

Correspondence
A notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 660 feet of the subject property, the site was posted, and a notice of public hearing was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on October 22, 2025. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comments in response to the City Council public hearing notices.

Staff notes that prior to the Planning Commission public hearing, over 50 letters of support were received from individuals, other stakeholders and community groups, including some of those stakeholders who had previously commented on the Draft EIR. These letters may be reviewed separately as an attachment to the October 8, 2025, Planning Commission staff report.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Project is expected to generate economic benefits to the City. In addition to required one- time permit and development impact fees, it is also anticipated that the project will create both temporary construction jobs and permanent jobs. Specifically, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 100 new jobs immediately and expand up to 289 permanent jobs beyond which already exist at the existing facility at full build out. The project will also generate approximately 400 temporary construction jobs. In addition, the increased employment could indirectly benefit other local businesses due to increased demand.

The expanded facility is likely to create long-term positive economic benefits to surrounding businesses such as hotels, restaurants and other business support services. The project scale

3 1
1 0
and operational reach will serve as a key anchor for strengthening the City’s food manufacturing sector, which could attract complementary businesses.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and anticipating the future,” by positioning Rancho Cucamonga as a competitive hub for food manufacturing in the region.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Vicinity Map and Aerial Photograph
Attachment 2 – Project Plans (via external link)
Attachment 3 – Master Plan
Attachment 4 – Environmental Documentation (via external link) Attachment 5 – Applicant’s List of Project Benefits
Attachment 6 – October 8, 2025 Planning Commission Staff Report and Meeting Minutes Attachment 7 – City Council Resolution

Haven Avenue
6th Street
7th Street
N
Project
Boundary
Legend
Vicinity Map and Aerial Photograph
ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:

El-Camino-Project-Plans

505050
45 S
D
S S
T
D
U
E
D
D
SS
UV
D
T

CATCH BASIN
TG=1084.17'
||
||
||
||
||
||
||
||

VESSELS

REBOILER
UNIT

CARBONSCAN
CO2

COMPRESSORS

GENERATING
UNIT

TOP & GAS COOLER

RECLAIMER
CARBON

FILTERDEHYDRATOR

EXHAUSTER
NOX
FLASH

NOX FLASH
PURGE
UNIT

SUBSTATION
15kV
SWGR
J
J
JJ
J
RR
R R
J R
R
J
J
J
R
R
R
R
T
T
J
J
JJ
J
RR
R R
J R
R
J
J
J
R
R
R
R
T
T
8FT

CHAINLINK
12FT

CHAINLINK
SLOPED

CHAINLINK

VSEP BRINE
TANKER

VSEP BRINE

LOADOUT HOSE

CABINET

VSEP BULK

CHEMICAL

UNLOAD CABINET

PB VAPPB VAP
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
EW1
HW1
HW1
AD1 AD1 AD1
FS1
EW1
HD4
HD4HD4
AD1
AD1 AD1
AD1
200 GAL
SUMP
BULK

UNLOADING
BULK

TRUCK HOOKUP
HOOKUP

WATER BATH

VAPORIZER

TRUCK UNLOAD STATION
PB VAP
N2 VAP
LIQUID

NITROGEN
VESSEL
6,000 GAL

PB VAPPB VAP

UNISENSOR
BOX
PARKER FILT.

AWNING

EFFLUENT

DISCHARGE

MONITORING LINE
T-3000

TREATMENT
TANK
No.1
3,000
GAL [8FT∅/9FT
HIGH]
T-4000

TREATMENT
TANK
No.2
3,000
GAL [8FT∅/9FT
HIGH]
P-2O10/2020
SYSTEM

FEED PUMPS
T-2200

CALAMITY

STORAGE
TANK
60,000
GAL[20'∅/30'
SWH]
T-2000

WASTEWATER

STORAGE
TANK
60,000
GAL[20'∅/30'
SWH]
MX-2000

TANK SIDE WALL MIXER
P-2210/2220

CALAMITY

FEED PUMPS
T-500-A

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.120,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
J.B.J.B.

T-2400
H2S

SCRUBBER

CAUSTIC
PUMPS

CAUSTIC
TOTE
ACID
PUMPS
ACID
TOTE
T-500-B

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.220,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
T-500-C

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.320,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
VSEP
BRINE

DISCHARGE
P-5010
P-5020

VSEP BRINE

DEFOAMING
PUMPS
ECP-5012
CR
8FT

CHAINLINK
12FT

CHAINLINK
SLOPED

CHAINLINK

VSEP BRINE
TANKER

VSEP BRINE

LOADOUT HOSE

CABINET

VSEP BULK

CHEMICAL

UNLOAD CABINET

PB VAPPB VAP
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
LIQUID CO2 VESSEL
50 TON
EW1
HW1
HW1
AD1 AD1 AD1
FS1
EW1
HD4
HD4HD4
AD1 AD1
AD1
BULK

UNLOADING
BULK

TRUCK HOOKUP
HOOKUP

WATER BATH

VAPORIZER

TRUCK UNLOAD STATION
PB VAP
N2 VAP
LIQUID

NITROGEN
VESSEL
6,000 GAL

PB VAPPB VAP

UNISENSOR
BOX
PARKER FILT.

AWNING

EFFLUENT

DISCHARGE

MONITORING LINE
T-3000

TREATMENT
TANK
No.1
3,000
GAL [8FT∅/9FT
HIGH]
T-4000

TREATMENT
TANK
No.2
3,000
GAL [8FT∅/9FT
HIGH]
P-2O10/2020
SYSTEM

FEED PUMPS
T-2200

CALAMITY

STORAGE
TANK
60,000
GAL[20'∅/30'
SWH]
T-2000

WASTEWATER

STORAGE
TANK
60,000
GAL[20'∅/30'
SWH]
MX-2000

TANK SIDE WALL MIXER
P-2210/2220

CALAMITY

FEED PUMPS
T-500-A

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.120,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
J.B.J.B.

T-2400
H2S

SCRUBBER

CAUSTIC
PUMPS

CAUSTIC
TOTE
ACID
PUMPS
ACID
TOTE
T-500-B

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.220,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
T-500-C

VSEP BRINE
TANK
No.320,000
GAL[12'∅/24'
SWH]
VSEP
BRINE

DISCHARGE
P-5010
P-5020

VSEP BRINE

DEFOAMING
PUMPS
ECP-5012
CR
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN DN
UP
DN
UP
UP
509

MAINTENANCE

MANAGER
524

ELECTRICAL
CHASE
516
LAB
516A

MICROLAB
522
SUGAR

VESTIBULE
121

CONFERENCE
133

BREAKROOM
132

PRE-SHIFT

MEETING
127
SHOWER
126
SHOWER
140

CORRIDOR
124
MEN
125
WOMEN 122

JANITOR
120
ELEV.

EQUIP.
101
LOBBY
100

SECURITY

VESTIBULE
102

TRAINING
ROOM B
103

TRAINING
ROOM A
116
MAIL
136

CORRIDOR
119
WOMEN
118
MEN
117

ELECTRICAL
115
FILES
ADMIN. TIMEKEEPING/

ROTATING OFFICE
114
108
OFFICE

MANAGER

OPERATIONS

MANAGER/ ROTATING
OFFICE
113
109
PLANT

DIRECTOR
112
OE

MANAGER
111
HR

MANAGER
110
SR. HR
MANAGER107
OFFICE
106

PC OPEN
OFFICE

PC LOCKER ROOM
128A 123
UNISEX
FF = 86' - 0"
1074' - 0" AMSL
FF = 86' - 0"
1074' - 0" AMSL
129
ELEV.

EQUIP.
503
PARTS
ROOM
510

CONTROL

SUPERVISORS
511

MAINTENANCE

SUPERVISORS
512
MAINT.

SHOP
323

PACKAGING
501
PARTS

MANAGER
502
PARTS

COUNTER
507
MEN
505
WOMEN
508

PRODUCTION
LOBBY
516B

SENSORY
LAB
518A

CORRIDOR
518B
UNISEX
144

CONFERENCE
137

CORRIDOR
138

CORRIDOR
141

VESTIBULE
ST-06
STAIR
530

LUBRICANT
532
UNISEX
533

RECEIVING
OFFICE
529

CORRIDOR
525B
IDF
525

VESTIBULE
525A
UNISEX
500
LOWER
LEVEL

PRODUCTION
FLOOR
523
SYRUP
ROOM
500A

ELEVATOR

EQUIPMENT
EL-02

ELEVATOR
504

JANITOR
528

ELECTRICAL
ST-17
STAIR
516D
QA

SUPERVISORS
512A
TOOL
ROOM
EL-01

ELEVATOR
ST-19
STAIR
ST-08
ST-16
ST-15
ST-16
ST-23
ST-29
ST-24
ST-21
ST-31 ST-25 ST-27
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
303
ELEC.
302

PRODUCT

RETURNS
402
ASRS
DOCK
AREA
304
FIRE
PUMP
313
UNISEX
315

WAITING
312
COFFEE
311
HUDDLE
310
OPS

SUPERVISOR
ST-09
STAIR
309
JAN.
305
UNISEX
306
UNISEX
307
UNISEX
308
UNISEX
ST-10
STAIR
324
EMPTY
PALLET

VESTIBULE
ST-31
ST-30
ST-08
ST-08
ST-08
ST-08 ST-08 ST-08 ST-08 ST-08
ST-07
ST-08
ST-26
UP
UP
128
LARGE
LOBBY
CONF.

ROOM 102
WASTE
ROOM
105

CATERING
103
ELEC.
104

MAIL/RECEPTION

SUPPORT
106
TIGER
JOE'S
BAR
126

EMPLOYEE
BREAK
ROOM
125

MEETING
ROOM
113

JANITOR
124

FITNESS

STORAGE
121

RESTROOM
122

RESTROOM
120

WOMEN'S

LOCKERS
118
MEN'S

LOCKERS
116

RESTROOM
117

RESTROOM
114

MAIL/SUPPLIES/

STORAGE
119

FITNESS

CENTER &
STORAGE 110

MECHANICAL
111
MEN'S

RESTROOM
112

WOMEN'S

RESTROOM
109
ELEV.

EQUIP.
100

LOBBY /

RECEPTION
127

COFFEE &

VENDING
107

TRAINING
ROOM
129

CORRIDOR
ST-02
STAIR
130

CORRIDOR
131

CORRIDOR
133

CORRIDOR
123

VESTIBULE
132

CORRIDOR
EL-01

ELEVATOR
103A
107A
107D
100A
104
128
E109
111
112
126C
126D
126E
126B
126A
125B
126F
131
125A
124A
124B
121
122
120 118
117
116
113
114
102A
ST-03
STAIR
108

TRAINING

STORAGE
133
110B
107B
110A
108
103B
ST-02
161

CORRIDOR
102B
100B
107
WATER
ROOM
101
TRASH

ENCLOSURE
102

ELEVATOR
103
MECH
ROOM
UP
UP
UP

ELECTRIC SERVICE
104

STORAGE
105

BIKE STORAGE
106
106
104B
104A
107
103
RAMP UP TO 2ND LEVEL
100J 100G100H
100F
100E
100D
100C 100B 100A
SG1
SG4SG4
100

PARKING
SG10
101
SG3
TYP
TYP
TYP
TYP
TYP
STOP
STOP

STOPSTOP
X
>>>>>
X
>
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP

WORKING CLEARANCE WORKING CLEARANCE

GAS METER

BOTTLING

GAS METER
CO-GEN
X

STOPSTOP
||||||||
EV VAN

EMERGENCY

ACCESS ONLY

EV VAN EV VAN EV VAN VAN VAN VAN VAN
DO NOT
BLOCK
DO NOT
BLOCK
DO NOT
BLOCK
DO NOT
BLOCK
6TH STREET

HAVEN AVE

UTICA AVE
INTERNAL ID.: PC
INTERNAL ID.: DC
INTERNAL ID.: ASRS

EXISTING
OFFICE
7TH STREET

PROPOSED BUILDING

PROPOSED

PARKING

STRUCTURE

EXISTING BUILDING

PROJECT PROPOSES
TWO (2) OPTIONS
FOR PHASE 2
2ND LEVEL DOCK CANOPY
RAMP

35.0'

DRIVEWAY

6.0' DEDICATION

26.0'

FIRE ACCESS

ONLY DRIVEWAY

50.0' DRIVEWAY
126.0'

60.0' 66.0' 19.0'
134.0'
25' DEDICATIONEX STORM DRAIN

EASEMENT

67.0'

67.0'
440' LINE OF SIGHT

16.0' CVWD

DRIVEWAY

63.7'
440' LINE OF SIGHT

25.0' EX STORM

DRAIN EASEMENT

PROP RW
CL

EX RW

EX RW

EX RW
CL

60.0'
27'
33'

66.0'
33'
33'
PR 6' SIDEWALK
PR 6' SIDEWALK
440' LINE OF SIGHT
440' LINE OF SIGHT
660' LINE OF SIGHT
660' LINE OF SIGHT
INTERNAL ID.: OFFICE
210.0'

65.0' 80.0' 65.0'

10.0'
26'21' 17'
64'
26' 26'16'
68'10.7'
11' SCE ESMT.
10' SETBACK

EX RW

PROP RW
PR 6' SIDEWALK
CL

EX RW

EX RW
858'
212'
73'
504'
412'
355'
373'
361'
267'
71'
191'
270'
±227'
±76'
440' LINE OF SIGHT

26.0' FIRE ACCESS

DRIVEWAY ONLY

CONCEPTUAL

LOCATION FOR

FUTURE CO-GEN
SYSTEM
72'
20'
52' 14'47'13'
22'
11'
22'
5'
60'
7'

36.0'

DRIVEWAY
22'
33'
43'

50.0' DRIVEWAY

54.0'
27'27'
22'11' 22' 5'
32'
14'
4'
14'16'16'
5'
18'16'16'
37'
180'

ACCESS EASEMENT
(c)2025 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
3801
UNIVERSITY AVE, SUITE 300; RIVERSIDE, CA 92501
PHONE: 951-543-9868
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM
SUBMITTAL:

APPENDIX M-3 EIRDATE: 08.18.2025 LONE OAK - EL CAMINO
10670 6TH STREET
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 91730
August 18, 2025 11:28:44am K:\RIV_LDEV\095468009 - Lone Oak-Rancho\CAD\Preliminary\CONCPET_MASTERPLAN.dwg

DESIGN REVIEW
DRC2023-00067
0 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
60 30 60120
NORTH
C002

CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN
APPENDIX M-3 EIR
Summarized Landscape Standards, Development Code Requirements Development Code
RequirementCode StandardProject Request
Open Space/Courtyards
Section 17.134.030
Projects over 3 acres shall provide
two (2) open spaces. This includes:

Pocket parks (no min.), Paseos, or
Town Square.

The Project will provide open spaces
for employees and a public/private
linear park space along Haven Avenue
and 6th Street.

Walls/Fencing
Section 17.48.050.E
Screening and walls shall be no
higher than 8 ft in height within the
industrial zone including screening
of loading docks and reuse areas.

The Master Plan shall allow perimeter
wall, screening walls and decorative
walls between 6 ft. to 14 ft. in height
along the perimeter of the project site,
primarily along the truck courts to
screen mechanical equipment, truck
areas, and elevated truck parking.

Landscaping/Tree
Ordinance- Removal and
replacement
Section 17.56.050,

17.56.080, and 17.80
Parking Lot Landscaping shall be
required with a minimum of one
tree per 3 parking stalls, 10% of the
total off-street parking area with
landscaping, a minimum of 5’ of
perimeter of landscaping along side
and rear proper lines and surface
lots shall be screened. Existing
trees shall be evaluated by an
arborist. Removal of heritage trees
shall be considered at a ratio of
1:1/2.

For the Master Plan:

A total of 24 trees were determined
heritage trees by a certified arborist. A
total of 110 will be replaced on site.

This replacement exceeds the 3 to 1
replacement requirement. The trees
will be located within employee break
areas, along parkways, within green
spaces, and enlarged setbacks and will
not be required to meet the 1 tree per 3
parking stalls requirement
Summarized Design and Development Standards of the ME-2 Zoning Designating Development Code
RequirementCode StandardProject Request
Building Typology
Table 17.130.060-1
and Section

17.138.020. E.2
Sites greater than six (6) acres shall
provide a minimum of three (3)
building types: Main Street,
Rowhouse, Courtyard Building,
Multiplex, and Mid-Rise Building.

The Master Plan will allow: two (2)
building types including Mid-Rise and
High-Rise Buildings. Building
Typologies have been selected based
on minimum development standards (i.e.
setbacks, permitted heights, etc.) and
not based on architectural design
requirement. The building design is
specific for an end user with specific
manufacturing requirements and use
needs.

Building Facades
Section 17.132.030-1
and Table

17.132.030-1
Mixed Employment Zones allows
building entrances and facades that
include: Shopfronts/Arcade and
recessed variations, and Forecourt
designs.

The Master Plan will allow: architectural
enhancements that reflect these
architectural building
facades/characteristics/design elements
while maintaining the function for the
operational needs of the facility. The
office building along Haven Avenue,
office areas on the primary
manufacturing building have been
enhanced with architectural elements
consistent with the requirements of
Section 17.132 and other enhancements
including art applications, landscaping
and screening details have been
included to provide visual interest along
Haven Avenue and 6th Street.

Building Articulation
Section 17.130.030
When a building façade exceeds 75
feet in length along a right of way the
building must include the following:
· At least one of the following:
•
Window bays
•
Recesses minimum of 3
ft. deep
•
Balconies
· Also the Building must have one of
the following:
• Change in roof parapet
height or shape
• Change in building height
The Master Plan will allow for the
following:

No change in roof parapet, change in
height or the addition of window bays,
recesses or balconies. In lieu of the
these details, the Project shall provide
articulated concrete walls with metal
panels, glass, decorative screen walls,
etc.

Ground Floor
Entrances
Section 17.138.020
All entrances to non-residential
ground floor uses must face and be
visible and accessible to primary
right- or way every 80 ft.

The Master Plan shall allow the
following:

No entrances shall be required along
Haven Avenue, 6th Street or Utica
Avenue to serve the Project.

Other Ground Floor
Treatments
Section 17.138.020
Corner Treatments shall be required
per the code.

Ground floor transparency for
commercial ground floor uses is
required with a minimum of 50
percent of commercial uses facing
the street.

Shade producing frontages such as
awnings, arcades, and galleries shall
be required on southern and western
facing buildings.

The Master Plan shall allow the
following:

Corner Treatments, balconies, ground
floor transparency for commercial
ground floor uses or shade producing
frontages such as awnings, arcades,
and galleries shall not be required for
the Project.

Corridor Fronting
Ground Floor Use
Restrictions
Section 17.130.040.B
Corridor fronting ground floor
commercial and retail uses are
required along Haven Avenue
frontage.

The Master Plan shall allow the
following:

No commercial or retail uses shall be
required at the ground floor fronting
Haven Avenue corridor.

Build to Line and
Frontage Area
Section 17.130.050
and Table

17.130.050-1
75% of a primary frontage width and
30% of a secondary frontage width
shall be within a minimum of 15 feet
and a maximum of 5 feet setback
from the property line.

The Master Plan will allow the following
setbacks:

Along Primary Frontage (Haven
Avenue)- Minimum 25’-8” and maximum
50’4” from property line.

Along Secondary Frontage (6th Street
and Utica Avenue)- Minimum 15’-10”
and maximum 78’-5” from property line.

Buildings do not front on Utica Ave as
parking and truck/dock doors are located
along Utica Avenue. Therefore,
measurements represent the frontage
along 6th Street.

Block Size/Building
Configurations -High
Rise
Section 17.130.050.H
Maximums:
· A. Width: Min. 150ft Max 400ft.
· B. Depth: Min. 150ft, Max
400ft.
· Interior Side Yard Setback:

None
· Rear Yard Setback: 10ft.
· Building Height: 132 ft.
maximum.

Proposed:
· Width: Min. No Maximum.
· Depth: No Maximum.
· Interior Side Yard Setback: None
· Rear Yard Setback: 5ft.
· Building Height: 131ft. maximum
Block Size/Building
Configuration- Mid
Rise
Section 17.130.050.G
Maximums:
· Width: Min. 150ft Max 400ft.
· Depth: Min. 150ft, Max 400ft.
· Interior Side Yard Setback:

None
· Rear Yard Setback: 10ft.
· Building Height: to eave/top of
parapet Max. 80 ft.
a. Overall Max. 92 ft
Proposed
· Width: Min. No Max
· Depth: No Maximum
· Interior Side Yard Setback: None
· Rear Yard Setback: 5ft.
· Building Height: 131ft.

Site and Block
Configurations
Section 17.138.030
and Table

17.138.030-1
Blocks Sizes within the ME2:

Block Face Length (max.) - 500 ft.

Perimeter (max) – 2,000 ft.

Blocks may exceed the maximum
allowed face length if a paseo is
included that cuts through the entire
block.

The Master Plan will allow:

Block Face Length (max.) - No maximum
Perimeter (max.) - No maximum
Paseos, employee break areas and
other parklets/green spaces are not
required to extend the entire block
length.

Slip Lane/Street
Frontage
Where project sites or development
sites exceed 500 feet along any
right-of-way, a frontage road is
required. The requirements for a
frontage road is at the discretion of
the director of Engineering Services.

The Master Plan will allow the following:

No slip lane or frontage road will be
required when the Project site exceeds
500 feet along any right of way.

Parking Standards –
Manufacturing, Light-
Large
Section 17.64.050-1
Parking is required for warehouse,
office and manufacturing per table

17.64.050-1 in the Development
Code. Therefore, the Project would
be required to provide approximately
806 auto parking stalls. Additionally,
the Project would be subject to the
TDM program and would be required
to provide bike parking and locker
facilities.

The Master Plan will allow: a maximum
number of 490 auto parking spaces. The
Project would be subject to the TDM
program and would be required to
provide bike parking and locker facilities.

Bicycle Parking25 short term bicycle parking spaces
and 25 long term bicycle parking
spaces would be required for the
project based on the 5% of the
required parking
The Master Plan will allow the following:
44 Bicycle parking spaces will be
provided within the parking structure. No
lockers would be provided.

SignagePer the RCMU:

Wall Mounted:

One sign per building face -
Maximum of 2
Sign Area: 150 sf per establishment
Free Standing/Monument:
1 sign per street frontage
Maximum Area: 24 sf
Maximum Height: up to 8’ in height
Maximum number: 1 per street
frontage and may be increased to
two per street frontage when signs
are spaced a minimum of 300 feet
apart or alternatively, the maximum
arar may be increased to 48 sf when
the sit frontage is longer than 500
feet. These can not be combined.

Commercial/mixed use/industrial
facilities are exempt from Table

17.74.080-1
Wall Mounted:
· One Per Building Face - Maximum
of 2 per street face
Sign Area: 400 sf
· Maximum Sign Copy Dimensions:

Architectural Art Sign Installation: If 1
line of copy: A maximum of 10’ high X
92’ long per line with a maximum area of
1,650 sf per building façade.

Standard Sign installation:

If a single line of copy: 10’ high 40’
long per building façade
If two lines of copy: 5’ high X 40’ long
per line per building façade.

Free Standing/Monument:
· Up to 8’ in height
· Sign Area: 36 square feet per sign
face
· Maximum number: 2 per street
frontage with 300 feet apart
Exterior Wayfinding: Including vehicular
directional and pedestrian wayfinding
signage.

Freestanding Wayfinding Sign Height:

Maximum of 14 feet
Maximum sign area: 150 sq.ft of sign
area (not including sign structure, pole,
or architectural elements) (1).
(1) Architectural element's shall be defined as oversized graphics, contour or dimensional sections of the sign that may protrude from the sign face or cabinet, glass/metal finishes or fixtures that enhances the sign or adds dimension.
. Landscaping
shall be per the site plan as shown.

Conditional Use Permit - The Master Plan establishes that the proposed use is defined as "Manufacturing Light-Large" pursuant to Development Code Section Table 17.136.020-1 and is permitted upon the approval of a Conditional use Permit. Any warehouse and distribution component of the use is considered ancillary to the primary Light-Large Manufacturing use and is allowed under the same Conditional Use Permit.

Attachment 3

ATTACHMENT 4
Due to file size, this attachment can be accessed through the following link:

Environmental Documents (Draft EIR, Final EIR, Technical Appendices, MMRP, Findings, and Draft SOC)

El Camino Project Benefits
Lone Oak-Rancho L.L.C/ Reyes Coca Cola Bottling 08/19/2025.

CREATING VALUE FOR OUR EMPLOYEES
• $600M invested in the project, 289 net new jobs, and almost 500 Employees onsite. • Best-In-Class Facility Aesthetics
• Company specific spaces for Event/training spaces, Covered parking spaces, ZEV Charging, Fitness Center, Bike Storage

CREATING ECONOMIC VALUE FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA
• New Jobs in the region during the 2+ year construction timeline • Bottling lines capacity will meet current business needs and future growth for the company.
• Local economic growth during construction (short term construction jobs and economic growth related to the purchase of materials, equipment, etc.) • Donations, Volunteer Hours & Presence in Community

CREATING VALUE FOR OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES
• Onsite solar (2+ MW) and Cogeneration power system (3 MW) to support the facility power needs.
• One of the best water stewards in the Coke system. Reclaims and re-uses water onsite before disposal to sanitary systems.
• Have sustainable infrastructure using Nitrogen, Ambient Filling & Electric Vehicles onsite.
• Interactive tour experience to educate the community on our business, our facility and our commitment to sustainability.
• Onsite Recycling services
• Offsite street improvements surrounding and adjacent to the property.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
• The Project applied for a series of entitlement actions including a Design Review, Master Plan and Sign Program to improve the site with a new ASRS, DC, and PC facility, consolidating operations onto one site with bottling, storage and distribution.
• The Project will install enhanced linear parklets along Haven Avene and 6th Street including substantial tree installation/replacement along the public corridors and public spaces, and will be available as open space with shade, seating and other amenities.

ATTACHMENT 5

El Camino Project Benefits

Lone Oak-Rancho L.L.C/ Reyes Coca Cola Bottling 08/19/2025.

• The Project will provide improved transit facilities, including onsite bike and employee carpooling facilities and offsite improvements to the existing bus stop along Haven Avenue.
• The Project will relocate existing public art within the site/project and provide additional public art along Haven Avenue and along 6th Street. • Construction of an additional local CVWD water well to support the Project. • There is no displacement of existing residential units as the Project includes the redevelopment of the existing distribution site.

DATE: October 8, 2025
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Jennifer Nakamura, CNU-A, Planning Director
INITIATED BY: Sean McPherson, AICP, Principal Planner
Claudia Vargas, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: LONE OAK-RANCHO, LLC - Recommendation to the City Council for a request to redevelop and expand an existing beverage distribution facility over two phases to include production, bottling and distribution operations and other site improvements, including a parking garage and new water well, on approximately 30.1 acres of land generally bounded by Haven Avenue to the west, 7th Street to the North, Utica Avenue to the east, and 6th Street to the south within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) Zone. APN:
0209-411-002. -003, -004, -023, -024, -032, -034, -035. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project (SCH2023080369). (Related Records: a Design Review (DRC2023-00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068) and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070)).

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, make findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program, adopt the corresponding Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approve the following: Design Review (DRC2023-00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068), and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070) through the adoption of the attached Resolution.

BACKGROUND:

The 30.1-acre project site currently comprises 8 parcels of land which are bounded by Haven Avenue to the west, 7th Street to the north, Utica Avenue to the east, and 6th Street to the south.

To be clear, the project does not include the parcel at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and 7th Street (APN0209-41-101). The project area has a general plan land use designation of 21 st Century Employment and is located within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME-2) zone. The project area also has a Corridor Frontage Overlay of Commercial and Retail along the Haven Avenue frontage extending to the corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street.

The project area is currently improved with 4 existing buildings which total approximately 208,575 square feet. This includes two office buildings located near the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and 6th Street (9227 Haven Avenue and 9267 Haven Avenue), an existing beverage distribution warehouse facility near the northwest corner of Utica Avenue and 6th Street (10670 6th Street), and an existing industrial building near the southwest corner of Utica Avenue and 7th Street ATTACHMENT 6

3 0
9 4
(10655 7th Street). Other existing improvements include parking areas, truck loading areas, drive aisles and existing landscaping. There is a large unused area at the center of the site which is currently vacant covered in native and nonnative shrubs and grasses. Of these existing buildings, 9227 Haven Avenue and 10670 6 th Street will be demolished. 9267 Haven Avenue will be renovated, and 10655 7 th Street is to be determined to remain or be demolished as part of a proposed “Phase 2” at a later date.

Figure 1: Vicinity/Aerial Photograph. Note existing structures to either be demolished or remain.

The table below highlights the existing surrounding land uses and corresponding General Plan and zoning designations:

Table 1: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Context
Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site Existing office, warehouse,
distribution, industrial and
vacant
21st Century Employment District Mixed-Employment
2 (ME2)
North Office/Industrial 21st Century Employment District Mixed-Employment 2 (ME2)

3 0
9 4
South Hotel/Industrial 21st Century Employment District Mixed-Employment 2 (ME2)
East Office/Commercial/Industrial 21st Century Employment District Mixed-Employment 2 (ME2)
West Office/Commercial 21st Century Employment District Mixed-Employment 2 (ME2)
Entitlement Changes
The applicant originally proposed a Development Agreement and Uniform Sign Program as part of the entitlement submittal package. Prior to the scheduling of the public hearing, the applicant withdrew their request for a Development Agreement and will instead be pursuing a Vesting Tentative Map under Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 16.49. The Vesting Tentative Map provides the developer with a statutory vesting process that locks in applicable ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the time the Vesting Parcel Map application was deemed complete. Also prior to the public hearing, and upon further review, staff determined that the Uniform Sign Program entitlement was unnecessary and the applicant subsequently removed this entitlement from the application request. Staff notes that with these entitlement changes, the overall project scope, design, and operational intent remain unchanged.

ANALYSIS:

Project Design and Layout
The applicant proposes a two-phase redevelopment and expansion of an existing beverage distribution facility as described above. Phase 1 includes the construction of approximately 959,441 square feet of new building area which includes a new beverage Production Center (PC), Distribution Center (DC), an Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS), an elevated truck deck, and associated parking and landscaped areas, new fences and walls. The PC, DC and ASRS components of the project will be in one large building which is the focal point of the project located at the south-central portion of the project area (henceforth referred to in this report as the PC/DC/ASRS building). In addition, a new 4-story parking structure totaling approximately 208,444 square feet is also proposed to be built at the southerly end of the project area adjacent to 6th Street. The existing 32,890 square foot office building at 9267 Haven Avenue will remain and is proposed to be renovated into office space as part of Phase 1. Lastly, Phase 1 also includes the construction of a ground water supply well located at the northwest corner if Utica Avenue and 6th Street. Currently, the applicant proposes to enclose this water infrastructure with a wrought iron fence.

Phase 2 of the project includes two options wherein the developer proposes to either maintain the existing 62,210 square foot building at 10655 7th Street or demolish this building and replace it with a new 40,085 square foot building at the same location. This decision has not yet been made and the eventual option selected will depend on operational needs once the new facility is in operation. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzed both scenarios. Lastly, Phase 2 will also include the construction and operation of a co-generation facility, which is an interior element of the PC/DC/ASRS building and is a component of the processing of beverages.

3 0
9 4
Figure 2: Proposed site plan noting location of referenced buildings.

Architecture and Site Planning
The applicant proposes a variety of building materials throughout the site. Specifically, the PC/DC/ASRS building, which at 131 feet tall is the dominant feature of the project, will provide a façade on all elevations comprised of insulated metal paneling of various colors ranging from grey to red. Other elevations will include tilt-up concrete construction in addition to metal panel elements, except for the east elevation which will also include metal structural components to support a raised truck deck and ramp. Other street-facing facades throughout the project, such as the 41-foot-tall parking structure, combines insulated metal panels with metal mesh intended to screen the structure and provide design consistency throughout. Office building facades will

3 0
9 4
comprise metal and stucco elements, in addition to glazing and window surrounds comprised of metal paneling.

Fig. 2: South elevation of proposed project, representative of color scheme and massing.

Fig. 3: West elevation of Haven Avenue office building, representative of office façade theme.

The Haven Avenue frontage (west elevation of the PC/DC/ASRS) is a design focal point. To meet the General Plan’s expectation that buildings within the 21 st Century Employment District be closer to the street and provide ground floor transparency, while also trying to maintain internal security for the user, the applicant proposes opaque spandrel glass, exaggerated window surrounds made of metal paneling, and multiple vertical elements comprised of dark metal paneling. The window surrounds and vertical features protrude from the painted concrete tilt-wall to provide depth and includes double-high opaque spandrel glass window features so as to provide the presence of a two-story façade.

The project also incorporates substantial pedestrian-oriented frontage improvements, which include a sidewalk with spaced shaded trees along Haven Avenue, a sidewalk with landscaped buffers along 6 th Street, 7 th Street and Utica Avenue. Streetscape enhancements feature two upgraded paving areas with seat wall along 6 th Street and a protected cycle track along the 6 th Street frontage, encouraging active transportation and supporting a cohesive streetscape.

Together these improvements strengthen the areas mobility network, supporting transit readiness and create a more walkable connected environment.

Fig. 3: Detail of Haven Avenue elevation of PC/DC/ASRS building. Fig. 4: Detail of Haven Avenue frontage looking south.

3 0
9 4
Relative to the images above, staff notes that the developer had originally proposed a frontage lane along Haven Avenue, as seen in the images above and plan set attached to this report. Staff determined that the frontage lane along this portion of Haven Avenue is not necessary, and it was therefore removed from the project. Staff has added a condition of approval requiring that all plans shall be modified accordingly for staff review and approval to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department prior to building permit issuance.

Compliance with General Plan and Development Standards
The 21 st Century Employment District is envisioned to provide for professional office and innovative businesses, and while residential uses are permitted, Volume 2, page 87 of the General Plan explicitly allows existing industrial uses to remain and expansions with clean industrial are allowed. In this case, staff notes that the use and user has existed at the site since at least the 1980s. With this provision, the General Plan allows for the expansion of this use.

Regarding compliance with development standards, the project applicant has applied for a Master Plan to establish site specific development standards for several development criteria (see “Master Plan” section below). Please see the reference table below regarding the project’s compliance with relevant development standards:

Table 2: Development Standards Compliance Table
Development Standard Required Proposed Complies
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.4 to 2.0 .89 Yes
Setback – Haven Avenue 5 to 15 feet (min/max) Var. 25.8’ to 39.8’ Yes* Setback – Utica Avenue 5 to 15 feet Var. 97’ to 110’ Yes* Setback – 7th Street 5 to 15 feet Approx. 14 feet Yes
Setback – 6th Street 5 to 15 feet Var. approx. 16’ to

78.5’
Yes*
Building Height OALCP
Requirements
131 feet Yes**
Open Space/Landscape
Standards
10% Approx. 19.3% Yes
*Complies upon approval of the master plan
**Building height is established by the Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (OALCP). The applicant has applied for approval of building height by FAA pursuant to OALCP.

Parking
Pursuant to Development Code Sections 17.64.050, 17.64.090, and Table 17.64.050-1, parking for industrial uses is based on a combination of warehouse, manufacturing, and office square footages. Specifically, warehouse parking is calculated at a rate of 1 space per 1,000 square feet for the first 20,000 square feet, 1 per 2,000 square feet for the next 20,000 square feet, and 1 per 4,000 square feet thereafter. In addition, office areas require parking at a rate of 1 space per 250 square feet. Further, the Development Code requires one trailer loading stall for each dock door proposed.

As such, Development Code Section 17.64.050 specifies the minimum number of passenger vehicle and trailer parking spaces required for a variety of land uses. A direct application of the Municipal Code parking requirements to the project results in 794 required spaces for passenger vehicles and 59 spaces for trailers. The table below demonstrates the project’s compliance with all parking standards:

3 0
9 4
Parking Ratio Required
Parking
Provided
Parking
Complies?
Warehouse,
Office,
Manufacturing
Warehouse - 1 per 1,000
sf for the first 20,000 sf; 1
per 2,000 sf for the next
20,000 sf, and 1 per 4,000
sf for remaining sf
Office - 1 per 250 sf
Manufacturing - 2 per
1,000 sf
794 521 YES*
Trailer Loading 1 per loading dock 59 87 Yes
*Complies with the parking study forecasted parking demand and master plan The project will provide 521 auto parking stalls, 87 trailer parking stalls, 57 truck dock doors, and 4 at grade dock doors. Of the auto parking stalls, nine would be ADA accessible and 25 would allow for Electric Vehicle (EV) charging, per the California Building Code (CBC). 20 percent (five stalls) of all EV charging stalls would be constructed prior to occupancy of Phase 1 Project operations while the remainder would be provided prior to occupancy of Phase 2.

A parking analysis was prepared for the project which anticipated parking demand over a typical 24-hour period. The peak parking demand was estimated to be 464 spaces from 11:00AM to 12:00PM using the employment projections for the site and assuming every employee on-site generated demand for one parking space. Based on this information, the applicant has also requested site-specific parking requirements pursuant to their Master Plan request which are based on the project’s parking analysis. Staff notes that the project involves a single-tenant user, thus there is a high degree of confidence in the parking analysis provided, as opposed to if the project included a multi-tenant commercial center or a speculative development where the end- user was not known. Thus, staff recommends that this customization of parking requirements be approved as part of the master plan request. In short, between the parking analysis for the project and the proposed site-specific development standard for parking established in the project’s Master Plan, parking is sufficient.

Landscaping
The project proposes significant landscaping along the project frontage and internal employee areas around office and building entrances. In particular, landscaping along the Haven Avenue and 6th Street frontage is designed to imitate urban parklets, wherein features such as enhanced paving and low seat walls invite pedestrians into the project perimeter. The project complies with applicable landscape standards. The project includes the planting of approximately 269 new trees, consisting of a mix of 24-inch and 36-inch box sizes. Species include Brisbane Box (Lophostemon confertus) and Chines Pistache (Pistacia chinensis), which will be used as primary shade trees. Other trees such as Coast Live Oak (Quercus agrifolia) and Marina Strawberry Tree (Arbutus ‘Marina’) are included throughout the site to enhance visual appeal and ecological value.

The remainder of the landscaped areas will feature ornamental groundcover, drought tolerant shrubs and flowering accent plants designed to support water-efficient, low-maintenance site aesthetics.

New Cucamonga Valley Water District Well
As part of the project’s initial phase, a new groundwater supply well will be constructed at the southwest corner of 6th Street and Utica Avenue. This well will serve as a dedicated water source

3 0
9 4
for the project and will be designed and built to meet the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) standards and requirements. It will have the capacity to meet the project’s peak water demand of approximately 1,270 gallons per minute. A 16-foot-wide driveway is proposed to provide CVWD with direct access for operations, maintenance and monitoring. To connect the well to the existing water system, the project will install approximately 2,700 linear feet of 12- inchater transmission pipe. The pipeline will run from the well site to 6 th Street right of way, continue east along 6 th Street, then turn north along 6 th Street, then turn north along Cleveland Avenue before tying into an existing inlet that supplies two steel tank reservoirs. These reservoirs are located at the northeast corner of 7 th Street and Cleveland Avenue, just northeast of the project site. The well site and all related facilities will be enclosed with security fencing and screened to ensure safe operation and to limit access to authorized CVWD personnel.

Entitlements Required for Proposed Development
In addition to the Design Review application, the project applicant has applied for a Master Plan, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map, Conditional Use Permit and Tree Removal Permit. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.14.060.B, “when a proposed project requires more than one permit with more than one approving authority, all project permits shall be processed concurrently, and final action shall be taken by the highest-level designated approving authority for all such requested permits.” The Master Plan included in the entitlement package requires City Council review and approval pursuant to Development Code Section 17.22.020. Accordingly, the City Council is the approving authority for this project. Therefore, the Planning Commission is the recommending body for the entitlements.
Master Plan (DRC2023-00072):Development Code Section 17.22.020 establishes that the purpose of a Master Plan is to allow for the coordinated comprehensive planning of a subarea of the city in order to accomplish certain objectives, which include but are not limited to: 1) allowing development of an exceptional project design that cannot be built under an existing zone or due to constraints of existing development standards; and 2) provide flexibility for developments beyond conventional zoning regulations to address special or unique needs or characteristics.

In this case, the developer is proposing to expand an existing beverage distribution facility which has been in operation in the city since the 1980s. The project would allow the existing business to remain in the city, provide additional jobs to the benefit of the community, and further our economic development goals to expand manufacturing uses. The proposed project cannot meet the strict criteria of all current development standards and the applicant has proposed a Master Plan to allow development of an exceptional project while providing flexibility beyond conventional zoning regulations.

Specifically, the applicant has requested establishing site-specific development standards as permitted through the Master Plan process to address the following development standards: Building Typology; Building Facades; Building Articulation; Ground Floor Entrances; Other Ground Floor Treatments; Corridor Fronting Ground Floor Use Restrictions; Build-to-Line and Frontage Area; Parking Standards; Bicycle Parking; Signage; Open Space Standards and Walls and Fences.. A full description of requested site-specific development standards is included with this report as Exhibit C (Master Plan).
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713): The proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map would consolidate the eight existing parcels within the approximately 30.1-acre project site and subdivide them into three new parcels to support the development of the project. Parcel 1 would be approximately 25.43 acres and would accommodate the

3 0
9 4
new industrial building, the proposed parking structure, surface parking areas and renovated office building. Parcel 2 would be approximately 0.68 acres and would be dedicated for new site access from 7 th Street, providing a direct vehicular ingress and egress to the project and Parcel 3 would be approximately 3.89 acres and would contain the existing 7 th Street warehouse building and associated parking. The subdivision layout reflects the intended functional use of the site. Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068): The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Table 17.136.020-1 of the City’s Development Code to allow Manufacturing, Light-Large. Staff notes that any distribution component of the business is considered ancillary to the primary Light-Large Manufacturing use. Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070): Across the site currently, there are 257 trees which would be removed as part of this project. Of these, 24 trees are heritage trees.

Pursuant to Development Code Section 17.16.080, a tree removal permit is required for the removal of heritage trees. The applicant has provided an arborist report detailing these trees to be removed, which is included with this report as an appendix to the Environmental Impact Report. Staff notes that pursuant to Section 17.80.040, these 24 Heritage Trees are proposed for removal and would be replaced accordance with the City’s tree replacement standards, which require specific replacement amounts based on the size and type of each tree. Accordingly, the landscape plan proposes approximately 269 new trees that would provide a mix of shade, screening and ornamental planting consistent with City requirements.

Public Art
The project is subject to the public art requirement provided in Chapter 17.124 of the Development Code. The requirement is calculated at one dollar per square foot of building area, exclusive of parking structures. Considering the project involves the demolition of existing structures, the retention and remodeling of other structures, the two options within Phase 2, staff estimates that the public art valuation for this project will be approximately $775,000 square feet. This estimated valuation for public art will be determined prior to building permit issuance.

Design Review Committee
The Design Review Committee (Boling and Daniels) reviewed the project on May 7, 2024.

Committee members had general comments regarding the project’s architecture and design, and site planning. At the DRC meeting, committee members also discussed the need to screen the CVWD water well infrastructure from public view. Upon consulting with CVWD, staff notes that the screening of water well infrastructure is not permitted by CVWD. Thus, the applicant will propose wrought-iron security fencing around the CVWD water well. No members of the public attended the DRC meeting to speak on the item, and the Design Review Committee recommended that the item be forwarded to the Planning Commission as presented.

Environmental Review
Pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2023080369) has been prepared for this project. Under CEQA, the purpose of an EIR is to inform the public about any significant impacts to the physical environment resulting from a project, identify ways to avoid or lessen the impacts, identify alternatives and promote public participation. The contents of the EIR become a planning tool for the Planning Commission to use in determining the appropriate and best land use for the project site.

3 0
9 4
The intent of the EIR is to address and evaluate potentially significant impacts of the proposed projects and identify feasible mitigation measures and alternatives that may be adopted to reduce or eliminate these impacts. A summary of all project- related impacts and the recommended mitigation measures is provided in the Final EIR. The following summarizes key points in the environmental review process.

Notice of Preparation and Public Scoping Meeting
The Notice of Preparation (NOP) serves as public notification that an EIR is being prepared and requests comment and input from responsible agencies and other interested parties regarding environmental issues to be addressed in the document. In addition to the NOP, CEQA recommends conducting a scoping meeting for the purpose of identifying the range of potential significant impacts that should be analyzed within the scope of the Draft EIR. The public scoping meeting is to receive public testimony on those issues that the public would like to have addressed in the EIR as it relates to the project and environment.

Accordingly, a notice advertising both the NOP and Public Scoping Meeting notice was prepared for the project and circulated on August 17, 2023, to the State Clearinghouse, public agencies, Native American tribes, and those interested parties who had previously requested notification.

However, the NOP was subsequently cancelled to address a scheduling conflict regarding the Scoping Meeting; a revised NOP was prepared and issued on September 14, 2023. On September 28th, 2023, the City conducted a Scoping Meeting on the proposed project, the NOP and the EIR process but there were no attendees at the scoping meeting.

The public comment period to respond to the NOP closed on October 13, 2023, and comment letters were received from the following: California Department of Justice, California Native American Heritage Commission, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility (SAFER), Southwest Mountain States Regional Council of Carpenter (SWMSRCC), South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Californians Allied for Responsible Economy (CARECA).

Written responses to all significant environmental issues raised were prepared and made available in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).

AB 52 Compliance
Formal notification in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52 was sent on August 30, 2023, to tribal communities from a list of six tribes that have requested notification by the city. In response to these notices, the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI) responded and engaged in consultation. SMBMI requested the inclusion of specific cultural resource protection language, which has been incorporate into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation formally responded to the AB 52 notification on September 29, 2023, during which the tribe requested the presence of a tribal monitor during all grading activities. Although no known tribal cultural resources were identified within the project area, mitigation measures have been added to ensure protection in the event of unexpected discoveries during site disturbance. Thus, the CEQA document prepared for the project reflects the requested language/mitigation measures.

Draft EIR Preparation and Circulation
The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the DEIR was distributed on April 24, 2024, and the DEIR was circulated for a 45-day public review period beginning April 29, 2025, and concluding on June 13, 2025, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines The NOA included links to the full DEIR and technical appendices and was posted with the San Bernardino County Clerk, published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, and mailed to property owners within 660 feet of the project site as well as to

3 0
9 4
individuals and organizations that requested notification. The DEIR was also submitted via CEQAnet to the California Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation for distribution to relevant state agencies. The documents were also posted to the City’s website for public review during the same period. Hard copies of the DEIR and all technical appendices were provided for public review at the following locations:
Archibald Library – 7368 Archibald Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730; Paul A Baine Library – 12505 Cultural Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739; Planning Department Public Counter at City Hall – 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730.

Written comments on the DEIR were received from the following agencies and organizations:
California Office of Planning and Research
California Air Resources Board
State Water Resources Control Board
Southern California Gas Company
Cucamonga Valley Water District
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Lozeau Drury LLP, on behalf of Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility Blum, Collin & Ho LLP, on behalf of Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance and SWAPE
Advocates for the Environment
City of Ontario Traffic/Transportation Manager
These comments and the City’s responses have been incorporated into the Final EIR. The DEIR, FEIR, technical appendices, and mitigation are available on the City’s website under the “CEQA Documents Available for Review” section, located at: https://www.cityofrc.us/community- development/planning and can also be accessed by clicking on the hyperlink in Exhibit D.

Prior to the public hearing, staff received a number of comment letters and emails expressing support of the project. These documents are included with this staff report as Exhibit E.

Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP)
In compliance with CEQA, a mitigation monitoring and reporting program has been prepared. The MMRP is a reporting program that identifies each adopted mitigation measure or project design feature that reduces the significance level of a particular impact. The MMRP indicates responsibility and timing milestones for each mitigation measure.

Findings of Fact in Support of Determinations Related to Significant Environmental Impacts The EIR concludes that upon implementation of the project and all recommended mitigation measures, impacts associated with the project would remain significant and unavoidable for certain issue areas. These impacts include air pollutant emissions which exceed SCAQMD daily Nox thresholds specifically for project operations, as well as an exceedance of regional construction thresholds even with implementation of all mitigations. Also, the project will result in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) which exceed SCAQMD daily thresholds. These impacts will remain after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. As part of project approval, the City Council will be required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations which acknowledges these unavoidable impacts. In addition to the project benefits which are highlighted in the Draft Statement of Overriding Considerations, the applicant has also provided a list of

3 0
9 4
additional project benefits which is being included with this report as Exhibit H.

Correspondence
A notice of public hearing was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on September 22, 2025, notices were mailed to all property owners within 660 feet and other interested parties who had requested such notice on September 23, 2025, and the site was posted with a notice on September 24, 2025. As of the writing of this report, staff has not received any comments in response to the advertised public hearing notices.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Project is expected to generate economic benefits to the City. In addition to required one- time permit and development impact fees, it is also anticipated that the project will create both temporary construction jobs and permanent jobs. Specifically, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 289 permanent jobs beyond which already exist at the existing facility, and approximately 400 temporary construction jobs. In addition, the increased employment could indirectly benefit other local businesses due to increased demand. The expanded facility is likely to create positive economic benefits to surrounding businesses such as hotels, restaurants and other business support services. The project scale and operational reach will serve as a key anchor for strengthening the City’s food manufacturing sector, which could attract complementary businesses.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

The development of the project achieves the City Council’s Core Value of “Intentionally embracing and anticipating the future,” by positioning Rancho Cucamonga as a competitive hub for food manufacturing in the region.

EXHIBITS:

Exhibit A – Vicinity Map and Aerial Photograph
Exhibit B – Project Plans
Exhibit C – Master Plan
Exhibit D – Link to Environmental Documents (Draft EIR, Final EIR, Technical Appendices, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, EIR Findings and Draft SOC) Exhibit E – Comments Received in Support of the Project Exhibit F – Applicant’s List of Project Benefits
Exhibit G – Design Review Committee Comments
Exhibit H - Draft Resolution with Conditions of Approval

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1

Historic Preservation Commission and
Planning Commission
Agenda
October 8, 2025
Draft Minutes
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
7:00 p.m.

The regular joint meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning Commission was held on October 8, 2025. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Morales at 7:00 p.m.

A. Roll Call
Planning Commission present: Chairman Morales, Vice Chairman Boling, Commissioner Dopp, Commissioner Daniels and Commissioner Diaz.

Staff Present: Serita Young, Assistant City Attorney; Sean McPherson, Principal Planner; Miguel Sotomayor, Principal Engineer; Caleb Richards, Senior Landscape Planner; Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant.

B. Public Communications
Chairman Morales opened the public communications.

Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed the public communications.

C. Consent Calendar
C1. Consideration to adopt Regular Meeting Minutes of September 24, 2025.

Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Daniels. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.

D. Public Hearings
D1. HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW – NABEEL SALHAB – A request to construct an approximately 6,201 square-foot, two-story single-family residence with a 1,108 square-foot attached garage on a 22,888 square-foot undeveloped lot within the Very Low (VL) Residential Zone with Hillside and Equestrian Overlays located at 10842 Carriage Drive - APN: 1074-531-14. This item is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 – New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures (DRC2025-00106).

Senior Landscape Planner Richards provided a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file).

Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.

Mr. Yousef, representing the applicant, was present and available to answer questions.

Hearing no comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed public hearing.

Commissioner Dopp indicated he had no issues with the project. It meets parameters.

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1
Commissioner Daniels stated that the project is compatible with the surrounding homes and meets all the code requirements.

Commissioner Diaz commented that it is a large, beautiful home and expressed excitement about a new family moving in.

Vice Chairman Boling thanked the applicant for a well-thought-out design, noting that it complements the neighborhood. He said the project complies with existing development code standards and addresses the city’s need to provide a range of housing types.

Chairman Morales thanked the developer for collaborating with staff to create a project that fits well within the neighborhood.

Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz; seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adopt Resolution 2025-031 approving Hillside Development Review DRC2025-00106. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.

D2. LONE OAK-RANCHO, LLC - Recommendation to the City Council for a request to redevelop and expand an existing beverage distribution facility over two phases to include production, bottling and distribution operations and other site improvements, including a parking garage and new water well, on approximately 30.1 acres of land generally bounded by Haven Avenue to the west, 7th Street to the North, Utica Avenue to the east, and 6th Street to the south within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) Zone. APN:
0209-411-002. -003, -004, -023, -024, -032, -034, -035. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project (SCH2023080369). (Related Records: a Design Review (DRC2023-00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068) and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070)).

Principal Planner McPherson provided a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted, for context, that the Planning Commission is a recommending body on this item. Following deliberation, the item will move forward to the City Council for final consideration. He noted a typo in the staff report regarding EV stalls, clarifying it should indicate 52 EV stalls and not 25. Additionally, he pointed out an error in the title of the Resolution, stating that the term “Vesting” should be included in reference to the Tentative Parcel Map. Commissioners were provided with a redlined version of the corrected Resolution on the dais for review. He also mentioned that, in reference to Exhibit E, many of the letters were duplicates, and this will be corrected prior to the item being presented to the City Council.

Commissioner Dopp inquired about Phase 2, noting that the intended use of the building remains unclear.

He asked whether it could potentially return to the Planning Commission as a conditional use item.

Principal Planner McPherson responded that Phase 2it may come back to the Planning Commission.

Commissioner Dopp asked staff whether any information on truck routes was provided by the developer.

Principal Planner McPherson responded that he would defer that question to the developer.

Commissioner Daniels asked staff to explain the reason for not wanting the slip lane on Haven Avenue and why it was deemed unnecessary.

Principal Planner McPherson answered that slip lanes in general will no longer be required along Haven south of the railroad tracks for any property.

Chairman Morales opened the public hearing.

Principal Planner McPherson announced that the applicant will be making a supplemental slideshow presentation, which included a fly through video (copies on file). Following the presentation, the applicant was available to answer questions.

The following individuals spoke in support of the project: Ben Pratt; Eddie Campos; Cesar Lamas; Robert Hufnagel; Louie Lopez; Jerry Delamose.

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1
For the record, the following correspondence expressing support for the project was received after the preparation of the agenda packet. The actual correspondence should be referred to for details:
Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce
Inland Empire Economic Partnership
Southern California District Council of Laborers
Special Olympics Southern California
Additionally, a letter from the Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce was received at the meeting and filed by the Executive Assistant.

Commissioner Dopp asked the applicant about the anticipated truck traffic through the city.

Applicant responded that the truck traffic would not change from what it currently is and will primarily use the I-10 and I-15 freeways.

Commissioner Daniels expressed he liked the appearance and colors of the building. He asked whether the materials used for the colors would fade over time.

Applicant responded that the materials were specifically selected to resist fading over the 30-year lifespan of the panels.

Commissioner Daniels asked where they stand with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval.

Applicant replied that they have received full approval from the FAA and have submitted their application to the City of Ontario for their approval as well.

Commissioner Diaz inquired about the truck traffic and heard that it may decrease, as certain operations will now be performed on-site that were previously performed off-site.

Applicant confirmed that, as part of their production process, some raw materials will now be created on- site, which will reduce the number of supply trucks needed.

Commissioner Diaz asked the applicant to explain their interactive tours and what that would look like.

Applicant explained that the tour is designed is avoid active operations on the production floor, creating a separate path through the facility. They would like to make it available for visits to both internal and external visitors with approval from local management. The intent is to welcome visitors and share the company’s story with a particular focus on sustainability, which will be integrated throughout the facility.

Vice Chairman Boling commented on the City’s ongoing efforts to incorporate active transportation elements into development projects and city infrastructure. He said that a significant investment was made in the cycle track bicycle lane along Sixth Street, and that the slip lane along a portion of Haven Avenue was removed to accommodate an additional bike lane. Given the facility’s location and its proximity to major public transportation infrastructure, including the Brightline and Metrolink stations, he inquired about on-site amenities available to support and encourage employees to commute by bicycle. Specifically, he asked whether the facility would provide secure bike lockers and/or bike racks.

Applicant confirmed that the facility will have a secured parking structure that will allow access to bikes, as well as charging stations for electric vehicles.

Principal Planner McPherson added that there are 44 bike stalls located within the parking structure.

Chairman Morales acknowledged the applicant’s significant investment of $600 million for the development of the state-of-the-art campus and asked how much future capacity growth the facility is designed to accommodate.

Applicant responded that while growth is planned on the distribution side, it will not be significant. On the production side, they will start with five production lines but have the capacity to expand to seven production lines, representing a 40% increase. He added that, as with any bottling plant, there will be opportunities

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1
for organic growth by improving efficiency on existing lines, providing additional room for expansion as operations progress.

Chairman Morales stated that along Sixth Street there are cylinder shaped objects and asked if they have considered placing art on those cylinders.

Applicant responded that they have not considered it but if the Commissioners would like them to do so, they will discuss further with staff.

Commissioner Daniels asked what their timing is on the project once they get the approvals.

Applicants answered that they will start as soon as possible.

Chairman Morales mentioned that the lights on the top of the tallest building must be reported to the FAA if they go out. He asked whether the contact number for the FAA will be posted for immediate access.

Applicant confirmed that they have a sophisticated emergency response plan in place.

Hearing no other comments from the public, Chairman Morales closed public hearing.

Commissioner Dopp stated that he has been the most critical on the Commission of warehouse industrial development. He expressed concerns about the frontage on Haven and questioned the ability and direction of both the General Plan and even the Council goals regarding their vision for major corridors. He feels they lose a little bit of that by getting rid of the second office building and it is mostly a warehouse that is fronting Haven. He suggested that the City Council may want to think about the Haven Avenue frontage a little bit further.

He also addressed pollution concerns, specifically greenhouse gas emissions, and the high concentration of warehouses in the area. He expressed appreciation for the efforts Coca-Cola and Reyes are making to their facility as environmentally friendly but emphasized that pollution remains a concern for him. He encouraged Reyes to consider expanding their electric vehicle fleet if the opportunity arises. He added that the project, aside from his concerns about the Haven frontage, is appropriate and beneficial for the community.

He said regarding potential murals and as a member of the Public Art Committee, the other committee members tend to be very cautious and wary about these bigger projects that come up and that their complaint is that they do not have a lot of input. He recommended as part of any mural to think about the city at large, maybe good sources of inspiration from the city’s heritage.

He commended the office space and the features that give it a “headquarters” feel, which aligns with the City’s vision. He expressed appreciation for the design, beside the Haven frontage, the landscaped urban parklets and the green space planned for the site, and the use of color throughout the property.

Commissioner Daniels commended the development, highlighting the many aspects involved and the various permits required. He expressed that it is a very good project that will benefit the community and the area. He appreciated hearing that the project will move forward promptly. He also thanked those who attended the meeting and shared their perspectives.

Commissioner Diaz concurred with the other commissioners, stating that it is a fantastic project for the community. She acknowledged concerns regarding the Haven frontage, viewing it as a negative aspect, and hopes efforts will be made to enhance its aesthetic appeal for those traveling along Haven. She commended the thoughtful consideration given to both the community and employees, describing it as impressive. She expressed enthusiasm about Coca-Cola remaining and growing in the city and thanked the audience members who highlighted the importance of the project, and the collaborative efforts involved.

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1
Vice Chairman Boling stated that this is one of the largest projects of this type that has come before the city in quite some time. He said as it pertains to the EIR, he wanted to make it clear what the Planning Commission’s role is to ensure the EIR was conducted at the appropriate level and then submitted to the City Council, as the Commissioners are just the recommending body.

He expressed appreciation that the applicant has electric trucks in their fleet, the project has a number of onsite infrastructure investments for environmental facilities of various types and that the air pollution issues that may be called out in an EIR of this type are more of a regional issue.

He said as it pertains to the project overall, the applicant’s business has been a long-term member of this community and continues to make a significant investment in the city and the region. The business is a major employer bringing in a high-level of employment to the area, offering competitive jobs to Rancho residents as well as others in the Inland Empire and beyond.

He said we cannot lose sight as to why a city exists, it is to maintain and grow the economic value of a community, and how we do it is to provide a high level of municipal services. Having this business continue to invest and expand in our city translates to the city’s success. He believed it was a thoughtful design and met the vision for the future, not only for its operational use but also for the employees that work there.

In regard to Public Art, he said that with the magnitude of the possible investment, it is a major opportunity to create a keystone component not only for Reyes but for the city and the region’s tourism and marketing plan. He asks that the same level of care and detail that they placed on getting the building and site layout done, be devoted for the selection and installation of the Public Art.

Chairman Morales expressed his appreciation to the developer for the state-of-the-art world class campus.

He thanked the applicant for their investment in the community, and for their two-years of work to get this going. He thanked them for designing the campus with their employees in mind. He also thanked the attendees for their helpful comments tonight and for participating in this important project for our city.

Commissioner Dopp mentioned that the Economic Development Department has emphasized the importance of attracting key industries to the city to create a diversified economy and provide higher-level jobs, reducing reliance on warehouses. He highlighted that food and beverage manufacturing is one of these important industries and commended the applicant for contributing to this goal.

Motion: Moved by Vice Chairman Boling; seconded by Commissioner Diaz to adopt Resolution 2025-032 as amended recommending that the City Council approve Design Review DRC2023-00067, Master Plan DRC2023-00072, Vesting Tentative Parcel Map SUBPTM20713, Conditional Use Permit DRC2023-00068 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2023-00070. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0.

E. Director Announcements
Principal Planner McPherson announced that last week the Planning Department was recognized at a statewide-level and received the California American Planning Association (APA) award of merit for Planning Agency. He also mentioned that in a few weeks, we have a full agenda with six or seven items.

F. Commission Announcements
Vice Chairman Boling mentioned that last week he attended the APA Conference, participated in numerous sessions and received annual legal updates. Most importantly was a recognition of the City’s Planning Agency with the award of merit recognizing the professionalism, teamwork and diligence that shows in the projects that come forward for the Commission to consider. He also mentioned that a number of laws have been proposed and adopted by the state to help address the perceived housing crisis and yet at the conference it was pointed out by Deputy City Manager Matt Burris that depending upon how you count what is in the pipeline, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has somewhere in the neighborhood of 8,400 to over 10,000 housing units that have been approved over the last few years, and yet when we look at housing construction , it is lacking.

HPC/PC Draft Minutes

2 8
3 1
He said there is a recent article out of a San Francisco publication that building permits in California, there was on average 250 building permits per 100,000 residents in 2023. He said if you look at what the City of Rancho Cucamonga is trying to push through, we are well ahead of that. By comparison nationwide that number is in the 400s, that is almost 500 building permits issued per 100,000 residents nationwide. Even after the state has adopted and pushed onto the cities so many pieces of legislation that sometimes tie their hands, as far as quality of product, they are still behind the national average, so something is broken, and that message came out numerous times at the conference.

Commissioner Daniels asked staff if anything ever happened with the Commissioners letter that was going to the City Council.

Principal Planner McPherson answered that it is still being discussed internally with staff and will get back to the Commission as soon as they get further clarification.

G. Adjournment
Motion: Moved by Commissioner Diaz, seconded by Commissioner Dopp to adjourn the meeting. Hearing no objections, Chairman Morales adjourned the meeting at 8:31 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Thornhill, Executive Assistant
Planning Department
Approved:

RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW, MASTER

PLAN, VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,

AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT PERTAINING TO A REQUEST FOR A

PHASED REDEVELOPMENT AND EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING

BEVERAGE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY TO INCLUDE PRODUCTION,

BOTTLING AND DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS ON APPROXIMATELY

30.1 ACRES IN THE MIXED EMPLOYMENT 2 (ME2) ZONE; APNS: 0209- 411-02, -03, -04, -23, -24, -32, -34, -35. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH No. 2023080369) HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS
PROJECT.

A. Recitals.

1. Lone Oak - Rancho LLC, filed an application for the issuance of Design Review (DRC2023-00067), Master Plan (DRC2023-00072), Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (SUBTPM20713), Conditional Use Permit (DRC2023-00068), and Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070), as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject entitlements request is referred to as "the application."

2. On the 8th of October, 2025, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said applications recommending that the City Council approve the proposed project and concluded said hearing on that date recommending that the City Council approve the project as proposed.

3. On the 5th day of November, 2025, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date.

4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

B. Resolution.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:

1. This City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.

2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on November 5, 2025, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The project site consists of approximately 30.1 acres, generally located in the southern portion of Racho Cucamonga, bounded by Haven Avenue to the west, 7th Street to the north, Utica Avenue to the east, and 6th Street to the south and comprising the following Assessor Parcel Numbers (APN: 0209-411-02, -03, -04, -23, -24, -32, -34, and -35);and ATTACHMENT 7

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 1
Draft August 25, 2025
El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Revised September 24, 2025
1 OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION
These Findings of Fact and this Statement of Overriding Considerations are made with respect to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH# 2023080369) for the El Camino Project (the “Project”) considered by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”) relating to the potentially significant environmental effects of the Project.

The following Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations are required by the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), California Public Resources Code Section 21081, 21081.5 and 21081.6, and Title 14, California Code of Regulations ( the “CEQA Guidelines”) Sections 15091 through 15093, for the Project.

This document provides the findings required by CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines and the specific reasons for finding the Project acceptable notwithstanding that the Project results in significant adverse and unavoidable impacts that are infeasible to mitigate. Section 7 of this document addresses these unavoidable adverse impacts through a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
According to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines, “the most common type of EIR examines the environmental impacts of a specific development project. This type of EIR should focus primarily on the changes in the environment that would result from the development project. The EIR shall examine all phases of the project including planning, construction, and operation.” This City Council concludes that the El Camino Project meets the definition of a project under CEQA so the El Camino Project EIR is a project -level EIR as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15161 and contains all the sections and information required in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15120 to 15132.
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A private company, Lone Oak – Rancho LLC, is proposing to expand an existing beverage distribution facility. Existing development currently occupies the southern and northern portions of the site (approx. 17.9 acres) while the central portion (a former vineyard) occupies 12.2 acres of the site. The southern portion is developed with a beverage distribution facility and two office buildings. The northern portion of the site contains an existing 62,210-square foot warehouse on approximately 3 acres. The Project applicant is proposing to demolish up to 237,895 square feet of existing buildings and construct up to 1,054,541 square feet of new manufacturing, light industrial, and office uses on the Project site. Building heights will range from 34 to 130 feet and the Project will have a solar energy/battery storage system and a cogeneration system to help reduce energy consumption.

The proposed Project includes two different development options. Phase 1 plus Phase 2A results in 783,741 net square feet of building area of non -residential uses (Industrial and Office), not including a new parking structure which does not generate vehicular trips or house employees. In contrast, Phase 1 plus Phase 2B results in 761,616 square feet of building area, or 22,125 less Exhibit A

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 2 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
square feet than Phase 1 plus Phase 2A. The difference between the two options is that Phase 2A would reuse the existing 62,210 square -foot warehouse building while Phase 2B would demolish the existing warehouse building and construct a new 40,085 square foot light industrial building.

2.1 – PROJECT BACKGROUND

The City of Rancho Cucamonga (City or Lead Agency) has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed El Camino Project (“ proposed Project ” or “the Project”). The adoption and implementation of the Project is discretionary and defined as a “project” and is subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 1970 (Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CE QA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. seq.). Accordingly, the City has prepared this environmental impact report (EIR) to assess the short term, long term and cumulative environmental consequences that could result from adoption and implementation of the proposed Project. This report has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines and with the City’s local rules and procedures for implementing CEQA. It was prepared by professional planning consultants under c ontract to the City. The City is the Lead Agency for the preparation of this EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2023080369), as defined by CEQA (Public Resources Code, Section 21067, as amended), because it has primary discretionary authority with respect to the adoption and implementation of the proposed Project. The content of this document reflects the independent judgment of the City.

The approach to the analysis presented in this EIR is at a project level because specific development information is available regarding the proposed Project. Each environmental issue is analyzed at a similar project level, starting with a discussion of th e existing environmental setting, including physical conditions of the site and surrounding area, pertinent City General Plan goals, and policies and City Municipal Code requirements. Thresholds of significance are then defined and are used to measure the proposed Project’s potential impact to the environment.

Thresholds of significance are based on a broad list of questions and impact topics set forth in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines and the typical CEQA thresholds used by the City.

The impact analysis provided for each the 20 topical areas examines the specific short- and long- term environmental effects resulting from implementation of the proposed industrial development Project, including compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and City Municipal Code requirements. The assessment of impacts focuses on how the impact in question could occur and whether aspects of the proposed Project would reduce or ameliorate such impacts.

The presence of sensitive environmental resources, hazards onsite or in the immediate area, and the broad implications of the General Plan relative to the proposed Project are considered in the determination of impact significance. If the analysis indicates that a significant impact could occur, then mitigation measures are specified.

2.2 – PROJECT LOCATION

The 30.1-acre Project site is located in the southern area of the City of Rancho Cucamonga in southwestern San Bernardino County. The Project site is bounded on all sides by public roadways: 7th Street to the north, Utica Avenue to the east, 6th Street to the south, and Haven Avenue to the west. The Project is located approximately 1.8 miles west of the I-15 Freeway and approximately 1.2 miles north of the I -10 Freeway. The Project site is comprised of eight contiguous Assessor Parcels (APNs 209-411-02, -03, -04, -23, -24, -32, -34, and -35).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 3
Revised September 24, 2025

2.3 – EXISTING CONDITIONS

Regional Setting

The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the nation's largest metropolitan planning organization (MPO), representing six counties, 191 cities and more than 19 million residents. SCAG is currently the MPO of six of the ten counties in So uthern California, serving Imperial County, Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and Ventura County.

The SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2020 -2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020 -2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), now called “Connect SoCal”, in September 2020. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS includes goals and policies applicable to transportation and land use projects.

The City is within the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) which is under South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) jurisdiction. The SoCAB includes portions of San Bernardino County, Los Angeles County, and Riverside County, and all of Orange County. The SCAQMD is the entity responsible for mitigating emissions from stationary, mobile and indirect sources.

SCAQMD utilizes a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) that contain rules and regulations directed at attaining the National Ambient Ai r Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS).

The entire Southern California region contains many regional and local faults which results in the area being subject to moderate to high levels of groundshaking from earthquakes. The Project site is located in the Upper Santa Ana Valley Basin-Chino Subbasin and Chino Creek Watershed.

Runoff out of the mountains to the north can result in areas of localized flooding during heavy storms.

The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within the western part of the San Bernardino Valley on a deep alluvial plain formed by runoff from the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. The general area supported agriculture, mainly citrus and vineyards, since the late 1800’s but now it is largely urbanized. Past agricultural uses used hazardous chemicals in some locations for pesticides, fungicides, etc.

The mountain foothills to the north and some of the drainages out of the foothills support native vegetation but much of the land has been covered over by development and supports mainly weedy invasive species and wildlife tolerant of human activity. The region has been occupied by Native Americans for thousands of years and grading activities sometimes yield historical and archaeological artifacts.

Surrounding Land Uses

The Project site is surrounded by land designated in the City’s General Plan as 21 st Century Employment District. Existing land uses in this district include warehousing, commercial, vacant land, medical offices, hospitality uses, and other professional offices. A day care/pre -school is located near the southeast corner of the site, just east of Utica Ave. and just north of 6th Street.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 4 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Onsite Conditions

The 30.1 -acre Project site is developed with beverage distribution, warehousing, and offices totaling 270,800 square feet. According to the County Assessor’s Office website, the Project site is located on eight contiguous parcels: Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN) 209-411-023, 209-411- 024, 209-411-032, 209-411-034, 209-411-035, 209-411-002, 209-411-003, and 209-411-004.

At the time the NOP was issued, the southern three parcels (APNs 209-411-23, 209-411-24, 209- 411-34) contained a Distribution Center (DC) facility, two office buildings and support infrastructure with 208,590 square feet of space. The central two parcels (APNs 209-411-32, 209- 411-35) are currently vacant. The northern three parcels (APNs 209 -411-02, 209-411-03, 209- 411-04) located along 7 th Street are developed with an existing 62,210 square foot industrial warehouse (total existing building area is 270,800 SF).

The Project site is generally flat and gently slopes from the northwest towards the southeast.

Project site elevations range from approximately 1,091 feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the northwest corner down to 1,067 feet amsl on the southeast corner o f the Project site with a total elevation difference of approximately 24 feet. The existing building pads and developed parcels have been graded and are generally flat. Ground surface cover of the vacant parcels consists of sparse to moderate native and non-native grasses and shrubs.

The Project site is partially developed with warehouse and office buildings and is surrounded by other industrial and commercial land uses in all directions. The Project site has a General Plan designation of 21st Century Employment District and is within the Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) zone. The Project will not require a general plan amendment or a change of zone. The site also has a former vineyard in the northern half of the Phase 1 property and the entire site has over 200 landscape trees throughout the site including along the north side of the former vineyard.

Site History

For the purposes of this discussion, the southern and central portions of the site (25.5 acres) constitute Phase 1 while the northeasterly portion (4.6 acres) of the site constitutes Phase 2.

Phase 1 Site. The Project site supported agricultural uses in the past, including an orchard in the 1930s and grapevines in the southern and central portions of the site. The existing beverage distribution facility was developed in 1981 -1982 in the southern portion of t he site and currently supports a beverage distribution facility, but which once included the manufacturing and bottling of beverages, office uses, and drink distribution 1. This facility now includes a warehouse, office, fleet service shop, 12 6 parking spaces, and landscaping. The main warehouse building was expanded in 1986 and again in 1998. The site of the existing beverage facility is a 9.1-acre parcel (APN 209-411-34). The existing beverage facility office and warehouse occupy a total of 160,020 square feet and has been in operation since its construction in 1981. The two existing office buildings in the southwest corner of the site were constructed in 1990 as a multi -tenant office development and are currently occupied by various office us es. In December 2022 the Project applicant acquired this part of the Project site. These offices occupy APNs 209-411-23 and 209- 411-24. At present there is no beverage production or bottling at the facility only warehousing and distribution activities.

Phase 2 Site. The northeastern portion of the site contains the 7th Street warehouse building (i.e., Phase 2 property) which was developed in 1986 on the corner of Utica Avenue and 7th Street (APNs 209 -411-02, 209 -411-03, and 209 -411-04). The 62,210 -square foot warehouse was

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 5
Revised September 24, 2025
originally developed as a three -unit concrete tilt-up complex constructed by General Dynamics.

Since 1996, this building is currently occupied and has housed a series of unrelated industrial manufacturing uses in the past.

3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The Project is intended to implement the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan . The purpose of this Project is to implement the vision laid out in the Project objectives. The Project would generally increase the City’s production capacity and further fortify the economic base of the City. It would also revitalize a portion of the Cit y with new and renovated industry and production. The Project is proposed to be developed to accomplish the following objectives:

Objective 1: Facilitate the continued operation of the existing distribution facility with expanded operations and employment capacity.

Objective 2: Redevelop an existing industrial site with modern and sustainable facilities, including large -scale buildings, intricate manufacturing processes, and large employment opportunities.

Objective 3: Develop and operate an attractive state-of-the-art manufacturing and distribution facility in the City that meets industry standards to be competitive with similar facilities in the region.

Objective 4: Maximize the efficiency of the existing operations during the expansion process by providing interim manufacturing steps within the same building envelope.

Objective 5: Develop and operate a production and bottling facility that positively contributes to the local economy through new capital investment and the creation of new employment opportunities, including opportunities for highly trained workers.

Objective 6: Develop an industrial and manufacturing facility that is in close proximity to Interstate 10, Interstate 15, and other major transportation arterial roadways, to support the production of consumer goods and the distribution of manufactured goods throughout the region.

Objective 7: Implement a microgrid energy production system via cogeneration at an existing manufacturing site to minimize manufacturing waste and to reduce the demand on existing public services and systems while employing carbon -reducing technologies and reduce the f acility’s potential climate impact.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 6 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
4 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS

4.1 – LEAD AGENCY, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
The entitlement process will require review and approval from the City’s Design Review Committee (DRC), the Planning Commission, and the City Council. Due to its size and scale, the Project must implement a Master Plan as an entitlement tool to adopt specific development standards for the Project that vary from the City codes but incorporate various community benefits in exchange for the identified deviations from the City Code requirements. The Project requires the following discretionary actions/approvals:
• Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2023080369)
• Master Plan (DRC2023-00072) - The Project site is presently zoned ME2 Mixed Employment designation with a Corridor Fronting Commercial and Retail Overlay along the Haven Avenue frontage. The Project Master Plan identifies specific exceptions to the zone development standards. It also includes building details, elevations, landscaping and fencing plans, and other design elements. It should be noted the RCMC requires this document and the City is not offering any discretionary reductions in zoning standards. • Design Review (DRC2023 -00067) – The Design Review of the site plan and architectural design for the development of the bottling and distribution facility. The Project is being developed in two Phases which are evaluated in the EIR for potential impacts (Phase 1 and Phase 2). A new Design Review or Minor Design Review application will be required by the City for approval once plans for Phase 2 are completed. The City will review Phase 2 plans for consistency with the environmental analysis of the potential environmental impacts for Phase 2 included in this EIR. This applies to both Phase 2A (reuse of the existing building) as well as Phase 2B (demolition of the existing building and construction of a new building). • Conditional Use Permit (DRC-2023-00068) – The Project will operate a “Manufacturing, Light- Large” land use as defined in the City’s zoning ordinance and continue operations of “Wholesale and Distribution, Medium” land use in the Mixed Employment 2 (ME2) Di strict. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for Wholesale and Distribution has been included for the Project since this use is no longer permitted in the ME2 zone per the City’s updated development standards. Impacts associated with the Project and the CUP (inc luding 1,000 square feet of cold storage space) will be analyzed in the EIR and evaluated in the technical studies. • Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (original SUB TPM20713 to VTPM 20713) – The proposed Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (VTPM) would include a request to consolidate the eight existing parcels and create three new parcels for the Project. The VTPM would create the following three lots: Parcel 1 would be approximately 25.39 acres in size for the new industrial buildings, parking structure and office building; Parcel 2 would be 0.68 acres and would provide a new access from 7th Street to the Project site; and Parcel 3 would be 3.88 acres and would encompass the existing 7th Street warehouse building and parking area. Additionally, three lettered lots would be created for access.
• Tentative Parcel Map (SUB TPM20713) – The proposed Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) would include a request to consolidate the eight existing parcels and create three new parcels for the Project. The TPM would create the following three lots: Parcel 1 would be approximately

25.39 acres in size for the new industrial buildings, parking structure and office building; Parcel 2 would be 0.68 acres and would provide a new access from 7th Street to the Project site; and Parcel 3 would be 3.88 acres and would encompass the existing 7th Street warehouse building and parking area. Additionally, three lettered lots would be created for access.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 7
Revised September 24, 2025
• Uniform Sign Program (DRC 2023 -00069) - The proposed Project includes the review of a Uniform Sign Program which governs the design and construction of all planned and future signs.
• Tree Removal Permit (DRC2023-00070) –The Project proposes the removal of a number of trees that require the submittal of a removal permit as the identified trees meet the intent of Section 17.80 of the City’s Development Code.

4.2 – OTHER AGENCIES
Federal Agencies

• None

State and Regional Agencies

• State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water for approval of a domestic water supply permit amendment of a new source and possible treatment changes (Cal. Code Regs. § 64556)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) – Permits for individual pieces of equipment as appropriate.
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) – Rule 2305 – New Warehouses • Cucamonga Valley Water District (new water well permits for construction and operation) • Connection permits and approvals by various regional utility providers

Local Agencies

• Connection permits and approvals by various local utility providers

5 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and these Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists, without limitation, of the following documents:
• Two Notices of Preparation (“NOP”) and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project; in this case dated August 17, 2023 and September 14, 2023; • All comments submitted by public agencies or member s of the public during the two (2) 30-day public comment period for the first NOP that began on August 17, 2023 and ran through September 15, 2023 and the second NOP period that began on September 14, 2023 and ran through October 13, 2023;
• The El Camino Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (sometimes referred to herein as the “DEIR,”) dated April 25, 2025;
• All comments submitted by public agencies or members of the public during the 45 -day public comment period for the DEIR that began on April 29, 2025, and ended on June 13, 2025;

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 8 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
• The El Camino Project Final Environmental Impact Report (including Response to Comments), dated September 18, 2025;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project which is included as Section 4.0 of the FEIR;
• All findings and resol utions adopted by City decision -makers in connection with the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein; • All reports, studies, memoranda, staff reports, maps, exhibits, illustrations, diagrams or other planning materials relating to the Project prepared by the City , or by consultants to the City, or responsible or trustee agencies that were submitted to the City with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City’s actions on the Project;
• All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the Project;
• Minutes, as available, of all public meetings and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project;
• Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings;
• Matters of common knowledge within the City, including, but not limited to those cited above; and
• Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision (e).

The City Council has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the Project. The Draft EIR, Final EIR, and administrative record for the El Camino Project are available for review upon request at:

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 9
Revised September 24, 2025
6 FINDINGS OF FACT

Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project where an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) has been certified that identifies one or more significant impacts on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless the public agency makes one or more findings for each of those significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale of each finding. The possible findings, which must be support ed by substantial evidence in the record, are:

(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects on the environment.

(2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency.

(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.

With respect to significant effects which were subject to finding (3) above, the public agency must find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.

References for discussion of environmental impacts within the Final EIR are noted with each finding. Impact numbers refer to the section number and the threshold letter referenced in the Draft EIR where the full discussion of impacts is included. The Findings of Fact are presented on the following pages.

A. Effects Determined to Have No Impact or a Less than Significant Impact

The evaluation prepared in the El Camino Project EIR found and provided substantial evidence that certain environmental issues related to the El Camino Project would have no impact or have impacts that are less than significant. The City Council agrees with the characterization of the FEIR with respect to all of the El Camino Project impacts identified as resulting in “no impact” or “less than significant” impacts and finds that those impacts have been described and analyzed accurately and are supported by substantial evidence as described in the FEIR , including the Draft EIR. Reference should be made to the DEIR and FEIR for a more complete description of the findings regarding these impacts.

This finding applies to the evaluation of the potential impacts for the following item s, as further described in the DEIR, that the project will either have no impact or a less than significant impact.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 10 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Aesthetics

• AES-1: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

• AES-2: Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.

• AES-3: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site/planning area or its surroundings.

• AES-4: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime.

• AES-5: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to aesthetics.

Agricultural Resources

• AG-1: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use.

• AG-2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.

• AG-3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220 (g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104 (g)).

• AG-4: Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

• AG-5: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non -agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.

• AG-6: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to Agriculture and Forestry Resources.

Air Quality

• AIR-3: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

• AIR-4: Result in other emissions such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

Biological Resources

• BIO-2: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 11
Revised September 24, 2025

• BIO-3: Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

• BIO-5: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

• BIO-6: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

• BIO-7: Cause substantial adverse impacts with respect to biological resources.

Cultural Resources

• CUL-1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

• CUL-2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.5.

• CUL-3: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries.

• CUL-4: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to cultural resources.

Energy

• ENG-1: Significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

• ENG-2: Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

• ENG-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to energy.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 12 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Geology and Soils

• GEO-1: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

o Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. (Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42)

o Strong seismic ground shaking.

o Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction.

o Landslides.

• GEO-2: Result in substantial soil erosion of the loss of topsoil.

• GEO-3: Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in an on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.

• GEO-4: Be located on expansive soil, as defined by Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property.

• GEO-5: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.

• GEO-6: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature.

• GEO-7: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to geology and soils, including paleontological resources.

Greenhouse Gases

• GHG-2: Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emission of GHGs.

Hazardous and Hazardous Materials

• HAZMAT-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

• HAZMAT-3: Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 13
Revised September 24, 2025
• HAZMAT-4: Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

• HAZMAT-6: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

• HAZMAT-7: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

• HAZMAT-8: Cause substantial cumulative impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous materials.

Hydrology and Water Quality

• HYD-1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.

• HYD-2: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

• HYD-3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would; (a) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (b) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on -or offsite; ( c) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; (d) provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (e) impede or redirect flood flows.

• HYD-4: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.

• HYD-5: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

• HYD-6: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to hydrology and water quality.

Land Use and Planning

• LAND-1: Physically divide an established community;

• LAND-2: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

• LAND-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to land use and planning.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 14 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga

Mineral Resources

• MIN-1: Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state.

• MIN-2: Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land-use plan.

• MIN-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to mineral resources.

Noise

• NOISE-2: Would the project result in generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

The EIR found that within this impact category, less than significant impacts without mitigation were found for: (1) increase in onsite noise levels (Phase 1 Office and Parking Facilities and Phase 2A/2B 7 th Street Warehouse Facility) ; (2) i ncrease in onsite noise levels (CVWD Well Facility); and (3) increase in offsite traffic noise levels.

• NOISE-3: Would the project generate excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels.

The EIR found that within this impact category, less than significant impacts without mitigation were found for: (1) temporary construction vibration levels; and (2) operational vibration levels.

• NOISE-4: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the area to excessive noise levels.

• NOISE-5: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to noise or vibration.

Population and Housing

• POP-1: Induce substantial unplanned population growth either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

• POP-2: Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.

• POP-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to population and housing.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 15
Revised September 24, 2025
Public Services

• PS-1: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the following public services:

o Fire protection

o Police protection

o Schools

o Parks

o Other public facilities.

• PS-2: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to public services.

Recreation

• REC-1: Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.

• REC-2: Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

• REC-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to parks and recreation facilities.

Transportation

• TRANS-1: Conflict with program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

• TRANS-3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. , sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).

• TRANS-4: Result in inadequate emergency access.

Tribal Cultural Resources

• TCR-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to tribal cultural resources.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 16 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Utilities and Service Systems

• UTS-1: 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.

• UTS-2: Have insufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.

• UTS-3: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.

• UTS-4: 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.

• UTS-5: C omply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statu tes and regulations related to solid waste.

• UTS-6 Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to Utilities and Service Systems.

Wildfire

• WIL-1: Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuated plan.

• WIL-2: Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.

• WIL-3: 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.

• WIL-4: Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream floodi ng or landslides, as a result of runoff post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes Sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

• WIL-5: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire.

In addition, the EIR determined that potential impacts with respect to growth-inducing effects and irreversible environmental changes would be less than significant.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 17
Revised September 24, 2025
B. Impacts Determined to Be Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated

The Final EIR (including the Draft EIR) identifies the following significant environmental impacts associated with the Project. Based on the environmental analysis of the Project and the identification of feasible mitigation measures, potentially significant impacts have been determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than significant, and the City has found in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21081 (a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1) that “changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigates or avoid the significant effects on the environment.” The descriptions of the impacts in these findings are summary statements. Mitigation Measures are numbered to correspond to listings in the Draft EIR and Final EIR. Reference should be made to the Draft EIR and Final EIR for a more complete description.

AIR QUALITY

IMPACT AIR-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the South Coast Air Quality Management District 2022 Air Quality Management Plan.

The EIR found that within this impact category, regional construction emissions were found to be potentially significant for VOCs (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and NOx (Phase 1 only) and thus would conflict with the 2022 AQMP.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.3.5 of the DEIR states the proposed Project is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD.

Pursuant to the methodology provided in Chapter 12 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency with the AQMP is affirmed if the Project: (1) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP; and (2) does not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new one. Consistency Criterion 1 refers to the growth forecasts and associated assumptions included in the AQMP. Projects that are consistent with the AQMP growth assumptions would not interfere with attainment of air quality standards, because this growth is included in the projections used to formulate the AQMP. The proposed Project is estimated to create approxi mately 289 net new jobs. This value is within the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS growth projection for the City of Rancho Cucamonga of 420 jobs per year, which is an average rate across almost three decades (2016 to 2045 ). The employment growth associated with the Project (net 289 jobs) represents less than 2% of the anticipated total employment growth in the City between 2016 and 2045 (16,800 jobs). Therefore, the proposed Project would not exceed the growth assumptions contained in the AQMP.

Consistency Criterion 2 refers to AQMP control measures intended to achieve attainment of ambient air quality standards in the South Coast Air Basin. The Project would comply with SCAQMD rules developed as part of the AQMP; however, as described under Impact AIR-2, the proposed Project’s mitigated emissions levels are anticipated to exceed SCAQMD NOX emissions thresholds during Phase 1 and Phase 2 operations and during combined Phase 1 operations and Phase 2B construction. This increase in emissions above r ecommended thresholds could result in new and/or more frequent or more severe exceedances of regional air quality standards. As such, the proposed Project is determined to have the potential to conflict with the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP due to exceedances of the S CAQMD NOx daily significance threshold even after mitigation. This impact would be significant and unavoidable even with recommended mitigation measures MM-AIR-2A and MM-AIR-2B shown below (DEIR pages 4.3-49 to 4.3-50).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 18 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential VOC and NOx emissions during project construction:

MM-AIR-2A: Reduce Construction VOC Emissions. To reduce construction-related emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), the City shall require the applicant to implement the following measures during all Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction activities:
1) Use architectural coatings that meet the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) “Super Compliant” VOC standard of 10 grams/liter or less for all interior and exterior primer, sealer, paint, and other coating applications for which a super c ompliant product is commercially available.
a) If feasible given contract, logistical, and other construction factors, avoid painting during peak smog season (July, August, and September) if super compliant coatings are not commercially available.
2) Keep all coating containers closed when not in use to prevent VOC emissions. 3) Keep all paint and solvent laden rags and other materials in sealed containers to prevent VOC emissions.
4) Clean up water-based paints with water only and when possible do not rinse clean -up water down the drain, onto the ground, or into a storm drain. 5) Use SCAQMD compliant Clean Air Solvents to clean paint application equipment. 6) Recycle leftover paint.

MM-AIR-2B: Reduce Construction NOx and PM Exhaust Emissions. To reduce construction- related exhaust emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), including diesel particulate matter (DPM), the City shall require the applicant to implement the following measures during all Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction activities:
1) Connect to existing electrical service to power construction trailers and stationary and portable equipment (e.g., pumps, generators, compressors, and welding sets). This measure shall be subject to the approval of the local electric utility. If it is not feasible to connect to electrical service and/or extend electrical service to all work sites, biodiesel (no more than B20 blend), renewable diesel, or propane shall be used to power stationary and portable equipment provided the use of such fuels is allowed pursuant to manufacturer’s specifications. The use of stationary or portable diesel-fueled equipment shall be prohibited in the project area unless electrical service is denied, alternative fuels are not permitted by the manufacturer for the specific equipment in use, and there are no alternative equipment types capable of being powered by alternative fuels that can be used instead of the standard diesel-fueled equipment. 2) All construction equipment with a rated power -output of 50 horsepower (hp) or greater shall be certified to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 Final nonroad diesel engine emissions standards for NOX and PM10, or be retrofitted with California Air Resources Board (CARB)-verified diesel emissions control strategies capable of reducing exhaust NO X and PM10 emissions to levels that meet Tier 4 Final emissions standards, unless the applicant submits evidence to the City that specific equipment meeting this requirement is not available on loan, rent, or other terms of use within 200 miles of the City. In this instance, the next highest available emissions tier (e.g., Tier 4 Interim, Tier 3) for the specific equipment in question shall be required.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 19
Revised September 24, 2025
3) Limit idling of diesel -powered construction equipment, vendor delivery trucks, and hauling trucks to no more than two minutes unless manufacturer’s specifications specifically require main engine idling is necessary to maintain equipment in good working order.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-AIR-2A and MM-AIR-2B, the Project would have less than significant impacts for regional construction emissions of VOCs (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and NOx (Phase 1 only) and thus would be consistent with the 2022 AQMP (DEIR page 4.3-51)
IMPACT AIR-2: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutants for which the South Coast Air Basin is designated non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

The EIR found that within this impact category, regional construction emissions were found to be potentially significant for VOCs (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and NOx (Phase 1 only).

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.3.5 of the DEIR states the Phase 1 regional construction emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended threshold for CO, SO 2, PM 10, or PM 2.5, but would exceed the SCAQMD’s recommended threshold for VOCs and NO X, both of which are precursors to O 3.

SCAQMD’s regional criteria air pollutant threshold for VOC is 75 pounds per day and the threshold for NOX is 100 pounds per day. The Project’s construction emissions would exceed SCAQMD - recommended regional thresholds for VOCs (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and NO X (Phase 1 only), both of which are precursors to ozone (O 3, a pollutant fo r which the region is designated nonattainment). This is considered a potentially significant impact. Accordingly, the City shall require the applicant to implement Mitigation Measure AIR -2A, Reduce Construction VOC Emissions, and Mitigation Measure AIR -2B, Reduce Construction NO X and PM Exhaust Emissions), which would limit the VOC content in the coatings used during construction and require construction equipment to meet stringent U.S. EPA / CARB Tier IV Final emissions standards. These measures would low er maximum daily VOC and NO X emissions by approximately 67% and 58%, respectively. Mitigation Measures AIR-2A and AIR-2B would reduce the Project’s maximum daily regional NOx emissions to levels below the SCAQMD’s thresholds.

This impact would be less than significant with mitigation (DEIR pages 4.3-52 to 4.3-53).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential VOC and NOx emissions during project construction:

MM-AIR-2A: Reduce Construction VOC Emissions. See Impact AIR-1 above.

MM-AIR-2B: Reduce Construction NOx and PM Exhaust Emissions . See Impact AIR -1 above.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-AIR-2A and MM-AIR-2B, the Project would have less than significant impacts for regional construction emissions of VOCs (Phase 1 and Phase 2) and NOx (Phase 1 only)(DEIR page 4.3-53).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 20 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
IMPACT BIO-1: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.4.4 of the DEIR states that no special-status plant species were observed during field investigations conducted at the Project site, so no impacts would occur to these species.

Additionally, no special -status wildlife species were observed onsite during field investigations, and it was determined the Project site does not have the potential to support special-status wildlife species that would occur in the area. While not federally - or state -listed as endangered or threatened, the BRA determined t he Project site has the potential to support Cooper’s hawk, Costa’s hummingbird, and California horned lark, as well as burrowing owl. A pre -construction nesting bird clearance survey is recommended prior to Project clearing and grading and is included as Mitigation Measure BIO -1. With implementation of the recommended mitigation , impacts to special-status wildlife species will be less than significant.

Based on the results of the 2023 burrowing owl focused survey, no burrowing owls or evidence of recent or historic use by burrowing owls were observed on the Project site. As a result, burrowing owls are presumed to be absent from the Project site. However, this species can rapidly occupy a vacant site by taking over small mammal burrows. To ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the Project site, the BRA and BFS recommended that a pre -construction clearance survey be conducted in accordance with CDFWs 2012 Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation prior to any ground disturbing activities, as is outlined in Mitigation Measure BIO -2. If burrowing owls are determined to remain absent from the Project site during the pre-construction clearance survey, no further review will be needed. If burrowing owls are found to occupy the Project site during the pre -construction clearance survey, a burrowing owl relocation plan will be prepared and need to be approved by CDFW prior to construction activities. With implement ation of the recommended mitigation, impacts either directly or through habitat modifications, on candidate, sensitive, or special status species would be reduced to less than significant levels (DEIR page

4.4-12).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts to nesting birds and burrowing owl prior to grading:

MM-BIO-1: Nesting Bird Survey. Bird nesting season generally extends from February 1 through August 31 in southern California. To avoid impacts to nesting birds (common and special-status) during the nesting season, a qualified avian biologist will conduct a pre‐construction nesting bird survey three (3) days prior to project‐related disturbance to identify any active nests. If no active nests are found, no further action will be required.

If an active nest is found, the biologist will set appropriate no‐work buffers around the nest which will be based upon the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, nesting stage and expected types, intensity and duration of disturbance. The nests and buffer zones shall be field checked weekly by a qualified biol ogical monitor. The approved no ‐work buffer zone shall be clearly marked in the field, within which no disturbance activity shall commence until the qualified biologist has determined the young birds have successfully fledged and the nest is inactive. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 21
Revised September 24, 2025

MM-BIO-2: Burrowing Owl Survey. A pre-construction clearance survey for burrowing owl shall be conducted in accordance with the Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation 3 (California Department of Fish and Wildlife 2012) prior to ground disturbance to ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site.

If burrowing owls are found to occupy the project site during the pre -construction clearance survey, a burrowing owl relocation plan will need to be prepared and approved by CDFW prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities. The burrowing owl relocation plan shall outline recommended methods proposed to relocate the burrowing owls from the project site and provide measures that will be implemented for the maintenance, monitoring, and reporting of the relocated burrowing owls to increase chances of survivorship and better ensure compliance with CDFW guidelines. This plan should be implemented during the non -breeding season, and prior to seasonal rains to promote the best outcome for conservation of the burrowing owl. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2 prior to grading, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or state/federal regulatory agencies (DEIR page 4.4-13).

IMPACT BIO-4: Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.4.4 of the DEIR states that implementation of the proposed Project is not expected to have a significant impact to wildlife movement opportunities or prevent local wildlife movement through the area. The Project site is separated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages by existing development, and there are no riparian corridors or creeks connecting the Project site to these areas. The Project site is also not within any existing connectivity areas or wildlife linkages identified in Figure 5.4-6, Wildlife Movement Linkages Map, of the City General Plan4. Therefore, the Project site does not function as a major wildlife movement corridor or linkage. Due to the lack of any identified impacts to wildlife movement, migratory corridors or linkages or native wildlife nurseries, there are no impacts and no mitigation is required.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and the Bald/Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibit impacts to native resident or migratory wildlife (i.e., birds and raptors) and this issue was largely addressed in Impact BIO -1 relative to listed or sensitive birds tha t may utilize or reside on the site. That section determined those impacts were potentially significant and recommended Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO -2 to conduct surveys for nesting birds and burrowing owl on the site just prior to the start of ground disturbance to prevent impacts to those species. With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2, the Project will have less than significant impacts relative to migratory species or wildlife corridors under either the Phase 1 plus Phase 2A scenario or under the Phase 1 plus Phase 2B scenario (DEIR page 4.4-15).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts to nesting birds and burrowing owl prior to grading:

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 22 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga

MM-BIO-1: Nesting Bird Survey. See Impact BIO-1 above

MM-BIO-2: Burrowing Owl Survey. See Impact BIO-1 above

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites (DEIR page 4.4-15).

HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
IMPACT HAZMAT-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.9.4 of the DEIR stated that three of the recent Phase I/II ESA documents did not identify any areas of existing contamination on their portions of the Project site (i.e., the two existing office buildings and the vacant property just north of the existing two offices). However, the 2017 Ramboll ESA indicates the existing beverage distribution facility has had a long -documented history involving the storage and use of hazardous materials. Based on available information, the EIR concluded it was at least possible that there may be unanti cipated buried materials onsite from construction or operation of past and present onsite uses (i.e., orchard, vineyard, farmhouse, and existing beverage distribution facility). Therefore, Mitigation Measure HAZ -1 was recommended to assure that any unanticipated hazardous materials that are found during grading will be identified and properly remediated in a safe and effective manner (DEIR page 4.9-13).

According to the SCAQMD, demolition of older buildings and structures may pose a hazard regarding asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint. It should be noted that Asbestos Containing Materials (ACMs) and lead based paint (LBP) do not represent a significant public health hazard when they are left undisturbed, however, site development requires demolition of the existing office and warehouse buildings prior to grading. Due to the age of the existing onsite building, the EIR recommended a survey prior to any demolition on the site to determine if or to what degree the existing buildings contain ACMs and/or LBP. In this regard, Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 is recommended to be implemented prior to any demolition activities (DEIR page 4.9-15).

According to the State Water Resources Control Board, there are no leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cleanup sites or disposal sites within the Project site (DEIR page 4.9-15).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts from accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

MM-HAZ-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Hazardous Materials . Prior to issuance of a grading permit for Phase 1 and/or Phase 2, the project proponent shall retain a qualified environmental professional (QEP) experienced with remediating hazardous materials from infill urban

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 23
Revised September 24, 2025
construction sites. The QEP must be on -call and summoned to the site immediately if any potentially hazardous materials are found during grading. Grading must be halted within 100 feet of an area that appears to contain hazardous materials. The QEP will halt grading as necessary to effectively identify the potential contaminated materials, including directing any sampling and laboratory testing that may be required.

If soils are found to be contaminated at levels that are only slightly in excess of applicable residential standards, the QEP shall exercise professional discretion and have the option to coordinate with the grading contractor and developer to either remov e contaminated soil and/or mix the contaminated soil with clean soil from either onsite or offsite to dilute any contaminants to below applicable exposure standards for residential development.

Remediated areas must be retested to assure potential contaminant levels are below applicable residential standards. The results of any testing shall be provided to the City or other agencies as appropriate. Any contaminated soil that must be removed from the site shall be done by a licensed contractor and hauled to a landfill approved for such materials. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Department.

MM-HAZ-2: ACMs and LBP Survey . Prior to demolition of any structures on the project site in either Phase 1 or 2, the developer shall retain qualified licensed environmental contractor(s) to survey the existing onsite office and warehouse buildings and any related structures for asbestos- containing materials (ACMs) and Lead-Based Paints (LBPs). If the survey finds the presence of any ACMs or LBPs on the site, the contractor(s) shall follow all relevant guidance from affected regulatory agencies (e.g., CalEPA, SCAQMD, DTSC, County Health D epartment, etc.) in terms of safe removal and disposal of the contaminated materials as appropriate. The contractor(s) shall prepare and submit a final report to the City Community Development Department within 30 days after completion of demolition/removal for ACMs and LBPs on the project site.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -HAZ-1 and MM-HAZ-2, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment (DEIR page 4.9-16).

IMPACT HAZMAT-5: For projects located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or wor king in the project area.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.9.4 of the DEIR states that the Project site is located 1.95 miles north of the airport. San Bernardino County has delegated each airport proprietor to create individual Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans, rather than establish an Airport Land Use Commission. The Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT ALUCP) serves to promote safe compatibility between the airport and the surrounding land uses. As stated previously, the site is zoned as Mixed Employment 2 (ME2), allowing for medium to high intensity professional office or industrial/manufacturing spaces. The Project involves the demolition and new construction of the existing onsite beverage facility to allow for the new production, bottling, and expanded distribution of beverage products. The surrounding land uses of the Project site all include

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 24 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
commercial and industrial developments, and development of the proposed Project will be in compliance with the City’s applicable land use designations and zoning.

The Project site will be developed and operated in cooperation with the ONT ALUCP and will not encroach on airport property. The Project site is outside of the ONT Safety Zones and ALUCP noise contour maps and will not expose persons residing or working in the Project area to excessive airport safety hazards or noise.

Map 2-4, Compatibility Policy Map, Airspace Protection Zones, in the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (OIA LUCP) indicates the majority of the Project site is within the maximum 70 foot building height in the High Terrain Zone and a portion of the site is within the maximum 70 foot - 100 foot building height area. The Project proposes several tall buildings on the site (i.e., ASRS is maximum 130 feet and 70 feet average, PC building is maximum 41 feet, and DC is maximum 45 feet). These buildings are approximately 10,000 feet north -northeast of the closest ONT runway. Therefore, the Project will need to obtain clearance from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and comply with its lighting/signage restrictions and warning improvements. These potential restrictions are addressed in Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 below.

The Project applicant initiated and concluded consultation with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Obstruction Evaluation / Airport Airspace Analysis (OE/AAA) Group on January 26, 2024, to determine whether the construction or operation of the Project would affect the National Airspace System (NAS). The Project applicant provided site plan, building elevation, and topographical information to the FAA for their review through the FAA OE/AAA online portal.

Email and telephone communication continued through June 11, 2024.

The FAA determined that the main building structure would create no hazard on the NAS on April 4, 2024, and conditioned requirements such as no strobe lighting with which the Project will comply as required by MM -HAZ 3 listed below . The Project would require the use of a crane during its construction, which the FAA determined on June 11, 2024, that the crane, as a temporary structure, would have no hazard on the NAS.

As a result, the construction and operation of the Project would not create a hazard on the NAS and a less than significant impact would occur with the implementation of the required lighting restrictions as conditioned by the FAA.

As noted in the existing conditions of the PlanRC General Plan Update, the southern border of the City is located approximately one mile north of the Ontario Airport’s 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, and as such, aircraft noise does not significantly impact persons on the site . The proposed Project will adhere to all noise and safety policies as established in the Noise Element of PlanRC, as well as those policies outlined in the ONT ALUCP. With this regulatory compliance, potential impacts related to airport ha zards will be less than significant and no mitigation is required (DEIR pages 4.9-19 to 4.9-20).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts related to proximity to airports:

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 25
Revised September 24, 2025
MM-HAZ-3: FAA Lighting Hazards . A minimum of 45 days prior to submittal of an application for a building permit for the project, the applicant shall consult with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department in order to demonstrate the Project is consistent with FAA lighting or other restrictions or prohibitions which may include but are not limited to the following:
a. Any use which would direct a steady light or flashing light of red, white, green, or amber colors associated with airport operations toward an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or toward an aircraft engaged in a straight fi nal approach toward a landing at an airport, other than an FAA-approved navigational signal light or visual approach slope indicator. b. Any use which would cause sunlight to be reflected towards an aircraft engaged in an initial straight climb following takeoff or towards an aircraft engaged in a straight final approach towards a landing at an airport.
c. Any use which would generate smoke or water vapor or which would attract large concentrations of birds, or which may otherwise affect safe air navigation within the area. d. Any use which would generate electrical interference that may be detrimental to the operation of aircraft and/or aircraft instrumentation.
e. All retention and water quality basins shall be designed to dewater within 48 hours of a rainfall event.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-HAZ-3, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to proximity to airports (DEIR page 4.9-20).

NOISE
IMPACT NOISE-1: Would the project generate a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance.

Substantial Evidence:

Section 4.13.4 of the DEIR states the proposed Project’s potential construction noise impacts were estimated using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Version 1.1, and guidance for conducting general, quantitative construction noise assessments contained in the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. C onstruction activities from Phase 1 and Phase 2B could exceed the City’s 70 dBA construction noise standard for commercial land uses established by Development Code Section

17.66.050. To reduce construction noise levels, the City shall require the applicant to implement Mitigation Measure NOI -1, which would restrict work hours to periods when humans are less sensitive to elevated noise levels in accordance with Development Code requirements, implement construction staging and equipment noise control measures, and require installation of a temporary noise barrier between work areas and affected properties. The implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA to 7 dBA at individual receptor locations during the daytime, with the greatest reductions occurring at R07 due to a greater barrier height next to the well site than at other locations. The implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI -1 would avoid the potential for Project construction noise levels to exceed development code standards (DC Section 17.66.050 ) which would result in a substantial temporary increase in noise levels and, therefore, results in potentia l Project construction noise levels that are less than significant with mitigation (DEIR pages 4.13-31 to 4.13-34).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 26 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure to help reduce potential impacts related to construction noise (i.e., substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in excess of local standards):

MM-NOI-1: Reduce Noise Construction Levels . To reduce potential construction noise to levels that are consistent with the City’s 70 dBA L eq standard for commercial land uses, the City shall require the applicant and/or its designated contractor, contractor’s representatives, or other appropriate personnel to implement the following measures during construction activities:

1. Restrict Work Hours. All construction -related work activities, including material deliveries, shall be subject to the requirements of Municipal Code Section 17.66.050(D)(4). Construction activities, including deliveries, shall only occur during the hours of 7:00 AM to 8:00 PM on weekdays and Saturday, and shall not occur on Sunday. The applicant and/or its contractor shall post a sign at all entrances to the construction site informing contractors, subcontractors, construction workers, etc. of this requirement.

2. Construction Staging and Equipment Noise Control Measures.

a) Construction site access and staging activities such as receipt of deliveries, equipment and material storage, etc., shall occur as far away as possible from occupied parts of land uses (e.g., buildings, outdoor areas) adjacent to the Project site given si te and active work constraints.
b) All stationary noise generating equipment shall be shielded and located as far as possible from adjacent land uses given site and active work constraints. Shielding may consist of trailers, stored materials, or a three- or four-sided enclosure provided the structure/barrier breaks the line of sight between the equipment and the receptor, provides for proper equipment ventilation and operations, and complies with all other applicable occupational safety and health requirements.
c) Heavy equipment shall include standard noise suppression devices such as mufflers, engine covers, and engine/mechanical isolators, mounts, etc. Equipment and noise suppression devices shall be maintained in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations while on-site.
d) Pneumatic tools shall include a suppression device on the compressed air exhaust. e) Connect to existing electrical service to power stationary and portable equipment (e.g., pumps, generators, compressors, and welding sets). This measure shall be subject to the approval of the local electric utility.

3. Construction Activity Noise Control Measures:

a) Demolition Sequencing: Demolition/deconstruction activities shall be sequenced to take advantage of existing shielding/noise reduction provided by existing buildings, parts of buildings, and/or other structures (e.g., construction trailers), and shall use methods that minimize noise and vibration, such as sawing concrete blocks instead of crushing or other pulverization activities, unless there are project-specific technical and logistical constraints that require such activities.
b) Install Phase 1 Construction Noise Barrier. During all Phase 1 demolition, site preparation, grading, structure foundation work (e.g., excavation, pad pour, etc.), paving, and well

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 27
Revised September 24, 2025
drilling activities, the applicant shall install and maintain a physical noise barrier along the portion of the southeast perimeter of the site from 6 th Street north (i.e., adjacent to Utica Avenue) a distance of 500 feet. The barrier shall be installed at -grade (or mounted to structures located at-grade, such as a K-rail) and extend to a height of at least six (6) feet above grade, except adjacent to th e well drilling area, where the barrier shall extend to a height of 10 feet above grade, and shall consist of a solid material that is free of openings or gaps (other than weep holes) and that has a minimum rated transmission loss value of 25 dB adjacent to the well drilling area and 20 dB in all other areas. Potential materials that are capable of achieving required noise level reductions include nominal 0.5-inch plywood (20 dB), nominal 0.75 -inch plywood (25 dB), commercially available acoustic panels, blankets, or other products, or any combination of noise barriers and commercial products that achieve a minimum transmission loss value of 20 dB or 25 dB as required. The barrier may be removed following the completion of all Phase 1 demolition, site preparation and grading, structure foundation, paving, and well drilling within the 7-acre southeast quadrant shown in EIR Exhibit 4.13-3.
c) Install Phase 2B Construction Noise Barrier. During all Phase 2B demolition, site preparation, grading, structure foundation (e.g., excavation, pad pour, etc.), and paving work, the applicant shall install and maintain a physical noise barrier along the Phase 2B northern, eastern, and western boundary. The noise barrier shall be installed at-grade (or mounted to structures located at-grade, such as a K-rail) and shall extend to a height of at least six (6) feet above grade. The noise barrier shall consist of a solid material that is free of openings or gaps (other than weep holes) and has a minimum rated transmission loss value of 20 dB. Potential materials that are capable of achieving required noise level reductions include nominal 0.5 -inch plywood (20 d B), commercially available acoustic panels, blankets, or other products, or any combination of noise barriers and commercial products that achieve a minimum transmission loss value of 20 dB. The barrier may be removed following the completion of all Phase 2B demolition, site preparation and grading, structure foundation, and paving work.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-1, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to construction noise (DEIR page 4.13-37).

IMPACT NOISE-2: Would the project generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance.

Substantial Evidence:

As described in DEIR Section 4.13.5, the DEIR estimated the proposed Project’s potential on - and off -site operational noise levels using empirical equipment noise measurements from a similar beverage facility (the Downey PC/DC), manufacturer’s specifications, Project -specific development assumptions regarding the location of equipment, trip generation, etc., and the FHWA Traffic Noise Model. DEIR Section 4.13.5 indicates the increase in onsite noise levels from Phase 1 PC, DC, and ASRS and Phase 2 cogeneration facilities could be potentially significant and require mitigation) (DEIR pages 4.13-37 to 4.13-46). The analysis made the following specific determinations:

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 28 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
(a) i ncreases in onsite noise levels from Phase 1 PC, DC, and ASRS and Phase 2 cogeneration facilities would be potentially significant due to an increase in ambient noise levels in excess of the standards established in Development Code Section 17.66.110.

However, these levels are reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2 (see below);
(b) Increases in onsite noise levels from Phase 1 office and parking facilities and Phase 2A/2B 7th Street warehouse facility would be less than significant; (c) i ncreases in onsite noise levels ( backup generator) would be potentially significant by increasing ambient noise levels in excess of the standards established in Development Code Section 17.66.110. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2 (see below), impacts will be reduced to less than significant level;
(d) increases in onsite noise levels from new CVWD well would be less than significant; and (e) increases in off-site traffic noise levels from Project traffic will be less than significant.

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure to help reduce potential impacts related to operational noise (i.e., substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of local standards):

MM-NOI-2: Noise Verification Study. Prior to the issuance of any Phase 1 or Phase 2 grading permit for the project, the City shall review and approve a final noise analysis, prepared by or on behalf of the applicant, and based on the final project design, that: 1) Identifies the locations of the project’s final exterior stationary equipment, including backup generators, and truck dock areas and any screening walls; and 2) Demonstrates the project’s noise levels will not exceed the City’s applicable industrial noise standards (as outlined in Development Code Section 17.66.110).

The final analysis shall contain specific and verifiable information pertaining to the project’s final site design and layout and equipment noise levels (e.g., manufacturer’s specifications, empirical noise measurements). The analysis may be prepared for Phase 1, Phase 2, or combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 activities if final information is available.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-NOI-2, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to operational noise and not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in excess of local standards (DEIR page 4.13-46).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 29
Revised September 24, 2025

TRANSPORTATION
IMPACT TRANS-2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA guidelines section 15064.3(b) Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

Substantial Evidence:

DEIR Section 4.17.4 states that a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Study was prepared for the Project consistent with the requirements of California Senate Bill 743 and the City’s transportation report preparation guidelines. The EIR found the proposed Project did not satisfy any of the City- established screening thresholds so a quantitative VMT analysis was prepared using the San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM) in accordance with the City’s guidelines. The cumulative Project-generated VMT per employee of 16.9 does not exceed the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Buildout VMT per employee of 17.0 so the proposed Project is forecast to result in a less than significant VMT impact based on the City -established threshold for cumulative Project-generated VMT. However, baseline project-generated VMT per employee of

18.3 exceeds the City-established threshold of 17.4 VMT per employee. To reduce the baseline project-generated VMT to a less than significant level, baseline project -generated VMT must be reduced by 0.9 VMT per employee, or approximately 4.9 percent. The VMT Study therefore recommended Mitigation Measure TRA -1 to reduce project VMT below the City’s adopted standard. With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1, Project VMT impacts would be less than significant under either the Phase 1 plus Phase 2A scenario or the Phase 1 plus P hase 2B scenario (DEIR pages 4.17-19 to 4.17-23).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure to help reduce potential impacts related to Project VMT to less than significant levels:

MM-TRA-1: VMT Transportation Demand Management Reduction Plan . The proposed project shall implement a commute trip reduction program consisting of transportation demand management (TDM) measures that achieve a minimum VMT reduction of 4.9 percent. The VMT reduction associated with the TDM measures to be implemented shall be quantified in accordance with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity, Designed for Local Governments, Communities, and Project Developers (December 2021). Per General Plan Condition of Approval (COA) 5.17 -3, the project shall provide but is not limited to the following as determined applicable by City staff:
1) Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, or ride-sharing programs; 2) Improve or increase access to transit;
3) Include project measures to reduce transportation requirements such as work from home and flexible work schedules;
4) Link to existing pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; and/or 5) Provide traffic calming where applicable.

Alternatively, the project may participate in a regional VMT mitigation exchange/banking program (if one has been established) to reduce VMT from the project or other land uses to achieve stated levels.

Within one year of Phase 2 becoming fully operational, the developer must demonstrate a project trip reduction of at least 4.9% from estimated trips based on implementation of the actions and

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 30 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
programs outlined in this mitigation measure. If the 4.9% reduction cannot be demonstrated at that time, the project shall expand its VMT program offerings or participate in a regional VMT mitigation bank if such a program is available to achieve the 4.9% reduction goal. The project shall submit annual reports to the City to demonstrate ongoing compliance with this project VMT reduction goal.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-TRA-1, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to vehicle miles traveled (DEIR page 4.17-24).

IMPACT TRANS-5: Would the Project cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to transportation and traffic.

Substantial Evidence:

Regarding Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impacts, Impact TRANS -2 indicated the Project had a potentially significant VMT impact but that implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA -1, implementation of a Transportation Demand Management Program, would reduce th is potential impact to less than significant levels. The VMT analysis for the Project included a regional analysis that compared the Project VMT levels to City-wide (cumulative) levels by 2040. Cumulative link- level boundary VMT per employee within the Cit y boundary is estimated to decrease under the plus Project condition compared to the no Project condition; therefore, the proposed Project is forecast to result in a less than significant VMT impact based on the City -established threshold for cumulative project effect on VMT. The VMT Study recommended Mitigation Measure TRA -1 to reduce Project VMT below the City’s adopted standard. Cumulative project -generated VMT and the cumulative project effect on regional VMT is forecast to be less than significant based on City-established thresholds.

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure to help reduce potential impacts related to Project VMT to less than significant levels:

MM-TRA-1: VMT Transportation Demand Management Reduction Plan. See Impact TRA-2 above.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-TRA-1, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to vehicle miles traveled including any potential cumulative contributions (DEIR page 4.17-30).

TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
IMPACT TCR-1: Could the project result in a significant impact if it causes 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 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).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 31
Revised September 24, 2025

IMPACT TCR-2: Could the project result in a significant impact if it causes 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 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 th e significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Substantial Evidence:

The proposed Project site is located within the ancestral territory of both the Serrano and Gabrieleno tribal groups and is therefore of interest to both Tribes. However, only the Gabrieleno tribe requested consultation on this Project. In the past both the San Manuel and Gabrieleno tribes have expressed concern regarding impacts to artifacts and resources of their tribes and recommended four measures for tribal cultural resources (presented below) but did not indicate whether or not the Project would have any specific impacts on any tribal cultural resources. The text of all tribal measures have been incorporated into the four measures recommended in this EIR (TCR-1 through TCR-4). The only change is all the measures now apply to both tribal groups as appropriate (i.e., in those measures where the specific tribes are named).

The Project will be required to comply with all applicable laws and regulations including if unanticipated Native American artifacts or resources are found during grading. The City General Plan contains eight standard conditions of approval for cultural re sources (5.5-1 through 5.5-8).

However, the four mitigation measures included in Impact TCR-2 below (MM TCR-1 through TCR- 4) include equivalent procedures and requirements so no standard conditions will be applied in this case. The Project will have less than significant impacts in this regard under either the Phase 1 plus Phase 2A scenario or the Phase 1 plus Phase 2B scenario (DEIR pages 4.18-5 and 4.18- 6).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measures to help reduce potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources to less than significant levels:

MM-TCR-1: Tribal Coordination. The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department (San Manuel) and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (Gabrieleno) shall be contacted, as detailed in Mitigation Measure CUL -1, of any pre-contact and/or historic- era cultur al resources discovered during project implementation and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significa nt, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015), a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the archaeologist, in coordination with San Manuel and Gabrieleno, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for monitors to be present that represent San Manuel and Gabrieleno for the remainder of the project, should San Manuel and/or Gabrieleno elect to place a monitor or monitors onsite.

MM-TCR-2: Tribal Monitoring. The project proponent shall retain one or more Native American Monitor(s) from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (Gabrieleno) and the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (San Manuel). The monitor(s) shall be

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 32 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
retained prior to the commencement of any “ground -disturbing activity” for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on -site and any off -site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground -disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.

A copy of the executed monitoring agreement(s) shall be submitted to the City as the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity or prior to the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.

The monitor(s) will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities performed, locations of ground - disturbing activities, soil types, cultural -related materials , and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered tribal cultural resources (TCRs), including but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project proponent and/or /lead agency upon written request to the Tribes.

Onsite tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the Gabrieleno and San Manuel from a designated point of contact for the project proponent and/or the City as the lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Gabrieleno and San Manuel to the project proponent and/or the City as the lead agency that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact Gabrieleno and San Manuel TCRs.

Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.

MM-TCR-3: Document Distribution. Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department (San Manuel) and the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation (Gabrieleno). The Lead Agency and/or applicant shall, in good faith, consult with San Manuel and Gabrieleno throughout the life of project construction.

MM-TCR-4: Tribal Human Remains . Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98(d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or recognized on the project site, then Public Resource Code 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 sh all be followed.

Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 33
Revised September 24, 2025
Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2). Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

Finding:

The EIR found that with implementation of Mitigation Measure s MM-TCR-1 through MM-TCR-4, the Project would have less than significant impacts relative to tribal cultural resources (DEIR page 4.18-8).

C. Effects Determined to Be Significant, Adverse, and Unavoidable

As presented in the El Camino Project EIR, the City finds that adverse impacts identified below pertaining to Air Quality and Greenhouse Emissions cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels even with implementation of all feasible mitigation recommended in the DEIR.

AIR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS (AIR QUALITY)

IMPACT AIR-1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the South Coast Air Quality Management District 2022 Air Quality Management Plan.

Substantial Evidence:

DEIR Section 4.3.5 found that regional operational NOx emissions were potentially significant for Phases 1 and 2 and required mitigation. In addition, it found that combined regional Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B regional construction were potentially significant for VOC and NOx and required mitigation. The proposed Project is within the South Coast Air Basin which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. Pursuant to the methodology provided in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency with the AQMP is affirmed if the Project: (1) Is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP; and (2) does not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new one.

Consistency Criterion 1 refers to the growth forecasts and associated assumptions included in the AQMP. Projects that are consistent with the AQMP growth assumptions would not interfere with attainment of air quality standards, because this growth is included in the projections used to formulate the AQMP. The proposed Project is estimated to create approximately 289 net new jobs. This value is within the SCAG 2020 RTP/SCS growth projection for the City of Rancho Cucamonga of 420 jobs per year, which is an average rate across almost three decades (2016 to 2045. The employment growth associated with the Project (net 289 jobs) represents less than 2% of the anticipated total employment growth in the City between 2016 and 2045 (16,800 jobs).

Therefore, the propo sed Project would not exceed the growth assumptions contained in the AQMP.

Consistency Criterion 2 refers to the AQMP which contains control measures intended to achieve attainment of ambient air quality standards in the South Coast Air Basin. The Project would comply with SCAQMD rules developed as part of the AQMP; however, as described under Impact AIR-2 below, however the proposed Project’s mitigated emissions levels are anticipated to exceed SCAQMD NO X emissions thresholds during Phase 1 and Phase 2 operations and during combined Phase 1 operations and Phase 2B construction. T his increase in emissions above recommended thresholds could result in new and/or more frequent or more severe exceedances of regional air quality standards. Therefore, the proposed Project has the potential to conflict with

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 34 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
the SCAQMD 2022 AQMP due to exceedances of the SCAQMD NOx daily significance threshold even after mitigation. This impact would be significant and unavoidable even with mitigation (DEIR pages 4.3-49 to 4.3-50).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure s in an attempt to reduce these air pollutant emission impacts to less than significant levels:

MM-AIR-2A: Reduce Construction VOC Emissions. To reduce construction-related emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), the City shall require the applicant to implement the following measures during all Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction activities:
1) Use architectural coatings that meet the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) “Super Compliant” VOC standard of 10 grams/liter or less for all interior and exterior primer, sealer, paint, and other coating applications for which a super c ompliant product is commercially available.
a) If feasible given contract, logistical, and other construction factors, avoid painting during peak smog season (July, August, and September) if super compliant coatings are not commercially available.
2) Keep all coating containers closed when not in use to prevent VOC emissions. 3) Keep all paint and solvent laden rags and other materials in sealed containers to prevent VOC emissions.
4) Clean up water-based paints with water only and when possible do not rinse clean-up water down the drain, onto the ground, or into a storm drain. 5) Use SCAQMD compliant Clean Air Solvents to clean paint application equipment. 6) Recycle leftover paint.

MM-AIR-2B: Reduce Construction NOx and PM Exhaust Emissions. To reduce construction- related exhaust emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulate matter (PM), including diesel particulate matter (DPM), the City shall require the applicant to implement the following measures during all Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction activities:
1) Connect to existing electrical service to power construction trailers and stationary and portable equipment (e.g., pumps, generators, compressors, and welding sets). This measure shall be subject to the approval of the local electric utility. If it is not feasible to connect to electrical service and/or extend electrical service to all work sites, biodiesel (no more than B20 blend), renewable diesel, or propane shall be used to power stationary and portable equipment provided the use of such fuels is al lowed pursuant to manufacturer’s specifications. The use of stationary or portable diesel-fueled equipment shall be prohibited in the project area unless electrical service is denied, alternative fuels are not permitted by the manufacturer for the specific equipment in use, and there are no alternative equipment types capable of being powered by alternative fuels that can be used instead of the standard diesel-fueled equipment.
2) All construction equipment with a rated power-output of 50 horsepower (hp) or greater shall be certified to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Tier 4 Final nonroad diesel engine emissions standards for NO X and PM10, or be retrofitted with California Air Resources Board (CARB)-verified diesel emissions control strategies capable of reducing exhaust NO X and PM 10 emissions to levels that meet Tier 4 Final emissions standards, unless the applicant submits evidence to the City that specific equi pment meeting this requirement is not available on loan, rent, or other terms of use within 200 miles of the city.

In this instance, the next highest available emissions tier (e.g., Tier 4 Interim, Tier 3) for the specific equipment in question shall be required.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 35
Revised September 24, 2025
3) Limit idling of diesel-powered construction equipment, vendor delivery trucks, and hauling trucks to no more than two minutes unless manufacturer’s specifications specifically require main engine idling is necessary to maintain equipment in good working order.

MM-AIR-2C: Reduce Light -duty Vehicle Trip Emissions. To reduce light duty vehicle trip emissions (i.e., passenger cars and pick -up trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating of 8,500 pounds or less), the City shall require the applicant to comply with the voluntary Tier 1 designated parking for clean air vehicles and electric vehicle (EV) charging provisions contained in the version of the California Green Building Code (CalGreen Code) that is in effect at the time of building permit approval, unless the City has adopted local requirements that are more stringent than the CalGreen Code. As of January 1, 2025, the 2022 CalGreen Code includes the following voluntary clean air vehicle parking and EV charging provisions for non-residential projects:
1) Designated Parking for Clean Air Vehicles Tier 1 Provisions (CalGreen Code Section A5.106.5.1): The number of combined designated parking spaces for a zero-emitting, fuel- efficient, and car/vanpool vehicles shall be 35% of the total number of parking space s provided by the project. Based on the project’s current proposed 521 parking spaces, the total number of clean air vehicle designated parking spaces for the project equals 182 spaces.
2) EV Charging Tier 1 Provisions (CalGreen Code Section A5.106.5.3): The number of EV capable spaces, and EV capable spaces with electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), which creates an electric vehicle charging station (EVCS) shall be determined based on the total number of actual parking spaces as set forth in CalGreen Code Table A5.106.5.3.1. Based on the project’s current proposed number of 521 parking spaces:
a) The number of EV capable spaces shall be 30% of the total parking spaces provided.

Based on the project’s current proposed 521 parking spaces, the total number of EV capable spaces for the project equals 157 spaces.
b) The number of EV capable spaces provided with EVSE shall be 33% of the number of EV capable spaces provided by the project. Based on the project’s estimated total number of EV capable spaces for the project (157, see subsection a) above), the number of EV capable spaces with EVSE for the project equals 52 spaces (assuming all EVSE are level 2 charging equipment). The spaces with EVSE count towards the total number EV capable spaces required by subsection a) above. The EVSE may be any combination of level 2 and direct current fast charging equipment as permitted by CalGreen Code Section 5.106.5.3.2 (EVCS), and the EVCS may be managed by an automatic load management system (ALMS) in accordance with CalGreen Code Section 5.106.5.3.3 (ALMS).

MM-AIR-2D: Prepare VMT/TDM Reduction Plan (SAME AS TRA -1). The project shall implement a commute trip reduction program consisting of transportation demand management (TDM) measures that achieve a minimum VMT reduction of 4.9 percent. The VMT reduction associated with the TDM measures to be implemented shall be quantified in accordance with the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Hea lth and Equity, Designed for Local Governments, Communities, and Project Developers (December 2021). Per General Plan Condition of Approval (COA) 5.17 -3, the project shall provide but is not limited to the following as determined applicable by City staff:
1) Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs; 2) Improve or increase access to transit;

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 36 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
3) Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle networks into the project; 4) Include project measures to reduce transportation requirements such as work from home and flexible work schedules;
5) Link to existing pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service; and/or 6) Provide traffic calming where applicable.

MM-AIR-2E: Reduce Truck Trip Emissions. To reduce truck trip emissions (i.e., light -heavy, medium-heavy, and heavy -heavy duty trucks with a gross vehicle weight of 8,501 pounds or greater) and promote the use of near-zero emission (NZE) and zero emission vehicles (ZEV), the City shall require the applicant to:
1) Exceed the mandatory electric vehicle (EV) charging readiness requirements for planned off-street loading spaces specified in the version of the California Green Building Code (CalGreen Code) that is in effect at the time of building permit approval, unles s the City has adopted local requirements that are more stringent than the CalGreen Code. As of January 1, 2025, the 2022 CalGreen Code, Section 5.106.5.4 (EV charging: medium-duty and heavy -duty), specifies minimum power requirements for dedicated branch circuits, reserved locations for medium and heavy-duty ZEV charging cabinets and conduit routing, and sufficiently sized raceways and busways between electrical service panels and ZEV charging areas. Therefore, the City shall require the applicant to:
a) Design and include sufficient space for the transformer, main service equipment, and cabinets/subpanels necessary to accommodate a sufficient number of branch circuits to provide future installation of electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) at all truck docks and main truck parking areas.
b) Design and incorporate a sufficient number of raceways/busways to provide future EVSE installation at all truck docks and main truck parking areas. c) Dedicate/preserve convenient locations near all truck docks and main truck parking areas for the future installation of EVSE and reserve pathways for conduits needed to connect the EVSE to other electrical service equipment (e.g., raceway, cabinet, etc.) d) Install EVSE at 10% of the total truck docks included in the final Project design. Based on the project’s estimated total number of truck docks (57, see subsection a) above), the number of docks with EVSE for the project equals 6 docks. 2) Transport Refrigeration Unit (TRU) Restrictions: The applicant shall prohibit the use of diesel fueled TRUs on-site. All TRUs operated at the site shall be powered by electricity 3) Idling Signage: Signs shall be posted at all truck access gates and loading dock areas reminding drivers of idling limitations. The signs shall be clearly visible, readable at a distance of 10 feet, and notify truck drivers that:
a) The vehicle’s primary diesel engine shall be turned off when not in use. b) The vehicle’s primary diesel engine shall not idle for more than 5 consecutive minutes at any location pursuant to Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 2485.

MM-GHG-1: Reduce Appliance Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions. To reduce GHG emissions from appliance-related energy consumption, the City shall require all applicant installed refrigerators, dishwashers, clothes washers and dryers, and room air conditioners intended for employee use to be Energy Star certified products.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 37
Revised September 24, 2025
MM-GHG-2: Reduce Building Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions. To reduce GHG emissions associated with the performance of the building envelope and systems components covered by Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, the City shall require all new construction and major renovations undertaken by the applicant associated with the Project to be designed to have a total energy design rating that is at least 5% less than the standard building design for Climate Zone 15. The energy budget for the stand ard design building and the energy budget for the proposed design building shall be determined in accordance with the definitions and approach set forth in the version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code) that is in effect at the time of building permit approval (currently the 2022 Energy Code), unless the City has adopted local requirements that are more stringent than the Energy Code. The requirement to reduce a project’s energy budget by 5% below the standard design building shall not apply if the Energy Code or the City has already established a zero net energy requirement for the standard design building.

Finding:

The DEIR found that, even with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the Project would still result in significant regional operational NOx emissions for Phases 1 and 2 and combined regional Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B regional construction emissions were still significant for NOx. These emissions were significant and unavoidable and require a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

IMPACT AIR-2: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria air pollutants for which the South Coast Air Basin is designated non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Substantial Evidence:

DEIR Section 4.3.5 found the Project would have potentially significant regional NOx emissions during operation of Phases 1 and 2 and required mitigation. In addition, the EIR found that combined regional Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B regional construction Project emissions were potentially significant for VOC and NOx and required mitigation. This is the result of Project emissions from vehicles and stationary sources exceeding the daily significance thresholds established by SCAQMD for NOx and VOCs as indicated (DEIR pages 4.3-51 to 4.3-63).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure s in an attempt to reduce these air pollutant emission impacts to less than significant levels:

MM-AIR-2A: Reduce Construction VOC Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2B: Reduce Construction NOx & PM Exhaust Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above) MM-AIR-2C: Reduce Light-duty Vehicle Trip Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2D: Prepare VMT/TDM Reduction Plan (SAME AS TRA-1). (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2E: Reduce Truck Trip Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-GHG-1: Reduce Appliance Energy Consumption & GHG Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-GHG-2: Reduce Building Energy Consumption & GHG Emissions. (see Impact AIR -1 above).

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 38 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Finding:

The DEIR found that, even with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the Project would still result in significant regional operational NOx emissions for Phases 1 and 2 and combined regional Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B regional construction emissions were still significant for NOx. These emissions were significant and unavoidable and require a Statement of Overriding Considerations (DEIR page 4.3-63).

IMPACT AIR-5: Would the project cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to air quality.

Substantial Evidence:

The level of expected future development in the City and surrounding areas is substantial (i.e., 174 projects in four jurisdictions with 8,362 residential units and approximately 15 million square feet of non-residential development). In addition, the City expects continued growth based on its General Plan population and housing projections. While it is possible that cumulative projects 16- 18 may be under construction during the same timeframe as the Project, it is difficult to predict with any certainty due to the many factors involved in starting and maintaining construction (e.g., financing, equipment and staff availability, weather, etc.).

In developing its CEQA significance thresholds, the SCAQMD considered the emission levels at which a Project’s individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. As described under Impact AIR-2A, the proposed Project would result in potentially significant VOC and NOx impacts for regional construction emissions, regional operational emissions, and combined Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B construction emissions. The Project would incorporate Mitigation Measures AIR-2A through AIR-2E; however, regional operational emissions for NOx as well as combined operational and construction emissions for NOx would remain above SCAQMD thresholds and have the potential cause or contribute to existing or future air quality violations, thus conflicting with the 2022 AQMP (DEIR pages 4.3-72 and 4.3-73).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure s in an attempt to reduce these cumulative air pollutant emission impacts to less than significant levels:

MM-AIR-2A: Reduce Construction VOC Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2B: Reduce Construction NOx & PM Exhaust Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above) MM-AIR-2C: Reduce Light-duty Vehicle Trip Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2D: Prepare VMT/TDM Reduction Plan (SAME AS TRA-1). (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-AIR-2E: Reduce Truck Trip Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-GHG-1: Reduce Appliance Energy Consumption & GHG Emissions. (see Impact AIR-1 above).

MM-GHG-2: Reduce Building Energy Consumption & GHG Emissions. (see Impact AIR -1 above).

Finding:

The DEIR found that, even with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures, the Project would still result in significant regional operational NOx emissions for Phases 1 and 2 and

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact 39
Revised September 24, 2025
combined regional Phase 1 operational and Phase 2B regional construction emissions were still significant for NOx. These emissions were significant and unavoidable and require a Statement of Overriding Considerations (DEIR page 4.3-73).

GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

IMPACT GHG-1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

Substantial Evidence:

DEIR Section 4.8.5 states the proposed Project would generate GHG emissions from the short - term construction and long-term operational sources. Construction activities would cease to emit GHG upon completion, unlike operational emissions that would be continuous year after year over the life of the Project. Accordingly, the SCAQMD recommends averaging construction GHG emissions over a 30-year period and combining this average with operational emissions estimates to facilitate comparison to potential thresho lds, standards, plans, etc. that may be based on annualized GHG emissions estimates or GHG reduction targets.

The Project’s construction -related GHG emissions were estimated using Project -specific construction activities and SCAQMD -recommended air quality and GHG emissions modeling software (i.e., CalEEMod). Once operational, the Project would generate GHG emission s from mobile, area, energy, water/wastewater, solid waste, refrigeration, off -road, and stationary sources. The Project’s operational -related energy consumption was estimated using Project - specific development and operational characteristics, manufacture r’s equipment specifications, and SCAQMD-recommended modeling software (i.e., CalEEMod). It is noted that the proposed Project’s operational GHG emissions would vary by phase, equipment operations (anticipated minimum or potential maximum operations), and whether or not thermal recovery from the cogeneration system is used to offset natural gas combustion in Phase 2 boiler operation. The EIR evaluated worst-case GHG emissions estimates for each Project phase based on maximum potential stationary source equi pment operations (i.e., maximum 100% operating times instead of anticipated typical operating times).

The proposed Project would result in a net increase in annual GHG emissions compared to existing conditions for all phases and operating scenarios that is above the SCAQMD’s industrial threshold of 10,000 MTCO2e per year. During initial Phase 1 operations in 2026, the Project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions equal to 29,822 MTCO2e, with the largest net increases occurring from trucks and passenger vehicles (approximately 55% of the net increase), building energy (approximately 20% of the net increase), and the primary boiler’s natural gas consumption (approximately 19% of the net increase). The Project’s GHG emissions would increase in Phase 2, beginning in 2027, due to the operation of more stationary source equipment in the PC, including a second primary boiler and the cogeneration system. The net increase in GHG emissions during Phase 2 would be contingent on the amount of net electricity and thermal recovery that occurs from the proposed cogeneration system but would be between approximately 43,899 MTCO2e per year and approximately 41,126 MMBtu with thermal recovery.

Similar to Phase 1, the largest net increases in GHG emissions during Phase 2 would be from truck and passenger vehicle trips (approximately 37% to 39% of the net increase) and boilers (between approximately 27% and 29% of the net increase); however, the planned cogeneration system would substantially reduce building energy GHG emissions from approximately 7,663 MTCO2e per year in Phase 1 to 4,504 MTCO2e per year in Phase 2.

Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations 40 El Camino Project EIR Findings of Fact
City of Rancho Cucamonga
The proposed Project’s net increase in GHG emissions, at worst -case, would be approximately 29,822 MTCO2e per year during Phase 1 and approximately 43,899 MTCO 2e per year during Phase 2, which exceeds the SCAQMD’s industrial 10,000 MTCO 2e threshold. To reduce the proposed Project’s operational GHG emissions levels, the City will require the implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1, Reduce Appliance Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions, and GHG-2, Reduce Building Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions. These mitigation measures will increase the Project’s energy efficiency and reduce building energy consumption. Combined, these measures are estimated to lower GHG emissions between approximately 68 MTCO2e and 150 MTCO2e per year, or 1.5% to 2% of total building energy emissions (DEIR pages 4.8-25 to

4.8-31).

The EIR recommended the following mitigation measure s in an attempt to reduce these greenhouse gas emission impacts to less than significant levels:

MM-GHG-1: Reduce Appliance Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions. To reduce GHG emissions from appliance-related energy consumption, the City shall require all applicant installed refrigerators, dishwashers, clothes washers and dryers, and room air conditioners intended for employee use to be Energy Star certified products.

MM-GHG-2: Reduce Building Energy Consumption and GHG Emissions. To reduce GHG emissions associated with the performance of the building envelope and systems components covered by Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, the City shall require all new construction and major renovations undertaken by the applicant associated with the Project to be designed to have a total energy design rating that is at least 5% less than the standard building design for Climate Zone 15. The energy budget for the stand ard design building and the energy budget for the proposed design building shall be determined in accordance with the definitions and approach set forth in the version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code) that is in effect at the time of building permit approval (currently the 2022 Energy Code), unless the City has adopted local requirements that are more stringent than the Energy Code. The requirement to reduce a project’s energy budget by 5% below the standard design building shall not apply if the Energy Code or the City has already established a zero net energy requirement for the standard design building.

Finding:

Even with implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -GHG-1 and MM-GHG-2, the greenhouse gas emissions of the Project would not be reduced to less than significant levels and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is required. Impacts are significant and unavoidable.

IMPACT GHG-3: Cause substantial adverse cumulative impacts with respect to GHGs.

Substantial Evidence:

Global climate change is the result of GHG emissions worldwide; individual projects do not generate enough GHG emissions to influence global climate change. Thus, the analysis of GHG emissions is by nature, an inherently cumulative analysis focused on whet her an individual project’s contribution to global climate change is cumulatively considerable. As described under Impacts GHG-1 and GHG -2, the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions but would generate GHG emissions that exceed the SCAQMD’s 10,000 MTCO 2e per year industrial significance threshold applied in this EIR. Accordingly, the proposed Project would result in a cumulatively