Exhibit I - Initial Study — Rialto City Council, May 14, 2024

Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

1 SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

Independently reviewed, analyzed and exercised judgment in making the determination, by the Rialto Planning Division, pursuant to Section 21082 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

CEQA requires the preparation of an Initial Study when a proposal must obtain discretionary approval from a governmental agency and is not exempt from CEQA. The purpose of the Initial Study is to determine whether or not a proposal, not except from CEQA, q ualifies for a Negative Declaration (ND) or whether or not an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared.

1. Project Title: Sunrise Center

2. Lead Agency Name: City of Rialto
Planning Division
150 South Palm Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376

3. Contact Person: Daniel Casey, Principal Planner
Phone Number: (909) 820-2525 ext. 2075
Email: [email protected]

4. Project Location: 935 South Lilac Avenue in the City of Rialto

5. Geographic Coordinates of Project Site: 34°05'04.4"N 117°22'43.6"W

6: USGS Topographic Map: Fontana 7.5-Minute USGS Topographic Quadrangle

7: Public Land Survey System: Township 1 South, Range 5 West, Section 14, SBBM

8. Thomas Guide Location: Map 605, Grid G4, 2013 San Bernardino & Riverside Counties

9. Assessor Parcel Number: 0132-021-18

10. General Plan and Zoning Designations: The Project Site occurs within the Residential 2, Animal Overlay Land Use District, and is currently zoned Agricultural (A-1), Animal Overlay.

11. Description of Project: Gevork Consulting Engineering (Applicant) is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the existing land use designation of Residential 2 to General Commercial, and a Zone Change (ZC) to change the existing zoning of Agriculture (A-1) to General Commercial (C-3) to allow for the construction and operation of two separate office/retail buildings totaling 18,806 square-feet, related parking lot monument signage, and landscaping on a 1.4 -acre site. Both buildings could be used for either medical or retail/ office. The Proposed Project is being evaluated as a speculation Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

2 development, however for purposes of this analyses and the traffic study, projected uses include medical office at the 8,806 square-foot northerly building, and retail uses at the 9, 966 square-foot building. For purposes of estimating employment, the use of the buildings and square footages were applied to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. For medical office building, the ITE forecast s 317 daily trips, and the daily trips for 36 employees is 314. Therefore, 36 employees is used as an approximate estimation. For the retail use, an estimate of 16 employees per 10,000 SF was determined.

The Proposed Project would therefore have an estimated total employment of 52 employees. Hours of operation would likely be 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday through Friday for the medical office building and 8:00 am to 10:00 pm seven days/week for the retail building.

The Project Site is located on the southeast corner of Lilac Avenue and Randall Avenue (see Figure 1 - Regional Map and Figure 2 -Project Vicinity) and consists of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0132 -021-18. The Project Site is currently occupied by a single - family residential structure that would be removed to allow for the proposed development.

The Project would be developed in two phases with Phase 1 including the construction of the 8,806 square foot medical office building located on the northern portion of the Project Site and related parking, driveway improvements, internal drive aisles and landscaping (see Figure 3 – Site Plan). Phase 2 would include removal of the existing occupied residential structure on the southern portion of the Project Site and the construction of the 9,966 square-foot retail building, related parking, and landscaping.

Other Project -related improvements would include 11,086 square feet of landscaping (approximately 16.40 percent site coverage), paving, drainage improvements, and roadway improvements. Access to the Project Site would be provided by a 26 -foot driveway along Lilac Avenue and a 26-foot driveway along Randall Avenue.

This Initial Study addresses the potential impacts of the Proposed Project including all associated discretionary actions and approvals required to implement the Proposed Project, as well as all construction and operational activities, and evaluates the impacts of the Project occurring in one phase.

Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

3 12. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

The 1.4 -acre Project Site is mostly vacant with an existing single -family residence occurring on the southern portion of the Project Site. The Project Site is currently designated Residential 2 and within the Animal Overlay District. The Project Site is surrounded by residential development to the north, east, west, and south. Surrounding land use designations, zoning and existing land uses are listed in the table below.

Surrounding Land Use Designations and Zoning

LAND USE

DESIGNATION

ZONING EXISTING LAND
USE

PROJECT
SITE
Residential 2; Animal
Overlay District
Agricultural (A-1), Animal
Overlay District
Vacant/Single Family
Residential
NORTH Residential 2 Single Family Residential
(R-1C)
Single Family
Residential
EAST Residential 6 Single Family Residential
(R-1C)
Retirement Home
SOUTH Residential 6 Single Family Residential
(R-1C)
Single-Family
Residences
WEST Residential 30 Multiple Family Residential
(R-3)
Multiple Family
Residential

13. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, finance approval, or participation agreement):

• California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (RWQCB – Santa Ana Region, General Construction Permit, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

• City of Rialto discretionary actions:

Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

4 ▪ Approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA)
▪ Approval of a Zone Change (ZC)
▪ Approval of a Precise Plan of Design
▪ Approval of a Water Quality Management Plan for Compliance with City’s NPDES General Construction Permit

Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

5 Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

6 Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

7 Initial Study for the Sunrise Center Project
City of Rialto, California Introduction

8 1.1 EVALUATION FORMAT

This Initial Study is prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. This format of the study is presented as follows. The project is evaluated based upon its effect on twenty-one (21) major categories of environmental factors. Each factor is reviewed by responding to a series of questions regarding the impact of the project on each element of the overall factor. The Initial Study Checklist provides a formatted analysis that provides a determination of the effect of the project on the factor and its elements. The effect of the project is categorized into one of the following four categories of possible determinations:

Potentially Significant
Impact
Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Less than Significant No Impact

Substantiation is then provided to justify each determination. One of the four following conclusions is then provided as a summary of the analysis for each of the major environmental factors.

1. Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

2. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

3. Possible significant adverse impacts have been identified or anticipated and the following mitigation measures are required as a condition of project approval to reduce these impacts to a level below significant. The required mitigation measures are: (List mitigation measures)

4. Significant adverse impacts have been identified or anticipated. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required to evaluate these impacts, which are: (List the impacts requiring analysis within the EIR).

At the end of the analysis the required mitigation measures are restated and categorized as being either self-monitoring or as requiring a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Initial
Study
for
the
Sunrise
Center
Project
City
of
Rialto,
California
Introduction

1.2 ENVIRONMENTAL

FACTORS

POTENTIALLY

AFFECTED
The
environmental
factors
checked
below
would
be
potentially
affected
by
this
project,
involving
at
least
one
impact
that
is
“Potentially
Significant
Impact”
as
indicated
by
the
checklist
on
the
following
pages.

I
I
Aesthetics
[3
Biological
Resources
S
Geology
/
Soils
Agriculture
&
Forestry
Resources
[X]
Cultural
Resources
Greenhouse
Gas
Emissions
CD
Air
Quality
Energy
Hazards
&
Hazardous
Materials
I~1
Mineral
Resources
Public
Services
Ex]
Tribal
Cultural
Resources
Mandatory
Findings
of
Significance
Hydrology
/
Water
Quality
IKI
Noise
I
I
Recreation
I
I
Utilities
/
Service
Systems
I
I
Land
Use
/
Planning
I
I
Populations
/
Housing
l~~l
Transportation
I
I
Wildfire

1.3 ENVIRONMENTAL

DETERMINATION
On
the
basis
of
this
Initial
Study,
the
City
of
Rialto
Environmental
Review
Committee
finds:

I
find
that
the
Proposed
Project
COULD
NOT
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment,
and
a

NEGATIVE

DECLARATION
will
be
prepared.

I
find
that
although
the
Proposed
Project
would
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment,
there
will
not
be
a
significant
effect
in
this
case
because
revisions
in
the
project
have
been
made
by
or
agreed
to
by
the
project
proponent.

MITIGATED

NEGATIVE

DECLARATION
will
be
prepared.

I
find
that
the
Proposed
Project
MAY
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment,
and
an

ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
REPORT
is
required.

I
find
that
the
Proposed
Project
MAY
have
a
“potentially
significant
impact”
or
“potentially
significant
unless
mitigated”
impact
on
the
environment,
but
at
least
one
effect:
1)
has
been
adequately
analyzed
in
an
earlier
document
pursuant
to
applicable
legal
standards,
and
2)
has
been
addressed
by
mitigation
measures
based
on
the
earlier
analysis
as
described
on
attached
sheets.

ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
REPORT
is
required,
but
it
must
analyze
only
the
effects
that
remain
to
be
addressed.

I
find
that
although
the
Proposed
Project
could
have
a
significant
effect
on
the
environment,
because
all
potentially
significant
effects
(a)
have
been
analyzed
adequately
in
an
earlier
EIR
or

NEGATIVE

DECLARATION
pursuant
to
applicable
standards,
and
(b)
have
been
avoided
or
mitigated
pursuant
to
that
EIR
or

NEGATIVE

DECLARATION,
including
revisions
or
mitigation
measures
that
are
imposed
upon
the
Proposed
Project,
nothing
further
is
required.

I
l~lt'2QZ3
Signature
Date
DMI'C/
C
Printed
Name
For
9 Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Project Description

10 SECTION 2

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

2.1 PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT

The purpose of this Initial Study is to identify potential environmental impacts associated with a Proposed Project being the development of two office/retail buildings on an approximate 1.4-acre site located at the southeast corner of Randall Avenue and Lilac Avenue. This Initial Study has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines.

Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Rialto is the Lead Agency in the preparation of this Initial Study. The City has primary responsibility for approval or denial of this project. The intended use of this Initial Study is to provide adequate environmental analysis related to project construction and operational activities of the Proposed Project.

2.2 PROJECT LOCATION

The Project Site is located at 935 South Lilac Avenue at the southeast corner of Lilac/Bloomington Avenue and Randall Avenue. The Project Site occurs in Township 1 South, Range 5 West, Section 14 on the Fontana USGS 7.5-minute Quadrangle Map.

2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Gevork Consulting Engineering (Applicant) is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the existing land use designation of Residential 2 to General Commercial, and a Zone Change (ZC) to change the existing zoning of Agriculture (A -1) to General Commercial (C-3) to allow for the construction and operation of one medical office building (8,805 square feet) and one retail building (9, 966 square feet), related parking lot and landscaping on a 1.4-acre site.

The Project Site is located o n the southeast corner of Lilac Avenue and Randall Avenue (see Figure 1- Regional Map and Figure 2-Project Vicinity) and consists of Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 0132-021-18. The Project Site is currently occupied by a single-family residential structure that would be demolished to allow for the proposed development.

The Project would be developed in two phases with Phase 1 including the construction of Building North located on the northern portion of the Project Site and related parking, driveway improvements, internal drive aisles and landscaping (see Figure 3 – Site Plan). Phase 2 would include removal of the existing residential structure on the southern portion of the Project Site and the construction of Building South, related parking, and landscaping.

The proposed building setback from the east property line is 43 feet. To meet the requirement of a 1:1 ratio, the maximum height of the building (adjacent finish grade to top of parapet) will be 43 feet. At no point shall the height of the building exceed the proposed 43-foot setback. For every one foot of property height, the property will have a minimum 1-foot set back from neighboring residential zone, therefore the parapet will be reduced to maintain a minimum 1:1 ratio.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Project Description

11 Discretionary actions by the City of Rialto include approval of the Project’s Precise Plan of Design application and approval of a Conditional use Permit Application.

General Plan Designation and Zoning

The Project Site occurs within the Residential 2, Animal Overlay Land Use District, and is currently zoned Agricultural (A-1), Animal Overlay. According to the City of Rialto General Plan, Table 6-27 “Residential Land Use Designations,” Residential 2 allows for two dwelling units per acre, and reserves areas for very low -density residential development characterized by single, detached homes on large lots, with a density of no more than two units per acre.

According to t he City of Rialto General Plan, the City permits general agricultural uses in the Agricultural Zone (A -1), but this is a holdover zone from many years past. As part of planned comprehensive amendments to Title 18, the City will eliminate this zone. The A -1 Zone allows for 1 dwelling unit per acre. According to the Rialto Municipal Code Section 18.08.020, it allows for farms, grazing, poultry, private garages, and accessory uses.

Therefore, to allow for the Proposed Project, a GPA and ZC are required.

2.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SURROUNDING LAND USES

The Project Site consists of APN 0132-021-18. The Project Site has a paved driveway from South Lilac Avenue that provides site access to the existing residential building. and the northern portion of the property is vacant and undeveloped. Mature trees are along the perimeter of the southern portion of the property as well as being associated with the residential landscaping. The site topography has an average elevation of 1143 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and sheet flow is toward the southeast.

Surrounding properties are a mixed use of single -family residences and multi -family residences.

Other developed uses in the vicinity include a church and an American Legion Hall.

2.5 INTENDED USE OF THIS DOCUMENT

This Initial Study addresses the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, as well as those of the associated discretionary actions and approvals required to implement the Proposed Project, and those of subsequent construction and operational activities.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

12 SECTION 3

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM

I. AESTHETICS – Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?

c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?

a) Less than Significant. The City of Rialto General Plan identifies the views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains as backdrops for creating scenic vistas throughout the City. The San Bernardino Mountains are located to the northeast and the San Gabriel Mountains are located to the northwest of the Project Site. In accordance with City of Rialto General Plan Goal 2-14: Protect scenic vistas and scenic resources, the City recognizes the following policies:

Policy 2 -14.1: Protect views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains by ensuring that building heights are consistent with the scale of surrounding, existing development.

Policy 2-14.2: Protect views of the La Loma Hills, Jurupa Hills, Box Spring Mountains, Moreno Valley, and Riverside by ensuring that building heights are consistent with the scale of surrounding, existing development.

Policy 2 -14.3: Ensure use of building materials that do not produce glare, such as polished metals or reflective windows.

According to the City of Rialto General Plan, protecting natural landform views help develop a “sense of place.” In a sense, these scenic vistas signify to the person that they are in a special place, and the view they are experiencing is unique to that moment and to Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

13 that location alone. In order to protect scenic vistas, the City takes great care in ensuring that building heights and scale of projects do not hinder or impede scenic views. In addition, building materials in such locations are carefully selected as to not produce glare or other distracting occurrences.

The Project Site is located in an area with views of the San Bernardino Mountains and San Gabriel Mountains. The Project Site is surrounded by single-family residences to the north, south, and east, and multiple residential to the west. The City of Rialto Municipal Code Section 18.32.030 states that the building height limit for a C -3 Zone is six stories or 75 feet; the Proposed Project ’s buildings will b e two-story with a maximum height of approximate 28 feet.1 Therefore, because the Proposed Project adheres to the City’s policies, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. Mature trees and other vegetation in the southern lot is associated with the existing residential property. The Project Site is not located adjacent to or within the vicinity of a designated State Scenic Highway. The nearest officially designated State Scenic Route as identified by the San Bernardino Countywide Plan: NR -3 Scenic Routes & Highways Map is Lytle Creek Canyon Drive, located approximately eight miles to the northwest of the Project Site. 2 No known significant scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings exist on or within the vicinity of the Project Site. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) Less than Significant. The Project Site is in an urban area surrounded by single family uses to the north, south, east, and multiple family residential uses to the west and is within an urbanized area. The Proposed Project includes a ZC to C-3; upon approval of the ZC, the Proposed Project would not conflict with the Zoning Code or any other City regulations.

Implementation of the Project would provide medical office and retail uses for the benefit of the surrounding residential community. The Project’s proposed building materials list is a mix of neutral colors t hat would contribute to the existing visual character of the surrounding area of the Project Site. Therefore, no significant impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. Operation of the proposed buildings would result in an increase in indoor and outdoor illumination when compared to the current use of the site, which has an existing residential building . The Proposed Project will be developed to be consistent with the City of Rialto’s Municipal Code 18.61.140 – Lighting.3 In addition, discretionary actions for the Proposed Project by the City of Rialto includes approval of a Precise Plan of Design. With approval of the GPA, ZC , and the Precise Plan of Design, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to have a substantial adverse effect from light or glare on a scenic

1 City of Rialtos Municipal Code 18.32.030 – Height, bulk, and space requirements. Accessed on 2/13/2023. 2 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: NR-3 Scenic Routes & Highways Map. Accessed on 1/20/2023. 3 City of Rialtos Municipal Code 18.61.140 - Lighting. Accessed on 1/20/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

14 vista. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation

Less than
Significant
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
information compiled by the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s
inventory of forest land, including the Forest and
Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy
Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement
methodology provided in Forest Protocols ado pted
by the California Air Resources Board. Will the
project:

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

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104 (g))?

d) Result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

15 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation

Less than
Significant
No
Impact

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland to non -agricultural use
or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

a) No Impact . The Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program identifies the Project Site as “ Urban and Built -Up Land ” in its California Important Farmland Finder. 4 Urban and Built -Up land is occupied by structures with a building density of at least 1 unit to 1.5 acres, or approximately 6 structures to a 10 -acre parcel. Common examples include residential, industrial, commercial, institutional facilities, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary landfills, sewage treatment, and water control structures. According to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program no prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance occurs at the Project Site or in its immediate vicinity. Development of the Project Site would not convert farmland to a non -agricultural use. Therefore, no impacts are identified or ar e anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. According to the San Bernardino Countywide Plan: NR-5 Agricultural Map, no Williamson Acts are located within the Project Site.5 The City of Rialto’s Zoning Map shows the Proposed Project lies within the A -1 Zone and within the Animal Overlay boundaries. The Proposed Project includes a ZC that will change the existing zoning from A-1 to C-3. With approval of the GPA and ZC, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the Rialto General Plan. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) No Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned for Timberland Production. The Project Site is within a predominantly urbanized area is zoned A-1. Forest or timberland zoning designations do not occur in the vicinity. Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) No Impact. The Project Site is in an urbanized area and does not support forest land .

Implementation of the Proposed Project would not convert forest land to non -forest use.

Therefore, no impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) No Impact. The Project Site does not support agricultural or forest land uses that would be lost as a result of the Proposed Project implementation. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

4 California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed on 1/20/2023. 5 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: NR-5 Agricultural Map, 2020. Accessed on 1/20/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

16 III. AIR QUALITY

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following determinations.

Will the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?

c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?

d) Result in substantial emissions (such as odors or
dust) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?

a) Less than Significant. The Project Site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB).

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has jurisdiction over air quality issues and regulations within the SCAB. The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the basin establi shes a program of rules and regulations administered by SCAQMD to obtain attainment of the state and federal air quality standards. The most recent AQMP (AQMP 20 22) was adopted by the SCAQMD on December 2, 2022. The 2022 AQMP incorporates the latest scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including transportation control measures developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) from the 20 20 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, any updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories.

Conflicts with the AQMP would arise if Project activities resulted in a substantial increase in employment or population that was not previously adopted and/or approved in a General Plan. Large population or employment increases could affect transportation control strategies, which are among the most important in the air quality plan, since transportation is a major contributor to particulates and ozone for which the SCAB is not in attainment.

The Proposed Project includes a GPA from Residential 2 to General Commercial, and a ZC from Agriculture (A -1) to General Commercial (C -3). An evaluation of potential air quality impacts related to the existing use (single -family residence on-site and a potential additional single-family residence at buildout) and the proposed commercial/retail use was prepared. Operational emissions for the Proposed Project and the existing/buildout use Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

17 were estimated using California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1.1.8. The CalEEMod is recommended by SCAQMD for all general development projects within the South Coast Air Basin. Table 1 and Table 2 show operational emissions associated with the existing use and the Proposed Project. As shown in Table 1 operational impacts resulting from either the existing use or the Proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. As shown in Table 2, Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) would not exceed the screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year (Refer to Section VIII: GHG for additional information). The Proposed Project would not result in a conflict or obstruction to the implementation of the AQMP.

Table 1
Operational Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Existing Use 0.7 0.1 1.70 0.0 0.2 0.2
Proposed Project 3.2 2.6 21.2 0.0 1.5 0.3
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significance No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Max Emissions

Table 2
Greenhouse Gas Operational Emissions
(Metric Tons per Year)
Source/Phase CO2 CH4 N20
Existing Use 33.0 0.0 0.0
MTCO2e2 34.0
Proposed Project 804 1.0 0.0
MTCO2e2 844.0
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Annual Emissions
Excludes construction emissions amortization.

b) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project’s construction and operational emissions were screened using California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1.1.8 prepared by the SCAQMD (available at the City offices for review). CalEEMod was utilized to estimate the on-site and off-site emissions. The emissions incorporate Rule 402 and 403 by default as required during construction. The criteria pollutants screened for include reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrous oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and particulates (PM10 and PM2.5). Two of the analyzed pollutants, ROG and NO x, are ozone precursors. Both summer and winter season emission levels were estimated.

Construction Emissions

Construction emissions are considered short-term, temporary emissions and were modeled with the following construction parameters: site preparation, site grading (fine and mass grading), building construction, paving, and architectural coating. The resulting emissions Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

18 generated by construction of the Proposed Project is shown in Table 3, which represent max construction emissions.

Table 3
Maximum Construction Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
Source/Phase ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
2023 1.0 9.3 9.7 0.0 0.7 0.5
2024 4.7 30.5 33.7 0.0 1.4 1.2
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Significant No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod.2022

As shown in Table 3 and Table 4, construction emissions during either summer or winter seasonal conditions would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

Compliance with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403

Although the Proposed Project does not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions, the Project Proponent would be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations as the SCAB is in non -attainment status for ozone and suspended particulates (PM10 and PM2.5).

The Project Proponent would be required to comply with Rules 402 nuisance, and 403 fugitive dust, which require the implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) for each fugitive dust source, and the AQMP, which identifies Best Available Control Technologies (BACTs) for area sources and point sources. The BACMs and BACTs would include, but not be limited to the following:

1. The Project Proponent shall ensure that any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre-watered prior to the onset of grading activities.

(a) The Project Proponent shall ensure that watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly (2x daily) to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface and shall be watered at the end of each workday.

(b) The Project Proponent shall ensure that all disturbed areas are treated to prevent erosion until the site is constructed upon.

(c) The Project Proponent shall ensure that landscaped areas are installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

19 (d) The Project Proponent shall ensure that all grading activities are suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour.

During construction, exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and equipment and fugitive dust generated by equipment traveling over exposed surfaces, would increase NOX and PM10 levels in the Applicant/Contractor would be required to implement the following conditions as required by SCAQMD:

2. To reduce emissions, all equipment used in grading and construction must be tuned and maintained to the manufacturer’s specification to maximize efficient burning of vehicle fuel.

3. The Project Proponent shall ensure that existing power sources are utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation during construction.

4. The Project Proponent shall ensure that construction personnel are informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities.

5. All buildings on the Project Site shall conform to energy use guidelines in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code.

6. The operator shall maintain and effectively utilize and schedule on-site equipment in order to minimize exhaust emissions from truck idling.

7. The operator shall comply with all existing and future California Air Resources Board (CARB) and SCAQMD regulations related to diesel -fueled trucks, which may include among others: (1) meeting more stringent emission standards; (2) retrofitting existing engines with particulate traps; (3) use of low sulfur fuel; and (4) use of alternative fuels or equipment.

Operational Emissions

Operational emissions are categorized as area (operational use of the Project), energy (generation and distribution of energy to the end use), and mobile (vehicle trips). The operational mobile source emissions were calculated in accordance with the Trip Generation Analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates in April 2023. The Proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 675 daily trips.

The anticipated total daily trips were input into the CalEEMod Version 20 22.1.1.8 model to estimate the operational mobile source emissions. Emissions associated with the Proposed Project’s estimated vehicle trips were modeled and are listed in Table 4 and Table 5, which represent summer and winter operational emissions, respectively.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

20 Table 4
Summer Operational Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 2.7 2.2 20.1 0.0 1.5 0.3
Area 0.6 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Totals (lbs/day) 3.2 2.4 21.2 0.0 1.5 0.3
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Summer Emissions.

Table 5
Winter Operational Emissions
(Pounds per Day)
Source ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile 2.5 2.6 17.1 0.0 1.5 0.3
Area 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Energy 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0
Totals (lbs/day) 3.0 2.6 17.3 0.0 1.5 0.3
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Winter Emissions.

As shown, both summer and winter season operational emissions are below SCAQMD thresholds. Impacts are anticipated to be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.

The Proposed Project does not exceed applicable SCAQMD regional thresholds either during construction or operational activities. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a residence, hospital, convalescent facility or anywhere that it is possible for an individual to remain for 24 hours. Additionally, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, and athletic facilities can also be considered as sensitive receptors. The use of Local Significance Threshold (LSTs) methodology is voluntary, to be implemented at the discretion of local public agencies acting as a lead agency p ursuant to CEQA.

According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply if the Proposed Project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources (such as heavy-duty trucks) that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site; such as industrial warehouse/transfer facilities. The Proposed Project is the development of commercial /retail uses (medical office, etc.). Therefore, no long-term localized significance threshold analysis is warranted.

No significant impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

21 e) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project does not contain land uses typically associated with the emission of objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the Proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the applica tion of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities; and the temporary storage of domestic solid waste (refuse) associated with the Proposed Project’s (long -term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odo r impacts resulting from construction activity. It should be noted that any construction odor emissions generated would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction activity. I t is expected that Project - generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City of Rialto’s solid waste regulations. The Proposed Project would be also required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 t o prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Have substantial adverse effects, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, and
regulations or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc…) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife
species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

22 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?

Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional or state habitat conservation plan?

a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The south portion of the site is currently developed with residential uses. The north portion is vacant and adjacent to urban development including infrastructure on all sides. Based on a January 2023 site visit, t he Project Site is primarily composed of ruderal vegetation, it is heavily disturbed and does not contain habitat suitable for special status species. However, several birds were seen or heard during the site visit.

Vegetation that occurs on the Project Site and immediate surrounding area contains habitat suitable for nesting birds. As such , pre -construction surveys are warranted and recommended to reduce the potential impacts to nesting birds, should project construction occur during the bird nesting season. Therefore, possible significant adverse impacts have been identified or are anticipated and the following mitigation measure is required as a condition of project approval to reduce these impacts to a level below significant. The required mitigation measure is:

Mitigation Measure BIO-1:

Nesting bird surveys should be conducted prior to any construction activities taking place during the nesting season to avoid potentially taking any birds or active nests. In general, impacts to all bird species (common and special status) can be avoided by conducting work outside of the nesting season (generally March 15 th to September 15th), and conducting a worker awareness training. However, if all work cannot be conducted outside of the nesting season, a project -specific Nesting Bird Management Plan will be prepared to determine suitable buffers.

b, c) No Impact . Based on a January 2023 site visit, t he Project Site does not contain any drainage features or any wetlands, and therefore no Waters of the U.S., or Waters of the State. The Proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFW or USFWS. Furthermore, the Proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as none occur on -site. No impacts are identified, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) No Impact. The Project Site does not contain any habitat that would support fish and does not provide wildlife corridors due the urbanized nature of the immediately surrounding area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not interfere substantially with the movement Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

23 of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. No impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) No Impact. The habitat on -site consists primarily of non-native vegetation, with some native annuals and perennials. The site has ruderal vegetation along with some invasive species from the surrounding neighborhoods. There are ornamental trees located in the southern section of the Project Site that are affiliated with the residential development. The City of Rialto does not have a tree preservation policy or ordinance ; however, in accordance with City of Rialto General Plan Goal 2 -17: Provide high -quality and environmentally sustainable landscaping, the City recognizes the following policies:

Policy 2-17.1: Require the planting of street trees along public streets and inclusion of trees and landscaping for private developments to improve airshed minimize urban heat island effect and lessen impacts of high winds.

Policy 2 -17.2: Require all new development to incorporate tree plantings dense enough to shade and beautify residential and commercial areas.

Policy 2-17.3: Require the use of drought -tolerant, native landscaping and smart irrigation systems for new development lower overall water usage.

The Project Site contains non -native vegetation and non -protected ornamental trees, the Proposed Project does not conflict with any tree preservation policy or ordinance .

Therefore, no impacts are identified, and no mitigation measures are required.

f) No Impact. The Project Site is not located within the planning area of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan as identified in the CDFW California Natural Community Conservation Plans (April 2019), or as shown in the City of Rialto General Plan. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

V. CULTURAL RECOURES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource
pursuant to §15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

24 a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. An archaeological records search was completed by Brian F. Smith and Associates (BFSA) and results are documented in a letter dated January 26, 2023 (available for review at City offices). As part of the environmental review process, BFSA reviewed the results of the records search from the South Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton. The records search, which was completed on January 18, 2023, encompassed an area of one mile surrounding the Project Site . Based upon the records search results, four resources have been recorded within one mile of the Project Site, none of which are within the project boundaries. The resources include a historic industrial warehouse, a historic storage tank, a historic storage shed, and a historic trash scatter. The records search results also indicate that 20 previous studies have been conducted within one mile of the project, none of which overlap the subject property. Although no historic or prehistoric resources were fou nd on -site, the following mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CR-1:

In the event of an archaeological discovery, either historic or prehistoric, the archaeological monitor shall direct the contractor to temporarily divert all soil disturbing activities, including but not limited to, digging, trenching, excavating, or grading activities in the area of discovery and in the area reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent resources. If the discovered resource is associated with the prehistoric Native American occupation of this area, a Native American representative from a local tribe should be contacted to review and participate in the evolution of the discovered resource. The qualified archaeologist shall notify the City of the discovery, and subsequently the property owner shall be notified of the discovery.

If the resource is significant, the qualified archaeologist shall submit an Archaeological Data Recovery Program (ADRP) to the lead agency to review and approve. Impacts to significant resources must be mitigated before ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery will be allowed to resume. If the resource is not significant, the archaeologist shall submit a letter to the City indicating that artifacts will be collected, curated, and documented in the final monitoring report. The letter shall also indicate that no further work is required.

b) Less than Significant. BFSA requested a review of the Sacred Lands Files (SLF) by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on January 6, 2023, to determine if any recorded Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance are present within one mile of the project. The SLF search was positive for Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius and the NAHC recommended contacting the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

25 for further information. The Proposed Project is for a General Plan Amendment and a Zone Change to change the existing land use designation of Residential 2 to General Commercial, and a Zone Change (ZC) to change the existing zoning of Agriculture (A -1) to General Commercial (C -3) to allow for the construction and operation of two separate office/retail buildings totaling 18,806 square-feet, related parking lot, monument signage, and landscaping on a 1.4-acre site. The statutory requirements of Senate Bill 18 (Chapter 905, Statues of 2004) requires local governments to consult with California Native American tribes to aid in the protection of traditional tribal cultural places though local land use planning. The intent is to provide the Native American Tr ibes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage. Subsequently AB 52 was enacted specifying that CEQA projects with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource may have a significant effect on the environment. As such, the bill requires lead agency consultation with California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a Proposed Project, if the tribe requested to the lead agency in writing to be informed of Proposed Projects in that geographic area. The legislation further requires that the tribe requests consultation, prior to determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or envi ronmental impact report is required for a project . In accordance with SB 18 and AB 52 , the City notified the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians as well as other interested tribal representatives of the Proposed Project and requested …………..(pending info from the City)

c) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Construction activities, particularly grading, could potentially disturb human remains interred outside of a formal cemetery. Thus, the potential exists that human remains may be unearthed during grading and excavation activities associated with project construction. The Project’s contractor shall comply with procedures as set forth in CEQA Section 15064.5(e), the California Public Resources Code (Sec. 5097.98), and the State Health and Safety Code (Sec. 7050.5) in the event human remains are discovered. All work shall halt in that area (within a 100-foot buffer) and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5 and the code requirements shall be enforced for the duration of the project.

VI. ENERGY

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy, or wasteful use of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

26 a) Less than Significant Impact.

Electricity

Southern California Edison (SCE) currently provides electrical service to the Project area.

The demand for electricity associated with the Proposed Project would be for operation of the warehouse. In 2021, the Commercial Building sector of the Southern California Edison planning area consumed 34087.019307 GWh of electricity. 6 Based on the CalEEMod emission output tables for the Proposed Project, the estimated electricity demand is

0.283572 GWH ( refer Air Quality Report ). The Proposed Project’s estimated annual electricity consumption compared to the 2020 annual electricity consumption of the overall Industry Sector in the SCE Planning Area would account for approximately 0.0022299 percent of total electricity consumption. Total electricity demand in SCE’s service area is estimated to increase by approximately 12,000 GWh between the years 2015 and 2026.

The increase in electricity demand from the Proposed Project is insignificant compared to the projected electricity demand for SCE’s Industry sector demand and SCE’s estimated increase in demand between 2015 and 2026. Furthermore, the project design and materials would comply with the applicable Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the City of Rialto shall review and verify that the project plans demonstrate compliance with the current version of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards. The Proposed Project would also be required adhere to CALGre en, which establishes planning and design standards for sustainable site development, and energy efficiency. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Natural Gas

Southern California Gas Company currently provides natural gas service to the project area. In 2021, the Commercial Building sector of the Southern California Gas Company planning area consumed 871.416674 million therms of natural gas .7 Based on the CalEEMod emission output tables for the Proposed Project, the estimated natural gas demand is 3,003.91 therms of natural gas (refer to Air Quality Report) . The Proposed Project’s estimated annual electricity consumption compared to the 20 20 annual natural gas consumption of the overall Industry Sector in the Southern California Gas Company Planning Area would account for approximately 0.0001821 percent of total natural gas consumption. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

6 https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/Default.aspx. Accessed April 2023. 7 https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/Default.aspx. Accessed April 2023.

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

27 b) Less than Significant. Project design and operation would comply with the County of San Bernardino Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan and the State Building Energy Efficiency Standards related to appliance efficiency regulations, and green building standards. Project develo pment would not cause inefficient, wasteful and unnecessary energy consumption, and no adverse impact would occur.

The Proposed Project would be required to adhere to the County of San Bernardino Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan and to Title 24 to help decrease energy consumption and GHG emissions, to become a more sustainable community , and to meet the goals of AB 32. The Proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions, including Title 24, AB 32, and SB 32. The Proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and therefore no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:

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

ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?

iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?

iv. Landslides?

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?

c) 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

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

28 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the California Building Code (1994)
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life
or property?

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?

f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?

i) Less than Significant. A Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report dated January 8, 2022, was prepared by Soil Pacific Inc. for the Proposed Project. The report is available for review at City offices and is summarized herein. The Project Site is located in seismically active southern California with numerous fault systems in the region. The Project Site is not located within an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.8 The report states that the Project Site is not located in an active fault zone.

The nearest active fault is located within 2.5 miles northeast of the Site known as the “San Jacinto Fault Zone”. Therefore, less than significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

i) ii) Less than Significant. The City of Rialto, as is the case for most of Southern California, is located within a seismically active region. Faults and earthquakes present direct hazards from fault rupture and ground shaking as well as indirect hazards. The effect of seismic shaking on future structures and land development projects within the City may be mitigated by adhering to adopted building code standards. The California Building Standards Code regulates the design and construction of foundations, b uilding frames, retaining walls, excavations, and other building elements to mitigate the effects of seismic shaking and adverse soil conditions.

The Project Site is not located within a currently designated Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. During its design life, the site is expected to experience moderate to strong ground motions from earthquakes on regional and/or nearby

8 California Department of Conservation. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed on 1/20/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

29 causative faults. With adherence to City/County local codes, California Building Code (CBC), the latest requirements of the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California, and any other applicable building standards, the Proposed Project would not cause adverse effects relating to seismic-related ground failure.

Therefore, less than significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

iii) Less than Significant. Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which cohesion -less, saturated, fine-grained sand and silt soils loose shear strength due to ground shaking and behave as a viscous fluid . As stated in the Soils and Foundation Evaluation Report, liquefaction is not expected in the City of Rialto except within the narrow Lytle Creek Wash and near the Santa Ana River. The Lytle Creek Wash is approximately 3 miles to the northeast and the Santa Ana River is approximately 3 miles southeast of the Pro ject Site ; thus, the potential for liquefaction is considered low. Furthermore, development of the Project Site would take place in accordance with the applicable requirements listed in the California Building Standards Code and the buildings and construction requirements of the City of Rialto Municipal Code. Therefore, less than significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

iv) No Impact. The Project Site is not located within a mapped zone of an earthquake induced landslide and is located in a relatively flat area.9 Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant. During the development of the Project Site, which would include disturbance of approximately 1.4 acres, project-related dust may be generated due to the operation of machinery on -site or due to high winds. Additionally, erosion of soils could occur due to a storm event. Development of the Proposed Project would disturb more than one acre of soil; therefore, the Proposed Project is subject to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009 -2009-DWQ).

Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP must list Best Management Practices (BMPs) to avoid and minimize soil erosion. The SWPPP is prepared by the Construction Contractor and a Notice of Intent is submitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities. Adherence to the BMPs is anticipated to ensure that the Proposed Project does not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) Less than Significant. A site visit performed by Lilburn Corporation in January 2023 found the Project Site to be relatively flat with no prominent geologic features occurring on or within the vicinity of the Project Site. The Project Site is not located within a mapped

9 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: HZ-2 Liquefaction & Landslides Map. Accessed on 2/13/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

30 zone of earthquake induced landslide and is located in a relatively flat area , and development on the subject property would not be exposed to risk of landslide (see Item a) above). Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) No Impact. Expansive soils are fine-grained silts and clays which are subject to swelling and contracting. The amount of this swelling and contracting is subject to the amount of fine-grained clay materials present in the soils and the amount of moisture either introduced or extracted from the soils. The Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report states that the site is mostly underlain by gray to light brown, sand, gravel, and pebbly silty sand of Quaternary fan deposits (Qa). The depth of topsoil/fill mantel may vary throughout the site.

The thickness of topsoil where the borings were performed was limited to a maximum 2-3 feet. Underlaying materials are relatively dense and damp in place. Additionally, onsite soils are granular in nature, correlating to a “very low” expansion potential. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) No Impact. The Proposed Project would connect to the existing sewer system. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

f) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The City of Rialto’s General Plan does not identify the Project Site as an area including paleontological resources. However , the Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report states that the site is mostly underlain by gray to light brown, sand, gravel, and pebbly silty sand of Quaternary fan deposits (Qa). Older alluvial Quaternary Alluvium is derived broadly as alluvial fan deposits from the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and possibly including wind deposited sands. While fossil specimens are not associated with the younger Quaternary deposits, the older deposits have been known to yield specimens. Therefore, earthmoving activities may uncover resources.

To ensure that the construction and operation of the Proposed Project does not destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature the following mitigation measure shall be implemented:

Mitigation Measure GEO-1:

In the event fossil specimens are unearthed, the Project Proponent shall have a paleontological consultant assess the specimens and report to the City of Rialto. If the consultant and City concur, a paleontological monitoring program shall be implemented for the remainder of earth moving activities.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

31 VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purposes of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?

a) Less than Significant. Emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod version 2022.1.1.8 to estimate construction emissions, such as the worker and vendor trips and trip lengths, utilized the CalEEMod defaults for commercial/retail uses . Operational emissions are categorized as area (operational use of the project), energy (generation and distribution of energy to the end use), mobile (vehicle trips), waste (landfill), and water. The operational mobile source emissions were calculated in accordance with Trip Generation Analysis prepared by Kunzman Associates in April 2023. The Proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 675 daily trips.

Many gases make up the group of pollutants that contribute to global climate change and are classified as Greenhouse Gases (GHGs). However, three gases are currently evaluated and represent the highest concertation of GHG: Carbon dioxide (CO 2), Methane (CH 4), and Nitrous oxide (N2O). SCAQMD provides guidance methods and/or Emission Factors that are used for evaluating a project’s emissions in relation to the thresholds. A threshold of 10,000 MTCO 2E per year has been adopted by SCAQMD for industrial uses. The modeled emissions anticipated from the Proposed Project compared to the SCAQMD threshold are shown below in Table 6 and Table 7.

Table 6
Greenhouse Gas Construction Emissions
(Metric Tons per Year)
Source/Phase CO2 CH4 N20
2023 252 0.0 0.0
2024 1,022 0.0 0.0
Total MTCO2e 1,027
Amortized 30-years 34.2
SCAQMD Threshold 3,000
Significant No
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Annual Emissions.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

32 Table 7
Greenhouse Gas Operational Emissions
(Metric Tons per Year)
Source/Phase CO2 CH4 N20
Mobile 702 0.0 0.0
Area 0.4 0.0 0.0
Energy 89.5 0.0 0.0
Water 2.7 0.0 0.0
Waste 9.4 0.9 0.0
Total 844
Amortized 30-years (Construction) 34.2
MTCO2e 878.2
SCAQMD Threshold 3,000
Significant No
Source: CalEEMod.2022 Annual Emissions.

As shown in Table 6 and Table 7, the Proposed Project’s emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTCO2e screening threshold of significance. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant. There are no existing GHG plans, policies, or regulations that have been adopted by CARB or SCAQMD that would apply to this type of emissions source.

However, the operator would be required to comply with CARB and SCAQMD regulations related to diesel -fueled trucks, which may include among others: (1) meeting more stringent emission standards; (2) retrofitting existing engines with particulate traps; (3) use of low sulfur fuel; and (4) use of alternative fuels or equipment.

It is possible that CARB may develop performance standards for project -related activities prior to construction of the Proposed Project. In this event, these performance standards would be implemented and adhered to, and there would be no conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulations. The Proposed Project is consistent with CARB scoping measures and therefore does not conflict with local or regional greenhouse gas plans.

Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, an d no mitigation measures are required.

IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
Environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?

b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

33 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?

d) 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 the environment?

e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?

f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?

g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

a) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project is a retail development that includes a gas station/convenience store, car wash and four restaurants. Construction and operation of the Proposed Project would require the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of limited quantities of common hazardous materials such as gasoline, diesel fuel, oils, solvents, paint, fertilizers, pesticides, and other similar materials. Operations would include standard maintenance (i.e., landscape upkeep, exterior painting and similar activities) involving the use of commercially available products (e.g., pesticides, herbicides, gas, oil, paint, etc.) the use of which would not create a significant hazard to the public. All materials required during construction would be kept in compliance with State and local regulations and Best Management Practices.

Development of the Proposed Project would disturb more than one acre and would therefore be subject to the NPDES permit requirements. Requirements of the permit would include development and implementation of a SWPPP, which is subject to Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) review and approval. The purpose of an SWPPP is to: 1) identify pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges of stormwater associated with construction activities; and 2) identify, construct and implement stormwater pollution control measures to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges from the construction site during and after construction. The SWPPP would Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

34 include BMPs to control and abate pollutants. Therefore, no significant impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less Than Significant. Hazardous or toxic materials transported in association with construction of the Proposed Project may include items such as oils, paints, and fuels. All construction materials would be kept in compliance with State and local regulations.

Operational activities include standard maintenance that involve the use of commercially available productions, which would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, no significant impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) No Impact . The nearest school is Simpson Elementary School , located approximately

0.1-mile southwest of the Project Site. No hazardous materials would be emitted as a result of the construction of the project. The storage and use of hazardous materials are not associated with office/retail development.

All materials required during construction will be kept in compliance with State and local regulations. With implementation of BMPs and compliance with all applicable regulations, potential impacts from the use of hazardous materials during construction is considered to be less than significant. Additionally, the Project List is not listed as a hazardous waste site on the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor data management system.10 Therefore, the Proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or known proposed school. No impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. The Project Site was not found on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor data management system as reviewed on January 23, 2023. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) No Impact. The Project Site is located approximately 3.3 miles southeast of the former Rialto Municipal Airport which was officially closed in September 2014. The nearest airport is the San Bernardino International Airport, located approximately 5.4 miles southeast of the Project Site. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard related to airport land uses for people residing or working in the area.

Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures ar e required.

f) No Impact. The Project Site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. The three adjacent streets surrounding the Project Site;

10 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. EnviroStor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/ .

Accessed on 1/26/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

35 Bloomington Avenue, Randall Avenue, and Lilac Avenue, do not serve as evacuation routes.11 During construction and long-term operation, the contractor would be required to maintain adequate access for emergency vehicles as required by the City. The Proposed Project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan; therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

g) No Impact. As shown in Exhibit 5.3 of the City of Rialto General Plan, the Project Site is not identified in an area associated with risk of wildland fire. The Project Site is located in predominantly developed area and no wildlands are located on or adjacent to the Project Site. The Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?

b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede substantial groundwater management
of the basin?

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:

i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;

ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off-site;

iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or

11 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: PP-2 Evacuation Routes. Accessed on 2.28.2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

36 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

iv) impede or redirect flood flows?

d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?

e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or substantial groundwater
management plan?

a) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project would be subject to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Construction activities covered under the State of California’s General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activities that causes the disturbance of one acre or more. The General Construction permit requires recipients to reduce or eliminate non-storm water discharges into stormwater systems, and to develop and implement a Storm Water Pol lution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The purpose of the SWPPP is to:
1) identify pollutant sources that may affect the quality of discharges of stormwater associated with construction activities; and 2) identify, construct, and implement stormwater pollution control measures to reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges from the construction site during and after construction.

The NPDES also requires a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) , which is now available for review at County Offices . On February 15, 2023, a Preliminary WQMP for the Proposed Project was prepared by E&A Engineers (available for review at City offices) to comply with the requirements of the City of Rialto and the NPDES Area wide Stormwater Program . Mandatory compliance with the Proposed Project’s WQMP, in addition to compliance with NPDES Permit requirements, would ensure that all potential pollutants of concern are minimized or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged from the Project Site. The WQMP includes design of an infiltration system with catch basins that will have filter inserts installed to remove sediment, debris, and other pollutants of concern from any on-site storm flows prior to the flows being infiltrated into the groundwater. A Final WQMP is subject to approval by the Rialto Engineering Department to ensure stormwater discharges do not violate any water quality standards.

Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant. The Project Site is located within the service area of the City of Rialto. The San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District prepares an Integrated The most recent plan prepared by Water Systems Consulting, Inc. is an update to the Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

37 2020 IRUMP and dated June 30. 2021. The City of Rialto’s water supply and demand are provided in Chapter 14 of the plan.

Rialto is expected to experience moderate increases in water consumption due to population increases and implementation of water conservation efforts. Per capita consumption rates are expected to remain in compliance with the law (SB X7 -7). Future water us e projections must consider significant factors on water demand, such as development and/or redevelopment, and climate patterns, among other less significant factors which affect water demand. Although redevelopment is expected to be an ongoing process, it is not expected to significantly impact water use since the City's service area is near "built-out" condition.

The City of Rialto municipal water system generally obtains supplies from the following different types of sources:

1) Water delivered by SBVMWD through the Baseline Feeder: In 1991, the City contracted with SBVMWD for SWP water in lieu of water produced in the Bunker Hill Basin. The water is delivered through a 48 - inch transmission main. The agreement, referred to as the Baseline Feeder adds approximately 2,500 acre feet (AF) per year of supplemental water to the City's existing supplies.

2) Groundwater from five different adjudicated groundwater basins; relevant portions of these adjudications and judgments are provided in the Appendices. The City's primary source of water is from the City owned groundwater wells within five different groundwater basins in the upper Santa Ana River Basin. The five basins are the Rialto Basin, Creek Basin, Chino Basin, North Riverside Basin and the Bunker Hill Basin. There are a total of fourteen City wells, of which five are operational.

3) Surface water from canyon surface flows on the east side of the San Gabriel Mountains, including the North Fork Lytle Creek, Middle Fork Lytle Creek and South Fork Lytle Creek which is treated at the Oliver P. Roemer Water Filtration Plant. The WFF is owned and operated by the WVWD, and the City of Rialto has a 25% share in the Facility.

4) Emergency stand-by agreements with the City of San Bernardino and Riverside - Highland Water Company.

5) Recycled water is available from the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant.

According to the IRUWMP, during the third year of a multiple dry-year period projected out to the year 2040, the total water supply for the City is projected to be 1320 acre-feet (AF) for all supplies noted above , while the total water demand is project ed to be 13,350 AF, resulting in a projected surplus of 70 AF.12

122020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison. Page 4-26.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

38 There are no groundwater recharge facilities in the area of the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not substantially de crease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede substantial groundwater management of the basin . No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c)
i) Less than Significant. Erosion is the wearing away of a geologic surface as a result of the movement of wind or water. Siltation is the process in which a body of water sustains an abundance of suspended fine grained mineral particles, such as clay or silt. As stated in Section VII(b), during development of the Project Site, erosion of soils could occur due to a storm event. Development of the Proposed Project would disturb more than one acre of soil; therefore, the Proposed Project is subject to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board General Permit for Discharges of Stor m Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009 -2009-DWQ). Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling or excavation. The Construction Gen eral Permit requires the development and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP must list BMPs to avoid and minimize soil erosion. Adherence to BMPs is anticipated to ensure that the Proposed Project does not result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off- site. Examples of BMPs include i.e., sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, sweep roadway from track -out, and rumble strips. BMPs applicable to the Proposed Project will be subject to City approval and provided in contract bid documents. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

ii, iii) Less than Significant. As described by the WQMP and the Hydrology Study prepared by E&A Engineers in February 2023 (available for review at City office) the existing drainage for the Project Site relies on sheet flow over pavement in a southerly to easterly direction. The Proposed Project involves removal of existing asphalt/concrete pavement and demolition of the existing on-site buildings.

According to the WQMP and Hydrology Study, the Proposed Project has a drainage area of 68079.95 sf (1.56 acres). Runoff from the Proposed Project area will be conveyed through sheet flow over pavement towards V -gutters that lead to catch basins. Runoff will drain towards the WQMP-designed Cultec 180HD Recharger Underground Chambers. The proposed infiltration system will retain and infiltrate on-site storm water flows, and it will be located . The catch basins will have filter inserts installed to remove sediment, debris, and other pollutants of concern from the storm flows prior to the flows being infiltrated. The infiltration system will be sized to retain the 100-year storm runoff.

Furthermore, there are no streams or rivers on, or in the immediate vicinity of the Project Site. The Hydrology Study concluded that the Proposed Project would increase the amount of runoff discharge due to the increase of impervious surfaces Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

39 However, with adherence to the City-approved WQMP, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off-site or create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

iv) Less than Significant. According to the FEMA Flood Map and the Countywide Flood Hazards Map, the Project Site is not within range of any flood hazard s, the closest body of water is the Santa Ana River, which is approximately 3 miles south of the Project Site .13, 14 The proposed infiltration system will retain and infiltrate on-site storm water flows. The flows will be collected through sheet flow over pavement towards V-gutters that lead to catch basins that will drain to the Cultec underground chambers. The catch basins will have filter inserts installed to remove sediment, debris, and other pollutants of concern from storm flows prior to the flows being infiltrated. The infiltration system will be sized to retain the 100 -year storm runoff. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to impede or redirect potential flood flows. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. Seiches are standing waves generated in enclosed bodies of water in response to ground shaking. The Project Site is not located in the immediate vicinity of a known large body of water or water storage facility and therefore impacts from potential seiches are not anticipated. Tsunamis are large waves generated in open bodies of water by fault displacement of major ground movement. Due to the inland location of the Project Site, tsunamis are not considered to be a risk. Dams or other water-retaining structures may fail as a result of large earthquakes, resulting in flooding and mudflow production. As stated in the Hydrology Study, the Project Site is not located within a 100 -year FEMA Flood Zone Area and there are no dams or reservoirs near the Project Site. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.

No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) Less than Significant. Mandatory compliance with the Proposed Project’s WQMP, in addition to compliance with NPDES Permit requirements, would ensure that the Proposed Project does not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan .

As discussed in item X(b) above, the Proposed Project would not exceed the available supply of water or obstruct with implementation of a substantial groundwater management plan. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

13 FEMA Flood Map. Accessed on 2.17.2023.
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=rialto%20CA#searchresultsanchor 14 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: HZ -4 Flood Hazards. Accessed on 2.17.2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

40 XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established community?

b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?

a) Less than Significant. The physical division of an established community is typically associated with construction of a linear feature, such as a major highway or railroad tracks, or removal of a means of access, such as a local road or bridge, which would impair mobility in an existing community or between a community and an outlying area. The Proposed Project does not include the construction of a linear feature, and it would not impair mobility as the Project Site is within a developed area of the City . Therefore, the Proposed Project would neither physically divide an established community nor cause a significant environmental impact due to conflict with any land use plans or policies. N o significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. The Project Site is not located within the planning area of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan as identified in the CDFW California Natural Community Conservation Plans (April 2019), or as shown on the City of Rialto Land Use Policy Plan within the General Plan.15 Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

XII. MINERAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?

b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?

15 Rialto General Plan, 2010. Page 2-7. Exhibit 2.2. Accessed on 2/28/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

41 a) Less than Significant. The Project Site is located in an area designated as a Mineral Resource Zone -2 (MRZ -2), as identified in the General Plan Exhibit 2.7 and the San Bernardino Countywide Plan.16, 17 An MRZ-2 classification states that significant mineral deposits are present or are likely to be present in the location. The General Plan Exhibit

2.6, indicates that the Project Site does not have any significant aggregate resources, due to the proximity of residential zones. The Project Site is not located within an area protected by the City for mining development and therefore the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state . Therefore, no significant adverse impacts have been identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant. Exhibit 2.7 of the General Plan, identifies that the majority of designated aggregate resources occur in the northern part of the City. These areas have a land use designation of Open Space to protect aggregate resources as long as mining activity is feasible. Two aggregate mining operations exists withi n Lytle Creek, approximately four miles north of the Project Site. Th e Project Site is not located within an area protected by the City for mining development and therefore the Prop osed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state. The Project Site is not located within an area protected by the City for mining development and therefore the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of a known mineral resource or locally important mineral resource recovery site. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts have been identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

XIII. NOISE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project result in:

a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?

b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?

a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. A Noise Impact Analysis dated December 14, 2022, was prepared for the Proposed Project by MD Acoustics, LLC (available at the City offices for review). Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). The predominant rating scales for noise in the State of California are the

16 Rialto General Plan, 2010. Page 2-38. Accessed on 1/24/2023. 17 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: NR-4 Mineral Resource Zones. Accessed on 1/24/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

42 Equivalent-Continuous Sound Level (L eq) and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Both are based on the A -weighted decibel (dBA) which approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. The Leq is defined as the total sound energy of time -varying noise over a sample period. The CNEL is defined as time-varying noise over a 24-hour period with a weighted factor of 5 dBA applied to the hourly Leq for noise occurring form 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. (defined as relaxation hours) and 10 dBA applied to events occurring between (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. defined as sleeping hours). The State of California’s Office of Noise Control has established standards and guidelines for acceptable community noise levels based on the CNEL and day-night average sound level (L dn) rating scales. The purpose of these standards and guidelines is to provide a framework for setting local standards for human exposu re to noise.

The City of Rialto has adopted a Noise Element of the General Plan to control and abate environmental noise, and to protect the citizens of Rialto from excessive exposure to noise.

The Noise Element specifies the maximum allowable unmitigated exterior noise levels for new developments impacted by transportation noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports, and railroads. In addition, the Noise Element identifies noise policies and implementation measures designed to protect, create, and maintain and environment free from noise that may jeopardize the health or welfare of sensitive receptors, or degrade quality of life. The noise standards identified in the General Plan are guidelines to evaluate the acceptability of the transportation related noise impacts. These standards are based on the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and are used to assess the long - term traffic noise impacts on land uses. According to the City’s La nd Use Compatibility Guidelines (as shown in Exhibit D of the Noise Impact Analysis), noise-sensitive land uses such as single-family residences are normally acceptable with exterior noise levels below 60 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable with noise levels below 65 dBA CNEL.

General Commercial uses, such as the Proposed Project, are considered normally acceptable with exterior noise levels of up to 65 dBA CNEL, and conditionally acceptable with exterior noise levels between 70 to 75 dBA CNEL.

The Project Site is bordered by single family residential to the north, south, east, and multiple family residential to the west . The State of California defines sensitive receptors as those land uses that require serenity or are otherwise adversely affected by noise events or conditions. Schools, libraries, churches, hospitals, single and multiple -family residential, including transient lodging, motels and hotel uses make up the majority of these areas. Sensitive land uses that may be affected by project noise include the existing single- family residential uses located adjacent to the north, south , east, and multiple family residence to the west.

Three (3) 15-minute ambient noise measurements were conducted at the Project Site. The noise meters were placed in areas closest to single-family residential lots. Two noise meters were placed in the northeastern edge of the Project Site, and the third noise meter was placed in the southwestern corner of the site. The noise measurement s were taken to determine the existing ambient noise levels. Noise data indicates that traffic along Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

43 Bloomington Avenue is the primary source of noise impacting the Project Site and the adjacent uses. The ambient noise level ranged from 58 bBA Leq to 66 dBA Leq at the Project Site. Maximum hourly levels reached up to 87 dBA as a result of traffic along Blooming ton Avenue.

Construction

Construction activities would generate noise associated with the transport of workers and movement of construction materials to and from the area, from the ground clearing/excavation, grading, and building activities. Construction activities would be short-term and are permitted to occur only within the hours permitted by the City per section 9.50.050 and 9.50.070 of the Municipal Code, as shown below.

October 1st through April 30th.
• Monday – Friday: 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM
• Saturday: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
• Sunday: No permissible hours
• State holidays: No permissible hours

May 1st through September 30th.
• Monday- Friday: 6:00 AM to 7:00 PM
• Saturday: 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM
• Sunday: No permissible hours
• State holidays: No permissible hours

Construction noise will have a temporary or periodic increase in the ambient noise level above the existing within the project vicinity. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower settings. Noise levels will be loudest during the grading phase. The Noise Study concludes that the Proposed Project’s impact is considered less than significant, but recommended noise reduction measures to further reduce construction noise.

Mitigation Measure N-1:

During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices, such as mufflers, silencers, and original equipment devices.

Mitigation Measure N-2:

The contractor shall locate equipment staging areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest the Project Site during all project construction.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

44 Mitigation Measure N-3:

Idling equipment should be turned off when not in use.

Mitigation Measure N-4:

Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging.

Operation

Sensitive receptors that could be affected by project operational noise include existing single family residential to the north, south, east, and multiple family residential to the west. The worst-case stationary noise was modeled using SoundPLAN acoustical modeling software. Worst-case assumes that all the mechanical equipment and parking noise are always operational when in reality the noise will be intermittent and cycle on/off depending on the customer usage. Project operations are assumed to occur 24 hours continuously. A total of f our (4) receptors R1 – R4 were modeled to evaluate the Proposed Project’s operational noise impact (see Figure 4). R1 – R4 represent the residential land uses.

According to the Noise Study and depicted in Table 7 , project -generated operational vehicle traffic noise levels are anticipated to range from 36 dBA to 41 dBA at adjacent land uses (depending on location). The Proposed Project would not exceed the City’s residential nighttime exterior limit of 45 dBA. Existing measured ambient noise levels are anticipated to range between 58 to 67 dBA at the nearby receptors (R1 – R4). The ambient noise level is anticipated to increase by 0 dBA at the residential properties. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and no operational mitigation measures are required.

Table 7
Worst – Case Predicted Operational Noise Levels (dBA)

b) Less than Significant. Construction activity can result in producing vibrations that may be felt by adjacent land uses. The construction of the Proposed Project would not require the use of equipment such as pile drivers, which are known to generate substantial construction vibration levels. The primary vibration source during construction may be a bulldozer. A large bulldozer has a vibration impact of 0.089 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at 25 feet which is perceptible but below any risk of architectural damage.

Receptor Existing
Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)3
Project
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)3
Total
Combined
Noise Level
(dBA, Leq)
Nighttime
(10PM – 7AM)
Noise Limit
(dBA, Leq)4
Change in
Noise Level
as Result of
Project
1 67 41 67 0
2 58 38 58 45 0
3 36 0
4 64 37 64 0
Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

45 Figure 4

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

46 The land uses adjacent to the proposed construction area are single family residential and multiple family residential. The Noise Impact Analysis states that at a distance of 16 feet (residences to the south from the south PL), a large bulldozer would yield a worst -case

0.145 PPV (in/sec) which means the vibration would not be perceptible during grading along the southern property line of the Project Site and is below any threshold of structural damage. Therefore, there is less than significant impact, and no mitigation is required.

XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?

a) Less than Significant. Although the specific business(es) or tenant(s) that will occupy the proposed facility is not known at this time, future use of the buildings would be consistent with the allowed uses of the C-3 Zone within the City’s General Plan. The Proposed Project’s estimated 52 e mployees are anticipated to be local residences . The City of Rialto’s current unemployment rate is four percent as of February 2023. 18 Therefore, the Proposed Project's employment would not result in substantial growth that was not already anticipated by the City’s General Plan with the Project Site’s current land use designation of Residential 2 . The Project Site is served by existing public roadways , and utility infrastructure exists to serve the property. As such, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in significant direct or indirect growth in the area. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. The Project Site is mostly vacant with an existing single -family residence occurring on the southern portion of the Project Site . The Proposed Project would not reduce a substantial number of existing housing units, displace a substantial number of existing people, or necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

18 State of California. Employment Development Department. “Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places. Accessed on 3/1/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

47 XV. PUBLIC SERVICES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:

Fire Protection?

Police Protection?

Schools?

Parks?

Other Public Facilities?

a)
Fire Protection
Less than Significant. Fire emergency response at the Project Site would be provided by the City of Rialto Fire Department. The Rialto Fire Department is an all -risk fire agency; services include fire suppression, emergency medical, technical rescue, hazardous material, and other related emergency services. Firefighting resources in Rialto include four fire stations, emergency response personnel, firefighters/paramedics, and a Hazardous Materials Response Team. The closest City of Rialto Fire Station to the Project Site is Fire Station 201 located at 131 S Willow Avenue, approximately 1.1 miles northeast of the Project Site. The Proposed Project is required to provide a minimum of fire safety and support fire suppression activities, including type and building construction, fire sprinklers, and paved fire access that will subject to City Fire Department approval . Additionally, development impact fees are collected at the time of building permit issuance to offset project impacts. The Proposed Project is expected to receive adequate fire protection services and would not result in the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Police Protection
Less than Significant. The Project Site is located in the service area of the Rialto Police Department. The Rialto Police Department Station is located at 128 Willow Avenue, approximately 1.1 miles north of the Project Site. The Rialto Police Department provides Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

48 a full range of law enforcement and community programs. The Proposed Project is anticipated to require minimal police protection services and would not result in the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities . The City reviews staffing needs on a yearly basis and adjusts service levels as needed to maintain an adequate level of public protection. Additionally, development impact fees are collected at the time of building permit issuance to offset project impacts. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Schools
Less than Significant. The Proposed Project would not create a direct demand for public school services as the subject property would be developed as a C-3 zone. It is expected that the employment generated by the future tenant of the facility would be filled from the local area and would not result in substantial growth that was not already anticipated by the City’s General Plan. As such, the development would not generate any new school - aged children requiring public education . Therefore, no significant a dverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Parks
Less than Significant. The Proposed Project does not include any type of residential use or other land use that may generate a population that would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities in the vicinity. Anderson Park is located approximately 0.2 miles north of the Project Site. Employees are anticipated to come from the local labor pool and implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in additional population resulting in an increased use or substant ial physical deterioration of an existing neighborhood or regional park. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Other Public Facilities
Less than Significant. The Proposed Project is not expected to result in a demand for other public facilities/services, such as libraries, community recreation centers, and/or animal shelters. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not adversely affect other public facilities or require the construction of new or modified facilities. Employees are anticipated to come from the local labor pool (based on a current unemployment rate of 4% and implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in additional population.

Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

49 XVI. RECREATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?

b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities, which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment?

a) No Impact. No residential use or other land use that may generate a population that would increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities in the vicinity is proposed. The City of Rialto’s population is 105, 484, with an annual growth rate of 0.46 percent. 19 The Proposed Project is anticipated to have approximately 52 employees, which are anticipated to come from the local labor pool. The implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the increased use or substantial physical deterioration of an existing neighborhood or regional park. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

XVII. TRANSPORATION

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Conflict with a plan, ordinance or policy
addressing circulation system, including transit,
roadways, bicycle lanes and pedestrian paths?

b) For a land use project, would the project conflict
or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)(1)?

19 World Population Review. Rialto, California Population Demographics. Accessed on 2.28.2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

50 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
c) For a transportation project, would the project
conflict or be consistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(2)?

d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?

e) Result in inadequate emergency access?

a,b) Less than Significant. A Trip Generation Analysis and a Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis both dated April 6, 2023 were prepared by Kunzman Associates and are available for review at the City Offices. The purpose of these studies is to provide an assessment of potential traffic impacts resulting from the Proposed Project as compared to the existing residential use on-site.

Access to the Project Site will be available on both Lilac Avenue and Randall Avenue. The Proposed Project will have full access to Lilac Avenue and right turn in/out only access to Randall. The driveways will be approximately 26 feet wide and are designated primarily for passenger car usage.

The Proposed Project trip generation rates were determined for daily traffic, morning peak hour inbound and outbound traffic and evening s based on trip generation rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021), and the City of Rialto Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (December 2013). Trip generation rates for ITE Land Use Codes Medical Office and Strip Retail Plaza As shown in Table 8 below, t he Proposed Project is forecast to generate a total of approximately 666 daily vehicle trips, including 41 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 77 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour net of the existing use . The trip distribution would contribute 37 morning peak hour and 67 evening peak hour trips to the six -legged intersection of Lilac Avenue (NS)/Randall(EW)/Bloomington Avenue (SWME).

Table 8
Proposed Trip Generation

Project
Peak Hour

Daily
Morning Evening
Inbound Outbound Total Inbound Outbound Total
Existing Development
Proposed Development
0 31
1 11
1 42
1 31
0 46
1 78
9 675
Total New Trips 31 10 41 30 46 77 666
Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

51 As shown on the General Plan Exhibit 4.2 – Transit and Rail Routes, a local bus route occurs along Randall Avenue. H owever, development and operation of the Proposed Project is not anticipated to impact bus routes. According to the General Plan Exhibit 4.4 – Bicycle Route, no bike trails occur near or adjacent to the Project Site.20

Assuming the project shall construct all on -site and off -site improvements (if any) in accordance with City design standards, the project would not create any new safety or operational concerns.

c) Less than Significant. The VMT screening assessment was prepared in accordance with the City of Rialto’s Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines and Requirements. Projects in a Transit Priority Area, Projects in a Low Vehicles Miles of Travel Area, or certain types of locally serving projects are exempt from conducting a full VMT Analysis. The City’s Guidelines include a Fehr and Peers Screening tool. To determine a project’s exemption a project must meet one or more of the screening criteria to qualify.

Projects located within a TPA, defined as within one-half mile of major transit stop or high- quality transit corridor, may be presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This presumption may not apply, however, if the project:

1. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75;

2. Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking)

3. Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the SBCTA with input from the SCAG): or

4. Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate or high - income residential units.

Based on the Fehr and Peers Screening Tool, the Proposed Project is not located in a Transit Priority Area (TPA) and therefore does not meet this criteria.

The City’s Guidelines identify the types of projects that may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact as they are local serving and thus can be expected to reduce VMT or they are small enough to have a negligible impact. The Proposed Project is a retail project that does not exceed 50,000 square -feet of gross floor area. Thus, the Proposed Project meets this criteria.

Residential and office projects located within a low VMT generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. In addition, other employment -related and mixed -use land use projects may qualify f or the

20 Rialto General Plan, Exhibit 4.4 – Bicycle Route. Page 4-14 Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

52 use of screening if the project can reasonably be expected to generate VMT per resident, per worker, or per service population that is similar to the existing land uses in the low VMT area. The Project is located in a low Vehicles Miles travelled and therefore meets this criteria.

The Proposed Project satisfies the project type screening criteria for low vehicle trip generation and for project type such that it would result in a less than significant VMT impact in accordance with VMT established by the City. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project would not create substantial hazard due to a design feature or incompatible uses. Access to the Project Site will be available on both Lilac Avenue and Randall Avenue. The Proposed Project will have full access to Lilac Avenue and right turn in/out only access to Randall. The driveways will be approximately 26 feet wide and are designated primarily for passenger car usage Discretionary actions for the Proposed Project by the City of Rialto includes review and approval of Site Plan. With City approval of the Site Plan, the Proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses and would not result in inadequate emergency access. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e) No Impact. During construction and long-term operation, the contractor would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required by the City of Rialto. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.

No impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code
section 21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically defined
in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is:

a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or

b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

53 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American Tribe.

a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc prepared a Cultural Resources for the Proposed Project in January 2022 which included communication with Native American tribes. On December 28, 2021, Brian F. Smith and Associates submitted a request to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission’s Sacred Lands File.

However, no response has been received.

The Project Site was negative for cultural resources, the history of the area in relation to residential development and the close proximity of the property to Lytle Creek indicate that there is the possibility for the discovery of previously unrecorded prehistoric or historic cultural resources. Further, the surrounding area has been developed residentially since 1930 and buried historic resources associated with this development could be located within the Project Site. Given that the possibility of discovering a significant unanticipated tribal cultural resource remains, Mitigation Measure CR-1 and Mitigation Measure CR-2, listed in Section V, shall be implemented to ensure that less than significant impacts occur.

No additional mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant with Mitigation . California Assembly Bill 52 (AB52) was approved by Governor Brown on September 25, 2014. AB52 specifies that CEQA projects with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource may have a significant effect on the environment. As such, the bill requires lead agency consultation with California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of a Proposed Project, if the t ribe requested to the lead agency, in writing, to be informed of Proposed Projects in that geographic area.

The legislation further requires that the tribe-requested consultation be completed prior to determining whether a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report is required for a project.

As stated above, Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc prepared a Cultural Resources for the Proposed Project in January 2022 which included communication with Native American tribes. On December 28, 2021, Brian F. Smith and Associates submitted a request to the State of California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a records search in the commission’s Sacred Lands File. However, no response has been received.

On January 31, 2022, the City of Rialto mailed AB52 Notices to the Gabrieleno -Tongva Nation, Gabrieleno-Tongva Nation San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation and San Manuel Band of Mission Indian; However, only the Gabrieleno Band of Mission - Kizh Nation Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

54 requested consultation. As such, Mitigation Measure TCR -1 through Mitigation Measure TCR-3 provided by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission - Kizh Nation shall be implemented to ensure that less than significant impacts occur:

Mitigation Measure TCR-1:

Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground -Disturbing Activities

A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation.

The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground - disturbing activity” for the subject p roject at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off -site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.

B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground -disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground - disturbing activity.

C. 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 cultura l and historical artifacts, remains, places of sign ificance, 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/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.

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

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

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

Mitigation Measure TCR-2:

Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects

A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground -disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a N ative American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is a cceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)

E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non -TCR) shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

56 archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

Mitigation Measure TCR-3:

Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains

A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.

B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.

D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the rema ins. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be div erted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.

E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground -disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location wi thin the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

57 F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a minimu m) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery-related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the N AHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Would the project:

a) Require or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment
or storm water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?

b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?

c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project's projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?

d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure?

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

58 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
e) Negatively impact the provision of solid waste
services or impair the attainment of solid waste
reduction goals?

f) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?

a) Less than Significant. The Project Site is located within the service area of the City of Rialto Water Service Area. A Water Master Plan provides the long -term plan for construction of infrastructure needs that are met by customer rates or other available financing options. The Proposed Project will connect to an existing water line along Lilac Avenue. The City has indicated in a March 2, 2023 letter to the Applicant that it is capable of providing water service to the Proposed Project.

The City of Rialto Water Resources Division manages the City’s wastewater collection system. All of the wastewater flows from the City are collected by the City’s local sewer mains and delivered to the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant that provides tertiary treatment prior to discharge to the Santa Ana River. The City of Rialto currently provides sewer service to the existing residence on-site and would continue to provide sewer service to the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project will be connected to the existing sewage line along Lilac Avenue. The City has indicated in a March 2, 2023 letter to the Applicant that it is capable of providing sewer service to the Proposed Project.

Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electrical service to the project area and to the Project Site. The Proposed Project will receive electrical power by connecting to SCE’s existing underground power lines along L ilac Avenue, west of the Project Site. The increased demand is expected to be sufficiently served by the existing SCE electrical facilities. Total electricity demand in SCE’s service area is estimated to increase by approximately 12,000 Gigawatt hours between the years 2015 and 2026. The increase in electricity demand (see Section VI Energy) from the project would represent an insignificant percent of the overall demand in SCE’s service area. The Proposed Project would not require the expansion or construction of new electrical facilities.

Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) provides natural gas service to the vicinity and the Project Site. The Proposed Project will receive natural gas from the Southern California Gas Company by connecting to the existing line within Lilac Avenue. The increase in natural gas demand (see Section VI Energy) from the project would represent an insignificant percent of the overall demand in SoCalGas’s service area The Proposed Project would not require the expansion or construction of new natural gas facilities.

Spectrum and A T&T provides t elecommunication services to the Project Area will be connected by underground connections from existing underground lines along L ilac Avenue. The Proposed Project would not require the expansion or construction of new communication facilities.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

59 The Proposed Project is an acceptable use within the parameters in the City of Rialto’s General Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electrical power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construct ion or relocation of which could ca use significant environmental effects. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) Less than Significant. The Project Site is located within the service area of the WVWD.

As stated in the 2020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan ( IRUWMP), groundwater currently supplies the majority of Rialto's total supply, and the District will continue to rely on groundwater as its preferred source of supply, augmented with surface supplies when available. The District produces water from four different adjudicated groundwater basins: the Rialto Basin, Lytle Creek Basin, Riverside North Basin and the Bunker Hill Basin. Rialto and participates in several ongoing water conservation measures and contributes to regional recharge projects through the San Bernardino Basin (SBB) Groundwater Council and Rialto Basin Groundwater Council to optimize and enhance the use and reliability of local groundwater water resources.

According to the UWMP, during a multiple dry-year period, the total water supply for the City of Rialto is projected to be 14,691 acre -feet (AF) by 2045, while the total water demand is projected to be 12,775 AF in the same year, resulting in a projected surplus of 1,916 AF. 21 There are no groundwater recharge facilities in the area; therefore, the Proposed Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede substantial groundwater management of the basin. No significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) Less than Significant. Wastewater collected in the City of Rialto is treated at the Rialto WWTP. Constructed originally in 1956, the WWTP treats domestic and commercial/industrial wastewater generated within the City of Rialto and portions of the City of Fontana. The facility consists of the original plant and four independent treatment plants built successively in 1965, 1981, 1994, and 1998 to accommodate Rialto’s growth.

The combined total treatment design capacity of the plants is over 12 million gallons per day (MGD). The City of Rialto would provide sewer service to the Project Site with sewer being collected in lines along Lilac Avenue and Oliver Street. The owner will be required to construct an 8” sewer line, approximately 150 feet to the southerly boundary line of the above reference property. and the City has indicated it is capable of serving the Proposed Project. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) Less than Significant. Solid waste from the City of Rialto is transported to and disposed of at the Mid -Valley Sanitary Landfill located in the northern portion of the City. The landfill has a maximum throughput of 7,500 tons per day and has an expected operational life through 2033. According to CalRecycle’s Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates,

212020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Table 5 -16. DWR 7- 4R Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison. Page 5-25.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

60 “Commercial” land uses are estimated to generate approximately 547.56 pounds of solid waste per day, based on the Proposed Projects estimated 52 numbers of employees .22 Therefore, the Proposed Project is anticipated to be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

e, f) Less than Significant. The Proposed Project will be required to comply with the City of Rialto waste reduction programs, including recycling and other diversion programs to divert the amount of solid waste disposed of in landfills. The Project Applicant will be required to work with the local refuse hauler to develop and implement feasible waste reduction programs, including source reduction, recycling, and composting. Additionally, in accordance with the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991 (CA Pub Res. Code § 42911), the Proposed Project is required to provide adequate areas for collecting and loading recyclable materials where solid waste is collected. The collection areas are required to be shown on construction drawings and be in place before occupancy permits are issued. Implementation of these programs would reduce the amount of solid waste generated by the Proposed Project and diverted to landfills. The Proposed Project would comply with all applicable solid waste statutes and regulations. Therefore, no significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

XX. WILDFIRE

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:

a) Impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?

b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose
project occupants to, pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?

c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that
may result in temporary ongoing impacts to the
environment?

22 CalRecycle. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Accessed on 1/25/2023 .

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

61 Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?

a) No Impact. The Project Site does not contain any emergency facilities and is not located within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone.23, 24 The Project Site is adjacent to W. Randall Avenue and S. Lilac Avenue, which are not emergency evacuation routes. The General Plan does not identify individual evacuation routes, rather specify that unpredictable evacuation route movements will be conducted by the Rialto law enforcement agencies. 25 The I-10 and Route 66 Freeways are both evacuation routes within the Valley Region of the County. The Proposed Project is one mile north of the I-10 Freeway and 1.5 miles south of Route 66 Freeway.

During construction and long-term operation, the contractor would be required to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles as required by the City. The Proposed Project would not impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

b) No Impact. The Project Site is primarily flat and pre-construction grading is proposed to further prepare the site for the proposed development. Additionally, the Project Site is located within a predominantly developed region with no wildlands located on or adjacent to the Project Site. Wildland fire hazards are of concern where development is adjacent to wildland areas, particularly in north Rialto. Fires starting in the foothill areas can easily spread south and consume urban development, especially if pushed by the Santa Ana winds that blow from the Cajon Pass. As shown in Exhibit 5.3 of the City of Rialto General Plan, the Project Site is not identified in an area associated with risk of wildland fire.26 Thus, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to exacerbate wildfire risks, thereby exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Therefore, no impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

c) Less than Significant . The Project Site is located on the southeast corner of Randall Avenue and Lilac Avenue. Proposed on-site and off-site improvements include extending sidewalks and the removal of preexisting driveways along Lilac Avenue. As stated in Section XIX(a), the Proposed Project will connect to existing utilities and service system infrastructure. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result

23 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: PP-1 Critical Facilities. Accessed on 1/26/2023. 24 San Bernardino Countywide Plan: HZ-5 Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Accessed on 3/1/2023. 25 City of Rialto General Plan. Chapter 5: The Safety and Noise Chapter. Evacuation Routes and Emergency Shelters. Accessed on 3/1/2023.
26 City of Rialto General Plan. Exhibit 5.3 Fire Hazards. Accessed on 1/31/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

62 in temporary ongoing impacts to the environment. No significant adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no mitigation measures are required.

d) No Impact . Under existing conditions, the Project Site is primarily flat and pre - construction grading is proposed to further prepare the site for the proposed development.

The Project Site is not located in an area likely to become unstable as a result of on- or off- site landslide. Additionally, as shown in Exhibit 5.3 of the City of Rialto General Plan, the Project Site is not identified in an area associated with risk of wildland fire. The Project Site is not located within a 100-year FEMA Flood Zone Area, as stated in the General Plan Exhibit 5.2.27 There are no dams, reservoirs, or large water bodies near the Project Site. As stated in Section X(c) herein, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff, or impede or redirect potential flood flows. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with Mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact

a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?

b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?

c) Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause Substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?

27 City of Rialto General Plan. Exhibit 5.2 Flood Hazards. Accessed on 1/31/2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

63 a) Less than Significant with Mitigation. Based on a January 2023 site visit, the vegetation that occurs on the Project Site and immediate surrounding area does contain habitat suitable for nesting birds. As such, pre -construction surveys are warranted and recommended to reduce the potential impacts to nesting birds, should project construction occur during the bird nesting season. Therefore, possible significant adverse impacts have been identified or are anticipated and Mitigation Measure BIO -1 is required as a condition of project approval to reduce these impacts to a level below significant. The Proposed Project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or a wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, and reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal with implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. No additional mitigation is warranted.

An archaeological records search was completed by Brian F. Smith and Associates (BFSA) and results are documented in a letter dated January 26, 2023. As part of the environmental review process, BFSA reviewed the results of the records search from the Sout h Central Coastal Information Center at California State University, Fullerton. The records search, which was completed on January 18, 2023, encompassed an area of one mile surrounding the Project Site. Based upon the records search results, four resources have been recorded within one mile of the Project Site, none of which are within the project boundaries. The resources include a historic industrial warehouse, a historic storage tank, a historic storage shed, and a historic trash scatter. The records sea rch results also indicate that 20 previous studies have been conducted within one mile of the project, none of which overlap the subject property. Although no historic or prehistoric resources were found on -site, mitigation measure CR-1 would reduce potential impacts to less than significant.

b) Less than Significant. Cumulative impacts are defined as two or more individual affects that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. The cumulative impact from several Projects is the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the development when added to the impacts of other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable or probable future developments. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, developments taking place over a period. The CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130 (a) and (b), states:

(a) Cumulative impacts shall be discussed when the Project’s incremental effect is cumulatively considerable.

(b) The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided of the effects attributable to the Project. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness.

No potential impacts associated with the Proposed Project would be considered individually adverse or unfavorable. The Proposed Project is a compatible use identified in and previously evaluated as part of the City of Rialto General Plan and Municipal Code .

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Environmental Checklist Form

64 No additional potential cumulative adverse impacts are identified or are anticipated, and no additional mitigation measures are required.

c) No Impact. Incorporation of mitigation measures, City of Rialto policies, standards, and guidelines would ensure that the Proposed Project would have no substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly on an individual or cumulative basis.

No impact is anticipated.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California References

65 SECTION 4

REFERENCES

California Department of Conservation. California Important Farmland Finder . Accessed on January 20, 2023. From http://maps.conservation.ca.gov/ciff/ciff.html.

California Department of Conservation. Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. Accessed on January 20, 2023.

California Department of Toxic Substances Control. EnviroStor. Accessed on January 26, 2023.

California Energy Commission Efficiency Division. Title 24: 20 20 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed on May 2022 from
https://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/2018_Title_24_2019_Buildi ng_Standards_FAQ.pdf.

CalRecycle. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates . Accessed on January 25, 2023. F rom https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates.

City of Rialto. General Plan. December 2010.

City of Rialto. Municipal Code 18.16.140 – Lighting. Accessed on January 20, 2023.

City of Rialto. Official City Zoning Map. Updated July 8, 2013.

County of San Bernardino. Countywide Plan. Accessed on January 27, 2023.

Cultural Resources Study for the Sunrise Center Project. Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc.

January 26, 2023.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. Flood Maps. https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps.

Accessed April 19, 2023.

Hydrology Report for Proposed Commercial Building 935 S. Lilac Avenue. E&A Engineers.

February 15, 2023.

Noise Impact Study, Rialto Retail Center Project. MD Acoustics, LLC. December 14, 2022.

San Bernardino Countywide Plan. Maps, Tables & Figures. Accessed on April 19, 2023.

Soil and Foundation Evaluation Report for Proposed Commercial Buildings 935 S Lilac Ave, Rialto, CA 92376. Soil Pacific Inc. January 8, 2022.

State of California Employment Department. “Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Census Designated Places. Accessed on March 1, 2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California References

66 Trip Generation Analysis for 935 South Lilac Avenue Project. Kunzman Associates. April 7, 2023.

Vehicle Mile Traveled Screening Analysis for 935 South Lilac Avenue Project. Kunzman Associates. April 7, 2023.

Water Quality management Plan for Proposed Commercial Building. E&A Engineers. February 15, 2023.

Water Systems Consulting, Inc. and Woodard & Curran. 2020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Accessed on April 19, 2023.

World Population Review. Rialto, California Population Demographics. Accessed on February 28, 2023.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Comment Letters and Responses

67 SECTION 5

COMMENT LETTERS AND RESPONSES

The MND/IS was released for a 30 -day public review and comment period beginning on November 14, 2023, consistent with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines. During this time, the City received two comment letters.

CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines require public agencies to consider public comments received on a mitigated negative declaration; however, they do not require that agencies prepare written responses to such comments. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21091(d), ( f); State CEQA Guidelines, § 15074(b).) Nonetheless, the City has prepared written responses to each comment raised in each submitted comment letter.

The two comment letters, and all written responses to those comment letters, are enclosed. The comment letters, and the written responses, will be considered by the City Planning Commission and the City Council in making any approval or denial decision on the Proposed Project.

Board of Education
Mrs. Stephanie E. Lewis, President | Mrs. Nancy G. O’Kelley, Vice President | Mr. Joseph W. Martinez, Clerk | Mrs. Evelyn Dominguez, Member Mr. Edgar Montes, Member | Dr. Cuauhtémoc Avila, RUSD Superintendent | Mrs. Diane Romo, Lead Business Services Agent Rialto Unified School District | Facilities Planning Services 625 W. Rialto Ave. Rialto Ca, 92376 | 909-421-7555 | www.rialto.k12.ca.us 11/27/23
Daniel Casey
City of Rialto/Planning
150 S Palm Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376
RE: PPD # 2022-0019
Multi-Tenant Commercial Building. Location Randall Ave and Lilac Ave.

Dear Sir,
Thank you for the notification of the listed project. By the project description, this plan does fall within the boundary of the Rialto Unified School District.

MITIGATION FEES
The Rialto Unified School District requests to be notified in writing in advance of any and all notices regarding this development. The Rialto Unified School district is empowered to collect all Mitigation Fees pursuant to Board of Education Resolution. The fee must be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits. Upon payment of fees, a Certificate of Compliance will be issued.

COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC / AIR QUALITY
Please Note: This project is in the ‘suggested walking route’ to Simpson Elementary School located at 1050 South Lilac. See attached SRTS Map.

RUSD needs to be assured that any increase in commercial traffic in the area will not interfere with school district functions and/or that the existing school district functions will not interfere with the operations of the listed project. In addition, the District is concerned about air quality impacts that may affect District students.

Ambient air quality impacts from project construction and operational activities need to be adequately examined and addressed.

SAFE ROUTES
Rialto Unified School District participates in the Safe Routes to School Program and wants to make sure that this project coincides with any Safe Route improvements within the area such as fully developed safe walking patterns and biking paths to and from existing schools for all pedestrians.

Sincerely,
George Palma
Facilities Planning Services Technician
1-1
1-2
1-3
1-4
1-5
LETTER 1
LMNO

LMNOLMNOLMNO
LMNO
LMNO LMNO"$"$"$
"$
"$
LMNO
I
500 1,000 Feet0

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Comment Letters and Responses

72 Comment 1-1: Introductory comment stating project is within boundary of Rialto Unified School District.

Response to Comment 1 -1: This comment does not relate to CEQA or the IS/MND and no response is required.

Comment 1 -2: District requests to be notified of all notices related to the project, and that Mitigation Fees are required to be paid prior to issuance of any building permits.

Response to Comment 1-2: This comment does not relate to CEQA or the IS/MND. However, the City will notify the District of all notices regarding the project.

Comment 1-3: This comment notes that the Project is in the suggested walking route to Simpson Elementary School at 1050 S. Lilac (just south of the Project Site).

Response to Comment 1 -3: This comment does not question the content or conclusions of the IS/MND. However, once the single-family residential structure on -site is removed for project construction, access to the site would be via one driveway at both Lilac and one at Randall.

Sidewalks exist on both east and west sides of Lilac.

Comment 1-4: This comment requests assurance that increased traffic from the project will not interfere with school district functions or that school district functions will not interfere with project operations. Comment further states that District is concerned about air quality impacts.

Response to Comment 1 -4: This comment does not question the content or conclusions of the IS/MND. The Project will have full access to Lilac Avenue and is forecast to generate a total of approximately 666 daily vehicle trips, including 41 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 77 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour net of the existing use. The IS/MND analyzed the air quality impacts associated with the increased trips. As shown in Tables 1 and 2, operational impacts resulting from either the existing use or the Proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and Greenhouse Gas Emissions would not exceed the screening threshold.

Comment 1-5: This comment states the District participates in the Safe Routes to School Program and wants to make sure the Project coincides with any Safe Route improvements.

Response to Comment 1 -5: This comment does not question the content or conclusions of the IS/MND, however because the site is currently developed and because sidewalks exist on both sides of Lilac, no interference with the Safe Routes to School Program are expected.

Attachments: The District’s comment letter was submitted with three non -referenced attachments: 1) Simpson Elementary Suggested Walking Routes to School; 2) City of Rialto Notice of Intent to Issue a Mitigated Negative Declaration; and 3) an aerial showing location o f Project Site.

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
December 14, 2023
Daniel Casey
Principal Planner
City of Rialto
150 S Palm Avenue
Rialto, CA 92376-6406
[email protected]
RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) FOR THE SUNRISE CENTER DATED NOVEMBER 15, 2023 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2023110375 Dear Daniel Casey,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) received a MND for the Sunrise Center. The project provides for the development of one (1) 8,840 square foot multi- tenant commercial building, one (1) 9,966 square foot multi-tenant commercial building, and associated paving, landscaping, lighting, and drainage improvements on 1.55 acres of land (APN: 0132-021-18) located at the southeast corner of Randall Avenue and Lilac Avenue. In conjunction with the development, the project includes a proposal to change the General Plan land use designation of the project site from Residential 2 to Community Commercial and a proposal to change the zoning designation of the project site from Agricultural (A-1) to Neighborhood Commercial (C-1).

After reviewing the project, DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comment:

LETTER 2
2-1
Daniel Casey
December 14, 2023

Page 2 ends

1. I f buildings or other structures are to be demolished on any project sites included in the proposed project, surveys should be conducted for the presence of lead- based paints or products, mercury, asbestos containing materials, and polychlorinated biphenyl caulk. Removal, demolition, and disposal of any of the above-mentioned chemicals should be conducted in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. In addition, sampling near current and/or former buildings should be conducted in accordance with DTSC’s 2006 Interim Guidance Evaluation of School Sites with Potential Contamination from Lead Based Paint, Termiticides, and Electrical Transformers

2. D TSC recommends that all imported soil and fill material should be tested to ensure any contaminants of concern are within approved screening levels for the intended land use. To minimize the possibility of introducing contaminated soil and fill material there should be documentation of the origins of the soil or fill material and, if applicable, sampling be conducted to ensure that the imported soil and fill material meets screening levels for the intended land use. The soil sampling should include analysis based on the source of the fill and knowledge of the prior land use.

DTSC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the MND for the Sunrise Center. If you have any questions or concerns, simply respond to this email for guidance.

Sincerely,
D
ave Kereazis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP-Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
2-2
2-3
2-4
Daniel Casey
December 14, 2023

Page 3 ends

cc: (via email)
Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research State Clearinghouse
[email protected]
Tamara Purvis
Associate Environmental Planner
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Scott Wiley
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
HWMP - Permitting Division – CEQA Unit
Department of Toxic Substances Control
[email protected]
Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California Comment Letters and Responses

76 Comment 2 -1: Introductory comment that reiterates the Project Description and requests consideration of two comments provided by the Department of Toxic Substances Control.

Response to Comment 2 -1: This comment does not relate to CEQA or the IS/MND and no response is required.

Comment 2-2: Prior to demolition of on -site structures, surveys for hazardous materials should be conducted and removed/disposed in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. Sampling near those structures should be conducted in accordance the DTSC’s noted Guidance document.

Response to Comment 2-2: This comment does not relate to CEQA or the IS/MND. However, the City would not issue permits for demolition, or building permits until hazardous materials are appropriately removed.

Comment 2-3: This comment provides recommendation that all imported soil and fill material be tested to minimize introduction of contaminated soils or fill materials.

Response to Comment 2 -3: This comment does not question the content or conclusions of the IS/MND.

Comment 2-4: This comment is conclusory.

Response to Comment 2 -4: This comment does not question the content or conclusions of the IS/MND.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

77 SECTION 6
MITIGATION MONITORING and REPORTING PROGRAM

Sunrise Center

CITY OF RIALTO
0132-021-18
MITIGATION MONITORING and REPORTING PROGRAM

This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program was prepared to implement the mitigation measures outlined in the Initial Study for the development of two separate office/retail buildings totaling 18,806 square-feet within a 1.4-acre site, located at 935 South Lilac Avenue in the City of Rialto, CA. The Proposed Project would require the approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the existing land use designation of Residential 2 to General Commercial, and a Zone Change (ZC) to the existing zonin g of Agriculture (A -1) to General Commercial (C -3). This program has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the State and City of Rialto CEQA Guidelines.

CEQA Section 21081.6 requires adoption of a monitoring and/or reporting program for those measures or conditions imposed on a project to mitigate or avoid adverse effects on the environment. The law states that the monitoring or reporting program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.

The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program contains the following elements:

1. The mitigation measures are recorded with the action and procedure necessary to ensure compliance. The program lists the mitigation measures contained within the Initial Study.

2. A procedure for compliance and verification has been outlined for each mandatory mitigation action. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported.

3. The program contains a separate Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Record for each action. On each of these record sheets, the pertinent actions and dates will be logged, and copies of permits, correspondence or other data relevant will be retained by the City of Rialto.

4. The program is designed to be flexible. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. If changes are made, new monitoring compliance procedures and records will be developed and incorporated into the program.

The individual measures and accompanying monitoring/reporting actions follow. They are numbered in the same sequence as presented in the Initial Study.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

78 IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

BIO-1: Nesting bird surveys should be conducted prior to any construction activities taking place during the nesting season to avoid potentially taking any birds or active nests. In general, impacts to all bird species (common and special status) can be avoided by conducting work outside of the nesting season (generally March 15th to September 15th), and conducting a worker awareness training. However, if all work cannot be conducted outside of the nesting season, a project -specific Nesting Bird Management Plan will be prepared to determine suitable buffers.

IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION

Planning staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measure.

COMPLIANCE RECORD

When Required: The verification shall be completed prior to construction if construction schedule is during the period March 15th to September 15th.

WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY:

DATE PREPARED:

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

79 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES

CR-1: In the event of an archaeological discovery, either historic or prehistoric, the archaeological monitor shall direct the contractor to temporarily divert all soil disturbing activities, including but not limited to, digging, trenching, excavating, or grading activities in the area of discovery and in the area reasonabl y suspected to overlay adjacent resources. If the discovered resource is associated with the prehistoric Native American occupation of this area, a Native American representative from a local tribe should be contacted to review and participate in the evolution of the discovered resource. The monitor shall immediately notify the Principal Investigator (PI) of the discovery, and subsequently the property owner shall be notified of the discovery.

If the resource is significant, the PI shall submit an Archaeological Data Recovery Program (ADRP) to the lead agency to review and approve. Impacts to significant resources must be mitigated by the implementation of the ADRP before ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery will be allowed to resume. If the resource is not significant, the PI shall submit a letter to the County of San Bernardino indicating that artifacts will be collected, curated, and documented in the final monitoring report. The letter shall also indicate that no further work is required.

IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION

Planning staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measures.

COMPLIANCE RECORD

When Required: The verification shall be completed in the event of an archaeological discovery during the construction period, and final monitoring report at completion of construction.

WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY:

DATE PREPARED:

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

80 VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS RESOURCES

GEO-1: In the event fossil specimens are unearthed, the Project Proponent shall have a paleontological consultant assess the specimens and report to the City of Rialto. If the consultant and City concur, a paleontological monitoring program shall be implem ented for the remainder of earth moving activities.

IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION

Planning staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measure during construction.

COMPLIANCE RECORD

When Required: The verification shall be completed in the event of a paleontological discovery during the construction period, and final monitoring report at completion of construction.

WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY:

DATE PREPARED:

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

81 XIII. NOISE

N-1: During construction, the contractor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices, such as mufflers, silencers, and original equipment devices.

N-2: The contractors shall locate equipment staging areas that will create the greatest distance between construction-related noise/vibration sources and sensitive receptors nearest to the Project Site during all project construction.

N-3: Idling equipment should be turned off when not in use.

N-4: Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging.

IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION

Planning staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measures.

COMPLIANCE RECORD

When Required: The verification shall be completed throughout the construction period.

WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY:

DATE PREPARED:

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

82 XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

TCR-1: Retain a Native American Monitor Prior to Commencement of Ground -Disturbing Activities

A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground -disturbing activity” for the subje ct project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.

B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity, or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.

C. 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 material s, 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 sig nificance, 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/lead agency upon written request to the Tribe.

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

E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or Kizh archaeologist.

The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

83 TCR-2: Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects

B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material s hall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground -disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall be followed.

C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).

D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)

E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin (non -TCR) shall be curated at a public, non -profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent further disturbance.

TCR-3: Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains

A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo -nas-gna Burial Policy shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

84 B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created.

C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been plac ed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred materials.

If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24 -hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be di verted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.

E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site locatio n within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects.

F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. Th ese items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall b e no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.

G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a mi nimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery data recovery -related forms of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and t he NAHC.

The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.

IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION

Planning staff shall verify implementation of the above mitigation measures.

Initial Study for Lilac and Randall Commercial Buildings GPA & ZC City of Rialto, California MMRP

85 COMPLIANCE RECORD

When Required: The verification shall be completed throughout the construction period, with final reports of monitoring or discovery submitted to the City of Rialto, the Tribe, and the NAHC.

WRITTEN VERIFICATION PREPARED BY:

DATE PREPARED:

Rialto City CouncilMay 14, 2024

Rialto City Council
May 14, 2024