Agenda packet — Rancho Cucamonga City Council, August 19, 2026 (part 19 of 20)

Project #: DRC2021-00485 DRC2022-00345, DRC2022-00375, DRC2023-00349, DRC2023-00351, DRC2023-00408, DRC2025-00061, LSPR2025-00011 Project Name: Ares/Black Creek (Arrow Commerce Center)
Location: 12343 ARROW RTE - 022912134-0000
Project Type: Design Review Conditional Use Permit, Development Agreement, Landscape Review, Master Plan, PD Appeal, Tree Removal Permit, Zoning Map Amendment ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT:

Engineering Services Department
Please be advised of the following Special Conditions
Grading Inspections - Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the City inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations , the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the inspector.

The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections prior to continuing grading operations:
i. The bottom of the over-excavation;
ii. Completion of rough grading - The grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Services Department front counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record;
The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.

16. CFD District: CFD2022-01 and CFD2022-02: The developer shall enter into an Annexation Proceeding and sign a Consent and Waiver to join Community Facilities District CFD2022-01 (Street Lighting Services) and CFD2022-02 shall be filed by Special Districts prior to issuance of Building Permits. Any annexation cost shall be borne by the developer. For any questions and/or processing coordination of the CFD please contact Kelly Guerra at (909) 774-2582 or by email at [email protected].

17. The project Parcel Map shall meet the Subdivision Map Act, City Development Codes, and Conditions of Approval requirements. The Parcel Map shall be approved and recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorders Office prior to issuance of Building Permits.

18. The applicant shall obtain the applicable drainage easements from the properties to the south for the proposed storm drain improvements.

19. Standard Conditions of Approval

20. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards.

A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. The drainage study shall show that the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a grading permit. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer.

21. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street, and provisions made to pass through walls.

22. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the property from adjacent areas.

23. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk.

24. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 9 of 17

Page 11889922 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
** CD Information Required Prior to Sign-Off for Building Permit Prior to the issuance of building permits, if valuation is greater or equal to $100,000, a Diversion Deposit and a related administrative fee shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 65% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Applicant must identify if they are self-hauling or utilizing Burrtec prior to issuance of a building permit. Proof of diversion must be submitted to the Environmental Engineering Division within 60 days following the completion of the construction and / or demolition project.

Contact Marissa Ostos, Environmental Engineering, at (909) 774-4062 for more information.

Instructions and forms are available at the City's website, www.cityofrc.us, under City Hall / Engineering / Environmental Programs / Construction & Demolition Diversion Program.

25. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to Building Permit issuance if no map is involved.

26. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.

27. Add the following note to any private landscape plans that show street trees: “All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees, shall be installed per the public improvement plans .” If there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans, the street improvement plans will govern.

28. “Developer shall install a dark fiber conduit package fronting the development. Two 4” Schedule 40 PVC conduits, along with three 1 ¼” innerducts in one of the 4” conduits, per City Standard 145. The size, placement, and location of the conduit shall be shown on the Fiber Improvement Plans and subject to Engineering Services Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits .” Dark conduit shall be continued on-site to the telecom/network room of each building.

29. Construct or protect the following perimeter street improvements on Arrow Route including, but not limited to:

Curb & Gutter
A.C. Pvmt
Sidewalk - remove and replace per City Standards
Drive Appr. - remove existing and construct curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping Street Lights - protect
Street Trees
Underground overhead power poles in accordance with City Municipal Code Fiber Optic Conduit

30. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 10 of 17

Page 11889933 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits , whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e. Access ramps for the disabled shall be installed on all corners of intersections per latest ADA standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be installed to City Standards, except for single-family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Manager prior to submittal for first plan check.

31. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 11 of 17

Page 11889944 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: “Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet ___ (typically Sheet 1).” Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans.

Street Name
Botanical Name
Common Name
Min. Grow Space
Spacing
Size
Qty.

Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector.
3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department.

Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.

32. All public improvements on "A", "B", "C", "D", "E", and Yellowwood Avenue (interior streets, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, drainage facilities, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans shall be constructed as shown on the tentative map exhibit and as approved by the City Engineer. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches , sidewalks, access ramps and ADA compliant paths, street lights, fiber optic conduit, storm drain and street trees. Prior to Building permit, construction plans for the following improvements shall be submitted for review and approval of the City Engineer:
a. All streets (except "D" Street) shall provide minimum roadway width of 44-ft and improvements as shown on the tentative map exhibit.
b. "A" Street (Modified): Developer is responsible for the full-width construction of "A" Street. See approved tentative parcel map.
c. "D" Street (Modified): Developer is responsible for the full-width construction of "D" Street to provide 6' westerly parkway, 4' easterly parkway, and 40' curb to curb width.

33. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program.

34. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 12 of 17

Page 11889955 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects.

35. Prior to approval of the final map, a deposit shall be posted with the City covering the estimated cost of apportioning the assessments under Assessment District LMD 3B among the newly created parcels.

36. Any work proposed within or affecting the AT&SF Railroad right-of-way shall require prior authorization and/or permits from AT&SF.

37. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map.

38. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Sections 66462 and 66462.5 at such time as the City decides to acquire the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City if the City decides to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the City, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited to:
a. Portions of "E" Street to provide public roadway connection from Yellowwood Avenue to "D" Street within the proposed 66' public right-of-way dedication as shown on the tentative map. b. Portions of Yellowwood Avenue to provide public roadway connection from Arrow Route to "E" Street within the proposed 66' public right-of-way dedication as shown on the tentative map.

39. Private reciprocal access and applicable drainage easements shall be provided ensuring access to parcels 1 through 3 by CC&Rs or by deeds and shall be recorded concurrently with the map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, where no map is involved.

40. Reciprocal parking agreements for parcels 1 through 3 and maintenance agreements ensuring joint maintenance of all common roads, drives, or parking areas shall be provided by CC & R's or deeds and shall be recorded prior to, or concurrent with, the final map.

41. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.

42. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 13 of 17

Page 11889966 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Vehicular access rights along the project frontage on Arrow Route shall be restricted, except at the locations of approved openings as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.

43. Modified interior streets identified as "A" and "D" Street on the tentative map are designated as public streets; easements must be recorded concurrently with the the final map. The required right-of-way width shall be as shown on the tentative map exhibit and correspond to:

1. "A" Street: Southerly street segment, for approximately 140 ft shall provide a 44-ft paved roadway within 57-ft right-of-way. Sidewalk improvements are required along easterly boundary of street.

2. "A" Street: Shall provide transition from 57-ft right-of-way to 101-ft right-of-way and minimum 44-ft paved roadway. Sidewalk improvements are required along easterly boundary of street.

3. "B" Street: Provide 44-ft paved roadway within 66-ft right-of-way. Sidewalk improvements are required along both sides of the street.

4. "C" Street: A 44-ft paved roadway within a varying right-of-way width from 66-ft to 102-ft as shown on the tentative exhibit. Sidewalk improvements are required along both sides of the street.

5. "D" Street: A 40-ft paved roadway within a 50-ft right-of-way. Sidewalk improvements are required along the west side of the street and a minimum 4-ft landscaped setback along the east side.

44. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all public streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the public streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required.

45. Prior to Building Permit (or Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy), the developer shall submit funds to the City to pay its fair share for improvements to the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Arrow Route .

The fair share amount shall be seven percent (7%) of the total costs for the following improvements:
restripe the existing roadway to add a second southbound left turn lane; add a second eastbound receiving lane which widens Arrow Route from Etiwanda to the easterly City Limits. The fair share amount shall be determined based upon an engineer’s estimate of the listed improvements to be reviewed and approved by the City.

46. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required.

47. Developer shall execute a Line Extension Agreement for electric service and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and shall construct electrical distribution facilities in accordance with such agreement and Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility requirements and dedicate such facilities to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility shall be the electrical service provider for all project related development.

48. 49. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 14 of 17

Page 11889977 ends

Engineering Services Department
Standard Conditions of Approval
Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.

50. Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
The parcel is required to be annexed into Community Facilities District 85-1 (CFD 85-1) if it has not yet been annexed into the CFD. Please contact Kelly Guerra with the City of Rancho Cucamonga’s Special Districts Division at (909) 774-2582 or [email protected] to inquire about the annexation status and complete the annexation if needed. The annexation requirement will not be considered complete until the applicant provides proof of annexation or begins the annexation process and Special Districts notifies the Fire Marshal that the process has been started.

1. Combustible construction materials, including combustible roofing materials, are prohibited from being onsite prior to a water supply system in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-10 being provided in accordance with Fire District Standard 33-1. Copies of the Standards have been uploaded to the Documents section of this project in the Online Permit Center.

2. Plans for the alarm and/or supervision (monitoring) system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

3. Plans for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

4. Plans for the private, onsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

5. Plans for the public, offsite fire underground water infrastructure are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Plans are required to be submitted prior to or concurrently with the plans submitted to the Water District. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

6. Plans for the racks used for high piled combustible storage are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

7. Plans for the automatic fire sprinkler system are required to be submitted separately and issued a separate permit. Submit all plans to the Building Department for routing to the Fire District.

8. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 15 of 17

Page 11889988 ends

Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Emergency responder communication coverage in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-12 is required for the building(s) included in this project. A copy of the Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section of this project file in the Online Permit Center.

A radio signal strength test of the public safety radio communication system conducted in accordance with the requirements of the 2022 California Fire Code is required to be submitted. Where existing radio signal strength does not meet the requirements of the Fire Code, a separate submittal for an emergency responder communication coverage system is required.

9. A Knox Box key box is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-9. Additional boxes may be required depending on the size of the building, the location of fire protection and life safety system controls, and the operational needs of the Fire District. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. If an installed Knox Box is available to this project or business, keys for the building/suite/unit are required to be provided to the Fire Inspector at the final inspection.

10. A Knox key switch is required to be installed on motorized gates that are installed across or provide access to a fire access road (fire Lane). See Fire District Standard 5-3 for Residential Gates and Fire District Standard 5-4 for Commercial and Industrial Gates.

11. A Knox or Fire District padlock is required to be incorporated into the security system for a manually operated gate that is installed across or provides access to a fire access road (fire lane).

12. A fire service site plan is required in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-11. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.

13. All of the Fire District Standards applicable are required to be reproduced on the plans. The project is required to meet all of the applicable codes, regulations, and standards in effect and adopted at the time of plan check submittal. Fire District Standards associated with construction and plan submittals can be found on the City of Rancho Cucamonga's website and accessed via https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4k4qdxhs4tp13c7/AAAdscMKMdW9WIQe725xWyU-a?dl=0

14. Due to the type of construction, construction materials, the floor area of the project, and known risks associated with projects of this nature, a Fire Protection and Site Safety plan is required to be implemented when combustible construction materials are delivered to the site, with the exception of foundation form materials. The Fire Prevention and Site Safety plan is required to be in compliance with Fire District Standard 33-3. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section. Review and approval of the fire prevention and site safety plan is a condition of construction permit approval. The fire prevention and site safety plan is required to be approved by the Fire District prior to construction permits being approved and issued.

15. Roof access is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-6. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.

16. Street address and unit/suite signage for commercial and industrial buildings are required to be in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-8. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.

17. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 16 of 17

Page 11889999 ends

Fire Prevention / New Construction Unit
Standard Conditions of Approval
Identification of fire protection systems and components, fire alarm systems and components, and equipment and devices associated with fire and life safety systems is required to be in accordance with Fire District Standards 5-5 and 5-10. The Standards have been uploaded to the Documents section.

18. Public and private fire service water mains, public and private hydrants, water control valves, fire sprinkler risers, fire department connections (FDCs), and other fire protection water related devices and equipment are required to be provided, designed, and installed in accordance with Fire District Standard 5-10. The Standard has been uploaded to the Documents section.

19. www.CityofRC.us
Printed: 8/4/2026 Page 17 of 17

Page 11990000 ends

CITY COUNCILRESOLUTION NO. 2026-077
DRC2021-00485 – CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
August 19, 2026

Page 10 ends

EXHIBIT A
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

Page 11990011 ends

FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Arrow Commerce Center Project
SCH No. 2023110033
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
May 2026

Page 11990022 ends

FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS
Arrow Commerce Center Project
SCH No. 2023110033
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Contact:

Christine Delostrinos
Senior Planner
909.477.2750
[email protected]
Prepared by:

Ascent
530 Technology Drive, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
Contact:

Marlie Long
Project Manager
619.604.3787
[email protected]
May 2026
18010188.06

Page 11990033 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................................................................. I LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................................... II 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............................................................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Summarized Project Narrative......................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Project Objectives................................................................................................................................................................. 3 3 PROCEDURAL HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 5 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA ....................................................................................................................................... 6

5.1 Findings for Less-Than-Significant Impacts and Areas of No Impact................................................................ 6

5.2 Findings for Potentially Significant and Cumulatively Significant Environmental Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant Level Through Mitigation Measures............................................................ 9

5.3 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ..........................................................................................................................22

5.4 Findings Associated with Project Alternatives..........................................................................................................25 6 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................. 30

6.1 Significant and Unavoidable Impacts...........................................................................................................................30

6.2 Project Benefits....................................................................................................................................................................30 7 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................................................................................. 32 8 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................................ 33 Attachments
A – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Tables
Table 2-1 Summary of Proposed Building Floor Area................................................................................................................. 2

Page 11990044 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ii Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Rancho Cucamonga
CO carbon monoxide
CPUC California Public Utilities Commission
CUP conditional use permit
dB decibel
dBA a-weighted decibel
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
EV electric vehicle
ft Feet
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GBMI Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation
GHG greenhouse gas
gsf gross square feet
GWP global warming potential
IE Industrial Employment
Leq equivalent continuous sound level
MBMI Morongo Band of Mission Indians
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
NOA Notice of Availability
NOP notice of preparation
NOx oxides of nitrogen
NZE near-zero emission
OM&M Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring
PM particulate matter
PRC California Public Resources Code
proposed project Arrow Commerce Center Project
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
sf square feet
SoCal Gas Southern California Gas Company
TAC toxic air contaminants
TCR tribal cultural resources
TDM transportation demand management
TRU Transport Refrigeration Unit
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compounds
ZE zero emission

Page 11990055 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 1
1 INTRODUCTION
These findings have been prepared on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City). The City is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the Arrow Commerce Center Project (proposed project), for which an environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared pursuant to CEQA (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.). Approval of a project with significant impacts requires that findings be made by the lead agency pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15043, 15091, and 15093). State CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b) states that a public agency shall not approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared and significant effects were identified unless significant effects would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level by the mitigation measures identified in the EIR or, if the EIR identifies residual significant impacts after implementation of mitigation measures, the agency finds that the unavoidable impacts are acceptable through a statement of overriding considerations, supported by substantial evidence in the record, which includes the documents, materials, and other evidence.

CEQA Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 state that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which a certified EIR identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings, which must be supported by substantial evidence in the record, are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding, and they have been adopted by that other agency 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 project alternatives identified in the EIR.

When making the findings required in item (1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes or alterations required in the project to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects (i.e., mitigation measures). These mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other mechanisms.

The mitigation measures required of the proposed project are listed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP) (Attachment A). The MMRP is adopted concurrently with these findings, as required by CEQA Section 21081.6(a)(1), and will be implemented throughout all phases of the project, including design, construction, and operation. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with all mitigation measures.

These findings constitute the City’s evidentiary and policy basis for its decision to approve the proposed project in a manner consistent with CEQA. These findings are not merely informational but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City approves the project (CEQA Section 21081.6[b]). The mitigation measures identified as feasible and within the City’s authority to implement for the approved project become part of the MMRP, and the City will enforce implementation of the mitigation measures. The City, upon review of the Final EIR and based on all the information and evidence in the administrative record, hereby makes the findings set forth herein. These findings are based on substantial evidence in the entire administrative record, and references to specific reports and specific pages of documents are not intended to identify those sources as the exclusive basis for the findings.

Page 11990066 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
2 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 SUMMARIZED PROJECT NARRATIVE
The proposed project includes the demolition and site clearing of existing paved surface areas and site grading, excavation, and the construction and operation, and maintenance of five buildings for warehouse distribution.

Specifically, each warehouse building would be two stories in height and would consist of warehouse distribution uses, associated office space, and loading docks for truck trailers. In total, the proposed project would develop 1,830,729 gross square feet of new building floor area (approximately 42 acres) across five buildings. Table 2-1 summarizes the proposed floor area for each proposed building.

Table 2-1 Summary of Proposed Building Floor Area
Building Number Warehouse (sf) Office 1st Floor (sf) Office 2nd Floor (sf) Total Building (sf) 1 80,223 7,000 3,000 90,223
2 73,929 5,000 3,000 81,929
3 62,637 5,000 3,000 70,637
4 1,020,861 30,000 20,000 1,070,861
5 497,079 10,000 10,000 517,079
TOTAL 1,734,729 57,000 39,000 1,830,729
Notes: ft = feet, sf = square feet, gsf = gross square feet Source: Provided by HPA Architecture, February 6, 2023; adapted by Ascent.

Overall, the proposed project would develop the project site with 44 acres of paved or other impervious surface area.

A total of 282 loading dock spaces are included in the proposed project. In addition, 968 vehicle parking spaces and 444 truck trailer parking spaces would be provided onsite. Of the 968 automobile parking stalls, 194 stalls would be electric vehicle (EV) Capable (i.e., with electrical panel space and conduit to accommodate installation of electric vehicle supply equipment). The proposed project would also develop new public streets, water quality basins, utility infrastructure, exterior lighting and signage, and provide roughly 10 percent landscape coverage.

Construction of the proposed project would occur over approximately 18 months assumed to begin in January 2026 and end in July 2027. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would occur in the following stages: demolition and site clearing, grading and excavation, building construction and infrastructure improvements, architectural coatings, and paving. Construction hours for the project would be 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, with the exception of concrete pours, which would extend into nighttime hours (i.e., 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). During the grading stage approximately 255,000 cubic yards of cut and fill would be balanced on site. A maximum of 9,500 cubic yards of material would be disturbed on a daily basis during construction. Approximately 10,000 tons of material, including approximately 3,500 cubic yards of contaminated soil, would be exported off-site during construction of the proposed project.

The types of tenants that would occupy the proposed buildings and the resulting business activities that would be conducted are not known at this time. For the purpose of evaluating the proposed project’s environmental effects in the EIR, the proposed building floor area of the five buildings is assumed to be used as follows:
 78 percent High-Cube Fulfillment Center (non-sorting);  12 percent General Warehouse; and
 10 percent High-Cube Cold Storage Warehouse.

Page 11990077 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 3
Buildings 1, 2, and 3 are anticipated to operate Monday through Friday between 4:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (16 hours per day, 80 hours per week), and Buildings 4 and 5 are anticipated to operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week. Proposed project operations are anticipated to commence in 2027. Based on industry average, the proposed project is anticipated to accommodate approximately 1,408 employees daily.

The proposed project requires City approval of its design review application, tentative and final parcel map, conditional use permit (CUP) and master plan, zoning map amendment, and development agreement.

2.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The project applicant has developed the following objectives for the proposed project:
 Develop a vacant, underutilized site that implements the General Plan’s vision for a modernized industrial employment district in the Southeast Industrial Area.
 Remove hazardous materials from the project site to enable industrial development compatible with human health standards.
 Locate warehouse development near compatible land uses and businesses and avoid conflicts with residential and other sensitive land uses.
 Develop in proximity to available infrastructure, such as designated truck routes, the State highway system, and utilities, with connections to the Southern California supply chain and goods movement network.  Provide a complete network of streets and access routes to increase access and improve public safety in the Southeast Industrial Area.
 Increase the number and quality of employment opportunities in the City to reduce the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside the area for employment and improve the jobs-to-housing balance.  Maximize the rate of economic activity per acre of land to increase the City’s tax base and increase overall economic development in the City.

Page 11990088 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
4 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
3 PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The following provides a summary of the project’s environmental review process:
 The City prepared, and on November 1, 2023, filed, a notice of preparation (NOP) for a Draft EIR along with an Initial Study Environmental Checklist, which provided a discussion of the environmental topics anticipated to be addressed in the Draft EIR. The NOP was filed with the San Bernardino County Clerk and sent to the State Clearinghouse, which posted the NOP on the CEQAnet web portal. The NOP and Initial Study Environmental Checklist were sent to responsible and trustee agencies, interested parties, and organizations, as well as private organizations and individuals that may have an interest in the proposed project. The documents were also posted on the City’s website and were also available at the Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive in Rancho Cucamonga, California. In addition, availability of the documents was advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin.
 The City held a public scoping meeting at the Ranch Cucamonga Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive in Rancho Cucamonga, starting at 6:00 p.m. on November 14, 2023. At the meeting, a presentation was given to present information regarding the project and the CEQA process, and to receive public comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the Draft EIR.  The City prepared, and on October 1, 2025, distributed, a Notice of Availability (NOA) and the Draft EIR for the project for a 45-day public review and comment period, which concluded on November 17, 2025. The NOA and Draft EIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse, which were posted on the CEQAnet web portal, and the NOA was mailed to relevant public agencies, responsible and trustee agencies, and interested parties. The Draft EIR was also posted on the City’s website and was made available at the City Clerk’s Office, the City Planning Department Public Counter, Archibald Library, and Paul A. Biane Library. The City published a notice of availability of the Draft EIR in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin and distributed the notice to a project-specific mailing list.  During the review period, written comments were received on the Draft EIR from five different entities: Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas); California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC); South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); Blum, Collins & Ho LLP; and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).

The Final EIR contains responses to these comments, including a transcription of each comment and the complete comment letter. In response to the comments received, revisions to the Draft EIR were made as set forth in Chapter 3 of the Final EIR. The Final EIR was provided to each commenting agency on June 12, 2026.  Pursuant to PRC section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15090, on July 15, 2026, the City certified that: (1) the Final EIR had been completed in compliance with CEQA; (2) the Final EIR was presented to the City Planning Commission, and the City Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to any approval or authorization of the project; and (3) the Final EIR reflected the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

Page 11990099 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 5
4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
In accordance with CEQA Section 21167.6(e), the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the proposed project includes the following documents:
 the NOP (November 1, 2023) and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the scoping period for the Draft EIR on the proposed project (State Clearinghouse No. 2023110033), including the Notices of Completion and Availability providing notice that the Draft EIR was completed and available for public review and comment (the NOP is provided in Appendix A of the Draft EIR);  the comments received during the scoping period in response to the NOP (provided in Appendix A of the Draft EIR);
 the Draft EIR (October 1, 2025) for the project, including the technical appendices;  all comments submitted during the comment period on the Draft EIR (the comments are transcribed in Chapter 2 of the Final EIR, and the full comment letters are provided in Appendix A of the Final EIR);  the Final EIR for the project (April 2026), which includes comments received on the Draft EIR, responses to those comments, and revisions to the Draft EIR;
 documents cited or refenced in the Draft and Final EIR;  the MMRP for the project (Attachment A to these findings);  all findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the project and all documents cited or referred to therein;
 all reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents in the City’s possession related to the project prepared by the City and by consultants to City with respect to City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to City’s action on the project;  all documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in connection with the project up through final consideration of project approval;  all minutes and/or verbatim transcripts, as available, of all public meetings held by the City in connection with the project;
 any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such public meetings;  portions of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code relevant to the project;  provisions of the City’s Zoning Code cited in materials prepared by or submitted to the City;  all resolutions adopted by the City regarding the project, and all staff reports, analyses, and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions;
 any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and  any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by CEQA Section 21167.6(e) and any other applicable law.

The official custodian of the documents that make up the record of proceedings is the City. All files have been made available to the City Planning Commission in considering these findings and whether to approve the project. These documents are available upon request for public review at the Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive in Rancho Cucamonga, California. The Draft EIR, Final EIR, and EIR appendices are available online at the City’s website:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/ezgw6i02xipw2atbx5iv8/AL4rW3HTg3eSBabvaPail8?rlkey=is2wz9w5mgwjiezsbt50d6c1e&e=2&dl=0.

Page 11991100 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
6 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
5 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
This Chapter present the City’s findings with respect to the environmental impacts of the project and the project alternatives pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Section 21081 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15097. These findings are organized as follows:
 Findings for Less-Than-Significant Impacts and Areas of No Impact: This section provides the City’s findings associated with impacts identified as “no impact” or “less than significant” in the EIR.  Findings for Potentially Significant and Cumulatively Significant Impacts Reduced to a Less-Than-Significant Level through Mitigation Measures: This section provides the City’s findings with respect to impacts identified as potentially significant or as cumulatively significant that would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures identified in the EIR. These findings are made pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091.  Findings for Significant and Unavoidable Impacts: This section provides the City’s findings with respect to impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the EIR.
 Findings Associated with Project Alternatives: This section sets forth the City’s findings with respect to alternatives to the project that were evaluated in the EIR. These findings are made pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091.
 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program: This section introduces the MMRP for mitigation measures proposed for adoption. In adopting these findings, the City, as lead agency under CEQA, commits to implement the MMRP pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15097. However, the project proponent would ultimately execute many of the mitigation actions. The MMRP is included as Attachment A to these findings.

The Final EIR, consisting of the Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR, responses to comments on the Draft EIR, revisions to the Draft EIR, and remaining contents of the Final EIR, is hereby incorporated by reference into these findings without limitation. This incorporation is intended to address the scope and nature of mitigation measures, the basis for determining the significance of impacts, and the comparative analysis of alternatives.

5.1 FINDINGS FOR LESS-THAN-SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS AND AREAS OF

NO IMPACT
The City Planning Commission agrees with the characterization in Section 1.2.1, “Notice of Preparation, Initial Study, and Public Scoping,” of the Draft EIR with respect to the resource areas for which the project would not result in potentially significant environmental impacts, as determined in the Initial Study Environmental Checklist. The City Planning Commission agrees with the characterization of impacts identified as less than significant in Chapter 3, “Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures,” and Chapter 4, “Cumulative Impacts,” of the Draft EIR, with the revisions identified in Chapter 3, “Revisions to the Draft EIR,” of the Final EIR. The City Planning Commission finds that those impacts have been described accurately and would be less than significant as described in the EIR.

The City Planning Commission also agrees with determinations made in the “Issues Not Discussed Further” sections in Chapter 3 of the Draft EIR that the identified issues and thresholds of significance are not applicable to the proposed project or that the project would have no impact related to the identified thresholds.

This finding applies to the following impacts evaluated in the EIR, each determined to have no impact or a less-thansignificant impact (no mitigation required).

Page 11991111 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 7

5.1.1 Aesthetics
 Impact 3.1-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.1-1: Conflict with Applicable Zoning and Other Regulations Governing Scenic Quality
 Impact 3.1-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.1-2: Create a New Source of Substantial Light or Glare That Would Adversely Affect Day or Nighttime Views in the Area

5.1.2 Air Quality
 Impact 3.2-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-1: Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan
 Impact 3.2-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-3: Generate Construction and Operational Emissions in Exceedance of the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) Localized Significance Thresholds  Impact 3.2-5 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-5: Result in Other Emissions (Such as Those Leading to Odors) Adversely Affecting a Substantial Number of People

5.1.3 Biological Resources
 Impact 3.4-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.4-1: Conflict with Any Local Policies or Ordinances Protecting Biological Resources, Such as a Tree Preservation Policy or Ordinance

5.1.4 Geology and Soils
 Impact 3.6-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.6-1: Directly or Indirectly Cause Potential Substantial Adverse Effects, Including the Risk of Loss, Injury, or Death Involving Strong Seismic Ground Shaking  Impact 3.6-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.6-2: Be Located on a Geologic Unit or Soil That is Unstable, or That Would Become Unstable as a Result of the Project, and Potentially Result in On- or Off-Site Landslide, Lateral Spreading, Liquefaction, or Collapse
 Impact 3.6-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.6-3: Be Located on Expansive Soil, Creating a Substantial Direct or Indirect Risk to Life and Property

5.1.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Impact 3.8-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.8-1: Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or Environment through Routine Transport, Use, or Disposal of Hazardous Materials or Reasonably Foreseeable Upset and Accident Conditions Involving the Release of Hazardous Materials into the Environment  Impact 3.8-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.8-3: For a Project Located Within an Airport Land Use Plan or, Where Such a Plan Has Not Been Adopted, within 2 Miles of a Public Airport or Public Use Airport, Would the Project Result in a Safety Hazard or Excessive Noise for People Residing or Working in the Project Area  Impact 3.8-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.8-4: Impair Implementation of or Physically Interfere with an Adopted Emergency Response Plan or Emergency Evacuation Plan

5.1.6 Hydrology and Water Quality
 Impact 3.9-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.9-1: Violate Water Quality Standards or Waste Discharge Requirements or Substantially Degrade Surface or Ground Water Quality

Page 11991122 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
8 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
 Impact 3.9-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.9-2: Substantially Decrease Groundwater Supplies or Interfere with Groundwater Recharge Such That the Project May Impede Sustainable Groundwater Management of the Basin  Impact 3.9-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.9-3: Substantially Alter Drainage Patterns of the Project Site in a Manner That Would Result in Substantial Erosion and Siltation, On- or Off-Site Flooding, an Exceedance of the Capacity of Stormwater Drainage Systems, Additional Sources of Polluted Runoff, or That Would Impede or Redirect Flood Flows
 Impact 3.9-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.9-4: Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of a Water Quality Control Plan or Sustainable Groundwater Management Plan

5.1.7 Land Use and Planning
 Impact 3.10-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.10-1: Physically Divide an Established Community  Impact 3.10-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.10-2: Conflict with any Land Use Plan, Policy, or Regulation Adopted for the Purpose of Avoiding or Mitigating an Environmental Effect

5.1.8 Noise and Vibration
 Impact 3.11-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.11-2: Exposure of Existing Receptors to Excessive Traffic Noise Levels and Cumulative Traffic Noise
 Impact 3.11-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.11-3: Long-Term Operational Non-Transportation Noise Levels and Cumulative Stationary Noise Sources
 Impact 3.11-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.11-4: Project-Level and Cumulative Exposure of Sensitive Receptors to Construction Vibration
 Impact 3.11-5 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.11-5: Project-Level and Cumulative Vibration Compatibility  Cumulative Impact 4.3.11-1: Cumulative Short-Term Construction Noise Impacts

5.1.9 Public Services
 Impact 3.12-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.12-1: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of New or Physically Altered Fire Protection Facilities, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios, Response Times, or Other Performance Objectives
 Impact 3.12-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.12-2: Result in Substantial Adverse Physical Impacts Associated with the Provision of New or Physically Altered Police Protection Facilities, in Order to Maintain Acceptable Service Ratios, Response Times, or Other Performance Objectives

5.1.10 Transportation
 Impact 3.13-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-1: Conflict with a Program, Plan, Ordinance, or Policy Addressing the Circulation System, Including Transit, Roadway, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities  Impact 3.13-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-3: Substantially Increase Hazards Due to a Geometric Design Feature (e.g., Sharp Curves or Dangerous Intersections) or Incompatible Uses (e.g., Farm Equipment)  Impact 3.13-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-4: Result in Inadequate Emergency Access

Page 11991133 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 9

5.1.11 Utilities
 Impact 3.14-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.14-1: Require or Result in the Relocation or Construction of New or Expanded Water, Wastewater Treatment Facilities or Storm Water Drainage, Electric Power, Natural Gas, or Telecommunications Facilities, the Construction or Relocation of Which Could Cause Significant Environmental Effects
 Impact 3.14-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.14-2: Have Sufficient Water Supplies Available to Serve the Project and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Development During Normal, Dry, and Multiple Dry Years  Impact 3.14-3 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.14-3: Result in a Determination by the Wastewater Treatment Provider Which Serves or May Serve the Project Determined that it Has Adequate Capacity to Serve the Project’s Projected Demand in Addition to the Provider’s Existing Commitments  Impact 3.14-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.14-4: 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  Impact 3.14-5 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.14-5: Comply with Federal, State, and Local Management and Reduction Statutes and Regulations Related to Solid Waste

5.2 FINDINGS FOR POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT AND CUMULATIVELY

SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS REDUCED TO LESS

THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL THROUGH MITIGATION MEASURES
The City Planning Commission agrees with the characterization in the EIR with respect to all impacts identified as “significant” or “potentially significant” that would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR and MMRP. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), a specific finding is made for each impact and its associated mitigation measures in the discussions below.

5.2.1 Air Quality
Impact 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4: Expose Sensitive Receptors to TAC Concentrations That Result in an Incremental Increase in Cancer Risk Greater Than 10 in One Million and/or a Noncarcinogenic Hazard Index of 1.0 or Greater Construction-related emissions of toxic air contaminants (TACs) associated with the proposed project would be spread over the project area, not affecting any one receptor for extended periods of time, and therefore, would not result in exposure of existing receptors to substantial TAC concentrations during construction. Project operations would produce substantial diesel particulate matter (PM), exceeding SCAQMD’s threshold for TAC cancer risk exposure of 10 in one million. Using this numerical threshold, the proposed project would generate substantial emissions of TACs, causing an adverse health impact from TAC exposure and would be significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact on sensitive receptors from exposure to TACs to less-than-significant levels. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Page 11991144 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation To reduce impacts from operations-related exhaust emissions, the project shall be required to employ fully electric yard equipment and include EV charging stations to allow for the EV truck charging.  All yard equipment used onsite for warehouse operations, including but not limited to forklifts and yard trucks, shall be powered by zero emission (ZE) technology, such as battery electric. The project applicant shall provide adequate charging stations within the project site to allow for the use of 100 percent EV equipment. These requirements are consistent with Strategy 1.4 of the Climate Action Plan (CAP), which requires equipment used in the operation of commercial and industrial uses greater than or equal to 50 horsepower to be equipped with ZE technology or fuels.
 The project applicant shall provide 10 percent “EV Ready” parking spaces, and 5 percent “EV Installed” parking spaces. These requirements are consistent with Strategy 1.2 of the CAP and, for the purposes of this measure, applies to both employee parking and medium-duty and heavy-duty truck parking. In order for this measure to be feasible, the project applicant shall ensure that the building design includes adequate electrical infrastructure to power the EV charging units in addition to the building’s other electrical demands.  The project applicant shall disclose this requirement to all tenants/business entities prior to the signing of any lease agreement. In addition, the limitation on using only ZE off-road yard equipment and adequate automotive and truck charging shall be included in all leasing agreements. Prior to issuance of a Business License for a new tenant/business entity, the project facility owner and tenant/business entity shall provide to the City Planning Division a signed document (verification document) noting that the Project development/facility owner has disclosed to the tenant/business entity the requirement to use only ZE equipment for daily operations.  The use of gasoline-powered landscape equipment shall be prohibited. This shall be enforced through verification of the City through a condition of approval made between future project applicants and the City. For this measure to be successfully implemented, the project applicant shall install electrical outlets on the exterior of buildings so that the corded electric landscaping equipment can be more easily used in different areas, and batteries can be charged if indoor charging is not available.

If zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs, the applicant shall demonstrate that a minimum of three off-road equipment fleet owners/operators/fuel providers in the San Bernardino County or adjacent counties were contacted and responded that zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2c: Transport Refrigerant Unit Electrical Hookups for Cold Storage Uses The project applicant shall install electrical hookups at every loading dock door and truck parking area for Transport Refrigeration Units (TRUs) with electric standby capabilities. TRUs are refrigeration systems powered by diesel internal combustion engines designed to refrigerate or heat perishable products that are transported in various containers, including truck vans, semi-truck trailers, shipping containers, and railcars. This measure requires TRUs to be plugged in, thereby eliminating the need to run TRUs on diesel. This measure only applies to the portion of future tenant uses that includes cold storage warehousing. Future tenants of cold storage facilities (e.g., storage facility equipped with temperature-controlled environments) within the project site shall ensure that all TRUs are plugged in and that no TRUs run on diesel power.

In order for this measure to be feasible, the project applicant shall ensure that the building design includes adequate electrical infrastructure to allow for the charging of all TRUs.

If zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs. To support this, the applicant shall demonstrate that a minimum of three off-road equipment fleet owners/operators/fuel providers in the San Bernardino County or adjacent counties were contacted and responded that zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs.

Page 11991155 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 11
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2d: Idling Limits During Operations The project proponent and future tenants shall ensure that all medium- and heavy-duty trucks that visit the project site limit their idling by shutting down engines when not in use. Ilding shall be limited to a maximum idling time of less than 3 minutes at any given location and a total of 15 minutes total within the project site for each truck visit. The future tenants shall install clear signage regarding the limitation on idling time at the delivery driveway and loading areas. The project applicant and future tenants shall report this information to the City to verify compliance. This shall be enforced through oversight by the City and shall be included as part of the contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all ongoing responsibilities.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that implementing Mitigation Measures 3.2-2b through 3.2-2d would reduce the impact on sensitive receptors from exposure to TACs to a less-than-significant level because these measures would substantially reduce diesel PM emissions from yard equipment and trucks. This mitigation would reduce the lifetime cancer risk to levels below SCAQMD’s cancer risk threshold. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts related to TACs would not be cumulatively considerable.

Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.2.2 Archaeological, Historical, and Tribal Cultural Resources Impact 3.3-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.3-1: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of Unique Archaeological Resources
While results of the records search and pedestrian survey did not identify known archaeological resources within the project site, project-related ground-disturbing activities could result in damage to or destruction of unknown, buried archaeological resources that quality as “unique” per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 or CEQA Section 21083.2(g). While unlikely, the potential exists to encounter and damage or destroy unique archaeological resources and as such, this impact would be considered potentially significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measure reduces the significant project impact on archaeological resources to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-1: For All Ground-Disturbing Construction Activities, Halt Ground Disturbance Upon Discovery of Subsurface Archaeological Deposits
In the event that any precontact or historic era subsurface archaeological features or deposits, including locally darkened soil (“midden”), that could conceal cultural deposits are discovered during construction, all grounddisturbing activity within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted by construction personnel, and a qualified professional archaeologist (one who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology) shall be retained to assess the significance of the find. If the qualified archaeologist determines the archaeological material to be Native American in nature, the City shall contact the appropriate California Native American tribes (Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation [GBMI], Morongo Band of Mission Indians [MBMI], and other tribes affiliated with the project site). A California Native American tribe(s) that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site may make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary and provide input on the preferred treatment of the find.

Page 11991166 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
12 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
If the find is determined to be significant by the qualified archaeologist or the tribal representative (i.e., because it is determined to constitute a unique archaeological resource or a tribal cultural resource, as appropriate), the qualified archaeologist and tribal representative, as appropriate, shall develop, and the applicant shall implement appropriate procedures to protect the integrity of the resource and ensure that no additional resources are significantly affected.

Procedures shall include but would not necessarily be limited to preservation in place (which shall be the preferred manner of protecting unique archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources), archival research, monitoring, subsurface testing, or contiguous block unit excavation and data recovery (pursuant to a data recovery plan). No work at the discovery location shall resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the resource has been concluded by the archaeologist and/or tribal representative(s).

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on archaeological resources to a lessthan-significant level because Mitigation Measure 3.3-1 requires the applicant to implement professionally accepted and legally compliant procedures for the discovery and protection of previously undocumented significant archaeological resources, such that substantial adverse changes to unique archaeological resources would be avoided. Specifically, the project applicant and construction contractors would be required to halt ground-disturbing activities within 50 feet of an unanticipated discovery of an archaeological resource until a qualified professional archaeologist completes all necessary investigations and evaluations of the find. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on archaeological resources would not be cumulatively considerable. Implementation of this mitigation measure will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

Impact 3.3-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.3-2: Cause a Substantial Adverse Change in the Significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource
Tribal consultation under Assembly Bill 52 has not resulted in the identification of tribal cultural resources on the project site. However, the project site and its vicinity have been identified as highly sensitive for tribal cultural resources by California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the area, and excavation activities associated with project construction may disturb or destroy previously undiscovered significant subsurface tribal cultural resources. This impact is considered potentially significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact on tribal cultural resources to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-1: For All Ground-Disturbing Construction Activities, Halt Ground Disturbance Upon Discovery of Subsurface Archaeological Deposits
This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.3-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.3-1 above.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-2a: Retain a Native American Monitor from MBMI Prior to Commencement of GroundDisturbing Activities The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by MBMI. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the proposed 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 proposed 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 shall be submitted

Page 11991177 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 13
to the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity. The monitor 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 applicant upon written request to the Tribe. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the MBMI from a designated point of contact from the project applicant that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the proposed project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by MBMI to the project applicant that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact TCRs.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-2b: Retain a Native American Monitor from the GBMI Prior to Commencement of GroundDisturbing Activities The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the GBMI. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the proposed 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 proposed 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 shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity. The monitor 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 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 applicant upon written request to the Tribe.

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

Mitigation Measure 3.3-2c: Halt Ground Disturbance Upon the Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource Objects (Non-Funerary/Non-Ceremonial)
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 tribal monitors and/or GBMI/MBMI archaeologists. Affected tribes will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe(s) deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe(s) deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes, or repatriation.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-2d: Halt Ground Disturbance Upon the Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects
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 PRC Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods are discovered or

Page 11991188 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
14 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
recognized on the project site, then PRC 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed.

Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California PRC 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.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on tribal cultural resources to a lessthan-significant level because Mitigation Measures 3.3-1 and 3.3-2a through 3.3-2d would require appropriate treatment and proper care of significant tribal cultural resources, in accordance with the wishes of the geographically and culturally affiliated tribe(s), in the case of a discovery, and would require a tribal monitor present from MBMI and GBMI for all ground disturbance activities. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources would not be cumulatively considerable.

Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.2.3 Energy
Impact 3.5-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.5-1: Wasteful, Inefficient, or Unnecessary Consumption of Energy, During Project Construction or Operation Implementation of the proposed warehouse complex would increase fuel (gasoline and diesel) and electricity consumption. Construction-related energy consumption would be temporary and would not require additional capacity or increased peak or base period demands for electricity or other forms of energy. Operational energy consumption would include fuel consumption associated with trucks, workers, and equipment, as well as energy use associated with electricity consumption that would increase energy consumption relative to existing conditions.

Nevertheless, the proposed project would allow for development that is not inherently energy efficient. Therefore, operation of the proposed warehouse complex would result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy, which would result in a significant impact. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact on energy consumption to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation This mitigation measure is described under 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4 in Section 5.2.1, “Air Quality,” above.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2c: Transport Refrigerant Unit Electrical Hookups for Cold Storage Uses This mitigation measure is described under 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4 in Section 5.2.1, “Air Quality,” above.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Zero Emission Construction Equipment This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.7-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.7-1 in Section 5.2.5, “Greenhouse Gase Emissions and Climate Change,” below.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1b: Install Renewable Energy
This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.7-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.7-1 in Section 5.2.5, “Greenhouse Gase Emissions and Climate Change,” below.

Page 11991199 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 15
Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on energy consumption to a less-thansignificant level because Mitigation Measures 3.2-2b, 3.2-2c, 3.7-1a, and 3.7-1b would reduce the project’s energy demand during construction and operation. Specifically, Mitigation Measures 3.2-2b and 3.2-2c would reduce fossil fuel energy demand through the requirement for zero emission yard equipment and EV charging to support the use of electric automobiles and trucks. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7-1b would reduce the proposed project’s energy demand through the requirement for zero emission construction equipment and the installation of renewable energy to support all of the project’s electricity needs. Implementation of these measures, along with the project’s all-electric building design and the project’s design features to include energy and water efficiency measures, would be sufficient to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level if otherwise not prescribed. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on energy would not be cumulatively considerable. Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

Impact 3.5-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.5-2: Conflict With Or Obstruct A State Or Local Plan For Renewable Energy Or Energy Efficiency
While the proposed project would largely adhere to the goals and policies of the City’s General Plan and CAP and would comply with the requirements of applicable building codes, the project would conflict with Policy RC 6.2 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and would not include all measures and policies within the City’s CAP that address zero emissions technologies, renewable energy, and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reductions. Therefore, the proposed project would result in significant impacts related to conflicting with the City’s CAP, the State’s Energy Efficiency Action Plan, and other renewable energy or energy efficiency plans. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact related to conflicts with renewable energy and energy efficiency plans to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact related to conflicts with renewable energy and energy efficiency plans to less than significant because Mitigation Measures 3.7-1a and 3.7-1b ensure the proposed project’s energy demand is reduced through the implementation of energy efficiency and renewable energy features in building design; inclusion of low-emission vehicles; requirement for zero emission equipment; and use of clean construction fleets. This would ensure compliance with the City’s CAP, State Energy Efficiency Action Plan, and other renewable energy or energy efficiency plans. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on renewable energy and energy efficiency plans would not be cumulatively considerable. Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

Page 11992200 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
16 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings

5.2.4 Geology and Soils
Impact 3.6-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.6-4: Directly or Indirectly Destroy a Unique Paleontological Resource or Site or Unique Geologic Feature Due to the project site’s historical development and redevelopment, no unique geological features are present onsite.

Although most soils within the city are considered too young to contain paleontological fossils or other resources, excavation activities into deeper (older-aged) soils, potentially as shallow as 5 feet bgs, have been known to yield paleontological resources in southwestern San Bernardino County, where the project site is located. Because excavation of soils during construction activities would extend to depths greater than 5 feet bgs, the proposed project may result in inadvertent discovery of unique paleontological resources. If a unique paleontological resource or site is encountered during excavation it could be damaged or destroyed if protective measures are not in place.

This impact is considered potentially significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact on paleontological resources to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4a: Retain a Qualified Paleontologist Prior to the start of earthwork, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to oversee the paleontological mitigation program and shall attend the pre-construction meeting to consult with proposed project contractors concerning excavation schedules, paleontological field techniques, and safety issues relating to the protection of paleontological resources that could be encountered. The qualified Paleontologist shall have the following qualifications:
 an M.S. or Ph.D. emphasizing paleontology and sedimentary geology,  professional experience with paleontological procedures and techniques,  knowledge of the geology and paleontology of San Bernardino County, and  at least 2 years of work experience as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor.

In addition, a professional repository shall be designated by the qualified Paleontologist to receive and curate any discovered/recovered fossils. A professional repository is defined as a recognized paleontological specimen repository (e.g., an American Alliance of Museums-accredited museum or university) with a permanent curator, and that is capable of storing fossils in a facility with adequate security against theft, loss, damage, fire, pests, and adverse climate conditions (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). The qualified Paleontologist shall also direct the work of the paleontological monitor described in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4b.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4b: Monitor Earthwork that Exceeds 5 Feet Below Ground Surface A paleontological monitor shall be on-site full-time to monitor earthwork that exceeds 5 feet below ground surface (e.g., remedial grading for the building pads, excavation for water quality basins, and trenching for subgrade utilities), unless such earthwork only involves areas of known artificial fill. The paleontological monitor shall have the following qualifications:
 a college degree emphasizing paleontology with experience in the recognition and salvage of fossils materials, or  2 years of demonstrable equivalent experience in the recognition and salvage of fossil materials.

Page 11992211 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 17
sediments that are likely to contain small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The paleontological monitor shall also be empowered to temporarily halt or divert construction activities where necessary to allow for salvage of fossils, removal of sediment samples, and removal of any abundant or large specimens.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c: Complete Initial Assessment if Resources are Discovered If fossils are identified during earthwork by the paleontological monitor, the qualified paleontologist shall make an initial assessment of their significance. All identifiable vertebrate fossils (large or small) and uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils are considered to be significant and shall be recovered. Representative samples of common invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils shall also be recovered. In instances where recovery of small fossil remains (e.g., isolated teeth of small vertebrates) is required, it may be necessary to collect bulk-matrix samples for screen-washing as determined by the qualified paleontologist.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4d: Halt Work Conditions if Resources are Discovered while Qualified Paleontologist and Paleontological Monitor are Absent
In the event that potential fossils are encountered when the paleontological monitor is not monitoring the earthwork (i.e., an inadvertent discovery occurs when the conditions described in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4a are not present), earthwork within the vicinity of the discovery site shall temporarily halt, and the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be contacted and shall evaluate the significance of the discovery. Earthwork within the vicinity of the encounter shall not proceed until so directed by the paleontological monitor. If the inadvertent discovery is determined to be significant by the qualified paleontologist, the fossils shall be recovered, as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4e: Catalog Resources Discovered Any fossil remains salvaged during construction shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, taxonomically identified, and cataloged as part of the mitigation program. Fossil preparation shall include screen-washing of bulk matrix samples for microfossils or other laboratory analyses (e.g., radiometric carbon dating), if determined to be necessary by the qualified paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c. Fossil preparation and curation activities may be conducted at the laboratory of the qualified paleontologist, at an appropriate outside agency, and/or at the designated repository, and shall follow the standards of the designated repository.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4f: Curate Resources at a Professional Repository Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be curated at a professional repository, the San Bernardino County Museum, as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4a. The qualified paleontologist shall have a written repository agreement with the professional repository prior to their initiation of work on the proposed project.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4g: Create a Final Summary Report A final summary report shall be completed at the conclusion of the monitoring and curation phases of work and shall summarize the results of the mitigation program. The report shall be completed by or under the direction of the qualified paleontologist. A copy of the paleontological monitoring report shall be submitted to City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Director and to the professional repository, the San Bernardino County Museum. The report and specimen inventory, when submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga with confirmation of the curation of recovered specimens into the San Bernardino County Museum shall signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on paleontological resources to less than significant because Mitigation Measures 3.6-4a through 3.6-4g include requirements to prevent the destruction of unique paleontological resources or sites. Specifically, these measures require retaining a qualified paleontologist to oversee the paleontological mitigation program, retaining a paleontological monitor to monitor earthwork that

Page 11992222 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
18 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
exceeds 5 feet below the ground surface, completing an initial assessment of the significance of any discovered paleontological resources, halting earthwork when resources are discovered in the absence of a qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor, cataloging discovered resources, curating resources at a professional repository, and creating a final summary report. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on paleontological resources would not be cumulatively considerable.

Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.2.5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
Impact 3.7-1 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.7-1: Generate Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Either Directly or Indirectly, That May Have a Significant Impact on the Environment or Conflict With GHG Plans
The proposed project would generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from construction and operational activities, including emissions from truck and worker vehicle travel, yard equipment, building-related utility consumption, and refrigerants. The project would be inconsistent with the City’s CAP and the 2022 Scoping Plan. Thus, this impact would be significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measures reduce the significant project impact on GHG emissions to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4 in Section 5.2.1, “Air Quality,” above.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2c: Transport Refrigerant Unit Electrical Hookups for Cold Storage Uses This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4 in Section 5.2.1, “Air Quality,” above.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Zero Emission Construction Equipment At least 50 percent of the equipment used onsite to construct the project shall be powered by near-zero emission (NZE) or zero emission (ZE) technology. Examples of NZE and ZE technologies include battery electric, renewable diesel, hydrogen, or biomethane. This requirement applies to all construction equipment greater than or equal to 50 horsepower.

If NZE or ZE equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s construction equipment needs, the applicant shall demonstrate that a minimum of three off-road equipment fleet owners/operators/fuel providers in the San Bernardino County or adjacent counties were contacted and responded that NZE or ZE equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs.

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1b: Install Renewable Energy
The project applicant and future tenants shall design facilities with renewable energy to meet the maximum percent feasible of future power needs, including both building uses as well as charging for electrical equipment, vehicles, and trucks. The renewable energy will be installed consistent with Development Code Section 17.76.020, Development Criteria for Solar Systems, Subsection B. Design of renewable energy shall be demonstrated on building plans and submitted for approval by to the City prior to the issuance of building permits.

Page 11992233 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 19
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1c: Low GWP Refrigerants in Cold Storage The proposed project shall ensure that refrigerants with a lower global warming potential are used in cold storage refrigeration units. Typical replacements for R-410a, which has a global warming potential (GWP) of 2087.5, include R454b and R-32, which have a GWP of 465.39 and 675, respectively. Use of low GWP refrigerants shall be demonstrated on building plans for tenant improvement prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for the future tenant and shall be subject to City approval.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2a: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2 in Section 5.3.2, “Transportation,” below.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2b: Provide Employee Rideshare Program This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2 in Section 5.3.2, “Transportation,” below.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2c: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2 in Section 5.3.2, “Transportation,” below.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2d: Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2 in Section 5.3.2, “Transportation,” below.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on GHG emissions to a less-thansignificant level because Mitigation Measures 3.2-2b, 3.2-2c, 3.7-1a, 3.7-1b, 3.7-1c, 3.13-2a, 3.13-2b, 3.13-2c, and 3.13-2d would reduce the amount of GHG emissions generated from construction and operation of the proposed project in a manner that would ensure compliance with the CAP and Scoping Plan. Specifically, these mitigation measures would require zero emissions construction and yard equipment, support EV charging for trucks and vehicles, install renewable energy, require low-GWP refrigerants, and implement transportation demand management (TDM) measures to reduce employee VMT. Implementation of these measures would ensure that development under the proposed project would be consistent with the City’s CAP as well as the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan. Therefore, the project would not generate GHG missions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment or conflict with State GHG reduction goals. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on GHG emissions would not be cumulatively considerable. Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

Page 11992244 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
20 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings

5.2.6 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.8-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.8-2: Be Located on a Site which is Included on a List of Hazardous Materials Sites Compiled Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a Result, would it Create a Significant Hazard to the Public or Environment The project site is located on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The project site is listed on multiple databases that track potential and documented contamination, as discussed in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. In addition, the project has been identified as contaminated, since soil sampling and soil vapor sampling tests concluded that certain industrial chemical concentrations were reported in exceedance of screening level thresholds. Without proper safety procedures in place to ensure the proper handling and disposal of these contaminated soils, there is a potential to create a hazard to the public or environment during transport and disposal. This impact is considered potentially significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measure reduces the significant project impact on hazardous materials sites to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.8-2: Implement Remedial Action Plan To mitigate the potential for exposure to hazardous conditions, the project applicant shall implement the Remedial Action Plan prepared by Roux Associates 2025 under the oversight of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). The following actions shall be required to protect human health and the environment by minimizing the potential risk of exposure to future on-site receptors, as well as minimizing or eliminating potential future groundwater degradation from leaching of contaminants of concern:
 Permanent removal of soils, asphalt, and concrete in areas of concern impacted by diesel range organics, metals, benzo[a]pyrene, polychlorinated biphenyls, will be excavated to appropriate screening levels.  A passive vapor intrusion mitigation system will be designed in accordance with DTSC’s Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Guidance and installed beneath the future Building 4 to mitigate potential accumulation and intrusion of volatile organic compounds (VOCs).
 Future land use at the Site, including the prohibition of groundwater use for drinking water purposes, will be restricted through recording of a land use covenant with the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 67391.1.  A Site-specific Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring (OM&M) Plan will be prepared for the Site, which will define sampling and reporting procedures for soil vapor probes and indoor air. The OM&M Plan also will define contingency plans and provide decision-making protocols.

DTSC shall provide site clearance demonstrating that the site has been properly remediated to satisfactory screening levels prior to the City issuing a grading permit for the proposed project.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on hazardous materials sites to a lessthan-significant level because Mitigation Measure 3.8-2 would require the implementation of remediation actions in accordance with the requirements of the Remedial Action Plan to remove contaminated soils, install a vapor intrusion mitigation system, restricting future uses of the site, and implement an operations and maintenance program for ongoing monitoring prior to the construction phase of the project. This would minimize exposure of people and the

Page 11992255 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 21
environment to historical site hazards. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.8-2 would avoid the creation of a significant hazard to the public or environment, including but not limited to construction workers, indoor industrial workers, and outdoor industrial workers, during construction and operation of the proposed project that is related to the impacted soil and soil vapor on the project site. This mitigation would also ensure that the project’s incremental contribution to cumulative impacts on hazardous materials sites would not be cumulatively considerable.

Implementation of these mitigation measures will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.2.7 Noise and Vibration
Impact 3.11-1: Project-Related Short-Term Construction Noise Impacts Hourly noise levels during construction of the proposed warehouse complex would be up to 86.3 a-weighted decibel (dBA) equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) during daytime construction activities and 85.9 dBA Leq during nighttime construction (i.e., concrete pours). Construction noise levels would not exceed the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) daytime residential construction noise standard (i.e., 90 decibel [dB] Leq) or the City’s nighttime construction noise standards (i.e., 65 dB Leq) at any nearby residential land uses. Additionally, project-generated construction noise would not exceed the applicable FTA industrial daytime construction noise standards (i.e., 100 dB Leq) at any industrial land uses; but would exceed the City’s industrial nighttime construction noise standards (i.e., 70 dB Leq) at two industrial land uses. Further, construction-generated noise levels associated with the project would result in as much as a 12 dBA increase over existing nighttime noise levels at existing industrial receptors (i.e., State Route [SR] 1, SR 3, and SR 4), which would constitute a substantial noise increase. Therefore, this impact is considered potentially significant. Additionally, these impacts may contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR. The following mitigation measure reduces the significant project impact on noise and vibration to a less-than-significant level. These measures would also ensure cumulative impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.

Mitigation Measure 3.11-1: Implement Nighttime Construction-Noise Reduction Measures Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City, the project applicant shall implement or incorporate the following construction noise reduction measures into construction specifications for construction contractor implementation during concrete pours and any other nighttime (i.e., 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) project construction activity:
 All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise-reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturer recommendations. Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.
 All construction equipment and staging areas shall be located the maximum feasible distance from adjacent noise-sensitive land uses (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4), and/or located such that existing or constructed noise attenuating feature (e.g., temporary noise wall or blanket) block line-of-site between affected land uses and the construction noise source.
 Stationary noise sources such as generators or pumps shall be located the maximum feasible distance from adjacent uses (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4).
 Concrete mixing shall occur off-site and electric-powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment, where electric-powered equivalents are commercially available.  All motorized construction equipment shall be shut down when not in use to prevent idling.

Page 11992266 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
22 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
 For construction activity that would occur within a clear line-of-sight of adjacent offsite receptors (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4), temporary sound barriers to attenuate noise, such as temporary noise curtains, sound walls, or similar products that provide a barrier to attenuate construction noise shall be installed. The temporary sound barrier shall be located between the project construction noise sources and receptors to shield the receptors from construction noise. When installed properly, acoustic barriers can reduce construction noise levels by approximately 8-10 dB (EPA 1971). The installation of any temporary sound barrier shall meet all the following criteria:
 Be installed as close as feasible to the boundary of the construction site within the direct line of sight path of the nearby receptor(s);
 Shall consist of durable, flexible composite material featuring a noise barrier layer bound to soundabsorptive material on one side; and  Shall consist of rugged, impervious material with a surface weight of at least one pound per square foot, such that a minimum of 10 dBA reduction is achieved on the receiving side of the sound barrier.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce the impact on noise and vibration to a less-thansignificant level because Mitigation Measure 3.11-1 would require actions that reduce temporary construction noise levels at nearby receptors (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4). Specifically, this mitigation measure would reduce noise levels by locating equipment the maximum feasible distance from receptors; requiring the use of exhaust mufflers, engine shrouds, equipment enclosures; and requiring the installation of temporary noise barriers (e.g., temporary noise walls) during proposed project construction. Implementation of these noise-reduction features would reduce construction noise levels by approximately 10 dBA or more (NCHRP 1999). Nighttime construction noise levels would need to be reduced by approximately 1 dB at SR 1 and by approximately 3 dB at SR 3 during nighttime hours to comply with the industrial nighttime noise standards detailed in Section 17.66. 050(D)(4)(b) (i.e., 70 dB at industrial land uses) of the Municipal Code. Implementation of the noise-reduction features included in Mitigation Measure 3.11-1 would reduce construction noise levels at sensitive receptors by approximately 10 dBA. Therefore, with mitigation, constructiongenerated noise levels at SR 1 and SR 3 would not exceed the applicable City standard.

Additionally, to avoid a substantial increase in nighttime noise levels, nighttime construction noise level increases would need to be reduced by approximately 1 dB at SR 1 and SR 3 and by approximately 2 dB at SR 4. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.11-1 would reduce construction noise levels by approximately 10 dBA. Therefore, nighttime construction would not result in a substantial noise increase at SR 1, SR 3, or SR 4 because noise levels would be reduced below the applicable threshold.

Implementation of this mitigation measure will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.3 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The City Planning Commission agrees with the characterization in the EIR with respect to all impacts identified as “significant and unavoidable”, even with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR and MMRP.

In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a), a specific finding is made for each impact and its associated mitigation measures in the discussions below.

Page 11992277 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 23

5.3.1 Air Quality
Impact 3.2-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-2: Generate Construction and Operational Emissions in Exceedance of SCAQMD’s Mass Emission Thresholds Proposed project construction activities would generate criteria pollutant emissions that exceed SCAQMD regional construction-period thresholds for VOC, and proposed project operations would exceed SCAQMD regional operationsperiod thresholds for VOC, oxides of nitrogen (NOx), and carbon monoxide (CO). Therefore, this impact is significant.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that would substantially lessen construction and operational emissions of criteria air pollutants. However, VOC emissions from operations would not be reduced to below thresholds. Thus, the impact would not be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible additional mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts; therefore, a statement of overriding considerations will be required.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2a: Construction Low VOC Coatings To reduce VOC emissions during construction activities involving the application of coatings, the construction contractors shall use low-VOC coatings with a VOC content of 10 g/L or less during all phases of construction or comply with SCAQMD Rule 113 and extend the painting schedule to ensure VOC emissions do not exceed SCAQMD regional construction thresholds. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall submit a list of coatings to be used, their respective VOC content, and a summary of the surface area to be painted to the City. The project applicant and future tenants shall report this information to the City to verify compliance. This shall be enforced through oversight by the City and shall be included as part of contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all ongoing responsibilities during construction.

Mitigation Measure 3.2-2d: Idling Limits During Operations This mitigation measure is described under Impact 3.2-4 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-4 in Section 5.2.1, “Air Quality,” above.

Facts in Support of Findings
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.2-2a through 3.2-2d would substantially lessen construction and operational emissions of criteria air pollutants by requiring the use of low-VOC coatings during construction, fully electric yard equipment and electric vehicle charging stations, transport refrigerant unit electrical hookups for cold storage uses, and idling limits for medium- and heavy-duty trucks during operations. The EIR analysis of the project concluded that with implementation of Mitigation Measure 3.2-2a, emissions of all criteria pollutants, including VOCs, would be below SCAQMD regional construction thresholds and construction impacts associated with VOCs would be reduced to a lessthan-significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.2-2b through 3.2-2d, NOx and CO emissions would be reduced below the thresholds with mitigation; however, VOC emissions would not be reduced to below thresholds. No additional feasible mitigation or alternatives are available to further reduce this impact. Therefore, the project-level impact on criteria air pollutants would be significant and unavoidable, and the project would contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 3.2-2a through 3.2- 2d will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

Page 11992288 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
24 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings

5.3.2 Transportation
Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2: Conflict or Be Inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) Regarding Vehicle Miles Traveled Construction activities would be temporary and intermittent and thus would not result in long-term increases in vehicular trips. The operation of the proposed project would result in a project-generated VMT per employee of 23.8 in a baseline scenario and 22.7 VMT per employee in a future year scenario, which would exceed the City’s threshold of 22.3 VMT per employee. The proposed project effect on VMT would increase future year levels of VMT per service population within a 30-mile boundary from the project site, which exceeds the City’s threshold of no increase.

Therefore, the proposed project would conflict with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. This impact is significant.

Findings
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that would reduce project-generated VMT in the baseline and future scenarios to less than the City’s threshold. However, the project effect on VMT would still result in an increase in VMT per service population within a 30-mile boundary of the project site. Thus, the impact would not be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible additional mitigation measures that would reduce significant impacts; therefore, a statement of overriding considerations will be required.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2a: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement a marketing strategy to promote the project site employer’s commute trip reduction program. The marketing strategy shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 4 percent. The following features (or similar) shall be evaluated as part of development of the marketing strategy:
 on-site or online commuter information services,
 employee transportation coordinators,
 on-site or online transit pass sales, and
 guaranteed ride home service.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2b: Provide Employee Rideshare Program Prior to the issuance certificate of occupancy by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement a ridesharing program for employees with similar commutes with funding requirements for employers. Existing programs including Inland Empire Commuter can be leveraged for this measure. The employee rideshare program shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 4 percent. The following strategies shall be evaluated as part of development of the rideshare program:
 designating a certain percentage of desirable parking spaces for ridesharing vehicles,  designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ridesharing vehicles, and  providing an app or website for coordinating rides.

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2c: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities Prior to the issuance of building permits by the City, the project applicant shall install and maintain end-of-trip facilities for employee use. The implementation of end-of-trip facilities shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 0.3-percent. End-of-trip facilities considered in the proposed project shall include but not be limited to:
bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers.

Page 11992299 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 25
Mitigation Measure 3.13-2d: Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement an employersponsored vanpool service. The employer-sponsored vanpool service shall be designed and operated to reduce project generated VMT per employee by 1.6 percent.

Facts in Support of Findings
The project’s EIR analysis determined that mitigation would reduce project-generated VMT per employee.

Specifically, Mitigation Measures 3.13-2a through 3.13-2d require the project tenant(s) to implement commute trip reduction marketing, and provide an employee rideshare program, end-of-trip bicycle facilities, and an employersponsored vanpool service. Although project-generated VMT would be reduced to less than the City’s threshold in the baseline and future scenarios, the project would still result in an increase in VMT per service population within a 30-mile boundary of the project site. No additional feasible mitigation or alternatives are available to further reduce this impact. Therefore, the project-level impact on VMT would be significant and unavoidable, and the project would contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to a considerable degree. Implementation of Mitigation Measures

3.13-2a through 3.13-2d will be enforced through the MMRP; compliance with the MMRP will be included as a condition of project approval.

5.4 FINDINGS ASSOCIATED WITH PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
This section describes the alternatives that were considered for the proposed project, including the alternatives rejected from consideration and alternatives carried forward for analysis in the EIR. Additionally, findings are made for each of the alternatives, including the reasons for rejecting the project alternatives pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(c).

5.4.1 Alternatives Considered but Rejected in the EIR
As described above, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) provides that the range of potential alternatives for the project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. Alternatives that fail to meet the fundamental project purpose need not be addressed in detail in an EIR. (In re Bay-Delta Programmatic Environmental Impact Report Coordinated Proceedings (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1143, 1165-1167.) In determining what alternatives should be considered in the EIR, it is important to acknowledge the objectives of the project, the project’s significant effects, and unique project considerations. These factors are crucial to the development of alternatives that meet the criteria specified in Section 15126.6(a). Although, as noted above, EIRs must contain a discussion of “potentially feasible” alternatives, the ultimate determination as to whether an alternative is feasible or infeasible is made by lead agency decision-maker(s). (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21081(a)(3).) At the time of action on the project, the decision-maker(s) may consider evidence beyond that found in this EIR in addressing such determinations. The decision-maker(s), for example, may conclude that a particular alternative is infeasible (i.e., undesirable) from a policy standpoint, and may reject an alternative on that basis provided that the decision-maker(s) adopts a finding, supported by substantial evidence, to that effect, and provided that such a finding reflects a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and other considerations supported by substantial evidence. (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 401, 417; California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 998.) The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected during the planning or scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination.

The following alternatives were considered by the City but were not evaluated further in the EIR.

Page 11993300 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
26 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings

ALTERNATIVE LOCATION
When a lead agency considers alternatives to a project, “the key question and first step” is whether “putting the project in another location” would avoid or substantially lessen the project’s significant impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][2][A]). If no feasible alternative locations exist, the lead agency must disclose the reasons for this conclusion in the EIR.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f) requires consideration of an alternative location that the Applicant would be reasonably able to acquire, control, or gain access to develop. Under this alternative, an alternative location would be chosen and would substantially reduce or avoid potential environmental impacts. While there may be other vacant properties within the City, which could be similar in size to the project site, no feasible alternative locations exist for the proposed project for the reasons described herein.

The project site is located within the City’s Southeast Industrial Area, which is an industrial and warehouse district designated by the City with the intention of clustering industrial and warehouse operations in proximity to similar uses and buffered from non-industrial uses. While there could be similarly sized vacant lots outside of the Southeast Industrial Area, these alternative locations would create a land use conflict by siting an industrial use in a nonindustrial (e.g., residential or commercial) area, which would conflict with the City’s approach to land use planning. In addition, by locating the proposed project in an alternative location outside of the Southeast Industrial Area, this alternative location would be adjacent to residential, commercial, or other high human-occupied uses (i.e., schools, hospitals, etc.), which would create additional and/or increase severity of environmental effects due to the proximity of industrial uses and human activity. Furthermore, an alternative location outside of the Southeast Industrial Area would not achieve the majority of the project objectives.

Moreover, while there could be alternative locations within the Southeast Industrial Area similar in size to the project site, the difference between this alternative location and the project site would not be great enough to reduce the significant environmental impacts of the proposed project as this alternative location would have characteristics very similar to the project site due to its location within the Southeast Industrial Area. Lastly, the Applicant already has ownership control over the project site and does not control other undeveloped property of similar size that is not currently identified for development within the Southeast Industrial Area or within other industrial areas of the city. It would not be economically feasible for the Applicant to put the proposed project in another location because doing so would require the Applicant to sell the project site and pay for the high cost of purchasing another site within the Southeast Industrial Area. Therefore, it is for these reasons that the alternative location alternative was considered but rejected from further evaluation within the EIR.

5.4.2 Alternatives Evaluated in the EIR
Three alternatives, representing a range of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, were selected for detailed analysis. The goal for evaluating these alternatives is to identify ways to avoid or lessen the significant environmental effects resulting from implementation of the proposed project, while attaining most of the project objectives.

The following sections provide a general description of each alternative, its ability to meet the project objectives, and a qualitative discussion of its comparative environmental impacts. As provided in Section 15126.6(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, the significant effects of these alternatives are identified in less detail than the analysis of the proposed project in the EIR.

ALTERNATIVE 1: NO PROJECT – NO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE
Summary of Alternative
CEQA requires a “no project” alternative to be evaluated in an EIR. Alternative 1, No Project-No Development Alternative, assumes that the proposed project would not be approved and that no new development would occur on the project site in the future; the existing physical conditions of the project site would not change. Under this

Page 11993311 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 27
alternative, the project site would not be developed as contemplated by the proposed project and would remain vacant and undeveloped. The project site would remain as it is under existing conditions, consisting of a vacant, undeveloped parcel with previously disturbed bare ground, piles of crushed concrete and asphalt aggregate, minimal ornamental and ruderal vegetation, and minimal impervious surface area. No construction, including implementation of the site-specific RAP, or operation activities would occur on-site under this alternative.

Findings
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

Facts in Support of the Finding
As discussed in Chapter 5, “Alternatives,” of the Draft EIR, the No Project–No Development Alternative would avoid all adverse environmental impacts (as mitigated) associated with construction and operation of the proposed project; however, this alternative would not meet the project objectives listed in Section 2.2, “Project Objectives.” Specifically, maintaining the site as vacant, undeveloped land would not help the City achieve the General Plan’s vision for creating a modernized industrial employment district in the Southeast Industrial Area. In addition, this alternative would not provide new employment opportunities that would improve the City’s jobs-to-housing balance and would not contribute to economic activity that would increase the City’s tax base and overall economic development in the City. Furthermore, this alternative would not achieve several of project’s benefits, which include removing onsite contaminated soils and providing a complete network of streets and access routes to increase access and improve public safety in the Southeast Industrial Area.

It should also be noted the project site is unlikely to remain non-operational indefinitely because it is located within the City’s Industrial Employment District and zoned Industrial Employment (see Section 3.10.2, “Environmental Setting,” of the Draft EIR). As the General Plan and zoning designation indicates, the City Planning Commission has determined that industrial uses of some kind are appropriate for the site. In creating this industrial designation, the City has signaled to the property owners and to the real estate market in general that economic investments in the project site in the form of environmental review, permitting, and engineering work should ultimately lead to the right to make a substantial economic use of the property. If, after creating expectations of this kind, the City were to repeatedly deny requests to allow redevelopment of the site, at some point the City might face a claim that such denials have amounted to a regulatory taking of the property without just compensation. In short, it is unrealistic to assume that the project site will remain non-operational for the foreseeable future.

Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), based on the whole of the record, the City Planning Commission finds that the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including failure to feasibly attain all the basic objectives of the proposed project, render the No Project Alternative infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project.

ALTERNATIVE 2: REDUCED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
Summary of Alternative
Under Alternative 2, Reduced Project Alternative, the project would construct a total of 1,547,140 sf of industrial and warehouse uses on the same overall project site, which is 283,589 sf less than the proposed project. Under Alternative 2, only four industrial/warehouse buildings would be developed onsite as Buildings 1, 3, 4, and 5 proposed under the project would be retained but Building 2 would be eliminated. Buildings 1 and 3 would maintain the same building footprint and square footage and number of parking stalls for both automobiles and trailers as identified under the proposed project. Buildings 4 and 5 would be reduced in size, where Building 4 would be reduced by 48,681 sf and Building 5 would be reduced by the greatest amount at 152,979 sf. In addition, the number of dock doors in both buildings would proportionally decrease as compared to the proposed project. All building heights and design would remain consistent as described under the proposed project. Alternative 2 would accommodate approximately 1,190

Page 11993322 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
28 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
employees daily, which is 218 fewer employees compared to the proposed project (i.e., 1,408 employees). Once construction is completed, Alternative 2 would operate similarly to the project but with a reduced operational capacity due to the decrease in building square footage, loading bays and spaces, and employees.

Facts in Support of the Finding
As discussed in Chapter 5, “Alternatives,” of the Draft EIR, Alternative 2 would reduce the severity of the proposed project’s environmental impacts (as mitigated) because the building size would be 283,589 sf less than that of the proposed project, with 218 fewer employees than the proposed project. Alternative 2 would meet six of the project objectives but would not meet the last objective, which is to maximize the rate of economic activity per acre of land to increase the City’s tax base and overall economic development in the City. Therefore, Alternative 2 would represent an undesirable policy outcome because the economic merits of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed project.

As described in Section 5.3, “Significant and Unavoidable Impacts,” the proposed project would result in significant impacts on air quality (Impact 3.2-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-2) and transportation (Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2) that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level. The project’s significant and unavoidable impact on air quality (Impact 3.2-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-2) would be avoided Under Alternative

2. However, Alternative 2 would result in the same significant and unavoidable impact on transportation (Impact 3.13- 2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2) as the project. While Alternative 2 would avoid the project’s significant and unavoidable impact on air quality, it would not eliminate the significant and unavoidable impact on transportation, and would do so at the expense of substantially diminishing the proposed project’s ability to meet one of its fundamental objectives of optimizing the site’s development potential. The reduced building size and operational capacity under Alternative 2 would result in decreased economic benefits, fewer employment opportunities, and less efficient use of the City’s land that has already been designated for modernized industrial employment uses. The City Planning Commission, as policymaker, finds that the increased social and economic benefits to the City from selecting the proposed project outweigh the incrementally reduced impacts of selecting Alternative 2. Furthermore, the City Planning Commission gives weight to the fact that the applicant sees a business benefit in including the full industrial warehouse building in the proposed project.

Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), based on the whole of the record, the City Planning Commission finds that the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations render Alternative 2 infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project.

ALTERNATIVE 3: INCLUSION OF COMMERCIAL/RETAIL USE ALTERNATIVE Summary of Alternative
Alternative 3 was identified as an attempt to help reduce employee VMT impacts within the Southeast Industrial Area by introducing new commercial and/or retail uses consistent with allowable uses under the Industrial Employment (IE) zoning to better serve the employees of the project site and surrounding industrial operations. Under Alternative 3, the total building square footage would not change compared to the proposed project. However, this alternative would replace 30,000 sf of industrial and warehouse uses with commercial and/or retail uses to provide options for grab-n-go restaurants and/or stores, which are currently limited in the Southeast Industrial Area. The inclusion of grab-n-go restaurants and/or stores are intended to ultimately encourage employees from the project site and other surrounding business and industrial uses to stay within the Southeast Industrial Area during mealtimes instead of having to drive elsewhere in the city to pick up food options. Because employees would not need to travel outside of the Southeast Industrial Area for food options, Alternative 3 aims to help reduce employee VMT within the Southeast Industrial Area during the workday. In addition, Alternative 3 could also reduce operational air quality and GHG impacts connected with a reduction in employee vehicle trips.

Page 11993333 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 29
Findings
Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.

Facts in Support of the Finding
As discussed in Chapter 5, “Alternatives,” of the Draft EIR, Alternative 3 was identified as an attempt to reduce the severity of the proposed project’s environmental impacts (as mitigated) because the inclusion of commercial and/or retail uses would encourage employees to stay within the Southeast Industrial Area during mealtimes. However, Alternative 3 would result in the same significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality (Impact 3.2-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-2) and transportation (Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2) as the project. While Alternative 3 would meet all project objectives, this alternative would not reduce any of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and therefore, was determined to not be superior to the proposed project.

Therefore, there would be no benefit in selecting Alternative 3 in place of the proposed project. Furthermore, Alternative 3 would reduce the area of industrial and warehouse uses by 30,000 sf compared to the proposed project.

Therefore, Alternative 3 would be less effective than the proposed project at meeting the last objective, which is to maximize the rate of economic activity per acre of land to increase the City’s tax base and overall economic development in the City. Therefore, Alternative 3 would represent an undesirable policy outcome because the economic merits of this alternative would be less than those of the proposed project.

Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(3) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), based on the whole of the record, the City Planning Commission finds that the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations render Alternative 3 infeasible and less desirable than the proposed project.

ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, one of the alternatives must be identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative. Because Alternative 1, the No Project - No Development Alternative, would avoid all significant impacts resulting from construction and operation of the proposed project, it is the environmentally superior alternative. When the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126[d][2]) require selection of an environmentally superior alternative from among the other action alternatives evaluated.

Alternative 2 – Reduced Project would be the environmentally superior alternative because this alternative reduces the severity of the project’s environmental impacts while also meeting the majority of the project objectives.

Alternative 2 would eliminate the significant and unavoidable impact related to construction air quality associated with the proposed project, as well as reduce the magnitude of change for impacts associated with public services, transportation, and utilities. However, this alternative would slightly increase the magnitude of change for impacts associated with aesthetics (glare) and noise (traffic noise). Alternative 2 would not achieve one of the project objectives, which is to maximize the rate of economic activity per acre of land in order to increase the City’s tax base as well as to increase overall economic development in the city. While Alternative 2 would introduce new modern industrial and warehouse uses on the project site, because this alternative would be a reduced version of the proposed project, it would not fully utilize the project site to its highest economic potential for the City. Lastly, while Alternative 3 would meet all project objectives, this alternative would not reduce any of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project and therefore, was determined to not be superior to the proposed project.

Therefore, Alternative 2 is identified as the environmentally superior alternative, but for the reasons provided above, the City has rejected this alternative.

Page 11993344 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
30 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
6 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
CEQA requires the lead agency to balance the economic, social, legal, technological, and other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project.

Specifically, CEQA Section 21002 provides that “in the event specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof.” In addition, CEQA Section 21002.1(c) states, “If economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to mitigate one or more significant effects on the environment of a project, the project may nonetheless be carried out or approved at the discretion of a public agency....” State CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 provides that a “public agency shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared unless… [the agency has] determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093.” Finally, State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(a) provides that “[i]f the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered ’acceptable.’” The City Planning Commission has carefully balanced the benefits of the project against the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR that cannot be feasibly mitigated to a less-than-significant level. Notwithstanding the significant environmental effects identified in the EIR that cannot feasibly be eliminated, lessened, or mitigated to a less-than-significant level, the City Planning Commission, acting pursuant to CEQA Sections 21002 and 21002.1 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15092 and 15093, hereby determines that the significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable, as set forth below, are acceptable because of the overriding considerations described below. The City Planning Commission finds that each one of the following benefits of the proposed project, as set forth below, independent of each of the other benefits, warrants approval of the proposed project notwithstanding the unavoidable environmental impacts of the proposed project.

6.1 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
The project would have the following significant and unavoidable impacts:
 Impact 3.2-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.2-2: Generate Construction and Operational Emissions in Exceedance of SCAQMD’s Mass Emission Thresholds, and
 Impact 3.13-2 and Cumulative Impact 4.3.13-2: Conflict or Be Inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) Regarding Vehicle Miles Traveled

6.2 PROJECT BENEFITS
Pursuant to PRC Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15091 et. seq. and after extensive review of the entire administrative record, the City Planning Commission has determined that the project should be approved, and that the significant and unavoidable environmental effects of the project are outweighed by the following environmental, economic, social, technological, and other overriding considerations. The below stated reasons summarize the goals and objectives of the proposed project and provide the rationale for the benefits of the proposed project, each one being a separate and independent basis on which to approve the proposed project. Substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that approval and implementation of the project would provide the benefits listed below. The City Planning Commission thus finds as follows:
 The project would redevelop 94 acres of vacant, underutilized land within the Southeast Industrial Area, directly implementing the General Plan’s vision for a modernized industrial employment district that advances the City’s economic development goals.

Page 11993355 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 31
 The project would remediate existing site conditions by removing and properly managing hazardous materials to enable safe industrial use of the project site consistent with applicable regulatory standards. The remediation would include permanent removal of soils, asphalt, and concrete in areas of concern impacted by diesel range organics, metals, benzo[a]pyrene, polychlorinated biphenyls, to appropriate screening levels. Remediation would also include installation of a passive vapor intrusion mitigation system to mitigate potential accumulation and intrusion of VOCs. A land use covenant would also be recorded to protect human health by prohibiting future land use at the project site. Lastly, a site-specific OM&M Plan would be prepared for the project site that would define sampling and reporting procedures for soil vapor probes and indoor air, contingency plans, and decisionmaking protocols to protect human health. This remediation would reduce existing environmental constraints associated with site development and reduce long-term public health risks associated with continued site vacancy and unmanaged conditions.
 The project would introduce approximately 1,830,729 gross square feet of new warehouse distribution space strategically located near compatible industrial uses and available infrastructure (such as designated truck routes, and the State highway system, and utilities), while avoiding proximity to residential and other sensitive land uses.

By situating industrial development within an established employment area and in close proximity to regional transportation infrastructure, the project would support efficient goods movement and reduce the need for industrial development in less suitable locations.
 The project would leverage existing and planned infrastructure, including utilities and transportation facilities, and would improve circulation within the Southeast Industrial Area through the construction of new public streets and access routes. These improvements would enhance site accessibility, emergency response capabilities, and public safety while improving internal connectivity for industrial operations.  The project would generate employment opportunities, accommodating up to 150 temporary construction jobs and approximately 1,408 employees daily during operations. By increasing the availability of quality industrial employment opportunities within the City, the project would reduce the need for members of the local workforce to commute outside the area for employment and would contribute to improving the City’s jobs-to-housing balance.
 The project would also provide fiscal and economic benefits by maximizing economic activity per acre of land.

During operations, the project is expected to generate more revenue toward the City’s tax base compared to existing conditions.

In conclusion, the City Planning Commission finds that the foregoing benefits provided through approval of the proposed project outweigh the identified significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. The City Planning Commission further finds that each of the individual benefits discussed above outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable. The City Planning Commission further finds that each of the benefits listed above, standing alone, is sufficient justification for the City Planning Commission to override these unavoidable environmental impacts.

Page 11993366 ends

Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
32 Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings
7 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The City has prepared an MMRP for the project (Attachment A to these findings). The City Planning Commission, in adopting these findings, also approves the MMRP. As lead agency under CEQA, the City is responsible for the overall implementation and management of the MMRP. However, the project proponent will ultimately execute many of the mitigation actions. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with project mitigation measures. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. The MMRP is incorporated into the proposed project and is approved in conjunction with certification of the EIR and adoption of these findings of fact. If any conflict arises between these findings and the MMRP with respect to the requirements of an adopted mitigation measure, the more stringent measure shall control and shall be incorporated automatically into both the findings and the MMRP.

Page 11993377 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project Findings 33
8 REFERENCES
EPA. See US Environmental Protection Agency.

National Cooperative Highway Research Program. 1999. Mitigation of Nighttime Construction Noise, Vibrations, and Other Nuisances. Transportation Research Board National Research Council.

NCHRP. See National Cooperative Highway Research Program.

Roux Associates. 2025. Draft Remedial Action Plan: 12451 Arow Route, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Prepared for BTC III Arrow Route CC LP. March 17. Long Beach, CA.

US Environmental Protection Agency. 1971 (December). Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances. Washington, DC. Prepared by Bolt Baranek and Newman.

Page 11993388 ends

Attachment A
Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program

Page 11993399 ends

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
Arrow Commerce Center Project
SCH No. 2023110033
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Department
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
February 2026

Page 11994400 ends

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
Arrow Commerce Center Project
SCH No. 2023110033
Prepared for:

City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Contact:

Caleb Richards
Senior Planner
909.477.2750
[email protected]
Prepared by:

Ascent
530 Technology Drive, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
Contact:

Marlie Long
Project Manager
619.604.3787
[email protected]
February 2026
18010188.06

Page 11994411 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................................................... II MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ............................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................................................1 Purpose of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ...................................................................................................1 Roles and Responsibilities...................................................................................................................................................................1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Table..............................................................................................................1 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Tables
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ........................................................................................................ 2

Page 11994422 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ii Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CAP Climate Action Plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Rancho Cucamonga
COC contaminant of concern
dB decibel
dBA a-weighted decibel
DRO diesel range organics
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EIR environmental impact report
EV electric vehicle
g/L grams per liter
GBMI Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation
GWP global warming potential
IE Inland Empire
LUC land use covenant
MBMI Morongo Band of Mission Indians
MMRP mitigation monitoring and reporting program
NZE near-zero emission
OM&M Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring
PCB polychlorinated biphenyls
PRC Public Resources Code
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SR State Route
TCR tribal cultural resources
TRU Transport Refrigeration Unit
VIMS vapor intrusion mitigation system
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
ZE zero emission

Page 11994433 ends

City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 1

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.), the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) prepared an environmental impact report (EIR) for the Arrow Commerce Center Project (State Clearinghouse No. 2023110033) that identified significant impacts and mitigation measures that would reduce the identified impacts to less-than-significant levels, where feasible.

CEQA Section 21081.6 and State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091(d) and 15097 require public agencies to adopt a reporting and monitoring program for the changes made to the project it has adopted or made a condition of project approval to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. This mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) has been prepared for the project because the EIR identifies potentially significant adverse impacts related to project implementation, as well as mitigation measures to reduce those impacts. Adoption of this MMRP would occur along with approval of the project.

PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This MMRP has been prepared to ensure that all required mitigation measures are implemented and completed in a satisfactory manner before and during project construction and operation, as applicable.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The City is responsible for overall administration of the MMRP and for verifying that the project proponent, construction contractor, or other designated party has completed the necessary actions for each measure. The party responsible for implementing each item will identify the staff members responsible for coordinating with the City on the MMRP.

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM TABLE
Table 1, provided below, has been prepared to assist the responsible parties with implementing the mitigation measures. The numbering of mitigation measures follows the numbering used in the EIR. Mitigation measures that are referenced more than once in the EIR are not duplicated in the MMRP table. The table includes the following columns:
 Mitigation Measures: This column presents all the mitigation measures identified in the EIR, each of which has been adopted and incorporated into the project.
 Implementing Party: This column identifies the entity responsible for undertaking the required action.  Timing: Implementation of the action must occur before or during some part of project approval, project design, or project construction or on an ongoing basis. This column identifies the timing for implementation of each mitigation measure.
 Verification of Compliance: The City is responsible for ensuring that mitigation measures are successfully implemented. The “Verification of Compliance” column is to be used by the City to indicate how and when a mitigation measure was implemented. The City, at its discretion, may delegate implementation responsibility or portions thereof to qualified consultants or contractors.

Page 11994444 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
2 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance Air Quality
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2a: Construction Low VOC Coatings To reduce VOC emissions during construction activities involving the application of coatings, the construction contractors shall use low-VOC coatings with a VOC content of 10 g/L or less during all phases of construction or comply with SCAQMD Rule 113 and extend the painting schedule to ensure VOC emissions do not exceed SCAQMD regional construction thresholds. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the project applicant shall submit a list of coatings to be used, their respective VOC content, and a summary of the surface area to be painted to the City. The project applicant and future tenants shall report this information to the City to verify compliance. This shall be enforced through oversight by the City and shall be included as part of contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all ongoing responsibilities during construction.

Project applicant,
construction contractors,
and/or future tenants,
with City oversight
Prior to issuance of a
grading permit and
during all phases of
construction involving the
application of coatings
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation To reduce impacts from operations-related exhaust emissions, the project shall be required to employ fully electric yard equipment and include EV charging stations to allow for the EV truck charging.  All yard equipment used onsite for warehouse operations, including but not limited to forklifts and yard trucks, shall be powered by zero emission (ZE) technology, such as battery electric. The project applicant shall provide adequate charging stations within the project site to allow for the use of 100 percent EV equipment. These requirements are consistent with Strategy 1.4 of the CAP, which requires equipment used in the operation of commercial and industrial uses greater than or equal to 50 horsepower to be equipped with ZE technology or fuels.
 The project applicant shall provide 10 percent “EV Ready” parking spaces, and 5 percent “EV Installed” parking spaces. These requirements are consistent with Strategy 1.2 of the CAP and, for the purposes of this measure, applies to both employee parking and medium-duty and heavy-duty truck parking.

In order for this measure to be feasible, the project applicant shall ensure that the building design includes adequate electrical infrastructure to power the EV charging units in addition to the building’s other electrical demands.
 The project applicant shall disclose this requirement to all tenants/business entities prior to the signing of any lease agreement. In addition, the limitation on using only ZE off-road yard equipment and adequate automotive and truck charging shall be included in all leasing agreements. Prior to issuance of a Business License for a new tenant/business entity, the project facility owner and tenant/business entity shall provide to the City Planning Division a signed document (verification document) noting that the Project development/facility owner has disclosed to the tenant/business entity the requirement to use only ZE equipment for daily operations.  The use of gasoline-powered landscape equipment shall be prohibited. This shall be enforced through verification of the City through a condition of approval made between future project applicants and the City. For this measure to be successfully implemented, the project applicant shall install electrical outlets Project applicant, facility
owner, and future
building tenant(s), with
City oversight
Prior to issuance of a
Business License and
throughout the life of the
project

Page 11994455 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 3
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance on the exterior of buildings so that the corded electric landscaping equipment can be more easily used in different areas, and batteries can be charged if indoor charging is not available.

This measure only applies to the portion of future tenant uses that includes cold storage warehousing.

Future tenants of cold storage facilities (e.g., storage facility equipped with temperature-controlled environments) within the project site shall ensure that all TRUs are plugged in and that no TRUs run on diesel power.

In order for this measure to be feasible, the project applicant shall ensure that the building design includes adequate electrical infrastructure to allow for the charging of all TRUs.

If zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs. To support this, the applicant shall demonstrate that a minimum of three offroad equipment fleet owners/operators/fuel providers in the San Bernardino County or adjacent counties were contacted and responded that zero emission equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs.

Project applicant, facility
owner, and future
building tenant(s), with
City oversight
Prior to issuance of
building permits and
throughout the life of the
project
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2d: Idling Limits During Operations The project proponent and future tenants shall ensure that all medium- and heavy-duty trucks that visit the project site limit their idling by shutting down engines when not in use. Ilding shall be limited to a maximum idling time of less than 3 minutes at any given location and a total of 15 minutes total within the project site for each truck visit. The future tenants shall install clear signage regarding the limitation on idling time at the delivery driveway and loading areas. The project applicant and future tenants shall report this information to the City to verify compliance. This shall be enforced through oversight by the City and shall be included as part of the contractual lease agreement language to ensure the tenants/lessees are informed of all ongoing responsibilities.

Project proponent and
future tenant(s), with City
oversight
Throughout the life of the
project

Page 11994466 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
4 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance Archaeological, Historical, and Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure 3.3-1: For All Ground-Disturbing Construction Activities, Halt Ground Disturbance Upon Discovery of Subsurface Archaeological Deposits
In the event that any precontact or historic era subsurface archaeological features or deposits, including locally darkened soil (“midden”), that could conceal cultural deposits are discovered during construction, all ground-disturbing activity within 50 feet of the resources shall be halted by construction personnel, and a qualified professional archaeologist (one who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology) shall be retained to assess the significance of the find. If the qualified archaeologist determines the archaeological material to be Native American in nature, the City shall contact the appropriate California Native American tribes (GBMI, MBMI, and other tribes affiliated with the project site). A California Native American tribe(s) that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site may make recommendations for further evaluation and treatment as necessary and provide input on the preferred treatment of the find.

If the find is determined to be significant by the qualified archaeologist or the tribal representative (i.e., because it is determined to constitute a unique archaeological resource or a tribal cultural resource, as appropriate), the qualified archaeologist and tribal representative, as appropriate, shall develop, and the applicant shall implement appropriate procedures to protect the integrity of the resource and ensure that no additional resources are significantly affected. Procedures shall include but would not necessarily be limited to preservation in place (which shall be the preferred manner of protecting unique archaeological resources and tribal cultural resources), archival research, monitoring, subsurface testing, or contiguous block unit excavation and data recovery (pursuant to a data recovery plan). No work at the discovery location shall resume until all necessary investigation and evaluation of the resource has been concluded by the archaeologist and/or tribal representative(s).

Project applicant,
construction contractors,
qualified professional
archaeologist, and tribal
representative, with City
oversight
During constructionrelated ground-disturbing
activities
Mitigation Measure 3.3-2a: Provide all Cultural Documents to MBMI and Continue Coordination The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by MBMI. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the proposed 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 proposed 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 shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity. The monitor 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 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 Project applicant and the
City
Prior to and the
commencement of
ground-disturbing activity
or the issuance of any
permit necessary to
commence a grounddisturbing activity, during
ground-disturbing
activities

Page 11994477 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 5
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance burial goods. Copies of monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant upon written request to the Tribe. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the MBMI from a designated point of contact from the project applicant that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the proposed project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by MBMI to the project applicant that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact TCRs.

Mitigation Measure 3.3-2b: Retain a Native American Monitor from the GBMI Prior to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing Activities
The project applicant shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the GBMI. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity” for the proposed 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 proposed 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 shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity. The monitor 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 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 applicant upon written request to the Tribe. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written confirmation to the GBMI from a designated point of contact from the project applicant that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the proposed project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the GBMI to the project applicant that no future, planned construction activity and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential to impact TCRs.

Project applicant and the
City
Prior to and the
commencement of
ground-disturbing activity
or the issuance of any
permit necessary to
commence a grounddisturbing activity, during
ground-disturbing
activities
Mitigation Measure 3.3-2c: Halt Ground Disturbance Upon the Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural Resource Objects (Non-Funerary/Non-Ceremonial)
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 tribal monitors and/or GBMI/MBMI archaeologists. Affected tribes will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe(s) deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe(s) deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes, or repatriation.

Project applicant and
construction contractors,
with oversight from the
City
During construction
involving grounddisturbing activities

Page 11994488 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
6 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure 3.3-2d: Halt Ground Disturbance Upon the Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary or Ceremonial Objects
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 PRC 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 PRC 5097.9 as well as Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 shall be followed. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California PRC 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.

Project applicant,
construction contractors,
and the City
During construction
involving grounddisturbing activities
Energy
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation This mitigation measure is described under “Air Quality,” above.

See “Air Quality” above See “Air Quality” above
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2c: Transport Refrigerant Unit Electrical Hookups for Cold Storage Uses This mitigation measure is described under “Air Quality,” above.

See “Air Quality” above See “Air Quality” above
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Zero Emission Construction Equipment This mitigation measure is described under “Greenhouse Gase Emissions and Climate Change,” below.

See “Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Climate
Change” below
See “Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Climate
Change” below
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1b: Install Renewable Energy
This mitigation measure is described under “Greenhouse Gase Emissions and Climate Change,” below.

See “Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Climate
Change” below
See “Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Climate
Change” below
Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measure 3.6-4a: Retain a Qualified Paleontologist Prior to the start of earthwork, a qualified paleontologist shall be retained to oversee the paleontological mitigation program and shall attend the pre-construction meeting to consult with proposed project contractors concerning excavation schedules, paleontological field techniques, and safety issues relating to the protection of paleontological resources that could be encountered. The qualified Paleontologist shall have the following qualifications:
 an M.S. or Ph.D. emphasizing paleontology and sedimentary geology,  professional experience with paleontological procedures and techniques,  knowledge of the geology and paleontology of San Bernardino County, and  at least 2 years of work experience as a paleontological mitigation project supervisor.

Project applicant,
qualified paleontologist,
and construction
contractors, with City
oversight
Prior to the start of
earthwork and for the
duration of construction
activities involving
earthwork

Page 11994499 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 7
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance In addition, a professional repository shall be designated by the qualified Paleontologist to receive and curate any discovered/recovered fossils. A professional repository is defined as a recognized paleontological specimen repository (e.g., an American Alliance of Museums-accredited museum or university) with a permanent curator, and that is capable of storing fossils in a facility with adequate security against theft, loss, damage, fire, pests, and adverse climate conditions (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). The qualified Paleontologist shall also direct the work of the paleontological monitor described in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4b.

Mitigation Measure 3.6-4b: Monitor Earthwork that Exceeds 5 Feet Below Ground Surface A paleontological monitor shall be on-site full-time to monitor earthwork that exceeds 5 feet below ground surface (e.g., remedial grading for the building pads, excavation for water quality basins, and trenching for subgrade utilities), unless such earthwork only involves areas of known artificial fill. The paleontological monitor shall have the following qualifications:
 a college degree emphasizing paleontology with experience in the recognition and salvage of fossils materials, or
 2 years of demonstrable equivalent experience in the recognition and salvage of fossil materials.

The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of the qualified paleontologist. The paleontological monitor shall be empowered with the authority to salvage fossils as they are unearthed and remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The paleontological monitor shall also be empowered to temporarily halt or divert construction activities where necessary to allow for salvage of fossils, removal of sediment samples, and removal of any abundant or large specimens.

Project applicant,
paleontological monitor,
qualified paleontologist,
and construction
contractors, with City
oversight
For the duration of
construction activities that
involve earthwork that
exceed 5 feet below the
ground surface
Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c: Complete Initial Assessment if Resources are Discovered If fossils are identified during earthwork by the paleontological monitor, the qualified paleontologist shall make an initial assessment of their significance. All identifiable vertebrate fossils (large or small) and uncommon invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils are considered to be significant and shall be recovered.

Representative samples of common invertebrate, plant, and trace fossils shall also be recovered. In instances where recovery of small fossil remains (e.g., isolated teeth of small vertebrates) is required, it may be necessary to collect bulk-matrix samples for screen-washing as determined by the qualified paleontologist.

Project applicant,
paleontological monitor,
and qualified
paleontologist, with City
oversight
For the duration of
construction activities that
involve earthwork
Mitigation Measure 3.6-4d: Halt Work Conditions if Resources are Discovered while Qualified Paleontologist and Paleontological Monitor are Absent
In the event that potential fossils are encountered when the paleontological monitor is not monitoring the earthwork (i.e., an inadvertent discovery occurs when the conditions described in Mitigation Measure

3.6-4a are not present), earthwork within the vicinity of the discovery site shall temporarily halt, and the qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be contacted and shall evaluate the significance of the discovery. Earthwork within the vicinity of the encounter shall not proceed until so directed by the paleontological monitor. If the inadvertent discovery is determined to be significant by the qualified paleontologist, the fossils shall be recovered, as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c.

Project applicant,
paleontological monitor,
qualified paleontologist,
and construction
contractors, with City
oversight
For the duration of
construction activities that
involve earthwork

Page 11995500 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
8 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure 3.6-4e: Catalog Resources Discovered Any fossil remains salvaged during construction shall be cleaned, repaired, sorted, taxonomically identified, and cataloged as part of the mitigation program. Fossil preparation shall include screenwashing of bulk matrix samples for microfossils or other laboratory analyses (e.g., radiometric carbon dating), if determined to be necessary by the qualified paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4c. Fossil preparation and curation activities may be conducted at the laboratory of the qualified paleontologist, at an appropriate outside agency, and/or at the designated repository, and shall follow the standards of the designated repository.

Project applicant and
qualified paleontologist,
with City oversight
For the duration of
construction activities that
involve earthwork
Mitigation Measure 3.6-4f: Curate Resources at a Professional Repository Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps, shall be curated at a professional repository, the San Bernardino County Museum, as outlined in Mitigation Measure 3.6-4a.

The qualified paleontologist shall have a written repository agreement with the professional repository prior to their initiation of work on the proposed project.

Project applicant and
qualified paleontologist,
with City oversight
Prior to the initiation of
work on the proposed
project and for the duration
of construction activities
that involve earthwork
Mitigation Measure 3.6-4g: Create a Final Summary Report A final summary report shall be completed at the conclusion of the monitoring and curation phases of work and shall summarize the results of the mitigation program. The report shall be completed by or under the direction of the qualified paleontologist. A copy of the paleontological monitoring report shall be submitted to City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Director and to the professional repository, the San Bernardino County Museum. The report and specimen inventory, when submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga with confirmation of the curation of recovered specimens into the San Bernardino County Museum shall signify completion of the program to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources.

Project applicant and
qualified paleontologist,
with City oversight
At the conclusion of
monitoring and curation
phases
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
Mitigation Measure 3.2-2b: Zero Emission Electrical Design and Operation This mitigation measure is described under “Air Quality,” above.

See “Air Quality” above See “Air Quality” above
Mitigation Measure 3.7-1a: Zero Emission Construction Equipment At least 50 percent of the equipment used onsite to construct the project shall be powered by near-zero emission (NZE) or zero emission (ZE) technology. Examples of NZE and ZE technologies include battery electric, renewable diesel, hydrogen, or biomethane. This requirement applies to all construction equipment greater than or equal to 50 horsepower.

If NZE or ZE equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s construction equipment needs, the applicant shall demonstrate that a minimum of three off-road equipment fleet owners/operators/fuel providers in the San Bernardino County or adjacent counties were contacted and Project applicant and
construction contractors,
with City oversight
During all phases of
construction

Page 11995511 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 9
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance responded that NZE or ZE equipment and/or fuel options are not commercially available for the project’s heavy-duty off-road equipment needs.

Project applicant, facility
owner, and future
building tenant(s), with
City oversight
Prior to issuance of
building permits and
throughout the life of the
project

Mitigation Measure 3.7-1c: Low GWP Refrigerants in Cold Storage The proposed project shall ensure that refrigerants with a lower global warming potential are used in cold storage refrigeration units. Typical replacements for R-410a, which has a GWP of 2087.5, include R-454b and R-32, which have a GWP of 465.39 and 675, respectively. Use of low GWP refrigerants shall be demonstrated on building plans for tenant improvements prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for the future tenant and shall be subject to City approval.

Project applicant and
future tenant(s), with City
oversight
Prior to the issuance of
certificate of occupancy
and throughout the life of
the project

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2a: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing This mitigation measure is described under “Transportation,” below.

See “Transportation”
below
See “Transportation”
below

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2b: Provide Employee Rideshare Program This mitigation measure is described under “Transportation,” below.

See “Transportation”
below
See “Transportation”
below

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2c: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities This mitigation measure is described under “Transportation,” below.

See “Transportation”
below
See “Transportation”
below

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2d: Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool This mitigation measure is described under “Transportation,” below.

See “Transportation”
below
See “Transportation”
below

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure 3.8-2: Implement Remedial Action Plan To mitigate the potential for exposure to hazardous conditions, the project applicant shall implement the Remedial Action Plan prepared by Roux Associates 2025 under the oversight of DTSC. The following actions shall be required to protect human health and the environment by minimizing the potential risk of exposure to future on-site receptors, as well as minimizing or eliminating potential future groundwater degradation from leaching of COCs:
 Permanent removal of soils, asphalt, and concrete in areas of concern impacted by DRO, metals, benzo[a]pyrene, PCBs, will be excavated to appropriate screening levels.

Project applicant,
developer, landowner,
and construction
contractors, with
oversight by the City
Planning Director and the
San Bernardino County
Environmental Health
Division
Prior to issuance of
grading permit and
throughout the life of the
project

Page 11995522 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance  A passive vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) will be designed in accordance with DTSC’s Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Guidance and installed beneath the future Building 4 to mitigate potential accumulation and intrusion of VOCs.
 Future land use at the Site, including the prohibition of groundwater use for drinking water purposes, will be restricted through recording of a land use covenant (LUC) with the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office, pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 67391.1.  A Site-specific Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring (OM&M) Plan will be prepared for the Site, which will define sampling and reporting procedures for soil vapor probes and indoor air. The OM&M Plan also will define contingency plans and provide decision-making protocols.

DTSC shall provide site clearance demonstrating that the site has been properly remediated to satisfactory screening levels prior to the City issuing a grading permit for the proposed project.

Noise and Vibration
Mitigation Measure 3.11-1: Implement Nighttime Construction-Noise Reduction Measures Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City, the project applicant shall implement or incorporate the following construction noise reduction measures into construction specifications for construction contractor implementation during concrete pours and any other nighttime (i.e., 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.) project construction activity:
 All construction equipment shall be properly maintained and equipped with noise-reduction intake and exhaust mufflers and engine shrouds, in accordance with manufacturer recommendations.

Equipment engine shrouds shall be closed during equipment operation.  All construction equipment and staging areas shall be located the maximum feasible distance from adjacent noise-sensitive land uses (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4), and/or located such that existing or constructed noise attenuating feature (e.g., temporary noise wall or blanket) block line-of-site between affected land uses and the construction noise source.  Stationary noise sources such as generators or pumps shall be located the maximum feasible distance from adjacent uses (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4).
 Concrete mixing shall occur off-site and electric-powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment, where electric-powered equivalents are commercially available.
 All motorized construction equipment shall be shut down when not in use to prevent idling.  For construction activity that would occur within a clear line-of-sight of adjacent offsite receptors (i.e., SR 1, SR 3, and SR 4), temporary sound barriers to attenuate noise, such as temporary noise curtains, sound walls, or similar products that provide a barrier to attenuate construction noise shall be installed. The temporary sound barrier shall be located between the project construction noise sources and receptors to shield the receptors from construction noise. When installed properly, Project applicant and
construction contractors,
with City oversight
Prior to issuance of
grading permit and
during concrete pours
and any other nighttime
(i.e., 10:00 p.m. to 6:00
a.m.) project construction
activity

Page 11995533 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 11
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance acoustic barriers can reduce construction noise levels by approximately 8-10 dB (EPA 1971). The installation of any temporary sound barrier shall meet all the following criteria:
 Be installed as close as feasible to the boundary of the construction site within the direct line of sight path of the nearby receptor(s);
 Shall consist of durable, flexible composite material featuring a noise barrier layer bound to sound-absorptive material on one side; and
 Shall consist of rugged, impervious material with a surface weight of at least one pound per square foot, such that a minimum of 10 dBA reduction is achieved on the receiving side of the sound barrier.

Transportation
Mitigation Measure 3.13-2a: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement a marketing strategy to promote the project site employer’s commute trip reduction program. The marketing strategy shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 4 percent. The following features (or similar) shall be evaluated as part of development of the marketing strategy:
 on-site or online commuter information services,
 employee transportation coordinators,
 on-site or online transit pass sales, and
 guaranteed ride home service.

Project tenant(s), with City
oversight
Prior to issuance of
certificate of occupancy
and throughout the life of
the project

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2b: Provide Employee Rideshare Program Prior to the issuance certificate of occupancy for the future tenant by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement a ridesharing program for employees with similar commutes with through funding requirements for employers. Existing programs including IE Commuter can be leveraged for this measure.

The employee rideshare program shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 4 percent. The following strategies shall be evaluated as part of development of the rideshare program:
 designating a certain percentage of desirable parking spaces for ridesharing vehicles,  designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ridesharing vehicles, and  providing an app or website for coordinating rides.

Project tenant(s), with City
oversight
Prior to issuance of
certificate of occupancy
and throughout the life of
the project

Mitigation Measure 3.13-2c: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for the future tenant by the City, the project applicant or future tenant shall install and maintain end-of-trip facilities for employee use. The implementation of end-of-trip facilities shall reduce project generated VMT per employee by 0.3-percent. End-of-trip facilities considered in the proposed project shall include but not be limited to: bike parking, bike lockers, showers, and personal lockers.

Project applicant, with
City oversight
Prior to issuance of
building permits and
throughout the life of the
project

Page 11995544 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ascent
City of Rancho Cucamonga
12 Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP
Mitigation Measures Implementing Party Timing Verification of Compliance Mitigation Measure 3.13-2d: Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool Prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy for the future tenant by the City, the project tenant(s) shall implement an employer-sponsored vanpool service. The employer-sponsored vanpool service shall be designed and operated to reduce project generated VMT per employee by 1.6 percent.

Project tenant(s), with City
oversight
Prior to issuance of
certificate of occupancy
and throughout the life of
the project

Notes: CAP = Climate Action Plan; City = City of Rancho Cucamonga; COC = contaminant of concern; dB = decibel; dBA = a-weighted decibel; DRO = diesel range organics; DTSC = Department of Toxic Substances Control; EV = electric vehicle; GBMI = Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians- Kizh Nation; GWP = global warming potential; IE = Inland Empire; g/L = grams per liter; LUC = land use covenant; MBMI = Morongo Band of Mission Indians; NZE = near-zero emission; OM&M = Operations, Maintenance, and Monitoring; PCB = polychlorinated biphenyls; PRC = Public Resources Code; SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District; SR = State Route; TCR = tribal cultural resources; TRUs = Transport Refrigeration Units; VIMS = vapor intrusion mitigation system; VMT = vehicle miles traveled; VOC = volatile organic compound; ZE = zero emission

Page 11995555 ends

Ascent Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Arrow Commerce Center Project MMRP 13

REFERENCES
EPA. See US Environmental Protection Agency.

Roux Associates. 2025. Draft Remedial Action Plan: 12451 Arow Route, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Prepared for BTC III Arrow Route CC LP. March 17. Long Beach, CA.

US Environmental Protection Agency. 1971 (December). Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances. Washington, DC. Prepared by Bolt Baranek and Newman.

Page 11995566 ends

ORDINANCE NO. 1058

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT DRC2023-00408 BETWEEN THE CITY OF

RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND BTC III ARROW ROUTE CC, LP

TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE NEW
BUILDINGS TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 1,775,098 SQUARE
FEET ON AN APPROXIMATE 94.25-ACRE PROJECT SITE
(APNS: 0229-121-33, -34, AND -35, AND 0229-131-19-40)

BOUNDED BY ARROW ROUTE TO THE NORTH,

BNSF/METROLINK RAILWAY TO THE SOUTH, AND YELLOW

WOOD ROAD/JUNEBERRY DRIVE AND INDUSTRIAL LAND

USES TO THE EAST AND WEST, MAKING FINDINGS IN

SUPPORT THEREOF, AND MAKING FINDINGS PURSUANT TO

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

WHEREAS

Page 11995577 ends

Land Use General Plan Zoning
Site
North
South
West
East

Page 11995588 ends

Page 11995599 ends

Page 11996600 ends

Page 11996611 ends

Page 11996622 ends

Draft Development Agreement
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER’S USE
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DRC2023-00408

REGARDING THE ARROW COMMERCE CENTER PROJECT, RANCHO

CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA

RECITALS
Section 1.

Section 2.

Section 3.

Section 4.

Section 5.

Page 11996633 ends

Section 6.

AGREEMENT
Section 1. Definitions

Page 11996644 ends

Section 2. Recitals
Section 3. Interest of Developer
Section 4. Binding Effect of Agreement

Page 11996655 ends

Section 5. Relationship of Parties
Section 6. Term of Agreement
Section 7. Timing of Development
Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo,
Section 8. Assignment

Page 11996666 ends

Section 9. General Standards and Restrictions Pertaining to Development of the Site
Section 10. Effect of City Regulations on Development of Project

Page 11996677 ends

Section 11. Developer’s Obligations

Page 11996688 ends

Page 11996699 ends

Page 11997700 ends

Section 12. City’s Obligations
Section 13. Annual Review
Section 14. Indemnification and Legal Challenge

Page 11997711 ends

Section 15. Amendments
et seq.,
Section 16. Minor Amendments to Development Plan
Section 17. Enforcement
Section 18. Event of Default

Page 11997722 ends

Section 19. No Waiver of Remedies
Section 20. City Not Liable For Damages

Page 11997733 ends

Section 21. Rights of Lenders Under this Agreement
Section 22. Notice to Lender
Section 23. Action by Lender

Page 11997744 ends

Section 24. Notice
Section 25. Attorneys’ Fees

Page 11997755 ends

Section 26. Binding Effect
Section 27. Termination
Section 28. Applicable Law and Venue
Section 29. Partial Invalidity
Section 30. Recordation
Section 31. Force Majeure
Section 32. Integrated Agreement
Section 33. Time of Essence
Section 34. Operating Memoranda

Page 11997766 ends

Page 11997777 ends

CITY:

DEVELOPER:

Page 11997788 ends

Page 11997799 ends

ARROW ROUTE "B" S T R E E T "E" S T R E E T
"D" S T R E E T
"A" S T R E E T

A V E N U E Y E L L O W W O O D

Page 11998800 ends

Page 11998811 ends

Page 11998822 ends

Page 11998833 ends

Page 11998844 ends

Page 11998855 ends

Page 11998866 ends

EXHIBIT D

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
Fees shall include and be limited to the following:

Transportation Impact Fee – South Zone (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter

3.28)
Police Impact Fee (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 3.64) Fire Impact Fee (Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Chapter 3.80) Chapter 3.76)

Page 11998877 ends

Page 11998888 ends

Page 11998899 ends

Page 11999900 ends

Page 11999911 ends

Page 11999922 ends

Page 11999933 ends

Page 11999944 ends

Page 11999955 ends

Page 11999966 ends

Page 11999977 ends

Page 11999988 ends

Page 11999999 ends

Page 22000000 ends

Page 22000011 ends

Page 22000022 ends

Page 22000033 ends

Page 22000044 ends

Page 22000055 ends

Page 22000066 ends

Page 22000077 ends

Page 22000088 ends

Page 22000099 ends

Page 22001100 ends

Page 22001111 ends

Page 22001122 ends

Page 22001133 ends

Page 22001144 ends

Page 22001155 ends

Page 22001166 ends

Page 22001177 ends

Page 22001188 ends

Page 22001199 ends

Page 22002200 ends

Page 22002211 ends

Page 22002222 ends

Page 22002233 ends

Page 22002244 ends

Page 22002255 ends

Page 22002266 ends

Page 22002277 ends

Page 22002288 ends

Page 22002299 ends

Page 22003300 ends

Page 22003311 ends

Page 22003322 ends

Page 22003333 ends

Page 22003344 ends

Page 22003355 ends

Page 22003366 ends

PHASE 1 PHASE 2

Page 22003377 ends

DATE: August 19, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Elisa C. Cox, City Manager
INITIATED BY: Jason C. Welday, Engineering Services Director Jevin Kaye, Finance Director
Peter Castro, Deputy City Manager
Julie Sowles, Deputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to Consider an Amendment to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Statement of Goals and Policies for the Use of Community Facilities Districts and Assessment Districts; a Resolution to Join the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program, Finding an Exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Under Section 15061(B)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, and Authorizing Related Actions. (RESOLUTION NO. 2026-081) (CITY) RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached Fifth Amended and Restated City of Rancho Cucamonga Statement of Goals and Policies for the Use of Community Facilities Districts and Assessment Districts (Attachment 1);

2. Conduct a public hearing to consider the attached resolution (Attachment 3) to join the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (SCIP) sponsored by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA), finding an Exemption to CEQA Under Section 15061(B)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, and Authorizing Related Actions; and

3. Adopt the attached resolution after consideration of comments received during the public hearing.

BACKGROUND:

From the earliest days following incorporation, a foundational component of the City’s fiscal policy has been the principle that “development pays its own way”. In other words, as the city grows and develops, the impacts of that growth should not diminish the quality and level of existing public services and infrastructure, but instead, development should serve to enhance the built environment and public services within the community. The City’s Special Districts—consisting of benefit assessment districts and community facilities districts (CFDs)—have been one way that this principle has been put into practice.

Page 22003388 ends

Page 2 ends

These Special Districts rely upon levies of special assessments and special taxes to fund the infrastructure and public services authorized as they were established. These special assessments and special taxes are annually placed on the property tax bill for properties within the respective district. Special Districts formed specifically to fund infrastructure improvements needed to support a particular development are often initially funded by the issuance of public debt such as bonds or long-term loans and repaid over the life of the Special District. In addition to funding construction of improvements by developers, this form of Special District (typically a CFD) may be used to finance the developer’s obligation to pay Development Impact Fees (DIFs).

DIFs are fees collected based on a nexus study for specific types of infrastructure (e.g., parks, streets, community centers, libraries, and public safety facilities) that mitigate the cumulative impact of development over time. While allowable under state law, the City had not traditionally approved the use of CFDs for this purpose. Based on requests from the development community and the fact that this type of financing has become common practice in many cities to facilitate development, in January 2025, the City Council adopted an amended and restated Statement of Goals and Policies for the Use of Community Facilities Districts and Assessment Districts which now permits the use of CFDs to finance DIFs for development projects meeting certain requirements.

Over the past few months, staff have been approached by members of the development community seeking to establish CFDs for the primary purpose of financing DIFs that will be assessed on their projects based on this change in the policy. Since these would be the first of their kind established by the City, staff researched options to minimize the administrative burden of managing several small CFDs, to reduce the risk to our City credit rating, and to minimize the cost of financing for future property owners through more efficient financing strategies. An alternative identified during this process was SCIP sponsored by CSCDA.

California Statewide Communities Development Authority
CSCDA is a joint powers authority sponsored by the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties. Over 500 local agencies throughout California are members of CSCDA. SCIP was instituted by CSCDA in 2002 to allow owners of property in participating local agencies to finance the development related fees, such as DIFs that would be payable by property owners upon development of their property through a pooled community facilities district or assessment district program, which was later expanded to include financing of public capital improvements constructed by developers and public services necessary to support development in the local agency, as provided for in the proposed SCIP Resolution. It should be noted that while SCIP provides the option to finance public services (such as maintenance or public safety services), staff recommends and has included in the attached draft amended policy that the City retain this function as it is very closely tied to the services that we provide on a day-to-day basis and as such is in the best interest of our community to be managed locally. Since its inception SCIP has issued over $1 billion in land secured special assessment and CFD bonds for development projects in California.

ANALYSIS:

While reviewing the January 2025 policy change, staff determined that additional policies and mechanisms are necessary to better define and streamline the process of reviewing and establishing this new type of Special District while protecting the City’s credit rating, minimizing administrative burden, and responsibly managing the cost of financing that will ultimately become the responsibility of future property owners, residents, and business owners within these CFDs or special assessment districts.

Page 22003399 ends

Page 3 ends

Statement of Goals and Policies for the Use of Community Facilities Districts and Assessment Districts (Policy)
To lay the framework for this new financing mechanism, amendments are proposed to the Policy.

The proposed fifth amendment to the Policy is attached for consideration. In addition to minor clarifications and edits throughout the Policy, the key changes to the policy relate to the process for establishment of CFDs to finance infrastructure requested by developers for either construction of public infrastructure or the payment of DIFs related to the development. In essence, the proposed amended Policy would state that given the benefits of the SCIP program, that it is the City’s policy to direct requests to finance infrastructure or DIFs to CSCDA for a SCIP application, after review by City staff for conformance with policy requirements. Among the key requirements are that the proposed district would not exceed a maximum tax burden (which remains unchanged at 1.8%), maximum annual increases (which will remain at between 2% and 6% annually), and provides for a greater public benefit. Greater public benefit is defined to include, but not be limited to:
• Construction of a major public facility or infrastructure which promotes quality of life or economic development for the larger community and does not exclusively benefit the development project.
• Construction of public infrastructure to service commercial and/or industrial projects to expand the employment and/or sales tax base of the City. • Maintenance or other public services, such as police protection services, flood, storm drain protection services, streets, parks, trails, or open space maintenance, which promote or maintain a quality of life and public safety within the existing or developing areas of the City.

The intent of the third bullet is to ensure that the impact of new development is cost neutral with respect to maintenance of new public infrastructure. For example, under this particular public benefit, the operation and maintenance of new streetlights, streets, and storm drains within or constructed to support a development would be incorporated into a services (maintenance) CFD and be a condition of approval for the development. Alternatively, maintaining the infrastructure as privately owned and maintained by a Homeowners Association would also serve to make such maintenance cost neutral.

If the request meets the requirements of the Policy, staff (as authorized by the attached resolution consisting of the Finance Director, City Manager, or their designee) will provide consent to pursue financing and establishment of a Special District through SCIP for financing infrastructure improvements and/or DIFs. Once consent is granted, the developer may then apply to and work directly with CSCDA through the remainder of the process. The final approval or disapproval of the request would be made by CSCDA based on its policies and credit worthiness requirements.

If approved and the CFD is established by CSCDA, the developer would be required to provide notice of the CFD and special tax to buyers of residential properties. Evidence of notice to buyers would be submitted to the City for confirmation prior to scheduling a final inspection for each unit.

The draft Fifth Amended Policy along with a copy of the Fourth Amended Policy with proposed amendments are attached as Attachments 1 and 2 for reference.

Page 22004400 ends

Page 4 ends

CSCDA Statewide Community Infrastructure Program
If a property owner (or developer with appropriate property interests) applies to participate in SCIP, and the City consents to the application, the selected public capital improvements, facilities and/or DIFs owed to the City will be financed by the issuance of bonds by CSCDA. Property owners, in consultation with the City and the SCIP team, can opt to have CSCDA form either an assessment district or a CFD. CSCDA determines whether the project will be included in the SCIP pool program (where no one developer within the SCIP pool is responsible for the payment related to any other project) or, depending on the projected bond sizing and other factors, implemented as a stand-alone financing. In either case, CSCDA will form the appropriate district and impose an assessment or special tax, as applicable, on the owner’s property to repay the portion of the bonds issued to finance public capital improvements, facilities and/or DIFs.

With respect to the financing of development related fees, the property owner will either pay the development fees at the time of permit issuance and will be reimbursed from the SCIP bond proceeds when the SCIP bonds are issued, or the fees will be funded directly from the proceeds of the SCIP bonds. In both cases, the fees are subject to requisition by the City at any time to make authorized fee expenditures, and the City is never at risk for receiving its fees. If the property owner is required to construct improvements to be dedicated to the City, the proposed SCIP Resolution includes a form of acquisition agreement to be used when such improvements are funded with SCIP bond proceeds, which outlines how a developer will be reimbursed for improvements as they are certified complete by the City.

The benefits of SCIP to the property owner/developer include:
• Only property owners who choose to participate in the program will have assessments or special taxes imposed on their property.
• Instead of paying cash for public capital improvements and/or development related fees, the property owner receives low-cost, long-term tax-exempt financing of those costs and/or fees, freeing up capital for other purposes.
• The property owner (initial or future homebuyer) can choose to pay off the assessments or special taxes at any time.
• For home buyers, paying for the costs of public infrastructure through an assessment or special tax may be superior to having those costs "rolled" into the cost of the home.

Although the tax bill is higher, the amount of their mortgage is smaller, making it easier to qualify. Moreover, because the assessment/special tax financing is at tax-exempt rates, it typically comes at lower cost than mortgage rates.
• Owners of smaller projects, both residential and commercial, can have access to taxexempt financing of infrastructure. Without a pooled program like SCIP, only projects large enough to justify the formation of an assessment or community facilities district have access to tax-exempt financing. SCIP can finance projects as low as $500,000, which would not be economical on a stand-alone basis.

The benefits of SCIP to the City include:
• The City is not liable to repay the bonds issued by CSCDA or the assessments or special taxes, as applicable, imposed on the participating properties.

Page 22004411 ends

Page 5 ends

• CSCDA handles all district formation, district administration, bond issuance and bond administration functions. A participating local agency can provide tax-exempt financing to property owners through SCIP while committing virtually no staff time to administer the program.
• Providing tax-exempt financing helps participating local agencies cushion the impact of rising public capital improvements costs and development related fees on new development. Given the current economic environment surrounding development, additional options such as SCIP may help with the developer’s ability to move forward with a project improving the City’s ability to meet state housing requirements. • The availability of financing will encourage developers to pull permits and pay fees in larger blocks, giving the City immediate access to revenues for public infrastructure, rather than receiving a trickle of revenue stretched out over time. As part of the entitlement negotiation process, the possibility of tax-exempt financing of fees can be used to encourage a developer to pay fees up front.
• In some cases, the assessments or special taxes on successful projects can be refinanced through refunding bonds. Savings achieved through a refinancing may be used to reduce the special tax or assessment which is collected on the property tax bill subject to applicable federal tax limitations.

The proposed SCIP Resolution authorizes CSCDA to accept applications from owners of property within the current City limits to apply for tax-exempt financing of public capital improvements and DIFs through SCIP. It also authorizes CSCDA to form assessment districts and community facilities districts within the City’s boundaries, conduct assessment and special tax proceedings and levy assessments and special taxes against the property of participating owners.

The Resolution further embodies the terms of a joint community facilities agreement to be entered into between CSCDA and the City for each community facilities district, setting provisions for collection and application of the special tax for use when a community facilities district is formed and approves the form of an acquisition agreement to be entered into between the City and the participating property owner/developer to provide the procedure for disbursement of bond proceeds to pay for facilities constructed by the property owner/developer. It also authorizes miscellaneous related actions and makes certain findings and determinations required by law.

Environmental Review
The actions considered under this item, including proposed participation in SCIP are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State’s CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed action, as described in this Resolution, will have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed action is an administrative process of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. The City Council has reviewed the administrative record concerning the proposed action and the proposed CEQA determination, and based on its own independent judgment, finds that this action is not subject to and therefor exempt from the requirements of CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).

Page 22004422 ends

Page 6 ends

FISCAL IMPACT:

Adoption of the proposed goals and policies and joining SCIP will have no immediate or direct fiscal impact on the City. SCIP provides an additional financing option for property owners and developers to finance public improvements and Development Impact Fees associated with new development.

However, use of SCIP is expected to result in administrative savings to the City compared with establishing and issuing debt through individual City-sponsored CFDs. Under SCIP, CSCDA is responsible for district formation, bond issuance, ongoing district and bond administration, and related financing activities. This reduces the need for City staff to manage individual financing transactions, including the significant staff time associated with coordinating financing teams, reviewing financing documents, participating in financing and due diligence meetings, and overseeing the issuance and ongoing administration of bonds. While these staff-time savings cannot be reasonably quantified at this time, they are expected to be meaningful as additional development projects utilize infrastructure financing.

SCIP also reduces the City’s financial and administrative exposure associated with these financings. Bonds issued through SCIP are obligations of CSCDA and are secured by assessments or special taxes levied on participating properties; the City is not responsible for repayment of the bonds or the associated assessments or special taxes. Administrative costs associated with SCIP districts are funded through CSCDA’s assessment process rather than the City’s General Fund.

COUNCIL MISSION / VISION / VALUE(S) ADDRESSED:

This item furthers the Council’s vision to create an equitable, sustainable, and vibrant city, rich in opportunity for all to thrive by providing an additional financing option for investment in the construction of public infrastructure necessary to ensure that future development supports a safe and healthy community.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1 – Fifth Amended and Restated CFD and Assessment District Policy Attachment 2 – Fourth Amended and Restated CFD and Assessment District Policy with Proposed Amendments
Attachment 3 – Resolution No. 2026-081 to Join the SCIP Attachment 4 – Form of Acquisition Agreement

Page 22004433 ends

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATEMENT

OF GOALS AND POLICIES

FOR THE USE OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS

AND ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
Fifth Amended and Restated on August 19, 2026
ATTACHMENT 1

Page 22004444 ends

1 CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................2 POLICY PRINCIPLES............................................................................................................2 Taxpayer Protection Principle .........................................................................................2 Investor Protection Principle ..........................................................................................3 Credit Quality Protection Principle..................................................................................3 Public Benefit Principle...................................................................................................3 ELIGIBILITY.........................................................................................................................3 PRIORITIES FOR FINANCING ..............................................................................................4 BOND SALE GUIDELINES AND CREDIT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ......................................5 TOTAL TAX AND FEE BURDEN.............................................................................................5 DISCLOSURE TO PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY PURCHASERS ...................................................5 EQUITY OF THE PROPOSED SPECIAL TAX OR ASSESSMENT................................................5 Increases in Special Tax ..................................................................................................6 Prepayment of Special Tax ...........................................................................................6 APPLICATION PROCESS......................................................................................................6 MINIMUM STANDARDS.....................................................................................................7

Page 22004455 ends

2 INTRODUCTION
The establishment of these Goals and Policies is in response to an increasing interest in the use of land secured financing programs by property owners and property developers within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”), and are designed to set forth the terms, conditions, and considerations under which the City should consider implementing such land secured financing programs. These Goals and Policies shall apply to all special district financings hereafter formed or proposed to be formed by the City Council. Special district financings formed prior to the Fifth Amendment (adopted August 19, 2026) shall be subject to the policy in place at the time of formation. Any goal or policy stated herein may be supplemented, amended, or waived by resolution or motion adopted by the City Council.

These Goals and Policies cover Community Facilities Districts formed through the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 and Assessment Districts formed through the Municipal Improvement Acts of 1911 and 1913 (a Special District). Such Special Districts are created on behalf of property owners and property developers within the boundaries of the City to finance the costs of infrastructure on or serving an undeveloped property or to provide adequate public services to meet expanded demand on those services from development. In each and every circumstance, the decision as to whether or not the City will make use of land secured financing, including the use of Special Districts for the purposes of enhancing public services, will be the sole discretion of the City. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as obligating the City to make use of Special Districts in any circumstance or as granting any right to a property owner or property developer.

When establishing or consenting to the creation of a Special District to issue bonds, the City should exercise a fiscally conservative approach to minimize any financing risk to bondholders and maintain the City’s sound financial reputation. The individual and cumulative economic impact of a Special District should be carefully evaluated with the City’s Debt Management Policy.

POLICY PRINCIPLES
The following principles have been established, setting forth the general terms and conditions under which the City should consider proceeding with a Special District.

Taxpayer Protection Principle
The City will limit special taxes and assessments to a reasonable level to protect taxpayers by limiting the total tax burden of all applicable City and non-City taxes and assessments applied to a property at the time the Special District is formed for public services or prior to consenting to the formation of a Special District for land securing financing.

For residential properties that will be encumbered with a Special District, the property owner/developer shall provide written notice of the special taxes and assessments to the homebuyer prior to purchase. The property owner/developer shall provide documentation and certification of compliance with the disclosure obligation prior to scheduling the final inspection for each unit with the Building and Safety Services Department.

Page 22004466 ends

3 Investor Protection Principle
For Special Districts formed (or previously formed) by the City, the City will levy and collect special taxes and assessments from Special Districts to fully fund debt service payments, to pay for acquisition or construction of facilities, and to pay for public services, along with associated administrative fees and expenses, each fiscal year. Special taxes and assessments will be levied in advance of the issuance of bonds, if applicable, to establish revenues and demonstrate the taxpayer’s willingness and ability to pay special taxes and assessments. Additionally, special taxes and assessments must be levied to provide funding to pay for the first-year debt service payment and establish appropriate reserve funds.

Credit Quality Protection Principle
The City will protect its standing in the credit markets by managing and administering special districts formed by the City in a prudent, efficient, and effective manner. Therefore, the City should only form or consent to the formation of special districts with strong credit characteristics.

Public Benefit Principle
The City shall not approve a Special District, whether formed by the City or by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) whose primary purpose is to improve the financial feasibility or profitability of a private development unless the City determines that the resulting public infrastructure or public services provide a substantial and identifiable public benefit that would not otherwise occur. Examples of public benefit to the community at large may include, but are not limited to:
• Construction of a major public facility or infrastructure which promotes quality of life or economic development for the larger community and does not exclusively benefit the development project.
• Construction of public infrastructure to service commercial and/or industrial projects to expand the employment and/or sales tax base of the City. • Maintenance or other public services, such as police protection services, flood, storm drain protection services, streets, parks, trails, or open space maintenance, which promote or maintain a quality of life and public safety within the existing or developing areas of the City.

ELIGIBILITY
A Special District will not move forward to formation without an agreement that sets forth the conditions that must be satisfied for the City to form or consent to formation the district.

The City is a member of the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (SCIP) of the CSCDA.

Special Districts proposed through SCIP must first satisfy all City Goals and Policies. Compliance with CSCDA eligibility requirements shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the City’s

Page 22004477 ends

4 requirements. Further, final approval for financing after consent by the City will be determined by CSCDA pursuant to its regulations.

Special Districts requested to be established for provision of enhanced public services will be reviewed by the City on a case-by-case basis for consistency with these policies and fiscal sustainability. Under such review, the City may determine that annexation into existing special districts may be more efficient use of taxpayer dollars.

SCIP PARTICIPATION
The City’s participation in SCIP is intended solely to provide an alternative administrative mechanism for financing eligible public infrastructure and development impact fees. Participation in SCIP does not create an entitlement to CFD financing. The City retains sole discretion to determine whether any proposed Special District is consistent with these Goals and Policies and whether participation in SCIP is in the best interests of the City. The City may impose conditions of approval that exceed CSCDA’s minimum requirements whenever necessary to protect the City’s financial, legal or policy interests.

PRIORITIES FOR FINANCING
Special Districts shall be generally limited to financing public services and facilities. The priority that various kinds of public facilities and services will have for financing through the use of special districts is as follows:

1. Services authorized to be financed pursuance to through the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 or Assessment Districts formed through the Municipal Improvement Acts of 1911 and 1913;

2. Backbone infrastructure to be owned and operated by the City that is required to service proposed development and that is identified in an infrastructure master plan, specific plan, or other appropriate document approved by the City as a major backbone infrastructure element; and

3. Other public facilities to be owned and/or operated by the City for which there is a clearly demonstrated public benefit.

Public facilities financed in lieu of payment of development fees of the City or public facilities to be owned and or operated by a public agency other than the City, including public facilities financed in lieu of the payment of development fees will be considered on a case by case basis and if consented to by the City, will be considered for financing solely through CSCDA.

Privately owned facilities will not be financed through the City’s use of a special district.

Page 22004488 ends

5 BOND SALE GUIDELINES AND CREDIT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
As of August 2026, the City is a member of SCIP administered by CSCDA. Bond sales and management for Special Districts for infrastructure construction, including payment of development impact fees, shall meet the requirements of the SCIP and receive approval from the City to apply for funding through CSCDA.

TOTAL TAX AND FEE BURDEN
The total tax burden (consisting of the anticipated annual special tax or assessment, together with ad valorem property taxes, special assessments, special taxes for any overlapping special district, and any other governmental taxes or fees and charges payable from and secured by the property) (the “Total Tax Burden”) on any parcel in a Special District on which a for-sale residential unit has been, is being or is to be constructed shall not exceed 1.80% of the estimated base sales price of such parcel upon completion of the public and private improvements relating to it.

In connection with the preceding, the estimated base sales price shall be determined at the time when the subject home is complete and ready for occupancy and is being marketed. However, an applicant for consent or approval (depending on the nature of the proposed district) formation of a Special District shall provide an analysis of the estimated base sale price and anticipated total tax and fee burden in compliance with this policy with the application. The City, at its sole discretion, may limit the Overlapping Tax Rate to less than 1.80%, such as for seniors in age-restricted communities or homeowners in such segments that have demonstrated market sensitivity to tax burdens.

DISCLOSURE TO PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY PURCHASERS
To ensure that prospective property purchasers are fully informed about their taxpaying obligations, the City shall require the applicant to provide disclosure of special taxes (including those financed through CSCDA) and assessments to the purchasers of property, including homebuyer notifications, requiring a signature, before home purchases. Compliance with this disclosure requirement shall be as outlined in the Taxpayer Protection Principal section above.

EQUITY OF THE PROPOSED SPECIAL TAX OR ASSESSMENT
The allocation of any special tax or assessment shall be consistent with the methodology established by the engineer’s report and or the rate and method of apportionment, as applicable.

All special tax and assessment formulas shall include a maximum tax and a formula for prepayment, if applicable. The City will evaluate the equity of the proposed allocation of a special assessment or special tax consistent with the applicable statutes.

Page 22004499 ends

6 Increases in Special Tax
The annual increase of the maximum special tax or assessment for any parcel within a special district will be at a minimum of 2.00% but no more than 6.00% per fiscal year.

Prepayment of Special Tax
Generally, the special tax or assessment for a Special District will be structured to allow for the prepayment by property owners of special taxes or assessments levied to finance facilities. However, there will be no prepayment by property owners of special tax or assessments levied to finance services.

The City will recover the costs associated with requests for special tax or assessment payoff amounts and payment of delinquent special taxes or assessments and penalties.

APPLICATION PROCESS
An applicant for a Special District to finance public services shall submit:
• An application for Land Secured Financing Program accompanied by a minimum initial deposit of $50,000. The initial deposit may be waived if a public benefit principal is demonstrated to an exceedingly high degree (e.g., generating above average anticipated employment or sales tax for the proposed land use type) or as negotiated in a developer agreement. A minimum of $5,000 of the deposit is nonrefundable for City administrative costs. Additional deposits may be required. The initial deposit and any additional amounts will be held by the City and used only for the expenses and costs incurred in connection with the Special District formation.

Any balance of such deposit remaining upon completion of the Special District formation, or the abandonment thereof, and not needed to pay expenses and costs relating to it will be returned to the applicant. The use of the deposit shall in no way be construed as requiring the City to form a Special District or issue Special District bonds or to provide reimbursement from the proceeds thereof. • A preliminary report containing a plan of facilities and area of benefit; estimate of cost; and an itemized property tax report showing there are no unpaid delinquent taxes on the land within the proposed Special District.

If additional funds are needed to offset costs and expenses incurred by the City, a written demand shall be made to the applicant for such funds, and the applicant shall comply with each demand within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of such notice. If the applicant fails to make any deposit of additional funds for the proceedings, the City may suspend all proceedings until receipt of such an additional deposit.

No interest will be paid on the applicant’s initial or subsequent deposits with the City.

Page 22005500 ends

7 Applicants for infrastructure financed Special Districts shall submit a report indicating the facilities and/or impact fees that are proposed to be financed along with an analysis showing compliance with CSCDA requirements and this policy for consideration by the City. Should the City consent to the financing of infrastructure through CSCDA, the applicant will then be permitted to apply directly to CSCDA. Following the City’s determination that a proposed Special District is consistent with these Goals and Policies and approval to proceed through CSCDA, CSCDA shall be responsible for administering the financing process, including district formation, bond issuance, and postissuance administration in accordance with its policies and procedures. Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the City’s authority to establish the conditions under which it will consent to participation in SCIP.

MINIMUM STANDARDS
These Goals and Policies set forth herein reflect the minimum standards and serve as a guide for the City’s use of Special Districts to finance public facilities and services. The City, in its discretion and to the extent permitted by law, may waive any of the policies set forth herein in particular cases.

These Goals and Policies may be amended at any time and from time to time by the City.

Page 22005511 ends

CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STATEMENT

OF GOALS AND POLICIES

FOR THE USE OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTSAND

ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS

AND ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
FourthFifth Amended and Restated on January 15, 2025August 19, 2026
Attachment 1
1 ATTACHMENT 2

Page 22005522 ends

ATTACHMENT 1

Page 22005533 ends

1 CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................2 Policy Principles.................................................................................................................3 Taxpayer Protection Principle .......................................................................................3 Investor Protection Principle.........................................................................................3 Credit Quality Protection Principle................................................................................3 Public Benefit Principle..................................................................................................3 Eligibility ............................................................................................................................4 Priorities for Financing ......................................................................................................4 Bond Sale Guidelines and Credit Quality Requirements ...................................................5 Value-to-Lien Ratios ......................................................................................................5 Reserve Fund.................................................................................................................6 Credit Enhancement......................................................................................................6 Capitalized Interest .......................................................................................................6 Special Tax Delinquency Level.......................................................................................6 Financial Participation ...................................................................................................7 Terms and Conditions of Bonds ....................................................................................7 Total Tax and Fee Burden..................................................................................................7 Disclosure to Prospective Property Purchasers.................................................................8 Equity of the Proposed Special Tax or Assessment ...........................................................8 Increases in Special Tax .................................................................................................8 Prepayment of Special Tax...........................................................................................8 Application Process ...........................................................................................................8 Minimum Standards..........................................................................................................9 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................3 POLICY PRINCIPLES............................................................................................................4 Taxpayer Protection Principle .........................................................................................4 Investor Protection Principle ..........................................................................................4 Credit Quality Protection Principle..................................................................................4 Public Benefit Principle...................................................................................................4 ELIGIBILITY.........................................................................................................................6

Page 22005544 ends

2 PRIORITIES FOR FINANCING ..............................................................................................7 BOND SALE GUIDELINES AND CREDIT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS ......................................8 TOTAL TAX AND FEE BURDEN...........................................................................................10 DISCLOSURE TO PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY PURCHASERS .................................................11 EQUITY OF THE PROPOSED SPECIAL TAX OR ASSESSMENT..............................................11 Increases in Special Tax ................................................................................................11 Prepayment of Special Tax .........................................................................................11 APPLICATION PROCESS....................................................................................................11 MINIMUM STANDARDS...................................................................................................13

Page 22005555 ends

3 INTRODUCTION
The establishment of these Goals and Policies is in response to an increasing interest in the use of land secured financing programs by property owners and property developers within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “City”), and are designed to set forth the terms, conditions, and considerations under which the City should consider implementing such land secured financing programs. These Goals and Policies shall apply to all special district financings hereafter formed or proposed to be formed by the City Council. Special district financings formed prior to the Fifth Amendment (adopted August 19, 2026) shall be subject to the policy in place at the time of formation. Any goal or policy stated herein may be supplemented, amended, or waived by resolution or motion adopted by the City Council.

These Goals and Policies cover Community Facilities Districts formed through the Mello- Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 and Assessment Districts formed through the Municipal Improvement Acts of 1911 and 1913 (a Special District). It isSuch Special Districts are created on behalf of property owners and property developers within the boundaries of the City to finance the costs of infrastructure on or serving an undeveloped property or to provide adequate public services to meet expanded demand on those services from development. In each and every circumstance, the decision as to whether or not the City will make use of land secured financing, including the use of Special Districts for the purposes of enhancing public services, will be the sole discretion of the City. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as obligating the City to make use of land secured financingSpecial Districts in any circumstance or as granting any right to a property owner or property developer.

Page 22005566 ends

4 POLICY PRINCIPLES
The following principalsprinciples have been established, setting forth the general terms and conditions under which the City should consider proceeding with a Special District.

Taxpayer Protection Principle
The City will limit special taxes and assessments to a reasonable level to protect taxpayers by limiting the total tax burden of all applicable City and non-City taxes and assessments applied to a property at the time the Special District is formed and at the time any debt issuance is approved by the City Council, if applicablefor public services or prior to consenting to the formation of a Special District for land securing financing.

The property For residential properties that will be encumbered with a Special District, the property owner/developer shall provide written notice of the special taxes and assessments to the homebuyer prior to purchase. The property owner/developer shall provide documentation and certification of compliance with the disclosure obligation prior to the issuance of debt, if applicablescheduling the final inspection for each unit with the Building and Safety Services Department.

Investor Protection Principle
TheFor Special Districts formed (or previously formed) by the City, the City will levy and collect special taxes and assessments from Special Districts to fully fund debt service payments, to pay for acquisition or construction of facilities, and to pay for public services, along with associated administrative fees and expenses, each fiscal year. Special taxes and assessments will be levied in advance of the issuance of bonds, if applicable, to establish revenues and demonstrate the taxpayer’s willingness and ability to pay special taxes and assessments. Additionally, special taxes and assessments must be levied to provide funding to pay for the first-year debt service payment and establish appropriate reserve funds.

Public Benefit Principle
A fundamental element of whether the City will consider the formation ofThe City shall not approve a Special District will be, whether formed by the City or by the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA) whose primary purpose is to improve the determination of the level of benefit to the Special District provides the property in thefinancial feasibility or profitability of a private development versus the community at large. The City should not be perceived as enhancing or maximizing the rate of return for the property developer

Page 22005577 ends

5 or investors, and therefore should only consider forming a Special Districtunless the City determines that provides a greater benefit to the community at large.the resulting public infrastructure or public services provide a substantial and identifiable public benefit that would not otherwise occur. Examples of a public benefit to the community at large may include, but are not limited to, the:

Page 22005588 ends

6 • Construction of a major public facility or infrastructure which promotes quality of life or economic development for the larger community and does not exclusively benefit the development project.
• Construction of public infrastructure to service commercial and /or industrial projects to expand the employment and /or sales tax base of the City. • Maintenance or other public services, such as police protection services, flood, storm drain protection services, streets, parks, trails, or open space maintenance, which promote or maintain a quality of life and public safety within the existing or developing areas of the City.

ELIGIBILITY
A Special District will not move forward to formation without an agreement that sets forth the conditions that must be satisfied for the City to provide Special District financing assistanceform or consent to formation the district.

Generally, a Special District will not be considered unless a single landowner is developing the property and is proposed to be developed with at least 150 residential units. A Special District exclusively containing industrial or commercial property or only financing maintenance services and facilities does not have a unit minimum. The City may consider on a case by case basis a Special District financing that does not satisfy such criteria if the Policy Principles are upheld and a significant benefit to the community at large can be clearly identified.

The City is a member of the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (SCIP) of the CSCDA.

Special Districts proposed through SCIP must first satisfy all City Goals and Policies. Compliance with CSCDA eligibility requirements shall be in addition to, and not in lieu of, the City’s requirements. Further, final approval for financing after consent by the City will be determined by CSCDA pursuant to its regulations.

Page 22005599 ends

7 approval that exceed CSCDA’s minimum requirements whenever necessary to protect the City’s financial, legal or policy interests.

PRIORITIES FOR FINANCING
A City-administered Special DistrictDistricts shall be generally limited to financing public services and facilities. The priority that various kinds of public facilities and services will have for financing through the City’s use of special districts is as follows:

1. Services authorized to be financed pursuance to through the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 or Assessment Districts formed through the Municipal Improvement Acts of 1911 and 1913;

3. Other public facilities to be owned and /or operated by the City for which there is a clearly demonstrated public benefit.

Page 22006600 ends

8 Privately owned facilities and City will not be financed through the City’s use of a special district.

BOND SALE GUIDELINES AND CREDIT QUALITY REQUIREMENTS
The City’s Debt Management Policy shall guide the timing of any sale of bonds in connection with a Special District program and the conditions that must be satisfied prior to any such sale. The Finance Department will be tasked with monitoring the expenditure of bond proceeds to ensure they are used only for the purpose and authority for which the bonds were issued and exercising best efforts to spend bond proceeds in such a manner that the City shall meet one of the spend-down exemptions from arbitrage rebate. Tax-exempt bonds will not be issued unless it can be demonstrated that 85% of the proceeds will be expended within the threeyear temporary period.

The decision to not to issue Special District bonds unless and until the property whose special taxes or assessments will secure such bonds is all or substantially all developed shall be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Special District bonds proceeds which will be used by a governmental entity other than the City, the City may rely upon certification by such other governmental entity that it has adopted the policies described in SB 1029.

Value-to-Lien Ratios
The City will require that the credit quality of any special district bond issue be such that the value to lien ratio is, at a minimum, four to one (4:1) taking into account, the value of the improvements to be financed and considering all special tax and special assessment liens applicable to the property.

For Special District which include parcels to be developed for industrial or commercial purposes, the value of each such parcel must be at least four times the sum of the principal amount of the bonds allocable, on such reasonable basis as the City may determine, to such parcel, plus the principal amount of all other bonds outstanding that are secured by a special tax or assessment levied on the property.

Property values may be established by reference to the assessed value of the subject property or by an appraisal thereof. Appraisals, when used to establish property values, shall be performed by a state-certified real estate appraiser, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 11340 of the California Business and Professions Code selected by the City, per the State of California appraisal standards and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. The definitions, standards, and assumptions to be used in such an appraisal shall be the definitions, standards, and assumptions set forth by the California Debt and Investment Advisory Commission. In addition to an appraisal, a market absorption study may be required for specific economic and demographic data, of the rates at which the finished product will be sold to final

Page 22006611 ends

9 users, and, generally, include an analysis of competitive prices for the product types proposed to be developed in the Special District. The appraisal and absorption study shall be coordinated by, under the direction of, and addressed to the City. The applicant shall pay all costs associated with the preparation of the appraisal report and market absorption study.

Reserve Fund
To enhance the credit quality of a Special District bond issue, the City will require that a reserve fund secure each such bond issue. Generally, each such reserve fund will be required to be funded (with cash or an acceptable reserve surety or other credit facilities) in an amount no less than the least of (a) 10% of the initial principal amount of the bonds of such issue, (b) maximum annual debt service on the bonds of such issue, or (c) 125% of the average annual debt service on the bonds of such issue.

For smaller special districts, with 150 units or less, a special reserve fund in addition to the standard reserve fund may be required. The reserve fund level will be determined by the City based on the recommendation of a municipal finance advisor.

Credit Enhancement
Prior to the issuance of Special District bonds, each owner who, together with any affiliate thereof, owns land within the Special District, the maximum special tax or assessment applicable to which equals or exceeds 20.00% of the aggregate maximum special taxes or assessment authorized to be levied in the Special District shall deliver to the City or as directed by the City a renewable, irrevocable instrument of credit equal from a financial institution rated “A” or better in the amount of two times the amount of annual special tax or assessment which can be levied on such property. The instrument of credit shall remain in effect until such property owner is responsible for less than 7.00% of the maximum special taxes or assessments authorized to be levied in the Special District.

Capitalized Interest
Generally, the amount of capitalized interest funded for a Special District bond issue will be limited to the amount necessary to pay debt service on the bonds for 18 months. However, that the amount of such capitalized interest funded may be increased if required to provide the amount necessary to pay debt service on the bonds until the first interest payment date occurring after the levy of the special taxes may be included in the real property tax roll.

Special Tax Delinquency Level
The property tax delinquency rate on properties within a Special District shall be no greater than 5.00% at the time of any sale of bonds in connection with a Special District, except with the issuance of refunding bonds.

Page 22006622 ends

1 0
Financial Participation
The applicant of a Special District program will be expected to advance sufficient funds to pay all costs associated with the formation of the Special District and all costs associated with the issuance and sale of bonds, as required and deemed necessary by the City. Any reimbursement of such costs from the proceeds of the bond sale will be at the sole discretion of the City.

Terms and Conditions of Bonds
The City shall be responsible for determining the financing method to be used, the structure of the bonds to be issued including the method of sale (negotiated, competitive, or private placement), its consultants for the financing, the investment of bond proceeds, and all other terms and conditions incidental to structuring and closing a land secured bond issue.

As of August 2026, the City is a member of SCIP administered by CSCDA. Bond sales and management for Special Districts for infrastructure construction, including payment of development impact fees, shall meet the requirements of the SCIP and receive approval from the City to apply for funding through CSCDA.

Page 22006633 ends

1 1

DISCLOSURE TO PROSPECTIVE PROPERTY PURCHASERS
To ensure that prospective property purchasers are fully informed about their taxpaying obligations, the City shall require the applicant to provide disclosure of special taxes (including those financed through CSCDA) and assessments to the purchasers of property, including homebuyer notifications, requiring a signature, before home purchases. Upon request by the City, the applicant shall provide a certificate of complianceCompliance with thethis disclosure requirementsrequirement shall be as outlined in the Taxpayer Protection Principal section above.

Increases in Special Tax
The annual increase of the maximum special tax or assessment for any parcel within a special district will be at a minimum of 2.00% andbut no more than 6.00% per fiscal year.

Prepayment of Special Tax
Generally, the special tax or assessment for a special districtSpecial District will be structured to allow for the prepayment by property owners of special taxes or assessments levied to finance facilities. However, there will be no prepayment by property owners of special tax or assessments levied to finance services.

The City will recover the costs associated with requests for special tax or assessment payoff amounts and payment of delinquent special taxes or assessments and penalties.

APPLICATION PROCESS
In general, the City will not form a CFD or improvement areas within a CFD and issue bonds for projects with less than 150 units for reasons of cost-effectiveness and default risk mitigation. CFD’s with fewer than 150 units will be considered if the special taxes can adequately fund administrative expenses and annual debt service requirements, assuming 10.00% of units are delinquent. The formation of smaller Special Districts will be considered on a case by case basis.

An applicant is requestedfor a Special District to finance public services shall submit:

Page 22006644 ends

1 2
• An application for Land Secured Financing Program accompanied withby a minimum initial deposit of $50,000. The initial deposit may be waived if a public benefit principal is demonstrated to an exceedingly high degree (such as,e.g., generating above average anticipated employment or sales tax for the proposed land use type) or as negotiated in a developer agreement. A minimum of $5,000 of the deposit is non- refundable for City administrative costs. Additional deposits may be required. The initial deposit and any additional amounts will be held by the City and used only for the expenses and costs incurred in connection with the Special District formation. Any balance of such deposit remaining upon completion of the Special District formation, or the abandonment thereof, and not needed to pay expenses and costs relating to it will be returned to the applicant. The use of the deposit shall in no way be construed as requiring the City to form a Special District or issue Special District bonds or to provide reimbursement from the proceeds thereof.
• A preliminary report containing a plan of facilities and area of benefit; estimate of cost; and an itemized property tax report showing there are no unpaid delinquent taxes on the land within the proposed Special District. • If the City implements a Special District program involving facilities to be ultimately owned and operated by the City and certain other fees and or facilities to be owned and operated by another entity, the City will be the lead agency and, after entering into a Joint Financing Agreement (JCFA) with the other agency(s), the priority of funds will be established, with the City’s cost for facilities and services being the first priority.

No interest will be paid on the applicant’s initial or subsequent deposits with the City.

Applicants for infrastructure financed Special Districts shall submit a report indicating the facilities and/or impact fees that are proposed to be financed along with an analysis showing compliance with CSCDA requirements and this policy for consideration by the City. Should the City consent to the financing of infrastructure through CSCDA, the applicant will then be permitted to apply directly to CSCDA. Following the City’s determination that a proposed Special District is consistent with these Goals and Policies and approval to proceed through CSCDA, CSCDA shall be responsible for administering the financing process, including district formation, bond issuance, and postissuance administration in accordance with its policies and procedures. Nothing herein shall be construed as limiting the City’s authority to establish the conditions under which it will consent to participation in SCIP.

Page 22006655 ends

1 3

MINIMUM STANDARDS
These Goals and Policies set forth herein reflect the minimum standards and serve as a guide for the City will makeCity’s use of Special Districts to finance public facilities and services. The City, in its discretion and to the extent permitted by law, may waive any of the policies set forth herein in particular cases.

These Goals and Policies may be amended at any time and from time to time by the City.

Page 22006666 ends

Resolution No. 2026-081 – Page 1 of 11
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-081

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO

CUCAMONGA AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TO
JOIN THE STATEWIDE COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM;

AUTHORIZING THE CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE COMMUNITIES

DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO ACCEPT APPLICATIONS FROM

PROPERTY OWNERS, CONDUCT SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AND

SPECIAL TAX PROCEEDINGS AND LEVY ASSESSMENTS AND

SPECIAL TAXES AND TO FORM ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS AND

COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA; EMBODYING THE TERMS OF A

JOINT COMMUNITY FACILITIES AGREEMENT SETTING FORTH THE
PROVISIONS FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT FINANCINGS;

APPROVING FORM OF ACQUISITION AGREEMENT FOR USE WHEN
APPLICABLE; FINDING AN EXEMPTION FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) UNDER SECTION 15061(B)(3 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES; AND AUTHORIZING RELATED ACTIONS WHEREAS, the California Statewide Communities Development Authority (the “Authority”) is a joint exercise of powers authority, lawfully formed and operating within the State of California pursuant to an agreement (the “Joint Powers Agreement”) entered into as of June 1, 1988 under the authority of Title 1, Division 7, Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of the California Government Code (the “JPA Law”), the members of which include numerous cities, counties and local agencies in the State of California, including the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the “Agency” or “City”); and WHEREAS, the Joint Powers Agreement authorizes the Authority to undertake financing programs under any applicable provisions of State law to promote economic development, the stimulation of economic activity, and the increase of the tax base within the jurisdictional boundaries of its members (such members, the “Program Participants”); and
WHEREAS, as one of the Programs under the Joint Powers Agreement, the Authority has established the Statewide Community Infrastructure Program (“SCIP”) to allow the financing of certain public capital improvements to be constructed by or on behalf of property owners for acquisition by the Agency or another public agency (the “Improvements”) and improvements eligible for funding from certain development impact fees, capacity fees and/or other development related charges (the “Fees”) levied in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Sections 66000 and following) and other authority providing for the levy of fees and charges on new development to pay for public capital improvements (collectively, the “Fee Act”) through the levy of special assessments pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Streets and Highways Code Sections 10000 and following) (the “1913 Act”) and the issuance of improvement bonds (the “Improvement Bonds”) under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 (Streets and Highways Code Sections 8500 and following) (the “1915 Act”) upon the security of the unpaid special assessments; and
WHEREAS, the “Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982,” being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 (beginning with Section 53311) of the Government Code of the State (the “Mello-Roos Act”) is an applicable provision of State law available to, among other things, finance public improvements and public services (“Services”) necessary to meet increased demands placed upon local agencies as a result of development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority also uses SCIP to allow the financing of Fees and Improvements through the levy of special taxes and the issuance of special tax bonds (the “Special Tax Bonds” and, together with the Improvement Bonds, the “Local Obligations”) under the Mello-Roos Act upon the security of the special ATTACHMENT 3

Page 22006677 ends

Resolution No. 2026-081 – Page 2 of 11
taxes and to allow the financing of Services through the levy of special taxes under the Mello Roos Act; and
WHEREAS, the Agency desires to allow the owners of property being developed within its jurisdiction (“Participating Developers”) to participate in SCIP and to allow the Authority to conduct proceedings and to form community facilities districts (“CFDs”) and to issue Local Obligations under the Mello-Roos Act, as well as to conduct assessment proceedings to form assessment districts (“Assessment Districts”) under the 1913 Act and to issue Local Obligations under the 1915 Act, to finance Fees levied on such properties and Improvements, provided that such Participating Developers voluntarily agree to participate and consent to the levy of the assessments or special taxes, as applicable and the Agency approves each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to allow the Participating Developers to participate in SCIP and to allow the Authority to conduct proceedings and to form CFDs to levy special taxes to finance Services, provided that such Participating Developers voluntarily agree to participate and consent to the levy of such special taxes and the Agency approves each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP; and
WHEREAS, from time to time when eligible property owners within the jurisdiction of the Agency elect to be Participating Developers, and provided the Agency has approved each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP, the Authority will conduct proceedings under the 1913 Act and the Mello-Roos Act and issue Local Obligations under the 1915 Act and the Mello-Roos Act to finance Fees and Improvements and, at the conclusion of such proceedings, will levy assessments or special taxes, as applicable on such property within the territory of the Agency, including special taxes to finance Services, if applicable; and
WHEREAS, both the Authority and the Agency are “local agencies” under the Mello-Roos Act; and WHEREAS, the Mello-Roos Act permits two or more local agencies to enter into a joint community facilities agreement to exercise any power authorized by the Mello-Roos Act; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to enter into such joint community facilities agreements with the Authority from time to time to authorize the Authority to form CFDs from time to time within the territorial limits of the Agency to finance Fees, Improvements and Services necessitated by new development; and WHEREAS, there has been presented to this meeting a proposed form of Resolution of Intention to be adopted by the Authority in connection with assessment proceedings (the “ROI”), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the territory within which assessments may be levied for SCIP (provided that each Participating Developer consents to such assessment and the Agency has approved each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP) shall be coterminous with the Agency’s official boundaries of record at the time of adoption of such ROI, and reference is hereby made to such boundaries for the plat or map required to be included in this resolution (this “Resolution”) pursuant to Section 10104 of the Streets and Highways Code; and
WHEREAS, there has also been presented to this meeting a proposed form of Acquisition Agreement (the “Acquisition Agreement”), a copy of which has been made available to the City Council and is on file with the City Clerk, to be approved as to form for use with respect to any Improvements to be constructed and installed by a Participating Developer and for which the Participating Developer requests acquisition financing as part of its SCIP application; and WHEREAS, the Agency will not be responsible for the conduct of any proceedings; the levy or collection of assessments or special taxes or any required remedial action in the case of delinquencies in

Page 22006688 ends

Resolution No. 2026-081 – Page 3 of 11
such assessment or special tax payments; or the issuance, sale or administration of the Local Obligations or any other bonds issued in connection with SCIP; and
WHEREAS, the Authority periodically issues Local Obligations on behalf of the local agency participants in SCIP to provide financing for the Fees and Improvements; and WHEREAS, where the Authority determines a project is eligible for a SCIP pooled issuance, the Authority issues revenue bonds pursuant to the Marks-Roos Local Bond Pooling Act of 1985, consisting of Article 4 (commencing with Section 6584) of Chapter 5, Division 7, Title 1 of the California Government Code (the “Marks-Roos Act”) concurrently with the issuance of Local Obligations, the proceeds of which are used to purchase the Local Obligations; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 6586.5, notice was published at least five days prior to the adoption of this Resolution at a public hearing, which was duly conducted by this City Council concerning the significant public benefits of SCIP and the financing of the Improvements and the public capital improvements to be paid for with the proceeds of the Fees; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:

Section 1. This Resolution shall constitute full “local approval,” under Section 9 of the Joint Powers Agreement, for the issuance of bonds by the Authority from time to time in accordance herewith and the issuance of any refunding bonds therefor.

Section 2. The Agency hereby consents to the conduct of special assessment proceedings by the Authority in connection with SCIP pursuant to the 1913 Act and the issuance of Local Obligations under the 1915 Act on any property within the Proposed Boundaries (defined below); provided, that:
(1) Such proceedings are conducted pursuant to one or more Resolutions of Intention in substantially the form of the ROI; and
(2) The Participating Developers, who shall be the legal owners of such property at the time of the formation of the Assessment District, execute a written consent to the levy of assessments in connection with SCIP by the Authority and execute an assessment ballot in favor of such assessment in compliance with the requirements of Section 4 of Article XIIID of the State Constitution; and
(3) The Agency has approved each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP.

Section 3. The Agency hereby consents to the conduct of proceedings by the Authority under the Mello Roos Act to form CFDs within boundaries that shall be coterminous with the Agency’s official boundaries of record at the time of such proceedings or any portion thereof (the “Proposed Boundaries”), and to authorize a special tax and to issue Local Obligations under the Mello-Roos Act with respect thereto; provided that the Agency has approved each Participating Developer’s application to participate in SCIP, and Participating Developers, who shall be the legal owners of such property at the time of formation of the CFD, execute a written consent to the levy of special tax in connection with SCIP by the Authority and execute a ballot in favor of the formation of such CFD and the Mello-Roos Act. The Agency approves the use of the local goals and policies adopted by the Authority under Section 53312.7 of the Mello-Roos Act in connection with the formation of CFDs.

Section 4. CFDs formed by the Authority may finance any or all of the facilities, fees and services authorized under the Mello-Roos Act. The appropriate officials and staff of the Agency are hereby authorized and directed to cooperate with the Authority and the Authority’s special tax consultant and other consultants to determine facilities, fees and services to be financed within each CFD and to calculate the

Page 22006699 ends

Resolution No. 2026-081 – Page 4 of 11
appropriate level of the special tax to fund the Services for each CFD in connection with initial formation and in connection with the annual levy. The facilities are referred to herein as the “Improvements,” and the Improvements to be owned by the Agency are referred to as the “Agency Improvements.” The Fees paid or to be paid to the Agency are referred to as the “Agency Fees”. The Services funded are referred to as “Services”, and Services to be provided by the Agency are referred to as the “Agency Services”. With respect to Improvements, Fees or Services to be owned, used or provided by another local agency (a “Third Party Local Agency”), the Authority will separately identify them in its proceedings and will enter into a joint community facilities agreement with such Third Party Local Agency as required by the Mello-Roos Act. The Agency acknowledges that Improvements and Fees will be funded through a CFD only if they are necessary to meet increased demands placed upon the Agency as a result of development occurring or expected to occur within the proposed CFD and Services will be funded through a CFD only if they are in addition to those provided in the territory of the CFD before the CFD was created and will not supplant existing services. In connection with the formation of each CFD, as may be required by the Authority’s procedures, the Agency shall certify that such requirements are satisfied in form and substance satisfactory to the Authority.

Section 5. This Resolution sets the terms of a “joint community facilities agreement” (as defined in Section 53316.2 of the Mello Roos Act) between the Agency and the Authority. Adoption of each Resolution of Intention to form a CFD under the Mello-Roos Act to finance Agency Improvements, Agency Fees or Agency Services shall constitute acceptance of the terms hereof by the Authority with respect to such CFD. This Resolution and the Authority’s Resolution of Intention for the respective CFDs shall together embody a separate and independent joint community facilities agreement for each CFD formed by the Authority (the “Joint Agreement”). The City Council hereby finds and determines that this resolution and each Joint Agreement are beneficial to the residents of the Agency and are in the best interests of the residents of the Agency, and of the future residents of the area within the proposed CFDs.

Section 6. Proceeds from the sale of Local Obligations and Assessment District proceeds and CFD special tax proceeds available to finance the Improvements shall be deposited in one or more special funds for each development project (the “Acquisition and Construction Fund”), which the Authority shall establish and maintain for so long as such proceeds remain. The Acquisition and Construction Fund will be available both for Agency Improvements and Agency Fees and for the Improvements and Fees pertaining to each Third Party Local Agency. Subaccounts shall be created as necessary. The Authority shall promptly provide notice in writing (which may be delivered by electronic means) to the Agency as to the amount of Local Obligation proceeds, or assessments or special taxes made available to finance Improvements and Fees. The Authority will remit any assessment or special tax revenues from any particular CFD or Assessment District remaining after the final retirement of all related Local Obligations to the Agency and to the other local agencies in the proportions specified in the Authority’s proceedings.

The Agency will apply any such assessment or special tax revenues it receives for authorized Agency Improvements, Agency Fees and/or Agency Services, as applicable, and its own administrative costs only as permitted by respective Assessment District or CFD proceedings and by the Mello-Roos Act or the 1913 Act and 1915 Act, as applicable.

Section 7. As respects the Authority and each Third Party Local Agency, the Agency agrees to fully administer, and to take full governmental responsibility for, the construction or acquisition of the Agency Improvements and for the administration and expenditure of the Agency Fees, as applicable, including but not limited to environmental review, approval of plans and specifications, bid requirements, performance and payment bond requirements, insurance requirements, contract and construction administration, staking, inspection, acquisition of necessary property interests in real or personal property, the holding back and administration of retention payments, punch list administration, and the Authority and each Third Party Local Agency shall have no responsibility in that regard. The Agency reserves the right, as respects each Participating Developer, to require the Participating Developer to contract with the Agency to assume any portion or all of this responsibility.

Section 8. The Agency agrees to indemnify and to hold the Authority, its other members, and its other members’ officers, agents and employees, and each Third Party Local Agency and their officers,

Page 22007700 ends

Rancho Cucamonga City CouncilAugust 19, 2026

Rancho Cucamonga City Council
August 19, 2026