City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 1
CEQA Compliance Determination
City of Rialto
150 S. Palm Avenue, Rialto, CA 92376
(909) 820-2525
Proposed Best 1 Trucking
Determination of Environmental Compliance
California Environmental Quality Act - Title 14 California Code of Regulations Guidelines for Implementation
BACKGROUND
Best 1 Trucking submitted an application to the City of Rialto on November 9, 2018 for a Conditional Development permit to construct a new trucking facility on within approximately 2.84 acres the southwest corner of Locust Avenue and Stone Hurst Drive in the City of Rialto (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The facility will operate primarily as a truck terminal/ “transload” facility that brokers hauling jobs for independent drivers and temporarily stores trailers and goods temporarily prior to delivery to their ultimate destination.
As broker for independent truck operators who own thei r own tractor rig, Best 1 Trucking leases standard 53-foot-long trailers which are stored at the facility and matches independent drivers with hauling jobs.
Jobs are primarily to take an empty trailer from th e Best 1 facility to a location within Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino counties, where the trailer is loaded, and the driver hauls the goods to an in- state or out-of-state location. Much of the business entails hauling the good to the east coast. Goods are also “back-hauled” from the destination back to a receiver within the tri-county service area. The empty trailer is then returned to the Best 1 yard where it is serviced and re-used for the next job. A loading dock and warehouse are also available at the facility to temporarily store the goods in the event the local receiver cannot off-load the materials as scheduled. The good s are off-loaded from the trailer, onto the loading dock, and then moved to the warehouse portion of the facility where a new delivery schedule and transport method are created. The original trailer is then serviced and reused for the next larger delivery job.
Best 1 Trucking had been operating in much the same way in a leased facility in the City of Fontana for the past 10 years, until the cost of the lease was substa ntially increased. The operation then moved to a leased location in the City of San Bernardino. Owner T ony Hsu, through his cor poration T&D Management, purchased land in the City of Rialto and began the en titlement process to make the City of Rialto the new permanent home for Best 1 Trucking.
PROJECT SETTING AND LOCATION
The proposed Project is located on the southwest corner of Locust Avenue and W. Stonehurst Drive in the City of Rialto. The approximately 2.84-acre site is comprised of two parcels, APN 1133-08-101 and -102, both zoned I-GM (General Manufacturing). The Proj ect site is within the USGS 7.5’ quadrangle Devore, within Township 1 North, Range 5 West, Section 28, at latitude 34.14447, longitude -117.40945. The site is bounded on the east by N. Locust Avenue, on the nor th by W. Stonehurst Drive, on the west by an auto recycling use, and on the south by a metal and concrete products storage yard.
The site is accessed directly from Interstate 210 (I-210), via Locust Avenue, and directly to the site. Land uses between I-210 and the site are primarily industria l on the north, south, east and west, except for a pocket of residential along Bohnert Avenue (east side of Locust, just south of Stonehurst) and the site.
City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 2
CEQA Compliance Determination
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Project components include the following (see pl ans in Attachment A a nd site photographs in Attachment B):
Site Plan: The Project proposes to construct a 15,258 square foot warehouse that will include three standard sized loading bays, a 2,000 square-foot, two-story offi ce, a 968 square foot repair bay and a three-bay 4- foot-high deck loading dock. The building frontage is situated along Locust Avenue.
Parking: The site will offer the required number of parking spaces required for the square footage calculated as: 9.6 for the office, including handicap accessibl e, 11.9 spaces for warehouse, and 3.2 spaces for truck repair for a total of 25 regular parking spaces including 1 handicap accessible, and an additional 30 spaces for truck/trailer parking. The trailer parking is prim arily for the leased trailers of the business, but the independent drivers may also park their tractor rig shor t-term with the trailer either before or after jobs, during a break in assignments.
Landscaping and Hardscape: The facility will provi de 25,894 square feet of landscaped area (approximately 23 percent of the net lot area), primarily situated along the Locust Avenue and Stone Hurst Avenue frontages. The landscaped area will consist pr imarily of lawn grass and drought tolerant native plants. Concrete sidewalks and curb and gutter will also be installe d along Locust and Stone Hurst.
Wrought iron fencing is planned for the west and south property boundary.
Stormwater Management: An earthen retention basin is planned for the southeast corner of the property to capture stormwater flows from the paved site, allowi ng flows to percolate into the ground. The retention basin will be vegetated with grass and native vegetation.
Operational Activities and Traffic Generation:
General Operations
The facility will operate primarily as a truck terminal/ “transload” facility that brokers hauling jobs for independent drivers and temporarily stores trailers and goods prior to delivery to their ultimate destination. Tractor rigs will enter the facility collect a trailer, and leave. Upon return, the tractor rig generally enters the facility with an empty trailer, parks the trailer and leaves. If the independent tractor driver will be taking a short break (2 to 3 days generally) before his/her next run, the tractor may be parked in the space with the trailer until the new hauling job starts. For contracted loads where the receiver was not ready to off-load the co ntents of the trailer, the contents would be off- loaded onto the loading dock, and transferred to the warehouse where a new pickup and delivery schedule would be created. Overall, generally a pproximately 10 trucks per day enter and exit the facility during the hours of operation, based on th e same operation that has been in the City of Fontana for the past 10 years.
Site Access
The Project area can be accessed directly from the I-210 via Locust Avenue. The site can be accessed directly from either Locust Avenue (east entrance) or Stonehurst Avenue (north entrance).
Hours of Operation and Number of Employees
The facility is anticipated to operate 6 days pe r week between the hours of 6 am and 10 pm, and currently has 10 employees, which may be increased to no more than 15.
City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 3
CEQA Compliance Determination
Repair Services
A 968 square-foot repair bay is pl anned within the facility to primarily service the leased trailers.
Minor repairs (primarily safety items such as lighting, wipers, etc.) for the independent tractor rigs may also occur if needed by the independent driver. The repair bay will store minor amounts of oil and hydraulic fluid as needed for routine maintenance of the trailers. Oil changes may be performed for the tractor rigs if requested. Major repairs (such as drivetrain repair and maintenance) may also occur, although these repairs are anticipated to be infrequent as the more complicated repairs are generally performed by mechanics and shops that specialize in the more major repairs.
Circulation: Truck access to the site will generally via a 26-foot-wide driveway from Locust Avenue while employees will enter and exit from a 26-foot-wide driveway off of Stone Hurst Drive.
Lighting: Locust Avenue has existing street ligh ting located on the power poles. New lighting will be provided at the facility’s access points along Locust and Stone Hurst, and security lighting will be installed on the warehouse. Light poles will be placed in various locations in the parking lot and are planned to be a maximum of 25 feet high and shielded to direct light downward to prevent stray light onto existing surrounding properties.
Utilities and Services: The area is served by public sewer and water; electrical service is readily available through Southern California Edison (SCE) and natural gas is available through Sempra Energy. Two utility poles along Locust Avenue are proposed to be relocated, and an existing fire hydrant will be relocated to the new sidewalk area.
Construction Scenario
Construction is anticipated to occur in the summer/fa ll of 2020 and will last ap proximately 9-12 months.
Initial site improvements include grading and underground infrast ructure followed by construction activities. The grading quantities are anticipated to bala nce on site and little to no import or export of fill material is anticipated.
The warehouse is anticipated to be a concrete tilt up structure.
Project construction will require the use of heavy e quipment such as dozers, scrapers, paving machines, concrete trucks, and water trucks.
Best Management Practices During Construction
Based on recommendations from the biology report prepar ed for the site (Attachment C) and the cultural resources report (Attachment D), the applicant will in corporate the following b est management practices into the construction specifications:
• Burrowing Owl 30-day Pre-Construction Survey: A pre-construction survey will be conducted for burrowing owl by a qualified biologist. This survey includes conducting a pedestrian survey of the entire Project area, including a standard buffer area, where accessible and feasible. Survey transects will be spaced to allow 100 percent visual cove rage of the ground surface. The distance between transect center lines will account for vegetation density and ground surface visibility.
• Bird nesting season generally extends from February 1 through September 15 in southern California and specifically, April 15 through August 31 for mi gratory passerine birds. To avoid impacts to City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 4
CEQA Compliance Determination
nesting birds (common and special status) during the nesting season, a qualified Avian Biologist will conduct pre ‐construction Nesting Bird Surveys (NBS) prior to project ‐related disturbance to nestable vegetation to identify any active nests. If no active nests are found, no further action will be required. If an active nest is found, the biologist will set appropriate no‐work buffers around the nest which will be based upon the nesting species, its sensitivity to disturbance, nesting stage and expected types, intensity and duration of distur bance. The nests and buffer zones shall be field checked weekly by a qualified biological monitor. The approved no ‐work buffer zone shall be clearly marked in the field, within which no disturbance activity shall commence until the qualified biologist has determined the young birds have successfully fledged and the nest is inactive.
• In the event that evidence of archaeological resources are unearthed during construction activities, all work within 50 feet of the discovery should be halted or diverted until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the finds. No disturbance shall occur in the vicinity of the find until the site is evaluated by the archaeol ogist and the find is recorded or treated per the recommendations of the qualified archaeologist.
• In the event that human remain s are discovered, there shall be no disposition of such human remains, other than in accordance with the pro cedures and requirements set forth in California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. These code provisions require notification of the County Coroner and the Native American Heritage Commission, who in turn must notify those persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American for appropriate dispositi on of the remains. Excavation or disturbance may continue in other areas of the project site that are not reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains or archaeological resources.
REGULATORY SUMMARY
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is codified in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (14 CCR). This statute requires state and local agencies to identify the significant environmental impacts of their actions and to avoid or mitigate those im pacts, if feasible. Guidelines for implementation of the statute are the regulations th at explain and interpret the law for both the public agencies required to administer CEQA and for the public. They are found in the California Code of Regulations, in Chapter 3 of Title 14 “Guidelines fo r Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act” (Guidelines).
Definition of a Project. Guidelines Section 15378 defines a Project as “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical cha nge in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is any of the following:
(1) An activity directly undertaken by any public agency includi ng but not limited to public works construction and related activities clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing public stru ctures, enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and amendmen t of local General Plans or elements thereof pursuant to Government Code Sections 65100-65700.
(2) An activity undertaken by a person which is supported in whole or in part through public agency contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies.
(3) An activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies.
The proposed action to widen Stanfield Cutoff to construct a qualifies as a Project under the CEQA Guidelines.
City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 5
CEQA Compliance Determination
Exemptions to CEQA. Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code also requires the Guidelines to include a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and which shall, therefore, be exempt from the pr ovisions of CEQA. Currently 33 classes of projects are identified in 14 CCR, Chapter 3, Article 19. Categorical Exemptions Sections 15300 to 15333 as not having a significant effect on the environment; as such, they are declared to be categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents.
Exceptions to Exemptions. Guidelines Section 15300.2 also identifies exceptions in which a project that has been deemed to be consistent with a class of projects may have an impact on the environment, and therefore, not qualified under the exemption class. These exceptions include1:
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located -- a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, histor ic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
(f) Historical Resources. A categorical ex emption shall not be used for a projec t which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
EXEMPTION CONSISTENCY EVALUATION
The elements of the Proposed Best 1 Trucking opera tion could apply to Guidelines Section 15332, Class 32 “In Fill Development Projects.” This class of project s is generally characterized as less than 5 acres, within City limits, and where the site has no habitat or other value and can be serviced by existing utilities.
The text of Guidelines Section 15332 applicable to this Project is as follows:
(a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
(b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.
1 Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code; References: Sections 21084 and 21084.1, Public Resources Code; Wildlife Alive v. Chickering (1977) 18 Cal.3d 190; League for Protection of Oakland's Architectural and Historic Resources v. City of Oakland (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 896; Citizens for Responsible Development in West Hollywood v. City of West Hollywood (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 925; City of Pasadena v. State of California (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 810; Association for the Protection etc. Values v. City of Ukiah (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 720; and Baird v. County of Contra Costa (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1464 City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 6
CEQA Compliance Determination
(d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
The Project is zoned I-GM (General Manufacturing) a nd is within the Rialto Airport Specific Plan. The nearly 3 acre Project site is under the 5-acre threshold and can be served by all public utilities. The site is directly accessed by a major city street, off a major highway, and the surrounding land uses are developed with industrial uses. Therefore, the Project is consistent with criteria (a), (b) and (e).
Criteria (c ) and (d) relate to impacts for Biological Resources, Traffic, Noise, Air Quality or Water Quality.
The analysis for those is as follows:
Biological Resources
On July 30, 2019, biologists from Jericho Systems, Inc conducted a field survey of the Project site plus a 150-foot buffer survey area (where feasibl e) with focus on potential habitat for sensitive biological and hydrological resources.
The conclusions of the survey indicated that no State- and/or federally-listed threatened or endangered species were observed on site during the field survey, and none are expected to occur due to the poor quality of habitat and developed nature of the surrounding vicinity.
The report also noted that the habitat quality w as poor for the State-sens itive species Burrowing Owl; however, there were several ground squirrel burrows noted which can also serve Burrowing Owl. Therefore, as a best management practice, a pre-construction survey was recommended.
Additionally, due to the presence of minor vegetatio n, a pre-construction nesting bird survey was also recommended as a best management practice. These practices will be incorporated into the applicant’s construction specifications.
A copy of the Biological Resources report is located in Attachment C.
Therefore, based on the results of the biological resources report, the Project is consistent with criterion ( c), “The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.”
Traffic
The main roadway to be used by construction and operations will be Locust Avenue and Stonehurst Avenue.
The applicant prepared a traffic impact analysis in coordination with the City of Rialto traffic engineering (see information in Attachment D). The memo identified that the Project was exempt from the requirement of preparing a traffic impact study (TIA) consistent with the requirement set by the City of Rialto Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines and Requirements approved by the Transportation Commission on February 5, 2014. The applicant estimated in the 10 years he has operated the business, they have ge nerally between 10 and 20 trucks per day due to the nature of his business being one of providing jobs for long-ha ul independent truckers and there are only 32 spaces for parking.
However, in collaboration with the City of Rialto engineering, traffic calculations were revised for “warehouse” use and identified to generate approximately 217 total daily trips, 15 AM peak hour City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 7
CEQA Compliance Determination
trips and 16 PM peak hour trips (Attachment D). The City engineers agreed on November 27, 2019 that a Traffic Impact Analysis was not required, and that the development would pay a fair share contribution toward a traffic signal and a right turn lane that has been determined to be warranted at Locust/Bohnert. The traffic signal determination was a result of other developments in the area that have prepared recent traffic impact analy ses. The fair share is based on total passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips from the site.
Therefore, based on the results of the traffic im pact memorandum, the Project is consistent with criterion (d), Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality (emphasis added).
Noise
The Project site is surrounded by industrial uses and will operate as a truck terminal for brokering independent transportation services. The hours of construction and operati on will be within the City’s guidelines and similar to the surrounding land uses. Therefore, the Project is consistent with criterion (d), Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality (emphasis added).
Air Quality
The Project is consistent with the zoning as identified in the Rialto Airport Specific Plan and City’s General Plan – both of which have approve d environmental analyses and environmental documents. Construction of the s ite is required to follow all rules and regulations of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) . Because the Project is consistent with the zoning envisioned, the Project is consistent with criterion (d), Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality (emphasis added).
Water Quality
Construction of the site will follow all rules a nd regulations of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB). One regula tion includes the requirement of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be developed because the site is greater than 1 acre. The SWPPP will identify construction methods to reduce or eliminate impacts to water quality.
For operations, on-site flow is directed into an earthen stormwater basin where it will percolate into the ground. The retention basin will be maintained by the applicant.
Therefore, because the Project will comply with existing rules and an on-site stormwater basin will manage all on-site flows, the Project is consistent with criterion (d), Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality (emphasis added).
Therefore, the Project appears to be consistent with the requirements for Class 32, In-Fill Development.
EXCEPTIONS TO EXEMPTION CONSISTENCY EVALUATION
As previously discussed, Guidelines Section 15300.2 also identifies exceptions in which a project that has been deemed to be consistent with a class of projects may have an impact on the environment, and therefore, City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 8
CEQA Compliance Determination
not qualified under the exemption class. The criteria as outlined in Guidelines Section 15300.2 are provided in italicized type, and the consistency evaluation response is provided in standard type.
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located -- a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its im pact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
The project qualifies as Class 32. Therefore, this exception criterion is not applicable.
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these cla sses are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
The Project vicinity is fully developed with simila r industrial uses. There are no Projects similar in nature that will occur in the same place over time. Therefore, there is no cumulative impact as described by this criterion.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
The Project will develop an empty lot with an industrial use for which it is zoned, and which is similar to the adjacent industrial uses. There are no unusual circumstances associated with this Project.
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.
There are no scenic resources or scenic highways within the Project vicinity. No scenic resources such as trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or si milar resources are located along the Project site.
Therefore, there will be no impact.
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
Section 65962.5(a)(1) requires that Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) “shall compile and update as appropriate, but at least annually, an d shall submit to the Secretary for Environmental Protection, a list of all the following: ....(1) [a]ll hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code (“HSC”).” The hazardous waste facilities identified in HSC § 25187.5 are those where DTSC has taken or contracted for corrective action because a facility owner/operator h as failed to comply with a date for taking corrective action in an order issued under HSC § 25187, or because DTSC de termined that immediate corrective action was necessary to abate an imminent or substantial endangerment. This is known as the “Cortese List.” This is a very small and specific subgroup of facilities and they are not separately posted on the DTSC or Cal/EPA’s website. The following databases that meet the “Cortese List” requirements were reviewed for this project.
Envirostore Database. HSC § 25356(b)(1) requires “a listing of hazardous substance release sites selected for, and subject to, a response action under this chapter.” HSC § 25356(b)(2) requires DTSC to “update the list of sites at least annually to reflect new information regarding previously listed sites City of Rialto – Best 1 Trucking Page 9
CEQA Compliance Determination
or the addition of new sites requiring response ac tion.” The implementing regulations provide that sites may be listed pursuant to HSC § 25356 if (a) they are not owned by the Federal Government and (b) a release or threatened rele ase of hazardous substances has been confirmed by on-site sampling. (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Section 67400.1). DTSC’s list of sites that meet those criteria as well as the criteria in HSC § 25356(c), is found in a report in DTSC’s “Envirostor” database.
There are no sites listed on the EnviroStore database within the Project area.
Geotracker Database. Geotracker is the SWRCB’s database that manages potential hazardous sites to groundwater. The Geotracker database identifies a number of gas stations and other facilities that potentially handle hazardous waste or that are locat ed throughout the City of Rialto. However, the Project will occur along Locust Avenue and Stonehurst, and there are no sites identified on the Project site, or adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, the project will not be located on any site that has been identified in accordance with Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
(f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption s hall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
A historical/archaeological resources survey was prepared for the Project by CRM Tech in July 2019 (Attachment E). As a result of the field survey, the remains of a late-historic-period stone-and-mortar reservoir were recorded in the northwestern portion of the project area, but the site did not appear to meet the definition of a “historical resource” unde r CEQA provisions. No other potential “historical resources” were encountered throughout the course of the study.
As a precautionary measure, the cultural resources report suggested best management practices on how to handle unanticipated archaeological finds and human remains. These practices will be incorporated into the applicant’s construction specifications.
Therefore, the project will not cause a substantial a dverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS DETERMINATION
The Proposed Best 1 Trucking Project qualifies as a Class 32 Exemption as contained in Guidelines Section 15332, Class 32 “In Fill Development Projects” in that it is consistent with the exemption criteria and no exceptions are applicable.