Addressing GHG emissions generation impacts requires an agency to determine what constitutes a significant impact. The amendments to the CEQA Guidelines specifically allow lead agencies to determine thresholds of significance that illustrate the extent of an impact and are a basis from which to apply mitigation measures. This means that each agency is left to determine whether a project’s GHG emissions will have a “significant” impact on the environment. The guidelines direct that agencies are to use “careful judgment” and “make a good -faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate” the project’s GHG emissions.8 South Coast Air Quality Management Thresholds
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted a 10,000 MTCO 2e industrial threshold for projects where the SCAQMD is lead agency. During the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group Meeting #15, the SCAQMD noted that it was considering extending the industrial GHG significance threshold for use by all lead agen cies. This working group was formed to assist SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the State Office of Planning and Research, CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in the SCAB, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the SCAB, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. However, the SCAQMD has
8 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15064.4a. Accessed May 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-17
not announced when staff is expecting to present GHG thresholds for land use projects where the SCAQMD is not the lead agency to the governing board. During Meeting #8, the Working Group defined industrial uses as production, manufacturing, and fabrication activities or storage and distribution (e.g., warehouse, transfer facility, etc.). Additionally, the SCAQMD GHG Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group has specified that a warehouse is considered to be an industrial project. 9 Furthermore, the Working Group indicated that the 10,000 MTCO2e per year threshold applies to both emissions from construction and operational phases plus indirect emissions (electricity, water use, etc.).
Although the screening threshold for industrial projects is 10,000 MTCO 2e per year, this analysis conservatively utilizes 3,000 MTCO2e per year as the Project GHG threshold.
4.7.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.7-1: Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that could have a significant impact on the environment?
Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact Short-Term Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The Project would result in direct emissions of GHGs from construction. The approximate quantity of daily GHG emissions generated by construction equipment utilized to build the Project is depicted in Table 4.7-2: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Table 4.7-2: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Category MTCO2e
Construction 983.92
30-Year Amortized Construction 32.80
Source: Appendix I
As shown in Table 4.7-2, the Project would result in the generation of approximately 983.92 MTCO2e over the course of construction. Construction GHG emissions are typically summed and amortized over a 30 - year period, then added to the operational emissions. 10 The amortized Project construction emissions would be 32.80 MTCO 2e per year. Upon completion of construction , the generation of these GHG emissions would cease.
9 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2009).Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #8. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases- (ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-8/ghg-meeting-8-minutes.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
10 The amortization period of 30-years is based on the standard assumption of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009). https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg- meeting-13/ghg-meeting-13-minutes.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-18
Long-Term Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the Project. GHG emissions would result from direct emissions such as Project generated vehicular traffic, on-site combustion of natural gas, and operation of any landscaping equipment. Operational GHG emissions would also result from indirect sources, such as off-site generation of electrical power, solid waste generation, and the energy required to convey water to, and wastewater from the Project. Total GHG emissions associated with the Project are summarized in Table 4.7-3: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Table 4.7-3: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source
MTCO2e per Year
Unmitigated Mitigated
Construction Amortized Over 30 Years 32.80 32.80
Area Source 4.03 4.03
Energy1 598.13 227.00
Mobile – Trucks 12,162.07 12,162.07
Mobile – Passenger Cars 608.38 608.38
Off-Road – Forklifts and Yard Trucks2 1,587.86 86.87
Emergency Generators2 19.56 19.56
Waste3 74.87 18.72
Water and Wastewater4 109.19 106.63
Refrigerants 641.86 641.86
Total Project Emissions 15,838,75 13,907,91
Threshold 3,000 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes Yes
Notes:
1. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 requires the installation of photovoltaic solar panels to offset energy emissions and Mitigation Measure GHG- 2 requires buildings to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards.
2. Mitigated emissions include operation of electric forklifts and yard trucks, as well as Tier 4 certified standard emergency generators, pursuant to AIR-1 (refer to the Projects Air Quality Assessment).
3. Mitigation Measure GHG-3 requires a minimum of 75 percent solid waste diversion.
4. Mitigation Measure GHG-4 requires the installation of low-water use plants and drip irrigation.
Source: Appendix I
Below is a description of the primary sources of operational emissions:
▪ Area Sources. Area source emissions occur from architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, and consumer products. Landscaping is anticipated to occur throughout the project site.
Additionally, the primary emissions from architectural coatings are volatile organic compounds, which are relatively insignificant as direct GHG emissions. ▪ Energy Consumption. Energy consumption consists of emissions from Project consumption of electricity and natural gas.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-19
▪ Off-Road Equipment . Operational off -road emissions would be generated by off -road cargo handling equipment used during operational activities. Although the Project is a truck terminal facility, it has been assumed that off -road equipment would be utilized as a worst -case analysis.
It was conservatively assumed that the Project would include four diesel forklifts and one diesel yard trucks per SCAQMD data.11 The forklifts and yard trucks GHG emissions were based on CARB OFFROAD emissions data.
▪ Emergency Backup Generators. As the Project is a truck terminal facility with warehouse space, it is conservatively assumed that backup generators would be used in the event of a power failure.
Generators would not be part of the Project’s normal daily operations. Nonetheless, emissi ons associated with one emergency backup generator was included to be conservative. Emissions from an emergency backup generator was calculated separately from CalEEMod; refer to Appendix I. However, CalEEMod default emissions r ates were used. If backup generators are required, the end user would be required to obtain a permit from the SCAQMD prior to installation. Emergency backup generators must meet SCAQMD's Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirements and comply with SCAQMD Rule 1470 (Requirements for Stationary Diesel-Fueled Internal Combustion and Other Compression Ignition Engines), which would minimize emissions.
▪ Mobile Sources . Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example, ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern. NO X and ROG react with sunlight to form O 3, known as photochemical smog. Additionally, wind currents readily transport PM10 and PM2.5. However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant, dispersing rapidly at the source. o Project-generated vehicle emissions are based on the trip generation within the Traffic Study and have been incorporated into CalEEMod, as recommended by the SCAQMD. Per the Traffic Study, the Project would generate 951 total daily vehicle trips, which includes 574 daily truck trips.
▪ Solid Waste. Solid waste releases GHG emissions in the form of methane when these materials decompose.
▪ Water and Wastewater . GHG emissions from water demand would occur from electricity consumption associated with water conveyance and treatment. ▪ Refrigerants. Air conditioning and refrigerator equipment typically generate GHG emissions. The proposed Project would not include cold storage. Per 17 CCR 95371, new facilities with refrigeration equipment containing more than 50 pounds of refrigerant are prohibited f rom utilizing refrigerants with a GWP of 150 or greater as of January 1, 2022. Default CalEEMod assumption were utilized.
Table 4.7-3 shows that the Project’s unmitigated emissions would be approximately 15,838.75 MTCO 2e annually from operations with amortized construction. Project-related GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold. It should be noted that the majority of the unmitigated GHG emissions (81 percent) are associated with non -construction related mobile sources. Emissions of motor vehicles are controlled by State and federal standards, and the Project has no control over these standards.
11 SCAQMD. (2014). High Cube Warehouse Truck Trip Study White Paper Summary of Business Survey Results. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/high-cube-warehouse-trip-rate-study-for-air-quality- analysis/business-survey-summary.pdf. Accessed September 2023. Accessed September 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-20
The Project’s Air Quality Assessment includes Mitigation Measure (MM) AIR-1 and MM TRF-1 (see Section
4.17, Transportation) to reduce operational emissions. Mitigation Measure AIR-1 requires all outdoor cargo handling equipment be zero emission/powered by electricity and standard emergency generators be Tier 4 certified. Mitigation Measure TRF-1 requires preparation of a Traffic Demand Management (TDM) plan to reduce single -occupancy commute trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation. In addition, the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Climate and Air Quality Mitigation Measure 2 recommends that employers take steps such as preferential parking to encourage car-pooling and van-pooling.
Further, the Project would implement MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4. Mitigation Measure GHG-1 requires the installation of photovoltaic solar panels to offset energy emissions. Mitigation Measure GHG-2 requires the Project to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards to further improve energy efficiency. Mitigation Measure GHG-3 requires the Project to divert 75 percent of waste from landfills.
Mitigation Measure GHG-4 requires the installation of low water use plants and drip irrigation. The Project would also be required to comply with Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations (LOR) GHG-1 through LOR GHG- 8 which would be required by local, State, or federal regulations or laws.
Table 4.7-3 shows that implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce GHG emissions to 13,907.91 MTCO 2e. The majority of the Project’s GHG emissions are generated by mobile emissions.
Mitigation to reduce the Project’s mobile emissions is not feasible due to the limited ability of the City to address emissions resulting from mobile sources and/or emissions generated by cars and trucks outside of the City’s limits. As with all land use projects, the Project’s mobile and transportation related GHG emissions are a function of two parameters: emissions control technology and vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
CARB is directly responsible for regulating mobile and transportation source emissions in the State.
Regarding the first parameter, California addresses emissions control technology through a variety of legislation and regulatory schemes, including the Sta te’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (Executive Order S-01-07) (LCFS), a regulatory program designed to encourage the use of cleaner low-carbon transportation fuels in California, encourage the production of those fuels, and therefore, reduce GHG emissions and decrease petroleum dependence in the transportation sector. The regulatory standards are expressed in terms of the “carbon intensity” of gasoline and diesel fuel and their substitutes. Different types of fuels are evaluated to determine their “life cycle em issions” which include the emissions associated with producing, transporting, and using the fuels. Each fuel is then given a carbon intensity score and compared against a declining carbon intensity benchmark for each year. Providers of transportation fuels must demonstrate that the mix of fuels they supply for use in California meets these declining benchmarks for each annual compliance period.
In 2018, CARB approved amendments to the LCFS, which strengthened the carbon intensity benchmarks through 2030 to ensure they are in -line with California’s 2030 GHG emission reduction target enacted through SB 32. CARB is also implementing additional transportation sector regulations such as Advanced Clean Cars II, Advanced Clean Trucks, and Advanced Clean Fleets. This ensures that the transportation sector is meeting its obligations to achieve California’s GHG reduction targets. The Project would be required to comply with these regulations through vehicle manufacturer compliance. The State is also implementing legislation and regulations to address the second parameter affecting transportation related GHG emissions by controlling for VMT. Examples of this include SB 375, which links land use and Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-21
transportation funding and provides one incentive for regions to achieve reductions in VMT, and SB 743, which discourages VMT increases for passenger car trips above a region-specific benchmark.
Additional mitigation to further reduce the Project’s non -mobile emissions would be speculative. The Project’s mitigation measures and Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations ( LORs) address non -mobile emissions to the extent possible, by designing buildings to provide environmental design features, incorporate energy and water conservation measures, and provide electrical, heating, ventilation, lighting, and power systems that meet CALGreen Standards (MM GHG-1 requires the installation of photovoltaic solar panels to offset energy emissions. Mitigation Measure GHG-2 requires the Project to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards, which exceeds code requirements). Further, the Project would be required to divert 75 percent of solid waste from landfills ( MM GHG-3) and require low water use plants and drip irrigation (MM GHG-4). The State is addressing the remaining energy -related GHG emissions through SB 100 and SB 1020, which requires 100 percent clean electricity retail sales by 2045. Additionally, SB 905 requires the State to use carbon removal, carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration technologies and AB 1757 requires nature-based sequestration in natural working lands.
As shown in Table 4.7-3, mitigated GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold despite implementation of all feasible mitigation. Therefore, Project-related GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations:
LORs are existing requirements that are based on local, state, or federal regulations or laws that are frequently required independently of CEQA review. Typical LORs and requirements include compliance with the provisions of the Building Code, SCAQMD Rules, etc. The City may impose additional conditions during the approval process, as appropriate. Because LORs are neither Project specific nor a result of development of the Project, they are not considered to be either Project Design Features or Mitigation Measures.
Refer to LOR AQ-3 and LOR AQ-4 in the Air Quality Assessment prepared for the Project, which requires diesel-powered construction equipment to be turned off when not in use and the installation of water efficient irrigation systems and devices, respectively.
LOR GHG-1 Limit idling time for commercial vehicles to no more than five minutes per Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 2485.
LOR GHG-2 In accordance with California Title 24 Standards, buildings will be designed to have 15 percent of the roof area “solar ready” that will structurally accommodate later installation of rooftop solar panels. If future building operators pursue providing rooftop solar panels, they will submit plans for solar panels prior to occupancy.
LOR GHG-3 Install water -efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture -based irrigation controls and sensors for landscaping, according to the City’s Water Efficient Landscape requirements (Chapter 12.50 of the City’s Municipal Code).
LOR GHG-4 Design buildings to be water -efficient. Install water-efficient fixtures in accordance with Section 5.303 of the California Green Building Standards Code Part 11.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-22
LOR GHG-5 Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste in accordance with Section 5.408.1 of the California Green Building Standards Code Part 11.
LOR GHG-6 Provide storage areas for recyclables and green waste and adequate recycling containers located in readily accessible areas in accordance with Section 5.410 of the California Green Building Standards Code Part 11.
LOR GHG-7 To facilitate future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), construction shall comply with Section 5.106.5.3 (nonresidential electric vehicle charging) of the California Green Building Standards Code Part 11.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Climate and Air Quality Mitigation Measure 2: Individual industrial users should take all reasonable steps to encourage employees to car-pool rather than utilizing one vehicle per employee. Typical measures which can be taken by employers include:
a. Designation of preferential parking areas which may be used only by employees engaged in car-pooling.
b. Employers should be encouraged to institute van -pooing programs to reduce the number of vehicles driven by employees.
Project Mitigation Measures
Additional details regarding MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1 are included in Section 4.2, Air Quality and Section 4.17, Transportation, respectively.
MM GHG-1: Prior to issuance of a building permit, t he Project shall install solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other source of renewable energy generation on -site, or otherwise acquire energy from the local utility that has been generated by renewable sources, that would provide 100 percent of the anticipated electricity demand (i.e., the Title 24 electricity demand and the plug-load, anticipated to be approximately 4.62 kilowatt hours per year [kWh/year] per square foot for warehouse uses, 17.53 kWh/year/sf for office uses, 9.54 kWh/year/sf for automobile care centers, and 38.16 kWh/year/acre for parking lots12).
With anticipated energy consumption at approximately 2.3 million kWh per year, a PV panel array covering approximately one third of the proposed truck terminal roof space would provide sufficient on -site renewable energy generation to offset consumption. 13 The final PV generation facility size requires approval by Southern California Edison (SCE).
12 The expected electricity demand is based on CalEEMod; refer to Appendix I. 13 Estimated solar generation potential estimated using the National Renewable Energy Laboratory PVWatt Calculator:
https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php. Accessed September 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-23
SCE’s Rule 21 governs operating and metering requirements for any facility connected to SCE’s distribution system. Should SCE limit the off-site export, the proposed Project may utilize a battery energy storage system (BESS) to lower off -site export while maintaining on-site renewable generation to off-set consumption.
MM GHG-2: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant or successor in interest shall provide documentation to the City demonstrating the following:
▪ The Project shall be designed to achieve Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards in effect at the time of building permit application in order to exceed 2022 Title 24 energy efficiency standards.
▪ The Project shall provide facilities to support electric charging stations per the Tier 2 standards in Section A5.106.5.3 (Nonresidential Voluntary Measures) of the 2022 CALGreen Code.
MM GHG-3: The development shall divert a minimum of 75 percent of landfill waste. Prior to issuance of certificate of tenant occupancy permits, a recyclables collection and load area shall be constructed in compliance with City standards for recyclable collection and loading areas.
This mitigation measure applies only to tenant permits and not the building shell approvals. The diversion plan shall also comply with the established solid waste and recycling laws including AB 939 and AB 341.
MM GHG-4: Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the Project Applicant or successor in interest shall provide documentation to the City demonstrating that low water use landscaping and water-efficient (e.g., drip irrigation) systems would are installed.
Impact 4.8-2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions?
Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact.
Consistency with the City of Rialto Climate Adaptation Plan The Rialto Climate Adaptation Plan outlines goals to reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions to become a more sustainable community. The Project would be required to comply with all building codes in effect at the time of construction which include energy conservation measures mandated by Title 24 of the California Building Standards Code – Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards. Because Title 24 standards require energy conservation features in new construct ion (e.g., high‐efficiency lighting, high‐efficiency heating, ventilating, and air‐conditioning [HVAC] systems, thermal insulation, double‐glazed windows, water -conserving plumbing fixtures), these standards indirectly regulate and reduce GHG emissions. California's B uilding Energy Efficiency Standards are updated on an approximately three‐year cycle. The most recent 2022 standards went into effect January 1, 2023.
Further, the Project would comply with the City’s General Plan policies and State Building Code provisions designed to reduce GHG emissions. The Project would also comply with all SCAQMD applicable rules and regulations during construction and operation and would not interfere with the State’s AB 32 goals.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-24
Consistency with the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan
Adopted December 15, 2022, CARB’s 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality (2022 Scoping Plan) sets a path to achieve targets for carbon neutrality and reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045 in accordance with AB 1279. To achieve the targets of AB 1279, the 2022 Scoping Plan relies on existing and emerging fossil fuel alternatives and clean technologies, as well as carbon capture and storage. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on zero -emission transportation; phasing out use of fossil gas use for heating homes and buildings; reducing chemical and refrigerants with high GWP; providing communities with sustainable options for walking, biking, and public transit; displacement of fossil -fuel fired electrical generation through use of renewable energy alternatives (e.g., solar arra ys and wind turbines); and scaling up new options such as green hydrogen.
The 2022 Scoping Plan sets one of the most aggressive approaches to reach carbon neutrality in the world.
Unlike the 2017 Scoping Plan, CARB no longer includes a numeric per capita t hreshold and instead advocates for compliance with a local GHG reduction strategy (i.e., Climate Action Plan) consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5.
The key elements of the 2022 CARB Scoping Plan focus on transportation. Specifically, the 2022 Scoping Plan aims to rapidly move towards zero-emission (ZE) transportation (i.e., electrifying cars, buses, trains, and trucks), which constitutes California’s single largest source of GHGs. The regulations that impact the transportation sector are adopted and enforced by CARB on vehicle manufacturers and are outside the jurisdiction and control of local governments. The 2022 Scoping Plan accelerates development of new regulations as well as amendments to strengthen regulations and programs already in place. Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions in the latest 2022 Scoping Plan include:
▪ Implementing SB 100 (achieve 100 percent clean electricity by 2045); ▪ Achieving 100 percent zero emission vehicle sales in 2035 through Advanced Clean Cars II; and ▪ Implementing the Advanced Clean Fleets regulation to deploy zero -emission vehicle (ZEV) buses and trucks.
Additional transportation policies include the Off-Road Zero-Emission Targeted Manufacturer rule, Clean Off-Road Fleet Recognition Program, In -use Off -Road Diesel -Fueled Fleets Regulation, Clean Off -Road Fleet Recognition Program, and Amendments to the In-use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleets Regulation. The 2022 Scoping Plan would continue to implement SB 375. GHGs would be further reduced through the Cap- and-Trade Program carbon pricing and SB 905. SB 905 requires CARB to create the Carbon Capture, Removal, Utilization, and Storage Program to evaluate, demonstrate, and regulate carbon dioxide removal projects and technology.
As shown in Table 4.7-3, approximately 9 percent of the Project’s mitigated GHG emissions are from energy and mobile sources which would be further reduced by the 2022 Scoping Plan measures described above. It should be noted that the City has no control over vehicle emissions ( approximately 92 percent of the Project’s total emissions). However, these emissions would decline in the future due to Statewide measures discussed above, as well as cleaner technology and fleet turnover.
The Project would not impede the State’s progress towards carbon neutrality by 2045 under the 2022 Scoping Plan. The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future regulatory requirements promulgated through the 2022 Scoping Plan.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-25
SCAG RTP/SCS Consistency
On September 3, 2020, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal ( 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy [RTP/SCS]). The RTP/SCS is a long -range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental, and public health goals. The RTP/SCS embodies a collective vision for the region’s future and is developed with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal go vernments, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and local stakeholders in the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. SCAG’s RTP/SCS establishes GHG emissions goals for automobiles and light-duty trucks for 2020 and 2035 as well as an overall GHG target for the Project region consistent with both the target date of AB 32 and the post -2020 GHG reduction goals of Executive Orders 5-03-05 and B-30-15.
The RTP/SCS contains over 4,000 transportation Projects, ranging from highway improvements, railroad grade separations, bicycle lanes, new transit hubs and replacement bridges. These future investments were included in county plans developed by the six county transportation commissions and seek to reduce traffic bottlenecks, improve the efficiency of the region’s network, and expand mobility choices for everyone. The RTP/SCS is an important planning document for the region, allowing Project sponsors to qualify for federal funding.
The plan accounts for operations and maintenance costs to ensure reliability, longevity, and cost effectiveness. The RTP/SCS is also supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state GHG emissions reduc tion goals and Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requirements, preserve open space areas, improve public health and roadway safety, support our vital goods movement industry, and utilize resources more efficiently. GHG emissions resulting from development-related mobile sources are the most potent source of emissions, and therefore Project comparison to the RTP/SCS is an appropriate indicator of whether the Project would inhibit the post-2020 GHG reduction goals promulgated by the State. The Project’s consistency with the RTP/SCS goals is analyzed in detail in Table 4.7-4: Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-26
Table 4.7-4: Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency SCAG Goals Compliance
GOAL 1: Encourage regional economic
prosperity and global
competitiveness.
N/A: This is not a Project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
GOAL 2: Improve mobility, accessibility,
reliability, and travel safety for
people and goods.
N/A: Although the Project is not a transportation
improvement Project, the Project is located near
existing transit routes and access to Interstate 10 (I- 10).
GOAL 3: Enhance the preservation, security,
and resilience of the regional
transportation system.
N/A: As the Project is not a transportation improvement Project, Goal 3 is not applicable.
GOAL 4: Increase person and goods
movement and travel choices within
the transportation system.
N/A: As the Project is not a transportation improvement Project, Goal 4 is not applicable. However, the
Project includes a use that would support goods
movement.
GOAL 5: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
and improve air quality.
Consistent: The reduction of energy use, improvement of air quality, and promotion of more environmentally
sustainable development are encouraged through
the development of alternative transportation
methods, green design techniques for buildings, and
other energy -reducing techniques. The proposed
Project is required to comply with the provisions of
the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards
and the Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen).
Further, the Project is located within an urban area
in proximity to existing truck routes and freeways.
Location of the Project within a developed area
would reduce trip lengths, which would reduce GHG
and air quality emissions.
GOAL 6: Support healthy and equitable
communities.
Consistent: Although the Project exceeds regional thresholds for criteria pollutants based on the Air Quality
Assessment, the Project does not exceed localized
thresholds. Based on the Friant Ranch decision,
projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s LSTs
would not viol ate any air quality standards or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation and result in no criteria pollutant health impacts.
GOAL 7: Adapt to a changing climate and
support an integrated regional
development pattern and
transportation network.
N/A: This is not a Project -specific policy and is therefore not applicable.
GOAL 8: Leverage new transportation
technologies and data -driven
solutions that result in more efficient
travel.
N/A: As the Project is not a transportation improvement Project, Goal 8 is not applicable.
GOAL 9: Encourage development of diverse
housing types in areas that are
N/A: As the Project is not a housing development Project, Goal 9 is not applicable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-27
Table 4.7-4: Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency SCAG Goals Compliance
supported by multiple transportation
options.
GOAL 10: Promote conservation of natural and
agricultural lands and restoration of
habitats.
N/A: The Project is not located on agricultural lands.
Source: Appendix I
Compliance with applicable State standards would ensure consistency with State and regional GHG reduction planning efforts. The goals stated in the RTP/SCS were used to determine consistency with the planning efforts previously stated. As shown in Table 4.7-4, the Project would be consistent with the stated goals of the RTP/SCS. Therefore, the Project would not result in any significant impacts or interfere with SCAG’s ability to achieve the region’s post-2020 mobile source GHG reduction targets.
The Project would be consistent with the Rialto Climate Adaptation Plan, the CARB Scoping Plan, and SCAG’s RTP/SCS, and would be required to comply with existing regulations, including applicable measures from the City’s General Plan. The Project would be directly affected by the outcomes (vehicle trips and energy consumption would be less carbon intensive due to statewide compliance with future low carbon fuel standard amendments and increasingly stringent Renewable Portfolio Standards). As such, the Project would not conflict with any other State-level regulations pertaining to GHGs.
As shown in Table 4.7-3, approximately 93 percent of the Project’s Buildout mitigated GHG emissions are from energy and mobile sources which would be further reduced by the 2022 Scoping Plan goals described above (including achieve 100 percent clean electricity by 2045 [SB 100], achieving 100 percent zero emission vehicle sales in 2035 [Advanced Clean Cars II], and implementing the Advanced Clean Fleets regulation [ZEV buses and trucks]). The City has no control over vehicle emissions (approximately 84 percent of the Project’s total emissions), with the exception of land use decisions that could reduce VMT.
However, these emissions would decline in the future due to statewide measures discussed above (including the reduction in fuels’ carbon content, CARB’s Advanced Clean Car Prog ram, CARB’s Mobile Source Strategy, fuel efficiency standards, etc.), as well as cleaner technology and fleet turnover. SCAG’s 2020 RTP/SCS is also expected to help California reach its GHG reduction goals, with reductions in per capita transportation emissions of 19 percent by 2035.14 At this time it is not possible to quantify the emissions savings from future regulatory measures that have not yet been developed; nevertheless, it can be anticipated that Project operations would benefit from applicable measures are enacted to meet State GHG reducti on goals. The Project would not impede the State’s progress towards carbon neutrality by 2045 under the 2022 Scoping Plan. The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future regulatory requirements promulgated through the 2022 Scoping Plan.
14 CARB. (2023). SB 375 Regional Plan Climate Targets, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable- communities-program/regional-plan-targets. Accessed April 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-28
As discussed above, MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1 would reduce emissions through the use of electric off - road equipment , the use of generators meeting CARB Tier 4 Final emissions standards , and implementation of a TDM plan. Furthermore, MM GHG-1 requires the Project to install solar photovoltaic systems, MM GHG-2 requires the Project to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards to further improve energy efficiency; MM GHG-3 requires the Project to divert 75 percent of waste from landfills; and MM GHG-4 requires the installation of low water use plants and water-efficient irrigation systems.
In conclusion, the Project does not conflict with the applicable plans that are discussed above and therefore, with respect to this particular threshold, the Project does not have a significant impact.
However, despite plan consistency, the Project’s long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold even with implementation of MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1, as well as MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4. As such, the Project could impede California’s statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2045. A significant and unavoidable impact would occur as a result of the Project.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
MM AIR -1 included in Section 4.2, Air Quality , is applicable. MM TRF -1 included in Section 4. 15, Transportation, is applicable. Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-4 included above, under Impact
4.7-1, are applicable.
4.7.7 Cumulative Impacts
It is generally the case that an individual project of this size and nature is of insufficient magnitude by itself to influence climate change or result in a substantial contribution to the global GHG inventory.15 The State CEQA Guidelines generally address GHG emissions as a cumulative impact because of the global nature of climate change. 16 As the California Supreme Court explained, “because of the global scale of climate change, any one project's contribution is unlikely to be significant by itself”. 17 As such, GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective. The additive effect of Project-related GHGs would not result in a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change. In addition, the Project as well as other cumulative related projects would also be subject to all applicable regulatory requirements, which would further reduce GHG emissions. As discussed above, Proje ct-related GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold of significance despite implementation of MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1,
15 California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. (2008). CEQA and Climate Change White Paper. https://www.counties.org/resource-document/capcoa-white-paper-ceqa-and-climate-change. Accessed September 2023.
16 Pub. Resources Code, Section 21083, subd. (b)(2)
17 Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, 512.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-29
as well as MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4 and could impede statewide 2030 and 2045 GHG emission reduction targets. As such, the Project would result in a potentially significant cumulative GHG impact.
4.7.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would implement MM AIR-1, MM TRF-1, and MM GHG -1 through MM GHG -4 to reduce potential impacts regarding GHGs. However, t he Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts associated with GHGs with the implementation of mitigation.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.7
Draft Environmental Impact Report Greenhouse Gas Emissions
City of Rialto 4.7-30
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-1
4.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
4.8.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describes the potential hazards (other than geologic and flood hazards) associated with the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) that could impact human health and the environment. The analysis in this section is based on the Phase II Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report, 249 East Santa Ana Avenue, Rialto, California (Phase II Report), prepared by Environ (2010) for a portion of the project site, and the Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR) Radius Map Report, which are included as Appendix J and Appendix K, respectively. In addition, a regulatory database search of the Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor website and the State Water Resources Control Board Geotracker website was completed for the Project.
4.8.2 Regulatory Setting
The management of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes is regulated at the federal, State, and local levels, including, among others, through programs administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); agencies within the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), such as the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC); federal and State occupational safety agencies; and the San Bernardino County Department of Environmental Health (DEH).
At the federal level, the United States EPA is the principal regulatory agency, while at the State level, DTSC is the primary agency governing the storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous wastes. The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has jurisdiction over discharges into Waters of the State. The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the State Cal/OSHA regulate many aspects of worker safety.
Federal Regulations
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 is a United States federal law that aims to reduce the impact of disasters on communities and promote preparedness. It focuses on several key areas, including hazard mitigation planning, grants for mitigation projects, and the establishment of a National Mitigation Framework. The act encourages local communities to develop and implement hazard mitigation plans to identify and reduce risks. It also provides funding for projects that aim to mitigate the effects of disasters, such as flood control measures or building retrofits. Additionally, the act establishes the National Mitigation Framework, which serves as a guide for federal agencies and stakeholders to coordinate and collaborate on mitigation efforts.
Federal Emergency Management Act
The Federal Emergency Management Act establishes and outlines the responsibilities and authorities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The act aims to coordinate and support the nation's preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation efforts for all types of disasters, including natural disasters and emergencies caused by terrorism. FEMA is tasked with providing assistance and resources to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments, as well as to individuals and communities affected by disasters. The act also authorizes FEMA to administer various programs, such as the National Flood Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-2
Insurance Program and the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Program, which provide funding and support for disaster preparedness and mitigation initiatives. Additionally, the act establishes the National Incident Management Assistance Teams to assist with coordination during large-scale incidents and authorizes the president to declare a major disaster or emergency, enabling the release of federal resources and assistance to affected areas.
Toxic Substances Control Act/Resource Conservation and Recovery Act/Hazardous and Solid Waste Act
The federal Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) established a program administered by the United States EPA for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. RCRA was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act, which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes.
Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) are regulated under Subtitle I of RCRA and its regulations, which established construction standards for USR installations installed after December 22, 1988, as well as standards for upgrading existing USRs and associated piping. Since 1998, all non-conforming tanks were required to be either upgraded or closed.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act/Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, was enacted by Congress on December 11, 1980. This law (United States Code Title 42, Chapter 103) provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. CERCLA establishes requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites; provides for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites; and establishes a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party can be identified. CERCLA also enables the revision of the National Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP (Title 40, Code of Federal Regulation [CFR], Part 300) provides the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and/or contaminants. The NCP also established the National Priorities List. CERCLA was amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act on October 17, 1986.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) and the National Priorities List
The United States EPA also maintains the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation (CERCLIS) and Liability Information System list. This list contains sites that are either proposed to be or on the National Priorities List (NPL), as well as sites that are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL. The NPL is a list of the worst hazardous waste sites that have been identified by Superfund. There are no NPL sites on the project site.
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
The federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted to inform communities and residents of chemical hazards in their area. Businesses are required to report the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-3
locations and quantities of chemicals stored on-site to both State and local agencies. EPCRA requires the United States EPA to maintain and publish a digital database list of toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported by certain industry groups and federal facilities. This database, known as the Toxic Release Inventory, gives the community more power to hold companies accountable for their chemical management.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Act
The United States Department of Transportation (DOT) receives authority to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials from the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA), as amended and codified (49 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.). The DOT is the primary regulatory authority for the interstate transport of hazardous materials and establishes regulations for safe handling procedures (i.e., packaging, marking, labeling and routing).
The Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) was delegated the responsibility to prepare the hazardous material regulations, which are contained in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Parts 100-180. Title 49 of the CFR, which contains the regulations set forth by the HMTA, specifies requirements and regulations with respect to the transport of hazardous materials. It required that every employee who transports hazardous materials receive training to recognize and identify hazardous materials and become familiar with hazardous material requirements. Under the HMTA, the Secretary of Transportation “may authorize any officer employee, or agent to enter upon, inspect, and examine, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, the records and properties of persons to the extent such records and properties related to (1) the manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repair, testing, or distribution of packages or containers for use by any “persons” in the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce; or (2) the transportation or shipment by any “person” of hazardous materials in commerce.”
Clean Water Act/ Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Rule The Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. Section 1251 et seq. was enacted with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality through the regulation of point source and certain non‐point source discharges to surface water. Those discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process (CWA Section 402). In California, NPDES permitting authority is delegated to, and administered by, the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs). The project site is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB.
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act authorizes the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to issue NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit (Water Quality Order 99-08-DWQ), referred to as the “General Construction Permit”.
Construction activities can comply with and be covered under the General Construction Permit provided that they:
Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent all construction pollutants from contacting stormwater and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters;
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-4
Eliminate or reduce non-stormwater discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation; and
Perform inspections of all BMPs.
NPDES regulations are administered by the RWQCB. Projects that disturb one or more acres are required to obtain NPDES coverage under the Construction General Permits.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Congress passed the Occupational and Safety Health Act (OSHA) to ensure worker and workplace safety.
Their goal was to make sure employers provide their workers a place of employment free from recognized hazards to safety and health, such as exposure to toxic chemicals, excessive noise levels, mechanical dangers, heat or cold stress, or unsanitary conditions. To establish standards for workplace health and safety, OSHA also created the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health as the research institution for OSHA. The Administration is a division of the United States Department of Labor that oversees the administration of OSHA and enforces standards in all states. OSHA standards are listed in Title 29 CFR Part 1910.
OSHA’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response Standard applies to five groups of employers and their employees. This includes any employees who are exposed or potentially exposed to hazardous substances (including hazardous waste) and who are engaged in clean-up operations; corrective actions; voluntary clean-up operations; operations involving hazardous wastes treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; and emergency response operations.
State Regulations
California Code of Regulations, Title 17, Section 35000 et seq.
Title 17, Section 35000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations specifically addresses lead-based paint activities. This regulation sets standards and requirements for individuals and firms engaged in various lead-based paint activities, including inspection, risk assessment, abatement, and clearance testing.
The regulation outlines the qualifications and certification requirements for individuals conducting lead- based paint activities. It also establishes procedures for conducting inspections and risk assessments to identify lead hazards in buildings. Additionally, it provides guidelines for the safe and effective removal or containment of lead-based paint during abatement activities.
The regulation also specifies the requirements for clearance testing, which is conducted after lead-based paint abatement to ensure that the area is free from lead hazards. It outlines the sampling and analysis methods to be used during clearance testing and the acceptable clearance levels for different surfaces.
Furthermore, Title 17, Section 35000 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations includes provisions related to record keeping, notification requirements, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with the regulations.
California Environmental Protection Agency
CalEPA has jurisdiction over hazardous materials and wastes at the State level. DTSC is the department of CalEPA responsible for implementing and enforcing California’s own hazardous waste laws, which are known collectively as the Hazardous Waste Control Law. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-5
primarily under the authority of the federal and the California Health and Safety Code (primarily Division 20, Chapters 6.5 through 10.6, and Title 22, Division 4.5). Although similar to RCRA, the California Hazardous Waste Control Law and its associated regulations define hazardous waste more broadly and regulate a larger number of chemicals. Hazardous wastes regulated by California but not by the United States EPA are called “non-RCRA hazardous wastes”. Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup, and emergency planning.
Government Code Section 65962.5 (commonly referred to as the Cortese List) includes DTSC-listed hazardous waste facilities and sites, Department of Health Services lists contaminated drinking water wells, sites listed by the SWRCB as having UST leaks and have had a discharge of hazardous wastes or materials into the water or groundwater, and lists from local regulatory agencies of sites that have had a known migration of hazardous waste/material.
Enforcement of directives from DTSC is handled at the local level, in this case the San Bernardino County DEH. The RWQCB also has the authority to implement regulations regarding the management of soil and groundwater investigation.
CalFire Strategic Fire Plan 2019
CalFire uses this plan to direct and guide its fire management activities for the State Responsibility Area throughout California. CalFire’s mission is to serve and safeguard the people and protect the property and resources of California. CalFire responds to emergencies such as fires of all types, vehicle accidents, floods, earthquakes, hazardous material spills, and others within the State Responsibility Area. CalFire provides direction for fire prevention using fire resource assessments, a variety of available data, mapping and other tools. The plan emphasizes “pre-fire” management, which is a process to assess alternatives to protect assets from unacceptable risk of wildland fire damage and focus on those actions that can be taken in advance of a wildland fire to potentially reduce the severity of the fire and ensure safety. Pre-fire management activities include prescribed burning, fuel breaks, forest health treatments and removal of hazardous vegetation.
CalFire has mapped fire threat potential throughout California. It ranks fire threats based on the availability of fuel and the likelihood of an area burning (based on topography, fire history, and climate).
The rankings include no fire threat, moderate, high, and very high fire threat.
California Fire Code
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also known as the California Building Standards Code, contains the California Fire Code (CFC), included as Title 24, Part 9. The CFC includes provisions and standards for emergency planning and preparedness, fire service features, fire protection systems, hazardous materials, fire flow requirements, and fire hydrant locations and distribution.
The CFC, Chapter 9 of Title 24 of the CCR, was created by the California Building Standards Commission based on the International Fire code and is updated every three years. The overall purpose of the CFC is to establish the minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare from the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures, and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. Chapter 49 of the CFC contains minimum standards for development in the wildland–urban interface and fire hazard areas. The CFC also provides regulations and guidance for local agencies in the development and enforcement of fire safety standards.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-6
California Water Code
The California Water Code is a collection of laws and regulations that govern the management and use of water resources within the State of California. It covers various aspects related to water rights, water quality, water supply, water conservation, and water infrastructure. The code outlines the responsibilities of State agencies, local governments, and water districts in managing and protecting California's water resources. Additionally, it addresses issues such as groundwater management, water pollution control, flood control, and water infrastructure development. The California Water Code plays a crucial role in ensuring the sustainable and efficient use of water in the California.
Emergency Management Mutual Aid System
The Emergency Management Mutual Aid System (EMMAS) is a collaborative framework that enables jurisdictions and agencies to request and provide assistance during emergencies. It facilitates the sharing of resources, such as personnel, equipment, and expertise, to enhance the overall effectiveness of emergency response and recovery efforts. EMMAS operates through mutual aid agreements, promoting interoperability, coordination, and a seamless integration of resources from different jurisdictions. Its main goal is to ensure a coordinated and efficient response to emergencies that surpass the capabilities of a single jurisdiction.
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act of 1985 The California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, known as the Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act or the Business Plan Act, requires businesses using hazardous materials to prepare a plan that describes their facilities, inventories, emergency response plans, and training programs. Businesses must submit this information to the County DEH. The Environmental Health Division verifies the information and provides it to agencies responsible for protection of public health and safety and the environment. Business Plans are required to include emergency response plans and procedures in the event of a reportable release or threatened release of a hazardous material, including, but not limited to, all of the following:
Immediate notification to the administering agency and to the appropriate local emergency rescue personnel.
Procedures for the mitigation of a release or threatened release to minimize any potential harm or damage to persons, property, or the environment.
Evacuation plans and procedures, including immediate notice, for the business site.
Business Plans are also required to include training for all new employees, and annual training, including refresher courses, for all employees in safety procedures in the event of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material.
Hazardous Waste Control Act
The Hazardous Waste Control Act created the State hazardous waste management program, which is similar to but more stringent than the federal RCRA program. The act is implemented by regulations contained in Title 26 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), which describes the following required aspects for the proper management of hazardous waste: identification and classification; generation and transportation; design and permitting of recycling, treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; treatment Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-7
standards; operation of facilities and staff training; and closure of facilities and liability requirements.
These regulations list more than 800 materials that may be hazardous and establish criteria for identifying, packaging, and disposing of such waste. Under the Hazardous Waste Control Act and Title 26, the generator of hazardous waste must complete a manifest that accompanies the waste from generator to transporter to the ultimate disposal location. Copies of the manifest must be filed with the DTSC.
Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986
The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly referred to as Proposition 65, requires businesses to provide warnings to individuals about potential exposure to chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm. Proposition 65 mandates that businesses notify consumers if their products or environments contain any of the listed chemicals above certain threshold levels. The goal of Proposition 65 is to inform individuals about potential risks and allow them to make informed decisions regarding their exposure to these chemicals.
Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program The Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program (Unified Program) required the administrative consolidation of six hazardous materials and waste programs (Program Elements) under one agency, a Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The Program Elements consolidated under the Unified Program are Hazardous Waste Generator and On-site Hazardous Waste Treatment Programs (“Tiered Permitting”); Aboveground Petroleum Storage Tank SPCC; Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Program (a.k.a. Hazardous Materials Disclosure or “Community-Right-To-Know”); California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Cal ARP); Underground Storage Tank Program; and Uniform Fire Code Plans and Inventory Requirements.
The Unified Program is intended to provide relief to businesses complying with the overlapping and sometimes conflicting requirements of formerly independently managed programs. The Unified Program is implemented at the local government level by CUPAs. Most CUPAs have been established as a function of a local environmental health or fire department. Some CUPAs have contractual agreements with another local agency, a participating agency, which implements one or more Program Elements in coordination with the CUPA. The project site is in San Bernardino County. (The CUPA designated for San Bernardino County is the Hazardous Materials Division of the San Bernardino County Fire Department.) The Underground Storage Tank Program ensures the regulation of USTs within the County and prevents the release of hazardous substances into the groundwater and environment from USTs. In compliance with the program, USTs and any associated monitoring equipment are annually inspected to ensure the use of active USTs comply with applicable regulations.
Department of Toxic Substance Control
The DTSC is a department of CalEPA and is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans up existing contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of the federal RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code (primarily Division 20, Chapters 6.5 through 10.6, and Title 22, Division 4.5). Other laws that affect hazardous waste are specific to handling, storage, transportation, disposal, treatment, reduction, cleanup, and emergency planning. Government Code Section 65962.5 (commonly referred to as the Cortese List) includes DTSC-listed hazardous waste facilities and sites; Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-8
Department of Health Services lists of contaminated drinking water wells; sites listed by the SWRCB as having UST leaks and have had a discharge of hazardous wastes or materials into the water or groundwater; and lists from local regulatory agencies of sites that have had a known migration of hazardous wastes and/or materials.
California Office of Emergency Services
To protect the public health and safety and the environment, the California Office of Emergency Services is responsible for establishing and managing statewide standards for business and area plans relating to the handling and release or threatened release of hazardous materials. Basic information on hazardous materials handled, used, stored, or disposed of (including location, type, quantity, and health risks) needs to be available to fire fighters, public safety officers, and regulatory agencies. The information must be included in these institutions’ business plans to prevent or mitigate the damage to the health and safety of persons and the environment from the release or threatened release of these materials into the workplace and environment.
These regulations are covered under Chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety Code Article 1 – Hazardous Materials Release Response and Inventory Program (Sections 25500 to 25520) and Article 2 – Hazardous Materials Management (Sections 25531 to 25543.3). CCR Title 19, Public Safety, Division 2, Office of Emergency Services, Chapter 4 – Hazardous Material Release Reporting, Inventory, and Response Plans, Article 4 (Minimum Standards for Business Plans) establishes minimum statewide standards for Hazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBP). These plans shall include the following: (1) a hazardous material inventory in accordance with Sections 2729.2 to 2729.7; (2) emergency response plans and procedures in accordance with Section 2731; and (3) training program information in accordance with Section 2732. Business plans contain basic information on the location, type, quantity, and health risks of hazardous materials stored, used, or disposed of in the State. Each business shall prepare a HMBP if that business uses, handles, or stores a hazardous material or an extremely hazardous material in quantities greater than or equal to the following: 500 pounds of a solid substance, 55 gallons of a liquid, 200 cubic feet of compressed gas, a hazardous compressed gas in any amount, or hazardous waste in any quantity.
California Occupational Safety and Health Administration The California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) is the primary agency responsible for worker safety in the handling and use of chemicals in the workplace. Cal/OSHA standards are generally more stringent than federal regulations. The employer is required to monitor worker exposure to listed hazardous substances and notify workers of exposure (8 CCR Sections 337-340). The regulations specify requirements for employee training, availability of safety equipment, accident- prevention programs, and hazardous substance exposure warnings. In addition, Cal/OSHA regulates medical and/or infectious waste.
Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources Map
To evaluate the presence of oil or gas wells on-site and in the immediate site vicinity, maps available online at the California Department of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-9
(https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#/) were reviewed. No abandoned/plugged oil/gas wells are located on the project site.1
Radon
Radon is a colorless, odorless, naturally occurring, radioactive, inert, gaseous element formed by radioactive decay of radium (Ra) atoms. The United States EPA has prepared a map to assist national, State, and local organizations to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes.
Review of the United States EPA Map of Radon Zones places the project site in Zone 2. Zone 2 has a moderate potential for radon levels between 2.0 and 4.0 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). Based upon the radon zone classification, radon is not considered to be a significant environmental concern for the project site.2 License to Transport Hazardous Materials – California Vehicle Code, Section 32000.5 et seq In California, Section 31303 of the California Vehicle Code states that any hazardous material being moved from one location to another must use the route with the least travel time. This, in practice, means major roads and highways, although secondary roads are permitted to be used for local delivery. These policies are enforced by both the California Highway Patrol and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans).
Regional and Local Regulations
South Coast Air Quality Management District
San Bernadino County lies within the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The agency’s primary responsibility is ensuring that State and federal ambient air quality standards are attained and maintained in the Southern California Air Basin (SCAB). The SCAQMD is also responsible for adopting and enforcing rules and regulations concerning air pollutant sources, issuing permits for stationary sources of air pollutants, inspecting stationary sources of air pollutants, responding to citizen complaints, monitoring ambient air quality and meteorological conditions, awarding grants to reduce motor vehicle emissions, conducting public education campaigns, and many other activities. All projects are subject to SCAQMD rules and regulations in effect at the time of construction.
The following is a list of SCAQMD rules that are required of construction activities associated with the Project:
Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) – This rule requires fugitive dust sources to implement best available control measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. This rule is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. PM10 suppression techniques are summarized below.
a) Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise stabilized.
1 Department of Conservation (DOC). (2023). CalGEM GIS Well Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/.
Accessed September 2023.
2 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2018). Radon Zones Map. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/radon-zones-map.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-10
b) All on-site roads are paved as soon as feasible, watered regularly, or chemically stabilized. c) All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
d) The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations will be minimized at all times.
e) Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets will be swept daily or washed down following the workday to remove soil from pavement.
Rule 1166 – This rule sets requirements to control the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from excavating, grading, handling and treating VOC-contaminated soil as a result of leakage from storage or transfer operations, accidental spillage, or other deposition.
Rialto General Plan 2010
The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) policies for hazards and hazardous materials that are relevant to the Project are addressed below. The goals and policies are from the Rialto 2010 General Plan Safety and Noise Element. Where inconsistencies exist, if any, they are addressed in the respective impact analysis.
Goal 5-4 Protect the health and welfare of the public, environment, and economy by providing for the safe and responsible management of hazardous materials and wastes.
Policy 5-4.1 Continue to identify hazardous material users and generators within the City through the use of field surveys, inspection programs, and licensing requirements.
Policy 5-4.4 Require all hazardous waste generators and hazardous materials handlers to report to City officials, including the Fire Department any equipment malfunction or upset which may cause hazardous waste to be emitted.
Goal 5-5 Minimize the generation of hazardous waste in Rialto.
Policy 5-5.2 Encourage and promote practices that will reduce the use of hazardous materials and the generation of hazardous waste at their source, recycle the remaining hazardous wastes for reuse, and treat those wastes which cannot be reduced at the source or recycled.
Policy 5-5.3 Prohibit businesses from storing hazardous materials for commercial use or commercially generated hazardous wastes in residential areas.
Goal 5-7 Maintain a high level of emergency response capability.
Policy 5-7.3 Increase the City’s ability to coordinate and control its resources in an emergency situation by improving the operational capacity of the Emergency Operating Center, by identifying local resources available, and by developing contracts and agreements for utilizing these resources in an emergency.
City of Rialto Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS)/National Incident Management System (NIMS) Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (MHFP) The City of Rialto (City) provides fire and emergency response services to residents and businesses in the City. The City has adopted the Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (MHFP) to address the City’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-11
and national security emergencies. The objective of the MHFP is to incorporate and coordinate all the facilities and personnel of the City into an efficient organization capable of responding to any emergency.
City of Rialto Fire Code
The California Fire Code sets forth requirements including those for building materials and methods pertaining to fire safety and life safety, fire protection systems in buildings, emergency access to buildings, and handling and storage of hazardous materials. The City adopted the California Fire Code with certain amendments, additions, and deletions, as Chapters 15.28 of the Rialto Municipal Code.
4.8.3 Environmental Setting
Current Use
The project site is currently unoccupied, vacant land zoned for industrial use. No on-site operations exist.
Current activities on-site are limited to mining reclamation, which is anticipated to be completed in 2024, prior to the commencement of Project construction. Therefore, given that reclamation activities would be completed prior to Project construction, the analysis assumes a projected future condition (i.e., Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan completion) as the baseline condition. These reclamation activities include changes to topography, soil disturbance, and other geologic conditions within the project site to justify the use of a future baseline condition.
Current Use of Adjacent Properties
The project site is in an area of the City which primarily features industrial land uses. Table 4.8-1: Adjacent Properties, lists the land uses adjacent to the project site.
Table 4.8-1: Adjacent Properties
Direction Relative to
Project Site Description
North Industrial land uses north on the northern side of East Santa Ana Avenue South Industrial land uses; Santa Ana River; La Loma Hills East Veolia Water North America (501 East Santa Ana Avenue) West Industrial land uses; South Riverside Avenue
Historical Use of Site
According to the Phase II Report, gravel mining activities began within the project site during the 1950’s.
In 1978, an approximately 40-acre property, which included the project site, was permitted as a Class III landfill. Wastes permitted to be received at the landfill included construction and demolition wastes, asphalt and concrete, tree stumps, and tires. At the time of the Phase II Report, the only active areas of the project site included the northern portion, which was used to store abandoned vehicles and process equipment. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the project site would not pose any environmental concerns in association with the project site.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-12
Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan
The project site includes land of the previous Rialto Plant (California Mine ID # 91-36-004), which was used for sand and gravel surface mining. Operations at the Rialto Plant ceased in 1990 and there are no plans to resume mining activity at the site. Certification of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan (Reclamation Plan) is required by Municipal Code 18.76, which implements the State Surface Mining and Land Reclamation Act (SMARA). Recommended mitigation provided in the Reclamation Plan included dust-control practices and reclamation of the barrow pit.
Phase II Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report
The Phase II Report was prepared by ENVIRON in October 2010. Investigation activities included subsurface soil and groundwater investigation, monitoring well installations, surface soil samples, and groundwater sampling.
Soil samples identified minor impacts to subsurface soils as a result of previously placed artificial fill or from wastewater. The Phase II Report states that considering the low reported concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons, bis (2-ethylhexyphthalate), and metals, as well as the random distribution of metals concentrations above screening criteria and background concentrations, results from the soil samples are unlikely to result in risk of harm to public health or the environment.
Groundwater sampling identified minor impacts to groundwater below the project site. As a result of the low reported concentrations of extractable fuel hydrocarbons, chloroform, and metals, it is unlikely that results of the groundwater sampling would result in risk to public health or the environment.
It is noted that prior to construction of the Project, implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan and mass grading would be complete.
Database Review
Kimley-Horn and Associates completed a review of referenced databases and considered the potential and likelihood of contamination from adjoining and nearby sites. The project site is not listed on the GeoTracker database or the Envirostor website.34 The project site is not identified on the Cortese List, which is the list of hazardous materials sites that is compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code (https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtscs-cortese-list; accessed January 2024). To evaluate which of the adjoining and nearby sites identified in the regulatory database present an environmental concern to the project site, several factors are considered, including the type of database on which the adjoining/nearby property is identified, the topographic position of the property relative to the project site, the direction and distance of the identified facility from the project site, the known and/or inferred groundwater flow direction in the Project area, and the status of the respective regulatory agency- required investigations and/or cleanup associated with the identified facility. Only those nearby sites that are judged to warrant additional clarification are further evaluated. Using the referenced criteria, and based upon a review of readily available information contained within the regulatory database review, Kimley-Horn did not identify adjoining (i.e., bordering) or nearby sites (e.g., properties within a ¼-mile
3 State Water Resources Control Board. (2024). GeoTracker. http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov. Accessed January 2024. 4 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Envirostor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60003205. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-13
radius) identified in the regulatory database review that were judged to present a potential environmental risk to the subject property with the exception of the following:
Ecology Auto Wrecking: located at 221 East Santa Ana Avenue, Rialto, CA (cross-gradient, adjacent to the project site). This facility is listed in the GeoTracker database (0607133526; http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ accessed January, 2024) as a closed Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) case. In October 2005, the 10,000-gallon UST and associated piping were removed from the site. Total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) were detected at concentrations of 770 and 1,500 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) in samples collected 3 and 14 feet below ground surface (bgs) in the drain area (remote fill) west of the UST. From October 2006 until July 2013, site investigation activities included the installation of six groundwater monitoring wells and eight vapor extraction wells at the site. From October 2006 through June 2016, groundwater sampling was conducted at the site. Concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons in groundwater decreased with time and have not been detected since August 2013. The most recent quarterly groundwater monitoring and sampling event was conducted on June 16, 2016. The depth to groundwater was approximately 75.25 feet below the top of casing (btoc) and the average groundwater elevation was approximately 887 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Groundwater flow direction at the site is generally to the south-southwest. The case was closed by the State Water Resources Control Board on May 13, 2019. Given that the case has been closed, this facility is not considered an environmental concern for the project site.
In addition to the Cortese List, federal, State, and local governmental agencies maintain other lists of sites where hazardous materials may be present or used. Further, the EDR Radius Report includes current regulatory database information compiled by a variety of federal and State regulatory agencies. The EDR Radius Map Report included a review of the referenced databases and considered the potential or likelihood of contamination from adjoining and nearby sites. The project site was not listed in the databases reviewed by the regulatory database report for lists of sites where hazardous materials may be present or used; however, the project site was identified as an abandoned mine. As discussed above, mining operations on the project site ceased in 1990 and the certification of the Reclamation Plan is required by Municipal Code 18.76, which implements recommended mitigation including the mass grading of the project site. In addition, properties that were found in EDR’s search of government records within the one-mile search radius did not include any record of leaks, spills, or other hazardous waste violations at facilities considered to be an environmental concern. The project site is surrounded by existing industrial uses and Veolia Water North America to the east. The surrounding properties are not included on the GeoTracker database or Envirostor website. As such, the project site and adjoining/nearby properties are not environmental concerns for the Project.
4.8.4 Methodology
In determining whether implementation of the Project would result in hazards or hazardous materials, this analysis considers the recommendations of Appendix G to the State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines as described below. The evaluation was based on a review of regulations and a determination of the applicability of the regulations within the Project area. The baseline conditions and impact analyses are based on the Radius Map Report prepared by EDR and the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. The determination that the Project will or will not result in a significant impact with respect to Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-14
hazards and hazardous materials considers the type of development proposed and whether or not past or current uses on the site have the potential to pose a risk to the proposed development.
4.8.5 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for hazards and hazardous materials were derived from the Environmental Checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. An impact of a project could be considered significant and may require mitigation if it meets one of the following criteria. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
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, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.
4.8.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.8-1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The Project consists of the construction of a truck terminal and maintenance shop. Construction of the Project would involve the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials on and off the project site, which include fuels, paints, mechanical fluids, and solvents, but would not be present in such a quantity or used in such a manner that would pose a significant hazard to the public. In addition, should a spill or other hazardous materials incident occur, construction staff would be well versed in how to handle such a situation, including containment and who to contact if such a situation occurs.
The routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials can result in hazards to people and the environment, due to the potential for accidental release. Such hazards are typically associated with certain types of land uses, such as chemical manufacturing facilities, industrial processes, waste disposal, and hazardous material storage and distribution facilities. At full buildout, the Project would include one truck Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-15
terminal and one maintenance shop. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, this land use is not expected to use significant quantities of hazardous materials or to generate significant quantities of hazardous materials requiring transport. The routine transport, use, and disposal of these materials must adhere to federal, State, and local regulations for transport, handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances; such as the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act and Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Act, which address safe handling procedures and emergency response procedures in the event of an accidental release. Compliance with the regulatory framework would ensure Project construction would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Operations
The Project includes one truck terminal and one maintenance shop and is not anticipated to result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The proposed development would be expected to use limited hazardous materials and substances which would include fuels, paints, mechanical fluids, cleaners, solvents, and fertilizers and pesticides for site landscaping. Project operation would not create a significant impact through the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials since the facilities are required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and regional regulations which are intended to avoid impacts to the public and environment. These regulations ensure that hazardous materials/waste users, generators and transporters provide operational safety and measures to reduce threats to public health and safety. In addition, the Project would incorporate Mitigation Measure 3 of the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) EIR, which would require any toxic or hazardous wastes which are transported, processed, generated or stored shall be handled consistent with the regulations of the United States EPA, the State Department of Health Services, and the SCAQMD. With compliance with all applicable federal, State, and regional regulations regarding hazardous material generation and usage on the site, potential impacts related to transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Land Use Mitigation Measure 3: Any toxic or hazardous wastes which are transported, processed, generated or stored shall be handled consistent with the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department of Health Services, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The transportation of any toxic or hazardous substances through residential areas shall be prohibited.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-16
Impact 4.8-2: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The EDR Radius Map Report investigation included a review of local, State, and federal environmental record sources to check for the storage, use, production or disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials that may impact the project site. The results of the EDR Radius Map Report did not identify any environmental concerns associated with the project site. Upon completion of implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan and mass grading, no known hazardous materials would be located on the project site, the risk of a release of hazardous materials into the environmental is less than significant.
Operations
Project operations would involve typical hazardous materials/chemicals associated with truck terminal uses such as fuels, paints, mechanical fluids, cleaners, solvents, and fertilizers and pesticides for landscaping. As previously discussed, any routine transport, use, and disposal of these materials during Project operations must adhere to federal, State, and local regulations for transport, handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. Hazardous materials/chemicals such as fuels, cleaners, paints, solvents and fertilizers in low quantities do not pose a significant threat related to the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Additionally, the Project would include two 20,000-gallon diesel underground storage tanks, and one 8,000-gallon diesel exhaust fluid tank, which would be regulated by the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District, which has been designated as the CUPA for San Bernardino County. As required under the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District’s Underground Storage Tank Program, the Project’s UST would be inspected annually to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-17
Impact 4.8-3: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The nearest school to the project site is Crestmore Elementary (1060 W Etiwanda Avenue), located approximately 1.6 miles to the west. The Project does not propose any industrial uses which would generate hazardous emissions or involve the handling of hazardous materials, substances or waste in significant quantities that would have an impact to surrounding schools. The types of hazardous materials that would be routinely handled would include fuels, paints, mechanical fluids, cleaners, solvents, and fertilizers and pesticides for landscaping. The Project would be required to adhere to all applicable federal, State, and regional regulations regarding handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials.
Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.8-4: Would the project 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? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
California Government Code Section 65962.5 requires DTSC to compile a list of hazardous waste facilities that are subject to corrective action. As discussed in the Environmental Setting, the project site is not included on the hazardous sites list compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5.5 Further, as previously discussed, the results of the database review did not identify any hazardous site within the project site or the search radius that would be of concern to the Project. Accordingly, the project site does not consist of a hazardous material site pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, and the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Therefore, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to exacerbating environmental conditions due to existing hazardous materials. Impacts would be less than significant.
5 DTSC. (2024). Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup (Cortese List). https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtscs-cortese-list/.
Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-18
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.8-5: 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, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The nearest airport to the project site is the San Bernardino International Airport, located approximately
6.3 miles to the northeast. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan. As such, Project implementation would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people at the project site.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.8-6: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The City has adopted an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), which provides comprehensive policy and guidance for emergency and response operations to natural and manmade hazards. The Project would require the temporary partial closure of East Santa Ana Avenue during construction of the proposed improvements. Improvements would require full depth reconstruction of East Santa Ana Avenue, including mill and overlay, along the Project frontage to South Riverside Avenue. However, emergency access to the project site and surrounding area would be maintained. Impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-19
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.8-7: Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
According to the CalFire Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, the project site is located within a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within a Local Responsibility Area.6 The nearest VHFHSZ is located
0.9 miles to the southeast. Project implementation would comply with Chapter 15.28 of the City’s Municipal Code, which adopts the California Fire Code. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.8.7 Cumulative Impacts
Impacts associated with hazardous materials are often site-specific and localized. The EIR evaluates potential environmental concerns in connection with the project site and surrounding area. The database reviews the findings of various governmental database searches regarding properties with known or suspected releases of hazardous materials or petroleum hydrocarbons within a search radius of up to one mile from the project site and serves as the basis for defining the cumulative impacts study area.
Although some of the cumulative projects and other future projects associated with buildout of the surrounding communities also have potential impacts associated with hazardous materials, the environmental concerns associated with hazardous materials are typically site-specific. Each project is required to address any issues related to hazardous materials or wastes. Cumulative development
6 Cal Fire. (2023). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.8
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hazards and Hazardous Materials
City of Rialto 4.8-20
projects would be required to assess potential hazardous materials impacts on the development site prior to grading. The Project and other cumulative projects would be required to comply with laws and regulations governing hazardous materials and hazardous wastes used and generated as described previously.
Projects must adhere to applicable regulations for the use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and implement mitigation in compliance with federal, State, and local regulations to protect against site contamination by hazardous materials. Compliance with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations related to hazardous materials would ensure that the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would not result in adverse impacts. Additionally, site-specific investigations would be conducted at sites where contaminated soils or groundwater could occur to minimize the exposure of workers and the public to hazardous substances.
With adherence to applicable federal, State, and local regulations governing hazardous materials, the potential risks associated with hazardous wastes would be reduced to a level of less than significant. The incremental effects of the Project related to hazards and hazardous materials, are anticipated to be minimal, and any effects would be site-specific. Therefore, the Project would not result in incremental effects to hazards with respect to hazardous materials that could be compounded or increased when considered together with similar effects from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Therefore, the Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to or from hazards or hazardous materials.
4.8.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with hazards and hazardous materials.
No mitigation is required. However, the Project would include Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Land Use Mitigation Measure 3 to further reduce less than significant impacts.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-1
4.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
4.9.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report ( EIR) identifies and analyzes the potential impacts on hydrology (drainage flows), surface water quality, groundwater levels and groundwater quality available to the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project), while assessing the potential impacts the Project could have on those resources.
Information used in the preparation of this section include the following: the Final Drainage Report and the Water Quality Management Plan, prepared by Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. The Final Drainage Report and the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) are included as Appendix L and Appendix M, respectively.
4.9.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987, is the major federal legislation governing water quality. The objective of the CWA is “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.” Important applicable sections of the CWA are as follows:
▪ Section 301 prohibits the discharge of any pollutant by any person, except as in compliance with Sections 302, 306, 307, 318, 402, and 404 of the CWA. Sections 303 and 304 provide for water quality standards, criteria, and guidelines.
▪ Section 401 requires an applicant for any federal permit that proposes an activity which may result in a discharge to “waters of the United States” to obtain certification from the State that the discharge will comply with other provisions of the CWA. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) provides certification.
▪ Section 402 establishes the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) a permitting system for the discharge of any pollutant (except for dredge or fill material) into waters of the United States. This permit program is administered by the RWQ CB and is discussed later in this section.
▪ Section 404 establishes a permit program for the discharge of dredge or fill material into waters of the United States. This permit program is administered by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Federal Antidegradation Policy
The Federal Antidegradation Policy aims to protect and preserve the quality of water resources. It establishes guidelines to prevent the degradation of water bodies, including lakes, rivers, and streams.
The policy requires states to implement measures that maintain or improve the existing water quality in areas designated as "high quality" or "outstanding national resource waters." Any proposed activities or projects that could potentially degrade the water quality must be carefully evaluated and limited t o Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-2
minimize their impact. The goal of the federal antidegradation policy is to ensure the long -term sustainability and health of the nation's water resources for future generations.
National Flood Insurance Program
The purpose of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is to provide affordable flood insurance to property owners and communities that are at risk of flooding. The program was established by the federal government in 1968 to help mitigate the financial impact of flood damage and to encourage the adoption of flo odplain management practices. The National Flood Insurance Policy enables property owners in participating communities to purchase flood insurance, which is not typically covered by standard homeowners' insurance policies. By offering flood insurance, the program aims to reduce the costs of recovery from flood events and promote the use of floodplain management regulations that help to minimize future flood damage. The NFIP also works to map flood risk areas and provide floo dplain management assistance to communities to help them better understand and prepare for flooding.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES was implemented under the Clean Water Act in the United States. Compliance with the NPDES requires permits for any point source discharges of pollutants into the country's water bodies. The objective of the program is to protect water quality and prevent harm to the environment and human health from these discharges. The program is overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and delegated to State agencies. NPDES permits establish specific requirements and limitations for entities that discharge pollutants.
Safe Drinking Water Act
The Safe Drinking Water Act was enacted in 1974 to ensure the safety of drinking water within the United States. It is administered by the EPA. The act sets standards for drinking water quality and establishes regulations for public water systems to follow. It includes provisions for monitoring and testing water for contaminants, such as bacteria, chemicals, and pollutants. The act also requires public water systems to treat water to meet these standards and provide information to consumers about the qualit y of their drinking water. Overall, the Safe Drinking Water Act aims to protect public health by ensuring access to safe and clean drinking water for all Americans.
State Regulations
California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The State of California’s Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code Section 13000, et seq.) provides the basis for water quality regulation within California. The Act requires a “Report of Waste Discharge” for any discharge of waste ( liquid, solid, or otherwise) to land or surface waters that may impair a beneficial use of surface or groundwater of the State. Waste discharge requirements (WDR) resulting from the report are issued by the RWQCB, as discussed below. In practice, these req uirements are typically integrated within the NPDES permitting process. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) carries out its water quality protection authority through the adoption of specific Water Quality Control Plans (Basin Plans). These plans establish water quality standards for particular bodies of water.
California water quality standards are composed of three parts: the designation of beneficial uses of Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-3
water, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and implementation programs designed to achieve and maintain compliance with the water quality objectives.
Clean Water Act Section 402
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act authorizes the SWRCB, a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), to issue NPDES General Construction Storm Water Permit (Water Quality Order 99‐08‐DWQ), referred to as the “General Construction Permit.” Construction activities can comply with and be covered under the General Construction Permit provided they:
▪ Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) which specifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will prevent all construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off -site into receiving waters;
▪ Eliminate or reduce non‐storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation; and
▪ Perform inspections of all BMPs.
The SWPPP must contain a visual monitoring program; a chemical monitoring program for “non‐visible” pollutants to be implemented if there is a failure of BMPs; and a sediment monitoring plan if the construction site discharges directly to a water body list ed on the 303(d) list for sediment. Increased compliance tasks under the adopted 2022 Construction General Permit include project risk evaluation, effluent monitoring, receiving water monitoring and electronic data submission of the SWPPP and all other permit registration documents . The SWPPP shall also include an Erosion Control Plan that would identify specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. The Erosion Control Plan would be included with a project’s Grading Plan and would be subject to approval by the City Engineer.
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014
The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGWMA) aims to ensure long -term sustainability of groundwater resources. Under this act, local groundwater management agencies are required to develop and implement groundwater sustainability plan s for priority groundwater basins. The SGMA includes various objectives and requirements to establish a framework for sustainable groundwater management, which include avoiding significant and unreasonable groundwater level declines, preventing undesirable impacts on water quality, and achieving long -term groundwater sustainability within 20 years of implementing the ground sustainability plans . The act also emphasizes the importance of local control and provides opportunities for stakeho lder involvement in the development and implementation of groundwater sustainability plans.
Regional and Local Regulations
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) regulates State water quality standards in the City of Rialto. Beneficial uses and water quality objectives for surface water and groundwater Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-4
resources in the Project area are established in the water quality control plans of each RWQCB and mandated by the State Porter-Cologne Act and CWA. The RWQCB also implements the CWA Section 303(d) total maximum daily load (TMDL) process, which consists of identifying candidate water bodies where water quality is impaired by the presence of pollutants. The TMDL process is implemented to determine the assimilative capacity of the water body for the pollutants of concern and to establish equitable allocation of the allowable pollutant loading within the watershed. CWA Section 401 requires an applicant pursuing a federal permit to conduct any activity that may result in a discharge of a pollutant to obtain a water quality certification (or waiver) from the applicable RWQCB.
The RWQCB primarily implements basin plan policies through issuing waste discharge requirements for waste discharges to land and water. The RWQCB is also responsible for administering the NPDES permit program, which is designed to manage and monitor point and non -point source pollution. NPDES stormwater permits for general construction activity are required for projects that disturb more than one acre of land. Municipal NPDES stormwater permits are required for urban areas with populations greater than 100, 000 persons. In addition, projects that involve the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) are required to comply with the Caltrans statewide NPDES permit and associated Stormwater Management Plan (SEMP). Caltrans implements the SEMP in coordination with the RWQCB.
Rialto Municipal Code – Section 12.60.260 Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) Section 12.60.260 of the City’s Municipal Code requires all qualifying development projects to submit an approved Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) to the City prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. The SWQMP applies to construc tion projects covered by the NPDES general construction permit. The purpose of the SWQMP is to establish measures included as BMPs to effectively manage and reduce pollutants carried by stormwater runoff and minimize impacts to water bodies.
Rialto General Plan 2010
During project review, approval and permitting, the City requires new development projects to address the quality and quantity of stormwater runoff through the incorporation of permanent (post-construction) BMPs into the Project’s design.
The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) includes the following applicable policies related to flooding:
Goal 5-2 Minimize the risk and damage from flood hazards.
Policy 5-2.2 Require the implementation of adequate erosion control measures for development projects to minimize sedimentation damage to drainage facilities.
Policy 5-2.4 Require water retention devices in new developments to minimize flooding of the surface drainage system by peak flows.
4.9.3 Environmental Setting
Existing Conditions
Hydrology
The United States is divided into successively smaller hydrological areas, or units, which are then nested within each other. These regions are labeled from largest to smallest as regions (HUC 2) , subregions Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-5
(HUC 4), basins (HUC 6), subbasins (HUC 8), watersheds (HUC 10), and subwatersheds (HUC 12) .1 Hydrological unit boundaries of each designation are delineated based on surface features of their geographic locations. The project site is located within the Santa Ana, Middle Santa Ana River, and East Etiwanda Creek-Santa Ana River watersheds. Each watershed is classified with a Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) of HUC 8, HUC 10, and HUC 12, respectively.
The project site is located within the Santa Ana Basin. The Santa Ana Basin is the largest watershed in Southern California. The basin is home to over six million people and covers an approximately 2,700 - square mile area of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Los Angeles counties. The quality of surface and groundwater is highest within the tributaries that flow from the surrounding mountains as well as groundwater recharge by these streams. Water quality decreases as it moves along hydraulic flow paths, as a result of various factors including consumptive use, importation of wa ter high in dissolved solids, runoff from urban and agricultural areas, and the recycling of water within the basin.2 The project site was previously used for mining. The disturbance area of the former uses totals the entirety of the project site. Current activities on-site are limited to mining reclamation, which is anticipated to be completed in 2024, prior to the commencement of Project construction. Therefore, given that reclamation activities would be completed prior to Project construction, the analysis assumes a projected future condition (i.e., Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan completion) as the baseline condition. Th ese reclamation activities include changes to topography, soil disturbance, and other geologic conditions within the project site to justify the use of a future baseline condition.
Precipitation frequency data for the Project area was retrieved from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Atlas 14 (Rialto, California area). The National Weather Service data indicated that in 2023, the Project area experienced above-average precipitation of two to four inches.3 Soil and soil conditions affect infiltration and stormwater runoff of a site. Soils encountered on-site during the field investigation performed for the Final Drainage Report are considered “very low” expansive and are considered to be in hydrologic Group A. Group A soils having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted consisting chiefly of deep, well to excessively drained sand and/or gravel. These soils have a high rate of water transmission and would result in a low runoff potential.
Under existing conditions, the project site has undergone mass grading and runoff generally flows southeast to a desilt ing basin, which discharges to the low -lying area located at the south side of the project site, where the water infiltrates into the soil.
1 United States Geological Survey. (2013). Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). Pages 14 and 19. Reston, Virginia: United States Geological Survey. https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/pdf/tm11-a3_4ed.pdf. Accessed October 2023. 2 United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2018). Santa Ana Basin, National Water Quality Assessment Program.https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/enforcement/complaints/docs/invest igation/40_usgs_santa_ana_basin_national_water_quality_assessment_program.pdf. Accessed October 2023. 3 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Weather Prediction Service. (2023). Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service.
https://water.weather.gov/precip/index.php?analysis_date=1546300800&lat=34.1204394164&location_name=sgx&l ocation_type=wfo&lon=-117.3842106189&precip_layer=0.75&product=departure&recent_type=false&rfc_layer=- 1&state_layer=-1&hsa_layer=-1&county_layer=-
1&time_frame=year2date&time_type=year&units=eng&zoom=14&domain=current#. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-6
Groundwater
As described in the Geotechnical Investigation, exploratory borings were drilled to a maximum depth of
51.5 feet below ground surface and did not encounter groundwater. Two monitoring wells are located within the southern portion of the project site and were reported with groundwater depths of 73 feet and 68 feet below ground surface at the time of drilling. The historic minimum depth to groundwater within the project site ranges from 70 feet to 100 feet below the ground surface.
Flood Hazard
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) shows the project site being covered by one map panel, 06071C8686H.4 No part of the project site is within a FEMA -mapped special flood hazard area. The project site is classified as Zone X, which identifies areas of minimal flooding.
In addition, there are no dams, reservoirs or large water bodies near the project site. The Santa Ana River is approximately 0.7 miles south east of the project site and is classified as Zone AE, which identifies regulatory floodways within a Special Flood Hazard Area.5 Water Quality
The amount of pollutants in the surface runoff is determined by the quantity of a material in the environment and its characteristics. In an urban environment, the quantity of certain pollutants in the stormwater systems is generally associated with the intensity of the land use. Within the middle Santa Ana River watershed, pathogens, harmful bacteria, and nitrates are pollutants of concern.6
4.9.4 Methodology
Hydrologic modeling was prepared using the Modified Rational Method and the methodology described in the San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual. Modeling assumptions are addressed in Appendix L.
The WQMP was prepared to comply with the requirements of the City of Rialto, San Bernardino County Municipal Storm Water Management Program and the NPDES Areawide Stormwater Program requiring the preparation of a WQMP. The WQMP is included as Appendix M.
4.9.5 Thresholds of Significance
State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions concerning Hydrology and Water Quality. The questions presented in the Environmental Checklist Form have been used as significance criteria in this section. Accordingly, the Project would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.
4 United States Department of Homeland Security: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2023). National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. https://hazards-
fema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=- 117.3667679130852,34.04522156648235,-117.32522585986149,34.06299944290883. Accessed October 2023. 5 Ibid.
6 State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2019). Santa Ana Region – Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/tmdl/. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-7
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable 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 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; 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 sustainable groundwater management plan.
4.9.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.9-1: Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Construction activities associated with the development of the Project would be typical of those used in comparable truck terminal developments. Grading and earthmoving activities conducted during the Project’s construction period may require the use of water for dust mitigation. Water from dust control and other liquids such as fuels, lubricants, and liquid wastes can create runoff t hat would temporarily affect water quality.
Construction activities for the lot, infrastructure , and the storm drain system would require a NPDES Construction General Permit, obtained from the CalEPA, SWRCB.7 Prior to the issuance of a Construction General Permit, an approved SWPPP would need to be prepared for the Project. The SWPPP would identify site -specific construction BMPs to reduce or eliminate sediment and other pollutants in stormwater and non-stormwater runoff from the project site. BMPs are designed to control and prevent discharges of pollutants that can adversely impact the downstream surface water quality. Additionally, sedimentation and erosion control BMPs would protect groundwater quality. Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, the following:
Minimization of disturbed areas to the portion of the project site necessary for construction; ▪ Stabilization of exposed or stockpiled soils and cleared or graded slopes;
7 SWRCB. (2023). Construction Stormwater Program.
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.html. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-8
▪ Establishment of permanent re-vegetation or landscaping as early as is feasible; ▪ Removal of sediment from surface runoff before it leaves the project site by silt fences or other similar devices around the site perimeter;
▪ Diversion of upstream runoff around disturbed areas of the project site; ▪ Protection of all storm drain inlets on-site or downstream of the project site to eliminate entry of sediment;
▪ Prevention of tracking soils and debris off-site through use of a gravel strip or wash facilities, which will be located at all construction exits from the project site; ▪ Proper storage, use, and disposal of construction materials, such as solvents, wood, and gypsum; and
▪ Continual inspection and maintenance of all BMPs through the duration of construction.
As identified in Standard Condition ( SC) HYD-1, preparation, implementation, and participation with the Construction General Permit, including preparation of a SWPPP containing site -specific BMPs, would reduce Project construction impacts on water quality to acceptable levels. Compliance with SC HYD-2 would require the Project provide a SWQMP specifically identifying BMPs that will be incorporated into the Project to control stormwater and non -stormwater pollutants during and after construction.
Compliance with SC HYD-3 would require preparation of an Erosion Control Plan that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion. Therefore, SC HYD-1 through SC HYD-3 are proposed to preclude the violation of water quality standards during and after construction. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
Operations
The City of Rialto requires a SWQMP be prepared for any industrial/warehouse/commercial development of 100,000 square feet (sf) or more. The SWQMP must be approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. The Project’s WQMP included as Appendix M, addresses post- construction water quality. Stormwater generated by the Project would be captured and conveyed to an underground detention vault through a network of proposed catch basins, inlets, and underground piping.
The underground detention basin would serve as a storage facility with a modular wetland unit attached to the outflow pipe which would allow treatment of water, which would then be pumped to an on -site dry well. To address the 100 -year storm event and meet the capacity needs of the upstream dry well, the pump would be sized to achieve a 48 -hour draw down time in the underground basin. Any on-site area that flows away from the project site and off -site area that drains towards the project site would be collected in a series of brow ditches and storm drain pipes, and is ultimately dispersed at the southern portion of the project site to match the existing drainage condition of the project site . Similar to existing conditions, during operation water would infiltrate into the ground over a duration of time. With implementation of the SWQMP, Project operation would not result in significant impacts to surface or groundwater quality. Operation impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-9
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
SC HYD-1: The Applicant or his/her designees shall obtain a General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Construction Activity (Construction Activity General Permit).
The Applicant or his/her designees shall provide a copy of this permit to the City Public Works Department prior to the issuance of the first grading permit.
SC HYD-2: Prior to issuance of the first grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval, a SWQMP specifically identifying BMPs that will be incorporated into the Project to control stormwater and non -stormwater pollutants during and aft er construction. To ensure compliance, a legal and fiduciary enforcement mechanism in the form of a Storm Water Quality Management Plan Agreement shall be executed with the City of Rialto. This agreement shall additionally be recorded in the offi ce of the County Recorder for the County of San Bernardino. The SWQMP shall specify best management practices specific to the project site, which shall be integrated into the stormwater conveyance plan. The plan shall identify specific strategies, including the following. ▪ Site design features, including maximizing open space, preservation of natural drainages, and minimization of impervious surfaces.
▪ Source control features, including leveraging public outreach and education, use of appropriate landscaping, and covering trash storage areas. ▪ Treatment controls, including the use of underground chambers.
SC HYD-3: An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, and included with the Project’s grading plan, and implemented for the Project that identifies specific measures to control on -site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated thro ugh completion of grading. The Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum:
▪ Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California; and
▪ An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this Project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.9-2: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-10
The project site is within the service area of the West Valley Water District. The Project does not propose to use groundwater. According to the Geotechnical Investigation the minimum depth to groundwater within the project site ranges from 70 feet to 100 feet below the ground surface. Excavation during Project construction would reach a maximum depth of 22 feet. Therefore, construction activities would not significantly impact groundwater at the project site. The proposed underground detention facility would serve as a storage facility with a modular wetland unit attached to the outflow pipe, which will then pump water to an on-site drywell. The proposed dry well would allow stormwater to reach soils with favorable infiltration rates. Additionally, the Project would include approximately 10.8 acres of landscaping ( 23.6 percent of the project site), which would allow stormwater to infiltrate. Therefore, the Project would not significantly impact local groundwater recharge or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.9-3i: Would the project 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 result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
Project implementation would alter the project site’s existing drainage pattern. The project site currently consists of previously disturbed land. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the project site would have undergone mass grading and the site would be 100 percent pervious. As such, Project implementation would result in an increase in impervious surfaces on -site. To mitigate potential impacts as a result of an increase in impervious surfaces, the Project would implement Hydrol ogy and Flood Control Mitigation Measure 2 of the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) EIR, which requires the Project to minimize the amount of impervious surfaces on-site where feasible. As such, the project site would include approximately 10.8 acres of landscaping (23.6 percent of the project site) to minimize the amount of impervious surfaces on-site.
Further, the proposed drainage facilities have been sized to adequately treat runoff water from the project site, and the project site does not include discharge to any streams or rivers. The Project would be required to prepare an Erosion Control Plan and SWPPP, which would implement BMPs to minimize on-site and off -site erosion and siltation . Additionally, to further reduce potential impacts, the Project would implement Hydrology and Flood Control Mitigation Measure 2 of the Specific Plan EIR. Impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-11
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan Mitigation Measures: Hydrology and Flood Control Mitigation Measure 2 : Where feasible, the extent of impervious surfaces on individual industrial sites should be limited to minimize the quantity of storm run-off.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.9-3ii: Would the project 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 s ubstantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off- site?
Impact 4.9-3iii: Would the project 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 create or contribute runo ff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Impact 4.9-3iv: Would the project 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 impede or redirect flood flows?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would include the development of a truck terminal, maintenance shop, and associated on - and off-site improvements. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the project site would have undergone mass grading and the site would be 100 percent pervious. As such, Project implementation would result in an increase in impervious surfaces on -site. The proposed development may cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff.
The Project would capture and convey stormwater generated by the Project to an underground detention vault through a network of proposed catch basins, inlets, and underground piping. The proposed underground detention vault would serve as a storage facility and would include a modular wetland unit attached to the outflow pipe to allow treatment of water. Following treatment, runoff would be pumped to an on-site dry well. Any on-site area that flows away from the project site and off-site area that drains towards the project site will be collected in a series of brow ditches and storm drain pipes and would be dispersed at the south side of the project site to match the existing drainage condition. Further, similar to existing drainage conditions, water would infiltrate into the ground over a duration of time. With Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-12
implementation and maintenance of the proposed drainage system, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.9-4 Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
As previously discussed, the project site is not located within a FEMA-mapped special flood hazard area.8 The nearest body of water to the project site is the Santa Ana River, located approximately 0.7 miles to the southeast. No lakes, ponds, or partially closed standing bodies of water are located within or near the project site. The project site is located approximately 45.9 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. Therefore, the project site is not located within an area with risk of seiche or tsunami. Further , the WQMP and SWPPP prepared for the Project , would limit pollution rates from stormwater conveyance. The application of stormwater plans in the SWQMP and SWPPP as well as the minimal flood risk of the surrounding area would result in a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
8 United States Department of Homeland Security: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2023). National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. https://hazards-
fema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa9cd&extent=- 117.3667679130852,34.04522156648235,-117.32522585986149,34.06299944290883. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-13
4.9.7 Cumulative Impacts
The potential for hydrology and water quality impacts are the areas immediately upstream and downstream of the project site. This area is defined under the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan as High Industrial . As development occurs within the Specific Plan area , local surface and groundwater resources will be incrementally impacted as native soils are covered over, which will decrease percolation and increase runoff and urban pollutants. Similar to the Project , the cumulative projects will be required to prepare SWPPPs, which will prevent construction -related pol lutants from contaminating stormwater. Larger, future development projects, including the Project, will be required to prepare WQMPs.
4.9.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with hydrology and water quality. No mitigation is required. However, the Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Hydrology and Flood Control Mitigation Measure 2 to further reduce less than significant impacts.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.9
Draft Environmental Impact Report Hydrology and Water Quality
City of Rialto 4.9-14
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-1
4.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.10.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describes the land use conditions for the project site and discusses potential land use impacts that could result from implementation of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project). The pre-development condition of the project site and surrounding area was used as the baseline which to compare potential impacts associated with the Project. The baseline with which to compare potential impacts associated with the Project are based on conditions following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan.
4.10.2 Regulatory Setting
State Regulations
Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill 375 is a legislation that aims to address climate change by promoting sustainable land use and transportation planning by reducing vehicle miles traveled and promote more sustainable and efficient transportation systems within California. The bill requires regional agencies to develop and implement a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of their regional transportation plans. The purpose SCS is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promoting compact development, and increasing transportation options. The bill encourages collaboration between local governments, transportation agencies, and other stakeholders to achieve these goals.
Regional Regulations
Southern California Association of Governments
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a council of governments representing Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and Imperial counties. SCAG is the federally recognized Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for this region. SCAG is a regional planning agency and a forum for addressing regional issues concerning transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. SCAG is also the regional clearinghouse for projects requiring environmental documentation under federal and State law. In this role, SCAG reviews proposed development and infrastructure projects to analyze their impacts on regional planning programs. As the Southern California region’s MPO, SCAG cooperates with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), Caltrans, and other agencies in preparing regional planning documents. SCAG has developed the Regional Comprehensive Plan, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainability Communities Strategy.
Regional Comprehensive Plan
SCAG’s 2008 Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP) is a comprehensive, integrated policy plan that addresses regional issues related to growth management and development. The RCP provides a policy framework for preparing local plans and handling issues of regional significance, such as land use and housing, open space and biological habitats, water, energy, air quality, solid waste, transportation, security and emergency preparedness, economy, and education. The RCP advances regional planning by incorporating Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-2
an integrated approach between SCAG, State and local governments, transportation commissions, resources agencies and conservation groups, the private sector, and the general public.
The RCP aims to successfully integrate land and transportation planning and achieve land use and housing sustainability by implementing Compass Blueprint and 2% Strategy. Adopted goals related to implementation of the Compass Blueprint and 2% Strategy are contained primarily in the Land Use and Housing chapter of the RCP. Goals applicable to the Project include:
Focusing growth in existing and emerging centers and along major transportation corridors Injecting new life into under-used areas by creating vibrant new business districts, redeveloping old buildings and building new businesses and housing on vacant lots The Regional Housing Needs Assessment is discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, and the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy is discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 4.13, Population and Housing, and Section 4.15, Transportation, of this EIR.
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy The Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies established over several planning cycles to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. Section 4.9.2 of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS identifies ten goals that fall into four categories: economy, mobility, environment and healthy/complete communities.
1. The goals include the following: Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness;
2. Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability, and travel safety for people and goods;
3. Enhance the preservation, security, and resilience of the regional transportation system;
4. Increase person and goods movement and travel choices within the transportation system;
5. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality;
6. Support healthy and equitable communities;
7. Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network;
8. Leverage new transportation technologies and data-driven solutions that result in more efficient travel;
9. Encourage development of diverse housing types in areas that are supported by multiple transportation options; and
10. Promote conservation of natural and agricultural lands and restoration of habitats.
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment is discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-3
Local Regulations
City of Rialto General Plan 2010
A general plan functions as a guide for the type of community that is desired for the future and provides the means to achieve it. The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) contains the following chapters related to the State mandated elements required for a General Plan: Managing Our Land Supply; Investing in Our Future; Making the Connections: the Circulation Chapter; Safety and Noise; Housing Element; Our Roots:
Cultural and Historic Preservation; and Implementation Plan, which are described below. The General Plan Land Use Plan Map visually represents the physical relationship of all portions of the text, including development densities.
Chapter 2: Managing Our Land Supply. The Managing Our Land Supply Chapter combines the elements of Land Use, Community Design, Open Space, and Conservation. Its purpose is to guide long-term physical changes while providing and conserving community and natural resources. The chapter establishes the City's preferred land use patterns, guides the visual character of public places and private development, and creates conservation and protection plans for natural resources and open space. Its primary goal is to direct the use of the City's land resources in an equitable and productive manner to enhance the quality of life for residents and the overall community.
Chapter 3: Investing In Our Future. The Investing In Our Future Chapter discusses the economic development, redevelopment, and infrastructure plans. With the goals and policies set forth in this Chapter, the City aims to address the economic needs of the community, focus on redevelopment of project areas within the City, and maintain reliable public utility infrastructure.
Chapter 4: Making the Connections: The Circulation Element. The Circulation Element is a required part of the General Plan, and is designed to guide the development of the City's transportation system in line with the land use plan. Its purpose is to ensure that major roadways, transportation routes, and public utilities are coordinated with land use. The Circulation Element for the City of Rialto considers the increasing demand for travel due to development and the growth of its logistics industry. The Circulation Element aims to create a system of Complete Streets that accommodates the needs of all users, including pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, and public transportation users.
Chapter 5: The Safety and Noise Chapter. The City takes a proactive approach to planning by addressing hazards that may pose a threat to property and lives. These hazards include seismic and geologic hazards, flood hazards, fire hazards, hazardous materials, gangs, emergency response, and wind hazards. Although the City cannot prevent these hazards, it aims to minimize their effects through the goals and policies included in this chapter. Additionally, by addressing issues such as crime and hazardous materials use, Rialto can better respond to emergency situations and protect the community.
Chapter 6: Housing Element. The Housing Element is a required element of the General Plan. The City is currently under its sixth cycle Housing Element 2021 – 2029. The Housing Element serves as a comprehensive and coordinated strategy for promoting the development of safe, decent, and affordable housing for all members of the community.
Chapter 7: Our Roots: Cultural and Historic Resources. The City recognizes the significance of its cultural and historical resources in shaping its identity and development. Through the goals and policies provided Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-4
within this chapter, the City aims is to provide direction for preserving the City’s cultural and historic resources.
Chapter 8: Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan serves as a guide for City officials, staff, and the public to implement the goals and policies outlined in the General Plan. It translates the general terms of the General Plan into specific actions and measures. These measures can be existing processes or new programs that require City action and may be subject to funding availability. The measures are organized by General Plan elements and are intended to be used for the Annual Report on the City's progress in implementing the General Plan.
The City of Rialto General Plan is the comprehensive planning document governing development in the City, and contains goals, policies, and actions describing the community's vision for economic viability, livable neighborhoods, and environmental protection. The General Plan establishes land use designations for land in the City and policies for the orderly growth and development of the City of Rialto. Among other purposes, the General Plan identifies policies necessary to protect and enhance those features and services which contribute to the quality of life of the community in which it serves.
The project site has a General Plan land use designation of General Industrial. The General Industrial designation allows for a broad range of heavy industrial activities. The General Industrial designation permits manufacturing and distribution, heavy equipment operations, and similar uses.1 The designation allows for a maximum Floor to Area Ratio (FAR)2 of 1.0. The Project’s proposed uses are allowed under the General Plan designation for the project site.
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan
The Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) serves as a comprehensive and strategic framework designed to guide the responsible and sustainable development of a designated industrial area. Its primary purpose is to facilitate the growth and enhancement of economic activity, job opportunities, and infrastructure within the corridor, while simultaneously ensuring the protection of natural resources and the overall well-being of the community. By outlining land use regulations, zoning guidelines, transportation improvements, the Specific Plan seeks to create a cohesive and harmonious environment that supports both industrial growth and the quality of life for residents. The Specific Plan aims to establish a thriving and resilient industrial hub that benefits the local economy and maintains a high standard of living for the Rialto community. Requirements of the Specific Plan that are applicable to the Project supersede the requirements of the General Plan and the City’s Zoning Code.
The project site has a Heavy Industrial (H IND) land use designation within the Specific Plan. The H IND land use is identified as an industrial land use designation. Permitted uses within the H IND land use designation include transit and transportation terminals, repairs, and storage facilities.
City of Rialto Municipal Code – Title 18: Zoning
Title 18 of the Rialto Municipal Code functions as the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which identifies the permitted land uses on all parcels in the City through assigned land use designations and associated land use regulations and development standards. According to the City’s zoning map, the project site is located
1 City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/653/General-Plan. 2 Floor Area Ratio is the measurement of a building's floor area in relation to the size of the parcel.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-5
within the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan area. As such, applicable requirements of the Specific Plan supersede requirements of the Zoning Code.
4.10.3 Environmental Setting
Existing and Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is approximately 45.7 acres located directly south of East Santa Ana Avenue and approximately 0.4 miles east of Riverside Avenue. Current activities on-site are limited to mining reclamation, which is anticipated to be completed in 2024, prior to the commencement of Project construction. The project site is surrounded by existing industrial uses; the Santa Ana River and Loma Hills are located approximately 0.9 miles to the south.
General Plan and Zoning Designations
The project site has a General Plan designation of General Industrial and a land use designation of Heavy Industrial (H IND) within the Specific Plan. The project site is zoned Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan within the City of Rialto (City).
4.10.4 Methodology
The baseline with which to compare potential impacts associated with the Project are based on conditions following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. The analysis of the project site is based on the conditions of the site when the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published. The Project is evaluated against the significance criteria below, as the basis for determining the level of impacts related to land use and planning. This analysis considers existing regulations, laws and standards that serve to avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts. Where significant impacts remain, feasible mitigation measures are recommended, where warranted, to avoid or lessen the Project’s significant adverse impacts.
4.10.5 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for land use and planning were derived from the Environmental Checklist in the State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G. An impact of a project could be considered significant and may require mitigation if it meets one of the following criteria:
Physically divide an established community.
Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
4.10.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.10-1: Would the project physically divide an established community? Level of Significance: No Impact
The Project could have a significant environmental impact if it were sufficiently large or otherwise configured in such a way as to create a physical barrier or other physical division within an established community. For example, the construction of a highway through an existing community could constrain travel from one side of the community to another, as well as the cohesiveness of that community.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-6
As proposed, the Project would include the construction of a truck terminal. The Project would include 679 trailer parking spaces, 100 tractor parking spaces, and 149 passenger vehicle parking spaces.
Additionally, the Project would include a maintenance shop with 8 bays. The project site does not currently provide any connection to existing neighborhoods in the general area, nor does it provide connectivity or accessibility to other neighboring uses. The Project would not include the construction or alteration of roadways that would disrupt adjacent land uses. Additionally, the Project does not propose features such as a highway or above-ground infrastructure that preclude or impede movements through the project site, such that a permanent disruption in the physical arrangement of the surrounding community or isolation of that community would occur. Therefore, the Project would not physically divide an established community and no impact would occur.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.10-2: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Regional Comprehensive Plan Analysis
Consistent with the RCP, the Project would bring new business to a vacant lot with the construction of the proposed truck terminal on land zoned for industrial land uses. The Project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designation of the project site. The project site is zoned High Industrial (H IND) within the Specific Plan, which accommodates the proposed uses of the Project. Further, the project site is surrounded by existing industrial land uses and is not located adjacent to residential land uses. As such, Project implementation is consistent with the RCP.
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Analysis Project relevant RTP/SCS goals and policies for land use and planning are addressed below.
1. Encourage regional economic prosperity and global competitiveness
4. Increase person and goods movement and travel choices within the transportation system
7. Adapt to a changing climate and support an integrated regional development pattern and transportation network
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-7
Consistent with Goal 1, implementation of the Project would result in the development of a truck terminal on vacant land and provide additional employment opportunities within the community. Additionally, consistent with Goals 4 and 7, the Project would address the increase in demand for truck terminals, supporting an increase in the movement of goods. Additionally, the Project would include on-site and pedestrian access to the project site (i.e., sidewalks). Further, as discussed in Section 4.15, Transportation, the Project would implement project Mitigation Measure MM TRF-1, which would require the preparation of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan using feasible reduction strategies such as providing a rideshare program and end of trip bicycle facilities to further the goals of the RTP/SCS.
Therefore, the Project is consistent with applicable goals of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS.
The RTP/SCS is discussed further in Section 4.2, Air Quality, Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, 4.13, Population and Housing, and Section 4.15, Transportation, of this EIR.
General Plan Consistency Analysis
Project-relevant General Plan goals and policies for land use and planning are addressed in Table 4.10-1:
General Plan Consistency Analysis, below.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-8
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Chapter 2: Managing Our Land Supply
Goal 2-9: Protect residential,
schools, parks, and other sensitive
land uses from the impacts
associated with industrial and
trucking-related land uses, as well as
commercial and retail areas.
Consistent. The project site is zoned High Industrial within the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan and is surrounded by existing industrial uses. The nearest sensitive receptor is a single-family residence located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest of the project site. As discussed throughout the EIR, Project implementation would not result in significant impacts to sensitive land uses.
Policy 2-9.1: Require mitigation and
utilize other techniques to protect
residential development and other
sensitive land uses near industrial
land uses or within identifiable
health risk areas from excessive
noise, hazardous materials and
waste releases, toxic air pollutant
concentrations and other impacts.
Consistent. The nearest residential development to the project site is located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest. Project implementation would not result in significant impacts to sensitive land uses. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, to reduce potential health impacts, the Project would implement MM AIR-1, which would require emergency generators to meet California Resources Board standards and the Project to use zero emissions outdoor cargo handling equipment. To reduce potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts, the Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan Land Use Mitigation Measure 3, which would require the transportation, generation, processing, and storage of hazardous materials to be handled consistent with the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department of Health Services, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Lastly, to reduce potential hazards and hazardous materials impacts, the Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Environmental Health and Hazards Mitigation Measures 1 through 4, which would require Project implementation to adhere to noise level standards and the use of noise retardant measures.
Policy 2-9.2: Require all industrial
development to front on an
improved street with appropriate
from yard setbacks, landscaping and
façade and entrance treatments.
Consistent. The Specific Plan development standards require a minimum 25-foot front setback. The proposed truck terminal would be set back more than 44 feet from the property line along East Santa Ana Avenue. The Specific Plan does not require side or rear setbacks; however, the Project would include a landscaped perimeter, including the 105-foot pole line easement on the southern portion of the project site. In addition, the Project would include improvements to the segment of East Santa Ana Avenue located north of the project site. Improvements would include paving and the undergrounding of overhead utilities.
Goal 2-11: Design streetscapes in
Rialto to support and enhance the
City’s image as a desirable place to
live, work, shop, and dine.
Consistent. The Project would include a sidewalk and landscaping along the Project frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue.
Policy 2-11.1: Require the screening
of commercial or industrial parking
areas, storage yards, stockpiles, and
other collections of equipment from
the public right-of-way.
Consistent. The Project would include a retaining wall along the eastern boundary of the project site, screening views of parking areas from the adjacent parcels. Additionally, the Project would include landscaping along the boundaries of the project site.
Goal 2-14: Protect scenic vistas and
scenic resources.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, the project site is surrounded by existing industrial uses and is not located within an area designated by the City as a scenic vista. Further, views of designated scenic resources from the project site are limited and interrupted.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-9
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
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.
Consistent. The San Gabriel Mountains are located approximately 10 miles to the northwest and the San Bernardino Mountains are located approximately 14 miles to the east. The Specific Plan does not have a height building limit. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, although Project implementation would result in the partial obstruction of designated scenic vistas, these views are currently obstructed by existing urban 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.
Consistent. The La Loma Hills are located approximately 0.9 miles to the southeast, Jurupa Hills are located approximately 3.1 miles to the west, Box Springs Mountains are located approximately 7 miles to the southeast, the City of Moreno Valley is located approximately 8 miles to the southeast, and the City of Riverside is located approximately 2.1 miles to the south.
The Specific Plan does not identify a maximum height requirement for Heavy Industrial land uses.
As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, although Project implementation would result in the partial obstruction of designated scenic vistas, these views are currently obstructed by existing urban development.
Policy 2-14.3: Ensure use of building
materials that do not produce glare,
such as polished metals or reflective
windows.
Consistent. The proposed building materials include metal wall panels, concrete, galvalume metal roofing, and a glass curtain wall. The proposed building materials are not reflective and do not produce substantial glare.
Goal 2-17: Provide high-quality and
environmentally sustainable
landscaping.
Consistent. The Project would include approximately 10.8 acres of landscaping throughout the project site. The proposed landscaping would include native plant species and drought-tolerant plant species.
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.
Consistent. The Project would include approximately 10.8 acres of landscaping throughout the project site. The proposed landscaping would include the planting of various trees along the Project’s frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue and within the passenger vehicle parking area.
Policy 2-17.3: Require use of
drainage improvements designed,
with native vegetation where
possible, to retain or detain water
runoff and minimize pollutants into
drainage system.
Consistent. Landscaping would be included throughout the project site to retain runoff. The proposed landscaping would include native plant species.
The proposed drainage improvements would include a modular wetland unit to improve water quality of runoff.
Goal 2-22: Promote commercial
and/or industrial development that
is well designed, people-oriented,
environmentally sustainable,
sensitive to the needs of the visitor
or resident, and functionally efficient
for its purpose.
Consistent. The Project would include the development of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop. The design of the proposed development would require City approval prior to construction. Project implementation would provide employment opportunities and new truck and trailer parking to respond to current market demands.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-10
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 2-22.2: Encourage
architecture which disaggregates
massive buildings into smaller parts
with greater human scale.
Consistent. The proposed truck terminal and maintenance shop would both be one story buildings. The proposed truck terminal would be approximately 24 feet in height, and the maintenance shop would be approximately 22 feet in height. Materials used would include metal wall panels, concrete, galvalume metal roofing, and a glass curtain wall as well as various colors to reduce the overall sense of perceived mass. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, the Project would not result in significant visual impacts.
Policy 2-22.3: Require that
landscaping be incorporated into
commercial and industrial projects to
define and emphasize entrances,
inclusive of those areas along the
front of a building facing a parking
lot.
Consistent. Landscaping would be included throughout the project site.
Landscaping would include various trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. To emphasize the entrance of the site, landscaping would include pedestrian walkways, plantings, and lighting to create a visually appealing entrance.
Policy 2-22.5: Require developments
to provide pedestrian and vehicle
connections and pathways between
parking lots at the rear and front of
buildings.
Consistent. Vehicle access to the project site would be provided via one full-access driveway located on East Santa Ana Avenue. One additional emergency vehicle only driveway would be located at the northeastern corner of the project site, along East Santa Ana Avenue.
Pedestrian access to the project site would be provided via the proposed sidewalk along East Santa Ana Avenue. As shown in Figure 3-4a and Figure 3-4b, Pedestrian ramps would be to the proposed Truck Terminal would be separated from truck areas by handrails.
Goal 2-23: Minimize the visual
impact of parking lots
Consistent. The Project would include landscaping along the property boundaries and within passenger vehicle parking area to screen views of parking areas from adjacent land uses and roadway users.
Policy 2-23.1: Require the use of
drainage improvements designed,
with native vegetation where
possible, to retain or detain water
runoff and minimize pollutants into
drainage system.
Consistent. As discussed under consistency to Policy 2-17.3, Landscaping would be included throughout the project site to retain runoff. The proposed drainage improvements would include a modular wetland unit to improve water quality of runoff.
Goal 2-28: Protect and enhance
Rialto’s surface waters and
groundwater basins.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, to protect the City’s surface waters and groundwater basins, the Project has prepared a project-specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). Both the SWPPP and WQMP would include measures to protect water quality during Project construction and operation.
Policy 2-28.3: Design sidewalks,
roads, and driveways to minimize
impervious surfaces; provide flood
control channels with permeable
bottoms to help restore
groundwater aquifers.
Consistent. The Project site would include 10.8 acres of landscaping (23.6% of the project site). The remaining 34.9 acres of the project site would be pervious, which would include pedestrian walkways, driveways, and surface parking. The proposed driveways and sidewalks would be designed in accordance with City code.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-11
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Goal 2-29: Conserve water
resources.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, the West Valley Water District is anticipated to have water supply capacity to serve the Project during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. The proposed industrial uses would require minimal water consumption during operation.
Policy 2-29.1: Require new
development to use features,
equipment, technology, landscaping,
and other methods to reduce water
consumption.
Consistent. Landscaping would be included throughout the project site and a modular wetland unit would be included to retain stormwater runoff. The proposed landscaping would include native vegetation.
The proposed industrial use would require minimal water consumption during operation. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project would be consistent with the existing land use and zoning. As such, the proposed water usage has been accounted for.
Goal 2-30: Incorporate green
building and other sustainable
building practices into development
projects.
Consistent. The Project would comply with the requirements of the 2022 Green Building Standards, which includes requirements for construction waste reduction, selection of construction material and conservation.
Policy 230-1: Explore and adopt the
use of green building standards and
Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) or
similar in both private and public
projects.
Consistent. See consistency with Goal 2-30.
Policy 2-30.2: Promote sustainable
building practices that go beyond the
requirements of Title 24 of the
California Administrative Code, and
encourage energy-efficient design
elements, as appropriate.
Consistent. The Project would comply with Parts 6 and 11 of Title 24. The Project would have: (a) sensor-based lighting controls— for fixtures located near windows, the lighting would be adjusted by taking advantage of available natural light; and (b) efficient process equipment—improved technology offers significant savings through more efficient processing equipment.
Policy 2-30.3: Support sustainable
building practices that integrate
building materials and methods that
promote environmental quality,
economic vitality, and social benefit
through the design, construction,
and operation of the built
environment.
Consistent. The Project Applicant would have (a) 50 percent of its construction and demolition waste diverted from landfills; (b) mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; (c) low pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials, such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring and particle boards; and (d) a 20% reduction in indoor water use.
Goal 2-31: Conserve energy
resources.
Consistent. See consistency with Policy 2-30.2.
To conserve energy resources, the Project would comply with Parts 6 and 11 of Title 24.
Policy 2-31.1: Require the
incorporation of energy conservation
features into the design of all new
construction and site development
activities.
Consistent. See consistency with Policy 2-30.2.
The Project would comply with Parts 6 and 11 of Title 24. In addition, the Project would include drought tolerant landscaping.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-12
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Goal 2-32: Balance the provisions of
the California Surface Mining and
Reclamation Act with City objectives
to minimize negative impacts of
mining activities on the Rialto
community.
Consistent. The project site includes land of the previous Rialto Plant.
Operation of the Rialto Plant ceased in 1990, with no future plans for mining activities at the site. Impacts to mineral resources are further discussed in Section 4.11, Mineral Resources.
Policy 2-32.1: Allow the phasing of
planned land uses on large mineral
resource sites on that part of the site
on which mining is not anticipated,
or on that part of the site which
mining is completed and reclamation
has been established.
Consistent. Prior to the Project, implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, including mass grading, would be complete. The Project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designation.
Goal 2-34: Achieve waste recycling
levels that meet or exceed State
mandates. Achieve maximum waste
recycling in all sectors of the
community: residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional, and
construction.
Consistent. The Project would include recyclables collection on-site during construction and operation activities.
Policy 2-34.2: Utilize source
reduction, recycling, and other
appropriate measures to reduce the
amount of solid waste generated in
Rialto that is disposed of in landfills.
Consistent. The Project would include measures to recycle during construction and operation when feasible.
Policy 2-34.3: Encourage the
maximum diversion from landfills of
construction and demolition
materials through recycling and
reuse programs.
Consistent. Approximately 50 percent of Project construction and demolition waste will be diverted from landfills.
Goal 2-35: Reduce air pollution
emissions from both mobile and
stationary sources in the City.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, to reduce potential impacts to air quality, the Project would implement Laws, Ordinances, and Regulations (LORS) LOR AQ-1 through LOR AQ-6, Project mitigation measures MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1, and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Air Quality and Climate Change Mitigation Measures 1 through 4.
Policy 2-35.2: Require that new
development projects incorporate
design features that encourage
ridesharing, transit use, park and ride
facilities, and bicycle and pedestrian
circulation.
Consistent. The Project would include a sidewalk along the Project frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue to provide pedestrian access to the project site.
The Project would result in significant and unavoidable transportation impacts. To reduce the significance of impacts, the Project would implement MM TRF-1, which would result in the development of a TDM Plan incorporating feasible trip reduction strategies that would encourage ridesharing, transit use, park and ride facilities, and bicycle and pedestrian circulation.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-13
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 2-35.3: Establish a balanced
land use pattern, and facilitate
developments that provide jobs for
City residents in order to reduce
vehicle trips citywide.
Consistent. The proposed development would be consistent with the High Industrial land use designation in which the project site is located. Project implementation would create employment opportunities within the City.
Policy 2-35.4: Require new
development and significant
redevelopment proposals to
incorporate sufficient design and
operational controls to prevent
release of noxious odors beyond the
limits of the development site.
Consistent. The project site and surrounding parcels are located within land zoned for industrial uses. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site include residential land use approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest.
Project operation is not anticipated to result in a substantial amount of noxious odors beyond the limits of the project site.
Goal 2-36: Reduce the amount of
fugitive dust released into the
atmosphere.
Consistent. To reduce fugitive dust, the Project would implement LORs AQ- 1, which requires the implementation of Rule 402 and 403 dust control techniques to minimize PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations.
Policy 2-36.1: Put conditions on
discretionary permits to require
fugitive dust controls.
Consistent. See consistency with Goal 2-36.
Policy 2-36.3: Enforce regulations
that do not allow vehicles to
transport aggregate or similar
material upon a roadway unless the
material is stabilized or covered.
Consistent. The Project would include the development of a truck terminal for layover activities. Trucks transporting aggregate or similar material would be required to comply with applicable requirements for transportation of aggregate materials.
Goal 2-38: Mitigate against climate
change.
Consistent. To mitigate against climate change, the Project would include mitigation measures MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4, which would require solar panels, LEED certification, recyclable collection, and low-water use landscaping.
Policy 2-38.1: Consult with State
agencies, SCAG, and the San
Bernardino Associated Governments
(SANBAG) to implement AB32 and
SB375 by utilizing incentives to
facilitate infill and transit-oriented
development.
Consistent. As further discussed in Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project would comply with applicable regulations, including SB 32 and SB 375. The Project would implement standard mitigation measures and LORs, to reduce impacts associated with GHGs.
Policy 2-38.3: Provide enhanced
bicycling and walking infrastructure,
and support public transit, including
public bus service, the Metrolink,
and the potential for Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT).
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.15, Transportation, the Project would implement project Mitigation Measure MM TRF-1, which would require the preparation of TDM plan using feasible reduction strategies such as providing a rideshare program, end of trip bicycle facilities. Further, the Project would provide sidewalks along the Project frontage on the southern side of East Santa Ana Avenue to provide pedestrian access to the project site.
Goal 2-39: Conserve and enhance
Rialto’s biological resources.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-2, which require pre-construction surveys, implementation of a Burrowing Owl Relocation and Mitigation Plan in the event avoidance is not possible, and the removal of habitat that supports nests to occur outside of breeding season.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-14
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 2-39.1: Protect endangered,
threatened, rare, and other special
status habitat and wildlife species
within and along Lytle Creek by
working with the United States
Wildlife Service and the California
Department of Fish and Game to
establish Natural Community
Conservation Plans, Habitat
Conservation Plans (HCP), or other
established biological resource
protection mechanisms within this
sensitive area.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, MM BIO-1a through MM BIO-2, require pre-construction surveys, implementation of a Burrowing Owl Relocation and Mitigation Plan in the event avoidance is not possible, and the removal of habitat that supports nests to occur outside of breeding season.
Policy 2-39.2: Pursue open space,
wildlife corridors, or conservation
easements to protect sensitive
species and their habitats.
Consistent. See consistency with Policy 2.39-1.
Although the Project would result in impacts to Delhi fine sands, which provides habitat to DSFLF, existing Delhi fine sands on-site have been disturbed by previous grading and would not provide suitable habitat to DSFLF. As such, the Project would not result in impacts to DSFLF and mitigation is not required.
Chapter 3: Investing in Our Future: Economic Development, Redevelopment, and Infrastructure Goal 3-8: Promote affordable and
quality water service capable of
adequately meeting normal and
emergency water demands to all
areas in Rialto.
Consistent. Water services would be provided by West Valley Water District (WVWD), which is anticipated to have adequate supplies to serve the project site during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
Policy 3-8.1: Require that all new
development or expansion of
existing facilities bear the cost of
expanding the water system to
handle the increased demands
which they are expected to
generate.
Consistent. Water services to the project site would be provided by WVWD. The Project would include connections to existing facilities located within East Santa Ana Avenue. The Project would not require the expansion of existing facilities.
Policy 3-8.9: Conserve potable
water and utilize reclaimed water
for meeting landscaping and
irrigation demands as much as
possible.
Consistent. The Project would include new connections to water facilities located within East Santa Ana Avenue. The City’s General Plan EIR evaluated water usage for the City and it is anticipated that the City has an adequate water supply to serve the Project.
Policy 3-8.10: Support water
conservation through requirements
for landscaping with drought-
tolerant plants and efficient
irrigation for all new development
and City projects.
Consistent. The Project would include approximately 10.8 acres of landscaping. The proposed landscaping plans would include the incorporation of drought-tolerant plants.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-15
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Goal 3-9: Upgrade and maintain an
improved wastewater system with
adequate plant efficiency and
capacity to protect the health and
safety of Rialto residents,
businesses, and institutions.
Consistent. The Project would include the connections to existing wastewater system and would not require the construction or expansion of existing wastewater facilities.
Policy 3-9.1: Require that all new
development or expansion of
existing facilities bear the cost of
expanding the wastewater disposal
system to handle the increased
loads which they are expected to
generate.
Consistent. Wastewater services would be provided by Rialto Water Services. The Project proposes to connect to existing wastewater facilities located within East Santa Ana Avenue. As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would result in a minimal increase in wastewater and the existing facilities of the Rialto Water Services would adequately serve the project site.
Policy 3-9.2: Evaluate the
wastewater disposal system
routinely to ensure its adequacy to
meet changes in demand and
changes in types of waste.
Consistent. Wastewater produced by the Project would be treated at the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). As further discussed in Section
4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would not require the expansion of wastewater facilities.
Goal 3-10: Minimize the volume of
solid waste that enters local and
regional landfills.
Consistent. Solid waste services would be provided by the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, which is anticipated to have adequate capacity to serve the Project. The Project would include recyclable collection to reduce solid waste volume of Project implementation.
Policy 3-10.2: Encourage the
recycling of construction and
demolition materials in an effort to
divert these items from entering
landfills.
Consistent. The Project would recycle construction materials when feasible to minimize solid waste entering landfills.
Chapter 4: Making the Connections: The Circulation Chapter Goal 4-2: Protect residential
neighborhoods from through traffic
impacts.
Consistent. The residential land use to the project site is located 2,800 feet to the southwest. Traffic to and from the project site would not travel along roads within residential neighborhoods.
Policy 4-2.1: Locate new
development and their access points
in such a way that traffic is not
encouraged to utilize local
residential streets for access to the
development and its parking.
Consistent. Access to the project site would be provided via one full access drive located on East Santa Ana Avenue. Trucks would travel along Riverside Avenue and East Santa Ana Avenue, and would not cause traffic on residential streets
Policy 4-2.2: Discourage non-local
traffic from using neighborhood
streets.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 4-2.1.
The Project and surrounding area is located on land zoned for industrial uses. The Project would not result in a significant increase in the use of neighborhood streets.
Goal 4-9: Promote Walking. Consistent. The Project would include sidewalks along the Project frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue to provide pedestrian access to the project site.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-16
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 4-9.2: Require sidewalks and
parkways on all streets in new
development.
Consistent. The Project would include a sidewalk along East Santa Ana Avenue to provide pedestrian access to the project site.
Policy 4-9.4: Accommodate
pedestrians and bicyclists — in
addition to automobiles — when
considering new development
projects.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.15, Transportation, the Project would implement project Mitigation Measure MM TRF-1, which would require the preparation of a TDM plan using feasible reduction strategies such as providing a rideshare program and end of trip bicycle facilities. Further, the Project would provide pedestrian access to the project site with the inclusion of sidewalks along the Project’s frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue.
Policy 4-9.6: Encourage new
development to provide pedestrian
paths through projects, with outlets
to adjacent collectors, secondaries,
and arterial roadways.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 4-9.4.
The Project would provide parking along the Project frontage on East Santa Ana Avenue. Pedestrian pathways would not be included throughout the surface parking to optimize vehicle circulation.
Policy 4-9.7: Require ADA
compliance on all new or modified
handicap ramps.
Consistent. Handicap ramps located on-site would comply with ADA requirements.
Policy 4-10.1: Designate and
enforce truck routes for use by
commercial trucking as part of the
project approval process.
Consistent. Trucks travelling to and from the project site would travel along Riverside Avenue and East Santa Ana Avenue, which are designated truck routes within the City.
Policy 4-10.3: Develop appropriate
noise mitigation along truck routes
to minimize noise impacts on
nearby sensitive land uses.
Consistent. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site includes residential land uses located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest.
As further discussed in Section 4.12, Noise, due to distance from the nearest sensitive receptor, noise impacts would be less than significant.
Policy 4-10.4: Encourage the
development of adequate on-site
loading areas to minimize
interference of truck loading
activities with efficient traffic
circulation on adjacent roadways.
Consistent. The Project would include a total of 292 dock doors, which exceeds the required 8 under the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan development standards.
Chapter 5: The Safety and Noise Chapter
Goal 5-1: Minimize hazards to public
health, safety, and welfare
associated with geotechnical
hazards.
Consistent. The Project has prepared a Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, which includes recommendation to minimize potential geologic impacts. Geological hazards and potential impacts associated with the Project are further discussed in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-17
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 5-1.1: Require geotechnical
investigations by certified
engineering geologist or other
qualified professionals for all
grading and construction projects
subject to geologic hazards,
including fault rupture, severe
ground shaking, liquefaction,
landslides, and collapsible or
expansive soils. Particular attention
should be paid to areas within
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zones.
Consistent. A Project-specific Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was prepared for the Project by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc., and is included as Appendix G.
Policy 5-1.2: Require all
construction to be in conformance
with the Uniform Building Code
(UBC) and the California Building
Code (CBC), and to be consistent
with the Municipal Code as it
provides for earthquake resistant
design, excavation, and grading.
Consistent. A Geotechnical Investigation was prepared for the Project by LOR Geotechnical Group, inc. in February 2016. Project implementation would adhere to requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC), California Building Code (CBC), and the Rialto Municipal Code.
Goal 5-2: Minimize the risk and
damage from flood hazards.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project site is located within Zone X, which identifies areas of minimal flooding. The Project would implement Hydrology and Flood Control Mitigation Measure 2 of the Specific Plan EIR, which would require installation of impervious surfaces on individual industrial sites be limited to minimize the quantity of storm run-off, which would require limiting the installation of impervious surfaces on individual industrial sites to minimize the quantity of storm run-off.
Policy 5-2.2: Require the
implementation of adequate
erosion control measures for
development projects to minimize
sedimentation damage to drainage
facilities.
Consistent. The Project has prepared a SWPPP and WQMP, which would include erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize potential impacts associated with erosion.
Policy 5-2.4: Require water
retention devices in new
developments to minimize flooding
of the surface drainage system by
peak flows.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project site’s 100-year peak volume will be stored in an underground detention vault. Stormwater generated by the Project would be captured and conveyed to an underground detention vault through a network of proposed catch basins, inlets, and underground piping.
Goal 5-3: Increase the City’s fire
protection capabilities and
implement fire prevention
regulations and standards that
minimize potential fire hazards and
fire losses.
Consistent. Project implementation would adhere to requirements of the California Fire Code (CFC). Project implementation would result in a minimal increase in fire protection demand, and it is anticipated the Project would be adequately served by the Rialto Fire Department for fire protection services.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-18
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 5-3.3: Require that
development be phased in relation
to the City’s ability to provide an
adequate level of fire protection, as
per the City standards.
Consistent. On-site, the Project would include 31 fire hydrants and one emergency access driveway. The proposed buildings would be designed to comply with the current CFC. As determined in Section 4.14, Public Services, Project implementation would result in a minimal increase in service calls. It is expected that the Rialto Fire Department would adequately serve the site and does not require the construction or expansion of existing fire services facilities.
Policy 5-3.4: Require that all site
plans, subdivision plans, and
building plans be reviewed by the
Fire Department to ensure
compliance with appropriate fire
regulations.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 5-3.3.
Project implementation would result in a minimal increase in fire service calls. The Rialto Fire Department is anticipated to have the capacity to adequately serve the project site. Additionally, the Rialto Fire Department would review the building plans for compliance.
Goal 5-4: Protect the health and
welfare of the public, environment,
and economy by providing for the
safe and responsible management
of hazardous materials and wastes.
Consistent. As further discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, to reduce potential impacts associated with the management of hazardous materials, the Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan Land Use Mitigation Measure 3, which would require hazardous wastes that are transported, processed, generated, or stored to be handled consistent with the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department of Health Service, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Policy 5-4.4: Require all hazardous
waste generators and hazardous
materials handlers to report to City
officials, including the Fire
Department any equipment
malfunction or upset which may
cause hazardous waste to be
emitted.
Consistent. During operation, the Project would include two 20,000-gallon diesel underground storage tanks, and one 8,000-gallon diesel exhaust fluid tank, which would be regulated by the City.
Goal 5-5: Minimize the generation
of hazardous waste in Rialto.
Consistent. The Project would include the construction and operation of the proposed truck terminal and maintenance shop, and would not generate hazardous waste.
Policy 5-5.2: Encourage and
promote practices that will reduce
the use of hazardous materials and
the generation of hazardous waste
at their source, recycle the
remaining hazardous wastes for
reuse, and treat those wastes which
cannot be reduced at the source or
recycled.
Consistent. The Project would include the two 20,000-gallon diesel underground storage tanks, and one 8,000-gallon diesel exhaust fluid tank, which would be regulated by the City.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-19
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Goal 5-8: Provide effective and
comprehensive policing services
that meet the safety needs of Rialto.
Consistent. Police protection services for the Project would be provided by the Rialto Police Department. The Project would result in a minimal increase in police protection demand, and it is anticipated that the Rialto Police Department would adequately serve the Project. Additionally, the Project would include Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) measures (such as lighting and fencing) to reduce the potential of criminal activity on-site.
Policy 5-8.3: Continue to encourage
design concepts that inhibit and
discourage criminal behavior such
as Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design (CPTED)
techniques.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Goal 5-8.
The Project would include lighting on-site for security purposes. In addition, it is anticipated the Rialto Police Department would have adequate resources to serve the Project.
Goal 5-10: Minimize the impact of
point source and ambient noise
levels throughout the community.
Consistent. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest. As discussed in Section 4.12, Noise, the Project would not exceed the applicable Federal Transit Administration (FTA) construction thresholds during construction, and Project operation would generate ambient noise levels below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard.
Policy 5-10.2: Consider noise
impacts as part of the development
review process, particularly the
location of parking,
ingress/egress/loading, and refuse
collection areas relative to
surrounding residential
development and other noise-
sensitive land uses.
Consistent. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is residential land use located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest. As discussed in Section 4.12, Noise, the Project would result in less than significant noise impacts. Additionally, the Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Environmental Health and Hazards Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 to further reduce potential impacts.
Policy 5-10.3: Ensure that
acceptable noise levels are
maintained near schools, hospitals,
and other noise sensitive areas in
accordance with the Rialto
Municipal Code (Municipal Code)
and noise standards contained in
Exhibit 5.5 (Table 4.12-2: Rialto
Noise Guidelines for Land Use
Planning).
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 5-10.2.
Policy 5-10.4: Limit the hours of
operation at all noise generation
sources that are adjacent to noise-
sensitive areas.
Consistent. During operation, the Project would operate Monday through Friday from 8:00am to 5:00pm. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site includes residential land uses located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest. As further discussed in Section 4.12, Noise, due to distance from the nearest sensitive receptor, noise impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-20
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 5-10.5: Require all exterior
noise sources (construction
operations, air compressors,
pumps, fans and leaf blowers) to use
available noise suppression devices
and techniques to reduce exterior
noise to acceptable levels that are
compatible with adjacent land uses.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 5-10.2.
The majority of Project construction would occur within the City’s restrictions for construction hours. However, it is noted that nighttime construction would be limited to brief periods of construction activity and would not endure during the entire construction period.
Goal 5-11: Minimize the impacts of
transportation-related noise.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.12, Noise, the Project would result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways from daily activities, resulting in an increase in vehicular noise in the Project area. Although off-site traffic during Project operation would result in a noise increase that exceeds the
3.0 dBA increase significance threshold, the nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is 2,800 feet to the southwest and would thus not be impacted by traffic noise impacts.
Policy 5-11.3: Require development
of truck-intensive uses to minimize
noise impacts on adjacent uses
through appropriate site design.
Consistent. See consistency analysis for Policy 5-10.2.
Heavy truck and loading dock noise levels would be 32.4 dBA for the residential land use to the southwest, which would not exceed the City’s normally acceptable residential exterior noise standard (60 dBA).
Additionally, an industrial use would be located approximately 100 feet east of the loading area of the terminal building. At this distance, heavy truck and loading dock noise levels would be approximately 57.3 dBA, which is well below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard (75 dBA) for industrial use.
Chapter 7: Our Roots: Cultural and Historical Resources Goal 7-1: Preserve Rialto’s significant
historical resources as a source of
community identity, stability,
aesthetic character, and social value.
Consistent. The Project would implement MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2, and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Archaeological/Historical Mitigation Measures 2 and 3 to reduce potential impacts to historical resources. Requirements of these mitigation measures include retaining a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the find and preparation of a Monitoring and Treatment Plan if applicable.
Policy 7-1.1: Protect the
architectural, historical, agricultural,
open space, environmental, and
archaeological resources in Rialto.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation. The Project would implement MM CUL-1, MM TCR-1 through MM TCR-3, as well as Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Archaeological/Historical Resources Mitigation Measures 2 and 3, which would require a qualified archaeologist to be retained to evaluate the significance of finds.
Goal 7-3: Identify, document, and
protect significant archaeological
resources in Rialto
Consistent. To reduce potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources, the Project would implement Project mitigation measures MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-2 and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan Archaeological/Historical Resources Mitigation Measures 2 and 3.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-21
Table 4.10-1: General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy 7-3.1: Require archaeological
surveys during the development
review process for all projects in
archaeologically sensitive areas
where no previous surveys are
recorded.
Consistent. As further discussed, in Section 4.4 Cultural Resources, a Project-specific Cultural Resources Memorandum has been prepared for the Project. The Cultural Resources Memorandum did not identify any known cultural resources on-site.
Policy 7-3.2: Avoid impacts to
potentially significant prehistoric and
historical archaeological resources
and sites containing Native American
human remains consistent with State
law.
Consistent. See consistency with Policy 7-1.1.
Policy 7-3.3: Avoid impacts to
potentially significant prehistoric
and historical archaeological
resources and sites containing
Native American human remains
consistent with State law.
Consistent. See consistency with Policy 7-1.1.
Source: City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/653/General-Plan.
Specific Plan Consistency Analysis
The Project would include the development of a truck terminal and maintenance shop, which is consistent with the permitted uses identified within the Specific Plan for the H IND zone. As shown in Table 4.10-2:
Specific Plan Consistency, the Project would comply with Section 4.2.2 of the Specific Plan, which describes the development standards for the H IND land use designation.
Table 4.10-2: Specific Plan Consistency
Required per Heavy Industrial
Land Use Designation1 Proposed Project
Minimum Lot Size 15,000 sf 1,990,692 sf (45.7 acres)
Minimum Lot Width and
Depth 100 ft Width: 550 ft
Depth: 1,567 ft
Minimum Front Setback 25 ft 69 ft
Minimum Side Setback None 15 ft
Minimum Rear Setback None 20 feet
Minimum Site Landscaping
20 ft of landscaping shall be
provided along public street
frontages measured from face and
curb
Approximately 23.6% of the project
site would be landscaped.
Landscaping would be included along
the boundaries of the site as well as
within parking areas.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-22
Table 4.10-2: Specific Plan Consistency
Required per Heavy Industrial
Land Use Designation1 Proposed Project
Maximum Building Height No limit Truck Terminal: 24 feet Maintenance Shop: 22 feet
Outdoor Storage Permitted The Project does not propose outdoor storage.
1. Development Standards are derived from the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan, Section 4.
The Project would comply with Section 4.2.2 of the Specific Plan which identifies landscaped areas should consist predominantly of native, drought tolerant, low maintenance plant materials. Approximately 10.8 acres (or approximately 23.6 percent) of the project site would be landscaped. Additionally, the Project would incorporate Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Land Use Mitigation Measure 1 and Mitigation Measure 3 to ensure compliance with the Specific Plan. Mitigation Measure 1 would require adherence with the development and performance standards of the Specific Plan. Mitigation Measure 3 would require the transportation, generation, processing, and storage of hazardous materials to be handled consistent with the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency, the State Department of Health Services, and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
Municipal Code Consistency Analysis
Title 18 of the Rialto Municipal Code functions as the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which identifies the permitted land uses on all parcels in the City through assigned land use designations and associated land use regulations and development standards. The project site is designated Heavy Industrial within the Specific Plan. Development standards of the Specific Plan would supersede the requirements of the General Plan and Zoning Code.
The Project would provide signage in accordance with Section 18.102.060 of the City Zoning Ordinance.
The Project would comply with the City’s vehicle and truck trailer parking requirements as identified in Section 18.58 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. Further, in accordance with Section 18.61 of the Rialto Municipal Code, the Project would incorporate building design standards for industrial development such as well-defined main entrance, office space located in the front of the building, and desirable exterior building colors.
In accordance with the City’s Municipal Code, the Project includes a Precise Plan of Design for the development of the Project. Further, although the Project is consistent with the existing land use designation and zoning designation, as required by section 18.106.040, the Project has acquired a Conditional Development Permit (CDP). A CDP is required for Project implementation as the proposed truck terminal is considered a conditionally permitted use in industrial zones within the City.
The Project is consistent with the pertinent land use planning and policy documents, including the General Plan, Specific Plan, and the City’s Municipal Code. The Project would have a less than significant impact on a plan, policy, or regulation.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-23
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure 1: The site development standards and performance standards contained in Section
4.2.2 of the Specific Plan shall be adhered to in reviewing proposed specific developments. Adherence to these standards, especially the specific criteria for industrial uses in proximity to residential and other sensitive uses, will minimize any potential impacts.
Mitigation Measure 3 is further discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.10.7 Cumulative Impacts
The geographic area for the analysis of cumulative impacts to land use and planning includes the jurisdiction of local and regional agencies including the City of Rialto, San Bernardino County, and SCAG, where land use changes could interact with land use changes under the Project to result in cumulative effects. Table 4.0-1: Cumulative Projects List represents past, present, and potential future projects that could lead to cumulative impacts once combined with the Project.
The Project is consistent with applicable land use goals and policies. Although other changes in land use plans and regulations may have occurred with past and present projects in the area and may be necessary for individual future projects, such changes have been, and would be, required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan and other City policies such that no significant adverse cumulative impact has occurred or would occur from such changes. Given that the Project would be consistent with the land use policies of the applicable plans, the Project would not combine with any past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects to cause a significant adverse cumulative land use impact based on a conflict with a plan or policy. Any associated physical impacts are covered in the individual topic sections. It is also anticipated that regional growth would be subject to review for consistency with adopted land use plans and policies by the County of San Bernardino, City of Rialto, and other cities in the County, in accordance with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State Zoning and Planning Law, and the State Subdivision Map Act, all of which require findings of plan and policy consistency prior to approval of entitlements for development. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts associated plans and policies are anticipated. In addition, the contribution of the Project to any such cumulative impacts would be less than significant because present and probable future projects are consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations. The Project would not contribute to any cumulative impacts associated with plan or policy inconsistency.
4.10.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would result in less than significant impacts regarding land use and planning. No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.10
Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use and Planning
City of Rialto 4.10-24
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-1
4.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
4.11.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies and analyzes the mineral resources currently present on-site and near the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Projec t (Project) project site while assessing the potential impact the Project could have on those resources. Impacts in this section are assessed regarding their effects on valuable mineral resources and mineral resource recovery sites.
4.11.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
United States Code Title 30: Mineral Lands and Mining
Title 30 of the United States Code discusses mineral lands and mining, covering regulations and laws related to mineral resources on federal lands, such as coal, oil, gas, and other minerals. The United States Code Title §30.21a defines the national mining and minerals policy of the United States. This policy dictates that the United States will encourage the development of rational domestic mining reclamation practices, the sustainable development of domestic mineral resources, mining and mineral research, and the advancement of mineral waste disposal and reclamation methods. Title 30 also describes the federal regulations involving the sale of mineral lands.1
State Regulations
Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) provides regulations and policy regarding surface mining and reclamation operations in California. The SMARA ensures that adverse environmental impacts are minimized, and mined lands are restored to a usable condition. SMARA also encourages the production, conservation, and protection of California’s mineral resources. Section 2207 of the California Public Resources Code provides annual reporting requirements for all mines in the State, and the State Mining and Geology Board is granted authority and obligations under this section.
The State Mining and Geology Board has classified land in California based on the availability of mineral resources. Four mineral resources zone (MRZ) designations have been established for classifying sand, gravel, and crushed rock resources:
▪ MRZ-1: Adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. ▪ MRZ-2: Adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present or there is a high likelihood for their presence, and development should be controlled. ▪ MRZ-3: The significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from the available data.
1 United States of America. (1996). United States Code Title 30. https://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title30&edition=prelim.
Accessed April 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-2
▪ MRZ-4: There is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation.
Under SMARA, aggregate materials are classified as reserves or resources. Reserves are defined as aggregate materials believed to be acceptable for commercial use that exist within property boundaries owned or leased by an aggregate-producing company, and for which permission allowing extraction and processing has been granted by the proper authorities. Aggregate resources include reserves and similar potentially usable aggregate materials that have been granted. Mineral lands are locally reviewed in an effort to ensure that significant mineral deposits are identified and protected. The State Geologist produces an annual report of the disturbed and reclaimed land totals and any amendments to the reclamation plan.
Mineral Resources and Mineral Hazards Mapping Program
The California Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program (MRP) provides data about California's varied non-fuel mineral resources (such as metals and industrial minerals), mineral hazards (such as radon, mercury, and naturally occurring asbestos), and in formation about active and historic mining activities throughout the state. The MRP divides its efforts primarily into two areas: Mineral Resources, and Mineral Hazards.
Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources Map
The California Geologic Energy M anagement Division (CalGEM, formerly DOGGR ) prioritizes protecting public health, safety, and the environment in its oversight of the oil, natural gas, and geothermal industries, while working to help California achieve its climate change and clean energy goals. To evaluate the presence of oil or gas wells on -site and in the immediate site vicinity, maps available online at the California Dep artment of Conservation, Geologic Energy Management Division (CalGEM) (https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#/) were reviewed. No abandoned/plugged oil/gas wells are located on the project site.2
Senate Bill 4 and Interim Well Stimulation
On September 20, 2013, Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill 4. On November 15, 2013, CalGEM, began the formal rulemaking process for Well Stimulation Treatment Regulations, which went into effect on July 1, 2015. Effective January 1, 2014 and continuing until permanent regulations are adopted, Senate Bill 4 requires that oil and gas operators certify certain information and actions prior to any well stimulation activity.
Local Regulations
Rialto General Plan 2010
The primary role of the Managing Our Land Supply Element of the Rialto General Plan (General Plan) is to direct the use of the City’s land resources in the most equitable and productive manner possible, with the aim of providing a high quality of life for residents and the overall community. The General Plan notes that Rialto is predominately developed but some areas remain substantially undisturbed. Most undisturbed areas are in the northern portion of the City. The General Plan provides guidance regarding
2 Department of Conservation (DOC). (2023). CalGEM GIS Well Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/.
Accessed September 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-3
the City’s natural resources and their preservation, including mineral resources. The following policies are applicable to the Project.
Goal 2-32 Balance the provisions of the California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act with City objectives to minimize negative impacts of mining activities on the Rialto community.
Policy 2-32.1 Allow the phasing of planned land uses on large mineral resource sites on that part of the site on which mining is not anticipated, or on that part of the site which mining is completed and reclamation has been established.
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan
The Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) serves as a comprehensive and strategic framework designed to guide the responsible and sustainable development of a designated industrial area. Its primary purpose is to facilitate the growt h and enhancement of economic activity, job opportunities, and infrastructure within the corridor, while simultaneously ensuring the protection of natural resources and the overall well-being of the community. By outlining land use regulations, zoning guidelines, transportation improvements, the Specific Plan seeks to create a cohesive and harmonious environment that supports both industrial growth and the quality of life for residents. The Specific Plan aims to establish a thriving and resilient industrial hub that benefits the local economy and maintains a high standard of living for the Rialto community. Requirements of the Specific Plan that are applicable to the Project supersede the requirements of the General Plan and the City’s Zoning Code.
The project site has a land use designation of Heavy Industrial (H IND) within the Specific Plan. The H IND land use designation is identified as an industrial land use designation. Permitted uses within the H IND land use designation include transit and transportation terminals, repairs, and storage facilities.
Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan
The project site includes land of the previous Rialto Plant (California Mine ID # 91-36-004), which was used for sand and gravel surface mining. Operations at the Rialto Plant ceased in 1990 and there are no plans to resume mining activity at the site. Certification of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan (Reclamation Plan) is required by Municipal Code 18.76, which implements the SMARA. Recommended mitigation provided in the Reclamation Plan included dust-control practices and reclamation of the barrow pit.
4.11.3 Environmental Setting
Project Location
The Project would occupy approximately 45.7 acres of previously disturbed land. Specifically, the project site is located at 249 East Santa Ana Avenue. The City is largely urbanized and the project site is surrounded by existing industrial land uses.
Existing Conditions
The project site is located on land previously known as the Rialto Plant (California Mine ID# 91 -36-004).
The SMARA was enacted to establish State policy for the reclamation of mined lands and the conduct of surface mining operations throughout the State. Current activities on -site are limited to mining reclamation, which is anticipated to be completed in 2024, prior to the commencement of Project Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-4
construction. As such, prior to the commencement of construction for the Project, the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan (Reclamation Plan) must be implemented. The Reclamation Plan states that once the property has been reclaimed, the property should be utilized for heavy industrial uses, as provided by the Specific Plan.
Regional Conditions
The Project is located within the San Bernardino Production-Consumption (P-C) Region according to the California Geological Survey. The San Bernardino P-C Region is the largest of the seven P-C regions within the greater Los Angeles area. The San Bernardino P-C Region includes portions of the County of Riverside and the County of San Bernardino. Aggregate resources present within this region are primarily located within existing stream channels and their respective flood plains and alluvial fans.3 This region consists of three MRZs. According to Exhibit 2.7: Mineral Resource Zones, within the General Plan, the Project would be within both an MRZ-2 and MRZ-3 region.4
4.11.4 Methodology
Information in the Section of the EIR is based on the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan ( 1990) and existing data produced by government agencies, such as the federal government, State government, and City of Rialto (Rialto General Plan and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan).
4.11.5 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for mineral resources were derived from the Environmental Checklist in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. An impact of the Project would be considered significant and would require mitigation if it would meet one of the following criteria:
▪ 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.
▪ 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.
4.11.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.11-1: Would the project 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? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
According to the Exhibit 2.7: Mineral Resource Zones of the General Plan, the project site is within both an MRZ-2 and MRZ-3 region.5 Additionally, the project site is located on the previous Rialto Plant property (California Mine ID# 91-36-004), which was used for sand and gravel surface mining. However, mining
3 California Geological Survey (CGS). (2017). State Mining and Geology Board. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/smgb/reports/Documents/Designation_Reports/San_Bernardino_Designation_Rep ort_No.14.pdf. Accessed October 2023.
4 City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/653/General-Plan. 5 California Department of Conservation. (2023). Mineral Lands Classification. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-5
operations at the Rialto Plant ceased in 1990 and there are no plans to resume mining activity at the project site. The Project would include the construction and operation of a truck terminal and maintenance shop, which is permitted within the H IND land use designation of the Specific Plan.
Despite the project site’s location within an MRZ -2 and MRZ-3, the project site consist s of previously disturbed land from prior mining activities that formerly occurred on-site, but have since ceased. Although the project site is identified as a mineral resource of significance, previous mining operations have no longer made the project site a viable source for mineral resources. The project site and surrounding area are zoned for industrial uses , which do not permit mining activities. Further, the surrounding area is urbanized with industrial uses. Implementation of the Project would result in less than significant impacts.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.11-2: Would the project 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?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
The project site is located on the previous Rialto Plant property. According to the Reclamation Plan, t he Rialto Plant was used for sand and gravel surface mining from 1948 to 1990 with no plans to resume activity. Prior to commencement of Project construction, the implementation of the Reclamation Plan must be complete. Implementation of the Reclamation Plan include s mitigation measures to proper ly close the Rialto Plant including, but not limited , to dust-control practices during mining reclamation activities and preparation of a soils report . Upon implementation of the Reclamation Plan, the Project would not impact a locally important mineral resource recovery site as the prior Rialto Plant has ceased operations since 1990. The project site’s mineral resources are no longer being actively recovered and its status as a locally important mineral resource recovery site has diminished over the past decades. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.11
Draft Environmental Impact Report Mineral Resources
City of Rialto 4.11-6
No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.11.7 Cumulative Impacts
As concluded above, Project implementation would have a less than significant impact on the availability of a mineral resource. Considering the lack of an active mineral recovery site near the project site or within the City boundary or sphere of influence, implementation of the Project would not impact such facilities.
Therefore, the Project’s incremental effects involving mineral resources are not cumulatively considerable.
4.11.8 Significance of Impacts After Mitigation
The Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with mineral resources. No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-1
4.12 NOISE
4.12.1 Introduction
This section evaluates pre - and post-construction noise impacts associated with the implementation of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) and describes the affected environment and regulatory setting for noise. The Acoustical Assessment is summarized in this section and is provided as Appendix N to this Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
4.12.2 Noise Criteria and Definitions
Sound. Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source and that is capable of being detected by the hearing organs. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired and may be classified as a more specific gro up of sounds. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance and, in the extreme, hearing impairment. Excessive noise levels may also affect performance and learning processes through distraction, reduced accuracy and increase fatigue, annoyance and irritability, and the ability to concentrate.
Decibels and Frequency. In its most basic form, a continuous sound can be described by its frequency or wavelength (pitch) and its amplitude (loudness). Sound pressure levels are described in units called the decibel (dB). Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantif ies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used for earthquake magnitudes. Therefore, a doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; a halving of the energy would result in a 3 dB decrease.
Groundborne vibration consists of oscillatory waves that propagate from the source through the ground to adjacent structures. The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it is oscillating. The number of cycles per second of oscillation is the vibration frequency, which is described in terms of hertz (Hz). The normal frequency range of most groundborne vibration that can be felt generally starts from a low frequency of less than 1 Hz to a high of about 200 Hz.
Perception of Noise. The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the sound spectrum.
To accommodate this phenomenon, the A -scale, which approximates the frequency response of the average young ear when listening to most ordinary everyday sounds, was devis ed. When people make relative judgments of the loudness or annoyance of a sound, their judgments correlate well with the A - scale sound levels of those sounds. Therefore, the “A-weighted” noise scale is used for measurements and standards involving the human perception of noise. Noise levels using A -weighted measurements are written dB(A) or dBA.
Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with acoustical energy. The perception of noise is not linear in terms of dBA or in terms of acoustical energy. Two noise sources do not “sound twice as loud” as one source. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive changes of a 3 dBA increase or decrease; that a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible; and that an increase or decrease of 10 dBA sounds twice or half as loud, respectively.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-2
As noise travels from the source to the receiver, noise changes both in level and frequency. The most obvious change is the decrease in noise as the distance from the source increases. The manner in which noise reduces with distance (noise attenuation) dep ends on a number of factors. Ground absorption, atmospheric effects, and shielding (as by natural and man -made barriers) also affect the rate of noise attenuation.
Perception of Vibration. While people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration. Vibration in buildings caused by construction activities may be perceived as motion of building surfaces or ratt ling of windows, items on shelves, and pictures hanging on walls. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low - frequency rumbling noise, which is referred to as groundborne noise. Groundborne noise is usually only a problem when the originating vibration spectrum is dominated by frequencies in the upper end of the range (60 to 200 Hz), or when the structure and the construction activity are connected by foundations or utilities, such as sewer and water pipes.
The primary concern from vibration is the ability to be intrusive and annoying to nearby residents and other vibration-sensitive land uses. Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration level to diminish with distance away from the source. High -frequency vibrations reduce much more rapidly than low frequencies, so that low frequencies tend to dominate the spectrum at greater distances from the source.
Noise and Vibration Rating Scales. Several rating scales exist to analyze effects of noise on a community.
These scales include the equivalent noise level (Leq), the community noise equivalent level (CNEL), and the day-night average sound level (L dn). Average noise levels over a period of minutes or hours are usually expressed as dBA L eq, which is the equivalent noise level for that period of time. The period of time averaging may be specified; for example, L eq(3) would be a three -hour average. When no peri od is specified, a one-hour average is assumed. It is important to understand that noise of short duration (i.e., a time period substantially less than the averaging period) is averaged into ambient noise during the period of interest. Therefore, a loud noise lasting many seconds or a few minutes may have minimal effect on the measured sound level averaged over a one-hour period.
To evaluate community noise impacts, a descriptor was developed that accounts for human sensitivity to nighttime noise. The descriptor is called the Ldn, which represents the 24-hour average sound level with a penalty for noise occurring at night. The L dn computation divides the 24 -hour day into two periods:
daytime (7:00 AM to 10:00 PM) and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The nighttime sound levels are assigned a 10 dBA “penalty” prior to averaging with daytime hourly sound levels. CNEL is similar to Ldn except that it separates a 24-hour day into 3 periods: daytime (7:00 AM to 7:00 PM), evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM), and nighttime (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). The evening and nighttime sound levels are assigned a 5 and 10 dBA penalty respectively, prior to averaging with daytime hourly sound levels. Several statistical descriptors are also often used to describe noise, including Lmax, Lmin, and Lx. Lmax and Lmin are respectively the highest and lowest A -weighted sound leve ls that occur during a noise event. The L x signifies the noise level that is exceeded X percent of the time; for example, L10 denotes the level that was exceeded 10 percent of the time.
Vibration levels are usually expressed as single -number measure of vibration magnitude, in terms of velocity or acceleration, which describes the severity of the vibration without the frequency variable. The peak particle velocity (ppv) is defined as the m aximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-3
vibration signal, usually measured in inches per second (in/sec). Since it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings, ppv is generally used to assess vibration to structures.
4.12.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Federal Transit Administration Noise and Vibration Guidance The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual to provide guidance on procedures for assessing impacts at different stages of transit project development. The report covers both construction and operational noise impacts and describes a range of measures for controlling excessive noise and vibration. I n general, the primary concern regarding vibration relates to potential damage from construction. The guidance document establishes criteria for evaluating the potential for damage for various structural categories from vibration.
State Regulations
California Government Code
California Government Code Section 65302(f) mandates that the legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines established by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use compatibility in terms of “normally acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally unacceptable,” and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types. Single-family homes are “normally acceptable” in exterior noise environments up to 60 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. Multiple-family residential uses are “normally acceptable” up to 65 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. School s, libraries, and churches are “normally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL, as are office buildings and business, commercial, and professional uses.
Title 24 – Building Code
The State’s noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24: Part 1, Building Standards Administrative Code, and Part 2, California Building Code. These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for interior noise compatibility from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when noise -sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources create an exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany building plans must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new multi -family residential buildings, the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.
Regional and Local Regulations
Rialto General Plan 2010
The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) is a roadmap that encompasses the hopes, aspirations, values, and dreams of the community. The General Plan specifies exterior noise guidelines for land uses in the Safety Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-4
and Noise chapter. The City requires that new developments be designed to meet these guidelines.1 Noise compatibility can be achieved by avoiding the location of conflicting land uses adjacent to one another, incorporating buffers and noise control techniques including setbacks, landscaping, building transitions, site design, and building construction techniques. Selection of the appropriate noise control technique would vary depending on the level of noise that needs to be reduced as well as the location and intended land use. General Plan policies that directly address reducing and avoiding noise or vibration impacts include the following:
Goal 2-9 Protect residential, schools, parks, and other sensitive land uses from the impacts associated with industrial and trucking-related land uses, as well as commercial and retail areas.
Policy 2-9.1 Require mitigation and utilize other techniques to protect residential development and other sensitive land uses near industrial land uses or within identified health risk areas from excessive noise, hazardous materials and waste releases, toxic air pollut ant concentrations, and other impacts.
Goal 5-10 Minimize the impact of point source and ambient noise levels throughout the community.
Policy 5-10.2 Consider noise impacts as part of the development review process, particularly the location of parking, ingress/egress/loading, and refuse collection areas relative to surrounding residential development and other noise-sensitive land uses.
Policy 5-10.3 Ensure that acceptable noise levels are maintained near schools, hospitals, and other noise sensitive areas in accordance with the Rialto Municipal Code (Municipal Code) and noise standards contained in Exhibit 5 .5 (Table 4.12-1: Rialto Noise Guidelines for Land Use Planning).
Policy 5-10.4 Limit the hours of operation at all noise generation sources that are adjacent to noise - sensitive areas.
Policy 5-10.5 Require all exterior noise sources (construction operations, air compressors, pumps, fans and leaf blowers) to use available noise suppression devices and techniques to reduce exterior noise to acceptable levels that are compatible with adjacent land uses.
Goal 5-11 Minimize the impacts of transportation-related noise.
Policy 5-11.3 Require development of truck-intensive uses to minimize noise impacts on adjacent uses through appropriate site design.
The City of Rialto (City) is largely built out and the street system is well established, creating challenges for separating noise-sensitive land uses from primary noise sources. Thus, the Safety and Noise chapter of the General Plan establishes policies guarding against new noise or land use conflicts to minimize the impact of existing noise sources on the community. Table 4.12-1: Rialto Noise Guidelines for Land Use Planning presents the City’s exterior noise guidelines for land use planning. It should also be noted that the Safety and Noise chapter of the General Plan mentions sound levels exceeding 40 to 45 dBA are generally considered to cause sleep interference within a residence. The General Plan also references Title 24 of the California Health and Safety Code stipulating a maximum of 45 dBA for interior residential noise levels.
1 City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/653/General-Plan. Accessed August 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-5
Table 4.12-1: Rialto Noise Guidelines for Land Use Planning Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
R2 ‐ Residential 2, R6 ‐ Residential 6 50 – 60 60 – 65 65 – 70 70 – 85 R12 ‐ Residential 12 50 – 60 60 – 65 65 – 70 70 – 85
R21 ‐ Residential 21, R45 ‐ Residential 45 50 – 60 60 – 70 70 – 75 75 – 85 DMU ‐ Downtown Mixed‐Use 50 – 60 60 – 75 75 – 80 80 – 85 CC ‐ Community Commercial 50 – 65 65 – 75 75 – 80 80 – 85 GC ‐ General Commercial 50 – 65 65 – 75 75 – 80 80 – 85 BP ‐ Business Park, O ‐ Office 50 – 65 65 – 75 75 – 80 80 – 85 LI ‐ Light Industrial 50 – 70 70 – 75 75 – 80 80 – 85
GI ‐ General Industrial 50 – 75 75 – 85 NA NA
P ‐ Public Facility, P ‐ School Facility 50 – 60 60 – 65 65 – 70 70 – 85 OSRC - Open Space ‐ Recreation 50 – 75 NA 75 – 80 80 – 85 OSRS ‐ Open Space ‐ Resources 50 – 75 NA 75 – 80 80 – 85 NA: Not Applicable; dBA: Decibel
Notes:
Normally Acceptable – Specified land use is satisfactory, assuming buildings are of conventional construction.
Conditionally Acceptable – New development should be undertaken only after detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements are made.
Normally Unacceptable – New development should be discouraged, or a detailed analysis of noise reduction requirements must be made.
Clearly Unacceptable – New development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan.
City of Rialto Municipal Code
A noise ordinance is intended to control unnecessary, excessive, and annoying sounds from stationary, non-transportation noise sources. Noise ordinance requirements are not applicable to mobile noise sources such as heavy trucks traveling on public roadway s. Federal and State laws preempt control of mobile noise sources on public roads. Noise ordinance standards generally apply to industrial and commercial noise sources, as well as parks and schools affecting residential areas. The Municipal Code prohibits the production of excessive noise, and is applied to future development within the City to determine potential noise impacts.
The City has also instated permitted hours for disturbances specifically from construction activity under Municipal Code Section 9.50.070. This code states that no person shall be engaged in any type of work relating to construction, alteration, repair, ad dition, movement, demolition, or improvement to any building or structure except within the hours provided in Table 4.12-2: Permitted Hours of Construction Work, below. However, Section 9.50.060 of the Municipal Code indicates exclusions from the provisions of this specific chapter of the Municipal Code. As described in Section 9.50.060(L) of the Municipal Code, noise sources associated with construction, repair, or excavation, are exempt so long as there is a valid written agreement with the City or any of its political subdivisions that provides for noise mitigation measures.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-6
Table 4.12-2: Permitted Hours of Construction Work
Days of Week Time1,2
October 1st through April 30th
Monday – Friday 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Sunday No Permissible Hours
State Holidays No Permissible Hours
May 1st through September 30th
Monday – Friday 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Saturday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Sunday No Permissible Hours
State Holidays No Permissible Hours
For purposes of this section, the following exceptions shall apply:
1. Emergency repair of existing installations, equipment, or appliances; and
2. Such work that complies with the terms and conditions of a written early work permit issued by the city manager or his or her designee upon a showing of a sufficient need and justification for the permit due to hot or inclement weather, the use of an unusually long process material, or other circumstances of an unusual and compelling nature.
Source: Appendix N
The Project would be subject to the limitations imposed by the City regarding construction noise as depicted in Table 4.12-2.
The following section of the Municipal Code noise ordinance is relevant for operational noise.
Section 9.50.050: Controlled hours of operation
It is unlawful for any person to engage in the following activities other than between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. in all zones.
A. Operate or permit the use of powered model vehicles and planes; B. Load or unload any vehicle, or operate or permit the use of dollies, carts, forklifts, or other wheeled equipment that causes any impulsive sound, raucous or unnecessary noise within one thousand feet of a residence; C. Operate or permit the use of domestic power tools, or machinery or any other equipment or tool in any garage, workshop, house or any other structure; D. Operate or permit the use of gasoline or electric powered leaf blowers, such as commonly used by gardeners and other persons for cleaning lawns, yards, driveways, gutters and other property;
E. Operate or permit the use of privately operated street/parking lot sweepers or vacuums, except that emergency work and/or work necessitated by unusual conditions may be performed with the written consent of the city manager; F. Operate or permit the use of pile driver, steam or gasoline shovel, pneumatic hammer, steam or electric hoist or other similar devices; Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-7
G. Operate or permit the use of electrically operated compressor, fan, and other similar devices;
H. Perform ground maintenance on golf course grounds and tennis courts contiguous to golf courses that creates a noise disturbance across a residential or commercial property line;
I. Operate or permit the use of any motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight rating in excess of ten thousand pounds, or of any auxiliary equipment attached to such a vehicle, including but not limited to refrigerated truck compressors, for a period longer than fifteen minutes in any hour while the vehicle is stationary and on a public right -of-way or public space except when movement of the vehicle is restricted by other traffic;
J. Repair, rebuild, reconstruct or dismantle any motor vehicle or other mechanical equipment or devices in a manner so as to be plainly audible across property lines.
Additionally, Section 9.50.060(O) of the Municipal Code states that sounds generated in commercial and industrial zones that are necessary and incidental to the uses permitted therein are exempt from the Controlled Hours of Operation.
4.12.4 Environmental Setting
Existing Noise Levels
The City is impacted by various noise sources. Mobile sources of noise, especially cars, trucks, and trains are the most common and significant sources of noise. Other noise sources are the various land uses (e.g., residential, commercial, institutional, a nd recreational and parks activities) throughout the City that generate stationary-source noise. The existing mobile noise sources in the Project area are generated by motor vehicles traveling on East Santa Ana Avenue. The primary sources of stationary noise in the Project vicinity are those associated with the industrial processes to the north, east, and west. Industrial stationary noise sources may include mechanical equipment (use of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] units, etc.) and parking lot activities (cars parking, open and closing doors, etc.). The noise associated with these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence, short-term, or long- term/continuous noise.
Mobile Traffic Noise
Existing roadway noise levels were calculated for the roadway segments in the Project vicinity. This task was accomplished using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA -RD-77-108) and existing traffic volumes from the Traffic Study for the 249 Santa Ana Avenue Truck Terminal Project in the City of Rialto (Traffic Study), prepared by Kimley-Horn (April 2023).
The noise prediction model calculates the average noise level at specific locations based on traffic volumes, average speeds, roadway geometry, and site environmental conditions. The average vehicle noise rates (also referred to as energy rates) used in the FHWA model have been modified to reflect average vehicle noise rates identified for California by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The Caltrans data indicates that California automobile noise is 0.8 to 1.0 dBA higher than Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-8
national levels and that medium and heavy truck noise is 0.3 to 3.0 dBA lower than national levels. 2 The average daily noise levels along roadway segments in proximity to the project site are included in Table
4.12-3: Existing Traffic Noise Levels.
Table 4.12-3: Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing Conditions
ADT
dBA CNEL at 100 feet from
Roadway Centerline
South Riverside Avenue
I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue 33,990 71.9
Slover Avenue to East Santa Ana Avenue 27,760 71.1
Santa Avenue to Jurupa Avenue 23,930 70.4
East Santa Ana Avenue
East of South Riverside Avenue 1,430 56.4
ADT = average daily traffic; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = day-night noise level; Source: Appendix N
Sensitive Receptors
Noise exposure standards and guidelines for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with each of these uses. Residences, hospitals, schools, guest lodging, libraries, and churches are treated as the most sensitive to noise intrusion and therefore have more stringent noise exposure targets than do other uses, such as manufacturing or agricultural uses that are not subject to impacts such as sleep disturbance. When the air noise analysis was conducted for the Project, the nearest sensitive receptor was a single-family residential use located approximately 1,350 feet to the west of the project site at the southwest corner of South Riverside Avenue and East Santa Ana Avenue. That identified single-family use has since been demolished and the closest sensitive receptor is a single-family residential use located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest of the project site.
Noise Measurements
To quantify existing ambient noise levels in the Project area, Kimley-Horn conducted four short-term noise measurements on September 28, 2023. The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacen t to the project site. The 10 -minute measurements were taken between 12:23 p.m. and 1:17 p.m. Short -term L eq measurements are considered representative of the noise levels throughout the day. The average noise levels and measurement location are listed in able 4.12-4: Existing Noise Measurements . Location of the noise measurements are shown in Figure 4.12-1: Noise Measurement Locations. able 4.12-4: Existing Noise Measurements
Site # Location
Leq
(dBA) Time
1 West of the Jurupa Avenue and Willow Avenue intersection 68.4 12:44 PM 2 West of the East Santa Ana Avenue and South Riverside Avenue Intersection 69.6 1:00 PM
3 Slover Avenue East of South Riverside Avenue 60.8 12:23 PM 4 East Santa Ana Avenue east of South Riverside Avenue 65.6 1:17 PM Source: Appendix N
2 Hendriks, Rudolf W., California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels. 1985. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1985/1033/1033-010.pdf. Accessed May 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project
Rialto, CA
Source: Google Earth Pro, 2023
Figure 4.12-1: Noise Measurement Locations
Source: Google Earth Pro, 2023
Exhibit 4: Noise Measurement Locations
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Rialto, CA
Project Site
0 Short-Term Noise Measurement
� Kimley>>>Horn
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-10
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-11
4.12.5 Methodology
Construction Noise
Construction noise levels were based on typical noise levels generated by construction equipment published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and FHWA. Construction noise is assessed in dBA Leq. This unit is appropriate because L eq can be used to describe noise level from operation of each piece of equipment separately, and levels can be combined to represent the noise level from all equipment operating during a given period.
Construction noise modeling was conducted using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM).
Reference noise levels are used to estimate operational noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors based on a standard noise attenuation rate of 6 dB per doub ling of distance (line -of-sight method of sound attenuation for point sources of noise). Noise level estimates do not account for the presence of intervening structures or topography, which may reduce noise levels at receptor locations. Therefore, the noise levels presented herein represent a conservative, reasonable worst -case estimate of actual temporary construction noise. The City does not establish quantitative construction noise standards.
Therefore, this analysis conservatively uses the FTA’s threshold of 80 dBA (8-hour Leq) for residential uses and 90 dBA (8-hour Leq) for non-residential uses to evaluate construction noise impacts.
Operational Noise
Reference noise level data are used to estimate the Project operational noise impacts from stationary sources. Noise levels are collected from field noise measurements and other published sources from similar types of activities are used to estimate noise levels expected with the Project’s stationary sources.
The reference noise levels are used to represent a worst -case noise environment as noise level from stationary sources can vary throughout the day. Operational noise is evaluated based on the standards within the Municipal Code and General Plan.
An analysis was conducted of the Project’s effect on traffic noise conditions at off-site land uses. Without Project traffic noise levels were compared to With Project traffic noise levels. The environmental baseline is the Without Project condition. The Without Project and With Project traffic noise levels in the Project vicinity were calculated using the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). The actual sound level at any receptor location is dependent upon such factors as the source -to-receptor distance and the presence of intervening structures (walls and buildings), barriers, and topography. The noise attenuating effects of changes in elevation, topography, and intervening structures were not included in the model. Therefore, the modeling effort is considered a worst-case representation of the roadway noise.
In general, a 3-dBA increase in traffic noise is barely perceptible to people, while a 5‐dBA increase is readily noticeable.
Vibration
Ground-borne vibration levels associated with construction activities for the Project were evaluated utilizing typical ground-borne vibration levels associated with construction equipment, obtained from FTA published data for construction equipment. Potent ial ground -borne vibration impacts related to building/structure damage and interference with sensitive existing operations were evaluated, Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-12
considering the distance from construction activities to nearby land uses and typically applied criteria for structural damage and human annoyance.
4.12.6 Thresholds of Significance
Based upon the criteria derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project normally will have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
▪ Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
▪ Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. ▪ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
4.12.7 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.12-1: Would the project generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and por table generators, can reach high levels.
During construction, exterior noise levels could affect the residential neighborhoods near the construction site. This evaluation conservatively reflects the results of analysis based on a sensitive receptor located 1,350 feet west of the project site; however, that use has since been demolished and the nearest sensitive receptor is located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest of the project site. Further, it is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the sensitive receptors.
Construction activities would include site preparation, grading/infrastructure improvements, building construction, paving, and architectural coating applications. Such activities would require dozers and tractors during site preparation; excavators, grade rs, dozers, scrapers, and tractors during grading/infrastructure improvements; cranes, forklifts, generators, tractors, and welders during building construction; pavers, rollers, and paving equipment during paving; and air compressors during architectural coating applications. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings.
Construction noise was calculated accounting for each piece of equipment’s usage factor, or fraction of Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-13
time that the equipment would be in use at full power over a specific period of time. 3 Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical noise levels associated with individual construction equipment when operating at full power are listed in Table 4.12-5: Typical Construction Noise Levels.
Table 4.12-5: Typical Construction Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA Lmax)
at 50 feet from Source
Air Compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Concrete Vibrator 76
Crane, Derrick 88
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
Impact Wrench 85
Jack Hammer 88
Loader 80
Paver 85
Pneumatic Tool 85
Pump 77
Roller 85
Saw 76
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Truck 84
Source: Appendix N
The FHWA RCNM was used to calculate the worst -case construction noise levels at nearby sensitive receptors surrounding the project site during construction. The modeled receptor locations represent the closest existing receiving land use to Project construction activities. Noise levels at other sensitive receptors surrounding the project site would be located further away and would experience lower construction noise levels than the closest receptors modeled.
The Municipal Code does not establish quantitative exterior construction noise standards. While the Municipal Code does not establish quantitative construction noise standards, this analysis conservatively uses the FTA’s threshold of 80 dBA (8 -hour L eq) for residential uses and 90 dBA (8 -hour L eq) for non - residential uses to evaluate construction noise impacts.4
3 United States Department of Transportation: Federal Transit Administration (2018). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit- noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed May 2024. 4 Ibid.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-14
The noise levels calculated in Table 4.12-6: Project Construction Noise Levels show estimated exterior noise levels for the worst -case construction noise scenario without accounting for attenuation from intervening barriers, structures, or topography. The nearest noise sensitive receptor to the project site is the residence located approximately 2,800 feet to the southwest and the nearest non -residential receptors are the industrial uses located adjacent to the west and east of the project site. Noise levels at other receptors in the Project vicinity would be located further away and would experience lower construction noise levels than the closest receptors modeled. Because the building construction and paving phases are anticipated to overlap, the equipment from overlapping phases have been comb ined.
All construction equipment for each individual phase was assumed to operate simultaneously to represent a worst-case noise scenario as construction activities would routinely be spread throughout the project site and would operate at different intervals.
As shown in Table 4.12-6, the worst -case scenario construction noise levels would not exceed the applicable FTA construction thresholds. The highest exterior noise level at the nearest residential receptor would occur during the overlap of the building construction and paving pha ses and would be 58.5 dBA which is below the FTA’s 80 dBA threshold. Additionally, the highest exterior noise level at non-residential (industrial) receptors would also occur during the building construction/paving overlap and would be 75.5 dBA which is below the FTA’s 90 dBA threshold. Although sensitive uses may be exposed to elevated noise levels during Project construction, these noise levels would be acoustically dispersed throughout the project site and not concentrated in one area near surrounding sensitive uses. Therefore, per the methodology described in the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (September 2018), distances are measured from the nearby buildings to the center of the project site.
The City has set restrictions on construction hours to control noise impacts from construction activities.
Municipal Code Section 9.50.070 states that construction activities may only take place between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays from October 1 through April 30 and shall only occur between 6:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays from May 1 through September 30. It is noted that nighttime construction would be limited to brief periods of construction activity and would not endure during the entire construction period. Although the Municipal Code limits the hours of construction, it does not provide specific noise level performance standards for construction. By following the City’s standards, construction noise Impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-15
Table 4.12-6: Project Construction Noise Levels
Construction Phase Land Use
Receptor Location
Noise
Threshold
(dBA Leq)2 Exceeded? Direction
Distance to
Center of
Site (feet)1
Worst Case
Modeled
Exterior
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Site Preparation
Residential West 2,130 55.0 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial West 300 72.1 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial East 400 69.6 90 No
Grading
Residential South 2,130 55.6 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial North 300 72.7 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial South 400 70.2 90 No
Building Construction
Residential South 2,130 56.8 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial North 300 73.8 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial South 400 71.3 90 No
Paving
Residential South 2,130 53.5 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial North 300 70.6 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial South 400 68.1 90 No
Architectural Coating
Residential South 2,130 41.1 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial North 300 58.2 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial South 400 55.7 90 No
Building
Construction/Paving
Residential South 2,130 58.5 80 No
Commercial/
Industrial North 300 75.5 90 No
Commercial/
Industrial South 400 73.0 90 No
1. Per the methodology described in the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (September 2018), distances are measured from the nearby buildings to the center of the Project construction site. The closest residential use is now 2,800 feet from the project site and the results shown in the table are conservatively based on the previous residential use (now demolished) that was closer.
2. The City does not have a quantitative noise threshold for construction and only limits the hours of the construction activities. Therefore, FTA’s construction noise threshold are conservatively used for this analysis (FTA, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018).
Source: Appendix N
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-16
Operations
Implementation of the Project would create new sources of noise in the Project area. The major noise sources associated with the Project that would potentially impact existing and future nearby residences include the following:
▪ Mechanical equipment;
▪ Slow moving trucks on the Project site, approaching and leaving the loading areas; ▪ Activities at the loading areas (i.e., maneuvering and idling trucks, equipment noise); ▪ Parking areas (i.e., car door slamming, car radios, engine start-up, and car pass-by); and ▪ Off-site traffic.
Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical equipment (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) typically generates noise levels of approximately 52 dBA at 50 feet. HVAC units would be installed on the roof of the proposed buildings. Sound levels decrease by 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source.
The nearest residential sensitive receptor (residential use to the southwest) would be located as close as 2,800 feet from the HVAC equipment (the nearest proposed building) at the project site. At this distance, mechanical equipment noise levels would be approximately 20.4 dBA, which is well below the City’s normally acceptable residential exterior noise standard (60 dBA). Additionally, the adjacent industrial receptor to the east would be located as close as 160 feet from the HVAC equipment at the project site.
At this distance, mechanical equipment noise levels would be approximately 41.9 dBA, which is well below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard (75 dBA) for industrial use. Operation of mechanical equipment would not increase ambient noise levels beyond the acceptable compatible land use noise levels. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to mechanical equipment noise levels.
Truck and Loading Dock Noise
During loading and unloading activities, noise would be generated by the trucks’ diesel engines, exhaust systems, and brakes during low gear shifting/braking activities; backing up toward the docks; dropping down the dock ramps; and maneuvering away from t he docks. Loading/unloading activities would occur throughout the project site.
Typically, heavy truck and loading dock operations generate a noise level of 68 dBA at a distance of 30 feet. The closest residential sensitive receptor at the time of the noise analysis was the single -family residence located approximately 1,350 feet west of the project site. That single family residence has since been demolished and the closest sensitive receptor is located approximately 2,800 feet southwest of the project site. The analysis conservatively reflects the impacts to a residence located 1,3 50 feet from the project site. At this distance, heavy truck and loading dock noise levels would be 32.4 dBA, which would not exceed the City’s normally acceptable residential exterior noise standard (60 dBA). Additionally, an industrial use would be located approximately 100 feet east of the loading area of the terminal building.
At this distance, heavy truck and loading dock noise levels would be approximately 57.3 dBA, which is well below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard (75 dBA) for industrial use. Noise levels Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-17
associated with trucks and loading/unloading activities would not exceed the City’s standards and impacts would be less than significant.
Back-Up Alarms
Medium and heavy-duty trucks reversing into loading docks would produce noise from back -up alarms.
Back-up alarms produce a typical volume of 97 dBA at one meter (3.28 feet) from the source. The property line of the nearest residential sensitive receptor, at the time of this analysis was approximately 1,350 feet west of the project site. At this distance, exterior noise levels from back-up alarms would be approximately
44.7 dBA, which is below the City’s normally acceptable residential exterior noise standa rd (60 dBA) .
Additionally, the industrial use to the east would be located approximately 100 feet east of the truck terminal building where trucks could be reversing and maneuvering. At this distance, exterior noise levels from back -up beepers would be approximately 67.3 dBA, which is well below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard (75 dBA) for industrial use. Moreover, the closest sensitive receptor is located is located approximately 2,800 feet southwest of the project site, further from the project site than is reflected in the analysis. Therefore, back-up alarm noise impacts would be less than significant.
Parking Noise
The Project would provide 149 surface parking spaces for passenger vehicles. Traffic associated with parking lots is typically not of sufficient volume to exceed community noise standards, which are based on a time-averaged scale such as the CNEL scale. The instantaneous maximum sound levels generated by a car door slamming, engine starting up, and car pass-bys range from 60 to 63 dBA at 50 feet and may be an annoyance to adjacent noise -sensitive receptors . It should be noted that parking lot noises are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise standards in the hourly Leq metric, which are averaged over the entire duration of a time period.
Actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower than the reference levels identified above. Parking lot noise would occur within the surface parking lot on-site. It is also noted that parking lot noise occurs at the project site and surrounding commercial/industrial uses under existing conditions. Parking lot noise would be consistent with the existing noise in the vicinity and would be partially masked by background noise from traffic along surrounding roadways. The p assenger vehicle parking area would be located approximately 2,800 feet from the residential sensitive receptor to the southwest. Noise attenuation based strictly on distance and not taking into account intervening barriers or structures would reduce parking lot noise to 33.5 dBA, w hich is below the City’s normally acceptable residential exterior noise standard (60 dBA). Additionally, the industrial use to the east of the project site would be located approximately 450 feet from the passenger vehicle parking area. 5 At this distance, parking lot exterior noise levels would be approximately 37.5 dBA, which is below the City’s normally acceptable exterior noise standard (75 dBA) for industrial uses. Noise associated with parking lot activities is not anticipated to exceed the City’s noise standards during operation. Therefore, noise impacts from parking lots would be less than significant.
5 The boundary of the industrial use to the east of the Project site is adjacent to the proposed passenger vehicle parking area.
However, this use is a concrete supplier the area adjacent to the Project site is open, unoccupiable space. The office building is located approximately 940 feet to the north.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-18
Off-Site Traffic Noise
The Project would result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways from daily activities, thus increasing vehicular noise in the vicinity of existing and proposed land uses. Based on the Traffic Study for the 249 Santa Ana Avenue Truck Terminal Project in the City of Rialto ( Traffic Study) (Appendix O), typical daily activities are forecast to generate 951 daily trips, consisting of 377 daily passenger vehicle trips and 574 daily truck trips. In general, traffic noise level increases of less than 3 dBA is barely perceptible to people, while a 5‐dBA increase is readily noticeable. Generally, traffic volumes on Project area roadways would have to approximately double for the resulting traffic noise levels to increase by 3 dBA. Therefore, permanent increases in ambient noise levels of less than 3 dBA are considered to be less than significant.
Traffic noise levels for roadways primarily affected by the Project were calculated using the FHWA’s Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). Traffic noise modeling was conducted for conditions with and without the Project, based on traffic volumes obtained from the Traffic Study. The calculated traffic noise levels for the “Opening Year Without Project” and “Opening Year With Project” scenarios are compared in Table 4.12-7: Opening Year Traffic Noise Levels . As depicted in Table 4.12 -7, under the “Opening Year Without Project” scenario, noise levels would range from approximately 58.1 dBA to 72.7 dBA, with the highest noise levels occurring along South Riverside Avenue from the I-10 eastbound ramps to Slover Avenue. The “Opening Year With Project” scenario noise levels would range from approximately
65.3 dBA to 72.7 dBA, with the highest noise levels also occurring along South Riverside Avenue from the I-10 eastbound ramps to Slover Avenue.
Table 4.12-7: Opening Year Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Opening Year
Without Project
Opening Year
With Project
Change
Significant
Impacts ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet
from
Roadway
Centerline ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet
from
Roadway
Centerline
South Riverside Avenue
I-10 EB Ramps to Slover Avenue 40,163 72.7 35,455 72.7 0.0 No Slover Avenue to East Santa Ana
Avenue 33,303 71.8 29,135 71.9 0.1 No
East Santa Avenue to Jurupa
Avenue 24,409 70.5 24,505 70.5 0.0 No
East Santa Ana Avenue
East of South Riverside Avenue 2,106 58.1 2,415 65.3 7.2 No ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = community noise equivalent level.
Source: Appendix N
As depicted in Table 4.12-7, the “Opening Year With Project” scenario traffic noise levels would not exceed the 3.0 dBA increase significance threshold along South Riverside Avenue. Traffic noise increases along East Santa Ana Avenue east of South Riverside Avenue would result in an approximate 7.2 dBA increase.
However, there are no sensitive receptors located along this roadway segment and the With Project noise level would remain within acceptable noise levels for industrial uses. As a result, Project impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-19
As discussed above, the Project would result in less than significant operational and construction noise impacts. However, the Project would incorporate Agua Mansa Specific Plan EIR Noise Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 to further reduce noise impacts. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures : Environmental Health and Hazards
Mitigation Measure 2: Interior noise levels in residential and office structures shall not exceed 45 dBA.
Mitigation Measure 3: Where necessary, noise retardant measures should be incorporated into the design of industrial structures. Such measures include, but are not limited to, berms, noise attenuation walls, building insulation and the limitation of processing/manufacturing activities to enclosed buildings.
Mitigation Measure 4: The noise standards promulgated by the local jurisdictions shall be adhered to.
Each proposed use shall be reviewed for noise generation potential prior to approval.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.12-2: Would the project expose persons to or generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Upon completion of construction, the Project would not be a source of groundborne vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the Project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction o n the project site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved.
The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage. Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cos metic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any cosmetic damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibration generated by construction equipment. The City does not provide numerical vibration standards for construction activities. Therefore, this impact discussion uses the FTA and Caltrans standard of 0.20 in/sec PPV with respect to the prevention of structural damage for normal buildings and human annoyance.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-20
The FTA has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations. Table 4.12-8:
Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels, lists vibration levels for typical construction equipment.
It should be noted that the Project would not require the use of pile drivers. Groundborne vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. As indicated in Table 4.12-8, based on FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during Project construction range from
0.003 to 0.210 in/sec PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity.
Table 4.12-8: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment
Peak Particle Velocity
at 25 Feet (in/sec)
Peak Particle Velocity
At 60 Feet (in/sec)1
Vibratory Roller 0.210 0.056
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.024
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.020
Jackhammer 0.035 0.009
Small Bulldozer/Tractors 0.003 0.001
Notes:
1. Calculated using the following formula: PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5 where: PPVequip = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance PPVref = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Source: Appendix N
The nearest structures to any construction activity are the industrial buildings located approximately 60 feet to the east. Vibration velocities from construction equipment would range from 0.001 to 0.056 in/sec PPV at the nearest structure, which would not exceed the structural damage or human annoyance criteria of 0.2 in/sec PPV; refer to Table 4.12-8. It is also acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the nearest structure or sensitive receptor. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with the Project would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.12-3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not be en adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-21
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The public airport nearest to the project site is the San Bernardino International Airport, located approximately 6.3 miles to the northeast. As such, the Project would not be located within two miles of a public airport or within an airport land use plan. Additionally, there are no private airstrips located within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive airport- or airstrip-related noise levels and no impact would occur.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation is applicable to the Project.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.12.8 Cumulative Noise Impacts
For purposes of noise resource impact analysis, cumulative impacts are considered for cumulative development according to the related Projects; see Table 4.0-1: Cumulative Projects List. Construction- related noise is a localized activity and would only affect land uses that are immediately adjacent to the construction areas due to the fact that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source.
Noise by definition is a localized phenomenon, and drastically reduces as distance from the source increases. Cumulative noise impacts involve development of the Project in combination with ambient growth and other related development projects. As noise le vels decrease as distance from the source increases, only projects in the nearby area could combine with the Project to potentially result in cumulative noise impacts.
Cumulative Construction Noise
The Project’s construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Construction noise would be periodic and temporary noise impacts that would cease upon completion of construction. The Project would contrib ute to other proximate construction project noise impacts if construction activities were conducted concurrently. However, based on the noise analysis above, the Project’s construction -related noise impacts would be less than significant following the Municipal Code.
Construction activities at other planned and approved projects near the project site would be required to comply with applicable City rules related to noise and would take place during daytime hours on the days permitted by the applicable Municipal Code, and projects requiring discretionary City approvals would be required to evaluate construction noise impacts, comply with the City’s standard conditions of approval, and implement mitigation, if necessary, to minimize noise impacts. Construction noise impac ts are by Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-22
nature localized. Based on the fact that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts would be limited to the project site and vicinity. Therefore, Project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts, assuming such a cumulative impact existed, and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative Operational Noise
Cumulative noise impacts describe how much noise levels are projected to increase over existing conditions with the development of the Project and other foreseeable projects. Cumulative noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of the Project -generated traffic on local roadways in combination with cumulative projects in the vicinity. However, noise from generators and other stationary sources could also generate cumulative noise levels.
Cumulative Stationary Noise
As discussed above, impacts from the Project’s operational stationary noise would be less than significant.
Due to site distance, intervening land uses, and the fact that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts from on-site activities and other stationary sources would be limited to the project site and vicinity. No known past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects would compound or increase the operational noise levels generated by the Project. Thus, cumulative operational noise impacts from related projects, in conjunction with Project-specific noise impacts, would not be cumulatively significant.
Cumulative Traffic Noise
The cumulative mobile noise analysis is conducted in a two-step process. First, the combined effects from both the Project and other projects are compared. Second, for combined effects that are determined to be cumulatively significant, the Project’s incre mental effects are then analyzed. A project’s contribution to a cumulative traffic noise increase would be considered significant when the combined effect exceeds perception level (i.e., auditory level increase) threshold. The combined effect compares the “Cumulative With Project” condition to “Existing” conditions. This comparison accounts for the traffic noise increase generated by the Project combined with the traffic noise increase generated by cumulative projects. The following criteria is used to evaluate the combined effect of the cumulative noise increase. ▪ Combined Effect. The cumulative with Project noise level (“Cumulative With Project”) would cause a significant cumulative impact if a 3.0 dB increase over “Existing” conditions occurs and the resulting noise level exceeds the applicable exterior standard at a sensitive use.
Although there may be a significant noise increase due to the Project in combination with identified cumulative projects (combined effects), it must also be demonstrated that the Project has an incremental effect. In other words, a significant portion of the noise increase must be due to the Project. The following criteria have been utilized to evaluate the incremental effect of the cumulative noise increase. ▪ Incremental Effects. The “Cumulative With Project” causes a 1.0 dBA increase in noise over the “Cumulative Without Project” noise level.
A significant impact would result only if both the combined and incremental effects criteria have been exceeded and if noise levels exceed acceptable noise levels. Noise by definition is a localized phenomenon and reduces as distance from the source increa ses. Consequently, only the Project and growth due to Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-23
occur in the general area would contribute to cumulative noise impacts. Table 4.12-9: Cumulative Plus Project Buildout Conditions Traffic Noise Levels identifies the traffic noise effects along roadway segments in the vicinity of the Project site for “Existing,” “Cumulative Without Project,” and “Cumulative With Project,” conditions, and net cumulative impacts.
Table 4.12-9: Cumulative Plus Project Buildout Conditions Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment
CNEL @ 100 feet from Centerline
Combined
Effects
Incremental
Effects
Cumulatively
Significant
Impact? Existing
Cumulative
Without
Project
Cumulative
With
Project
dBA
Difference:
Existing and
Cumulative
With Project
dBA
Difference:
Cumulative
Without and
With Project
South Riverside Avenue
I-10 EB Ramps to
Slover Avenue 71.9 72.6 73.2 1.3 0.6 No
Slover Avenue to
East Santa Ana
Avenue
71.1 71.6 72.3 1.2 0.7 No
East Santa Avenue to
Jurupa Avenue 70.4 70.8 70.8 0.4 0.0 No
East Santa Ana Avenue
East of South
Riverside Avenue 56.4 58.5 65.2 8.8 6.7 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = day-night noise level
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Appendix N
First, it must be determined whether the “Cumulative With Project” 3.0 dB increase above existing conditions (Combined Effects) is exceeded. Next, under the Incremental Effects criteria, cumulative noise impacts are defined by determining if the forecast ambient (“Cumulative Without Project”) noise level is increased by 1.0 dB or more. Although the Combined Effects criteria (3.0 dBA) and the Incremental Effects criteria (1.0 dB) is exceeded along East Santa Ana Avenue east of South Riverside Avenue, cumulative noise levels would remain within acceptable noise levels for industrial uses; refer to Table 4.12-9. Thus, the Project, in combination with cumulative background traffic noise levels, would result in a less than significant cumulative impact. The Project’s contribution to traffic noise would not be cumulatively considerable.
4.12.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would not result in significant impacts associated with noise. However, the Project would incorporate Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Noise Mitigation Measures 1 through 4 to further reduce potential noise impacts. Implementation of the Project would result in less than significant noise impacts.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.12
Draft Environmental Impact Report Noise
City of Rialto 4.12-24
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-1
4.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
4.13.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provides contextual background information on potential impacts on population growth and housing (either directly or indirectly) resulting from implementation of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) within the City of Rialto (City). The analysis is based on data in the City of Rialto General Plan and available from the California Department of Finance (DOF) and Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG).
4.13.2 Regulatory Setting
State Regulations
California Housing Element Law
The Housing Element is one of the seven General Plan elements that are mandated by the State of California (California Government Code §§65580 to 65589.8). California State law requires that the Housing Element provides “an identification and analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing” (Government Code §65580).
State law requires that each city and county identify and analyze existing and forecasted housing needs within its jurisdiction and prepare goals, policies, and programs to further the development, improvement, and preservation of housing for all economic segments of the community, commensurate with local housing needs.
Regional and Local Regulations
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAG is a Joint Powers Agency established under Sections 6502 et seq. of the California Government Code.
SCAG is designated as a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the six-county region of San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Ventura, Orange, Riverside, and Imperial counties. The region encompasses a population exceeding 18 million persons in an area comprised of more than 38,000 square miles. As the designated MPO, SCAG is the responsible agency for developing and adopting regional housing, population, and employment growth forecasts for local governments. Rialto is a member of the SCAG Regional Council District 8 which also includes the City of Fontana.
SCAG’s demographic data is developed to enable the proper planning of infrastructure and facilities to adequately meet the needs of anticipated growth in the region. In September 2020, SCAG adopted Connect SoCal, its 2020 - 2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).
Major themes in the RTP/SCS include integrating strategies for land use and transportation; striving for sustainability; protecting and preserving existing transportation infrastructure; increase capacity through improved systems managements; providing more transportation choices; leveraging technology; responding to demographic and housing market changes; supporting commerce, economic growth and opportunity; promoting the links between public health, environmental protection and economic opportunity; and incorporating the principles of social equity and environmental justice into the plan.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-2
Growth forecasts contained in the RTP/SCS for San Bernardino County and the City are used as the basis of analysis for housing, population and employment forecasts in this section.
Regional Housing Needs Assessment
The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is an assessment process performed periodically as part of General Plan Housing Element updates at the local level. The RHNA process begins with the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s projection of future statewide housing growth need, and the apportionment of this need to regional Council of Governments (COGs) throughout the State. SCAG is the COG responsible for developing ”fair share” allocation methodology to distribute the region’s assigned share of statewide need to cities and counties in the region.1 California Government Code Section 65583 sets forth the specific content requirements of a jurisdiction’s Housing Element.
Included in these requirements are obligations on the part of local jurisdictions to provide their “fair share” of regional housing needs (its RHNA allocation) at all income levels. Regional growth needs are defined as the number of units that would have to be added in each jurisdiction to accommodate the forecasted number of households, as well as the number of units that need to be added to compensate for anticipated demolitions and changes to achieve an ideal vacancy rate. SCAG defines a “household” as an occupied dwelling unit.
The current RHNA 6th Cycle planning period is 2021-2029. The housing construction need is determined for four broad household income categories: very low (households making less than 50 percent of area median income), low (50 to 80 percent of area median income), moderate (80 to 120 percent of area median income), and above moderate (more than 120 percent of area median income). The intent of the future needs allocation by income groups is to relieve the undue concentrations of very low-income and low-income households in a single jurisdiction and to help allocate resources in a fair and equitable manner.2 For the 2021-2029 planning period, the City of Rialto is required to meet the RHNA number of 8,272 housing units. The Housing Element is required to identify potential candidate housing sites by income category to meet the City’s RHNA allocation.
Rialto General Plan 2010
Project relevant City of Rialto General Plan (General Plan) policies for population and housing are addressed below. Where inconsistencies exist, if any, they are addressed in the respective impact analysis.
Goal 6 Maintain and improve the quality of existing housing and neighborhoods in Rialto.
Policy 6-1.5 Preserve the existing character and quality of established single-family neighborhoods and communities.
4.13.3 Environmental Setting
Existing Regional and Local Population
Table 4.13-1: Population Projections for San Bernardino County and City of Rialto, identifies the increase of population growth within the County of San Bernadino and the City of Rialto, between 2018 and 2024.
1 SCAG. (2021). 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocation Methodology. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/6th-cycle-rhna-proposed-final-allocation-plan.pdf?1614911196.
Accessed October 2023.
2 Ibid.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-3
According to the DOF’s Cities, Counties, and State Population Estimates with Annual Percent Change (2023) data and SCAG’s 2020 – 2045 RTP/SCS, San Bernardino County currently has a population of approximately 2,182,056 residents. As of 2023, the City of Rialto has a population of approximately 102,985 residents.
Table 4.13-1: Population Projections for San Bernardino County and City of Rialto Location
2018
Population1
2023
Population2
2035
Population3
2040
Population3
2045
Population4
Projected
population
increase
(2023-2045)
%
Change
San Bernardino
County 2,150,017 2,182,056 2,637,400 2,731,300 2,815,000 632,944 29% City of Rialto 102,373 102,985 111,400 112,000 139,100 36115 35%
1. California Department of Finance (DOF). (2021). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011- 2020. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e5-2010-2020/.Accessed January 2024.
2. DOF. (2023). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2020-2023. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020- 2023/. Accessed January 2024.
3. SCAG. (2020a). 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/2016_2040rtpscs_finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction.pdf?1605576071.Accessed. October 2023.
4. SCAG. (2020b). Connect SoCal: Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. Accessed October 2023.
Existing Regional and Local Housing
According to the DOF’s City/County Population and Housing Estimates data, San Bernardino County and the City of Rialto have seen an increase in total and occupied housing units and a decrease in housing vacancy and population household numbers. Table 4.13-2: Housing for San Bernardino County and the City of Rialto identifies the total housing units (Total/Occupied) plus vacancy rate and person per household.
Table 4.13-2: Housing for San Bernardino County and the City of Rialto Location
Total Units Occupied Units Vacancy Rate
Persons/
Household
2018 2023 2018 2023 2018 2023 2018 2023
San Bernardino
County 719,911 747,011 638,633 681,556 11.3% 8.8% 3.31 3.15 City of Rialto 27,460 28,230 25,662 27,560 6.5% 2.4% 3.97 3.72
1. DOF. (2023). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011-2023, with 2020 Benchmark.
Retrieved from: Retrieved from: https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/. Accessed October 2023.
2. DOF. (2011). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011-2020, with 2010 Benchmark.
Retrieved from: Retrieved from: https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-4
City of Rialto
SCAG determines total housing needs for each community in Southern California based on three general factors: (1) the number of housing units needed to accommodate future population and employment growth; (2) the number of additional units needed to allow for housing vacancies; and (3) the number of very low, low, moderate, and above moderate-income units needed in the community. Additional factors used to determine the RHNA include tenure, the average rate of units needed to replace housing units demolished, and other factors. Based on DOF data (2023), the City has 28,230 housing units with an average of 3.72 persons per household. The vacancy rate was 2.4 percent. There is no existing residential development on the project site.
Existing Regional and Local Employment
Table 4.13-3: Labor Force Data for San Bernardino County and the City of Rialto identifies the total labor force and employment and unemployment rates for the County and the City for 2021 and 2023. Because Covid-19 resulted in decreased employment for both the County and the City, statistical information for 2020 was not used. According to the State of California Employment Development Department (EDD), between 2021 and 2023, the labor force and the number of employed persons increased in both the County and the City of Rialto.
Table 4.13-3: Labor Force Data for San Bernardino County and the City of Rialto Location
Labor Force Employment Unemployment Employment
Change 2021 2023 2021 2023 2021 2023
San Bernardino County 992,200 999,200 918,600 951,000 73,600 48,200 35% City of Rialto 46,300 46,200 42,300 43,800 4,000 2,400 35% Source: California Employment Development Department (2023). Labor Force and Unemployment Rate For Cities and Counties. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-census-areas.html. Accessed October 2023.
Jobs to Housing Balance
The economic analysis conducted for SCAG’s RTP/SCS shows that 168,400 new jobs were supported by transportation investments and 264,500 new jobs were created by improved competitiveness.
In terms of the jobs housing balance, the SCAG Rialto 2019 Local Profiles Report identified that 7.6 percent of Rialto residents work within the City, while 92.4 percent commute to places of employment outside the City. The RTP/SCS aims to balance the region’s future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. Consistent with the strategies identified in the RTP/SCS, the increased job opportunities in the City resulting from implementation of the Project would minimize commutes for employees living within the City.
4.13.4 Methodology
The Project is evaluated against the significance criteria below, as the basis for determining the impact’s level of significance concerning population and housing. In addition, this analysis considers the existing regulatory framework (i.e., laws and standards) that avoid or reduce the potentially significant environmental impact. Where significant impacts remain despite compliance with the regulatory framework, feasible mitigation measures are recommended, to avoid or reduce the Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-5
4.13.5 Thresholds of Significance
State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G has been used as significance criteria in this section. An impact of a project could be considered significant and may require mitigation if it meets one of the following criteria:
Would 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).
Would displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
4.13.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.13-1: Would the project 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)? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The project site is consistent with the General Industrial land use designation of the General Plan and the Heavy Industrial (H IND) land use designation within the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan). The Project proposes the construction of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop, that would employ an estimated 140 employees. As discussed above, approximately 92.4 percent of Rialto residents travel outside of the City for work. Consistent with the strategies identified in the RTP/SCS, the increased job opportunities in the City resulting from implementation of the Project would minimize commutes for employees living within the City. As the population trends upward (Table 4.13-1), residents within the City would be able to fill those positions. Because there is a surplus of homes in the City (Table
4.13-2), the Project would not require the construction of additional residential units that could induce substantial unplanned population growth not analyzed with the City’s General Plan Housing Element. It is also reasonable to assume that many employees may already reside in the City and local region and commute to the project site.
The Project would include off-site improvements to East Santa Ana Avenue to underground existing aboveground utilities along the project site frontage. However, these improvements would not provide an extension of infrastructure that would directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth on or near the project site. Additionally, the Project does not include development of any housing. Therefore, the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population. Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-6
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.13-2: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Level of Significance: No Impact
The project site consists of disturbed land as a result of previous industrial uses on-site; the project site does not feature existing housing. Therefore, construction and operations of the Project would not create an impact that would displace a substantial amount of people or housing. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.13.7 Cumulative Impacts
Potential cumulative population and housing impacts are assessed relative to the Specific Plan, General Plan, and regional plans, including SCAG’s Connect SoCal 2020-2045 RTP/SCS population, housing, and employment projections. SCAG’s regional growth projections reflect recent and past trends, key demographic and economic assumptions and include local and regional policies. Local jurisdictions participate in the growth forecast development process.
Cumulative impacts would occur if development on the project site, together with other cumulative projects would induce substantial unplanned population growth or displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. As discussed above, the Project is consistent with the General Industrial land use designation and the (H IND) zoning designation within the Specific Plan, and therefore does not conflict with the City’s General Plan or the City’s Housing Element. Further, the Project would not result in significant direct or indirect permanent or temporary impacts related to population or housing because the Project is consistent with the City’s land use and zoning designation, there is an existing housing surplus in the City, and the off-site improvements that would be implemented as a part of the Project would not extend existing infrastructure that would directly or indirectly induce unplanned population growth on or near the project site. Other projects under development would also be subject to project- level review and project-specific measures would be required, as needed, to reduce significant impacts.
Therefore, the Project would not result in incremental significant effects to population or housing that Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-7
could be compounded or increased when considered together with similar effects from other cumulative present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Given the Project’s consistency, as well as the potential for other projects to be generally consistent with the City’s population and housing policies, the Project would not result in significant population and housing impacts, and therefore, taken with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects, Project impacts are not considered cumulatively considerable and no mitigation is required.
4.13.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would not result in significant impacts associated with population and housing. No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.13
Draft Environmental Impact Report Population and Housing
City of Rialto 4.13-8
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-1
4.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
4.14.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describes existing public services for the Project area and identifies and addresses potential impacts of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project), related to fire and police protection services provided by the City of Rialto (City).
4.14.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA)
In March 2003, FEMA became part of the United States Department of Homeland Security. FEMA's continuing mission is to lead the effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident. FEMA also initiates proactive mitigation activities, trains first responders, and manages the National Flood Insurance Program and the United States Fire Administration.
Federal Fire Safety Act (FFSA)
The 1992 Federal Fire Safety Act (FFSA) is different from other laws affecting fire safety as the law applies to federal operations, and there is no requirement for local action unless a private building owner leases space to the federal government. The FFSA requires federal agencies to provide sprinkler protection in any building, whether owned or leased by the federal government, that has at least 25 federal employees during the course of their employment.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
OSHA's mission is to assure safe and healthy working conditions for workers through enforcing standards and providing training and educational tools. The agency is also charged with enforcing a variety of whistleblower statutes and regulations.
OSHA: Emergency Action Plan. Developments are required under OSHA standards to prepare an emergency action plan (EAP) kept in the workplace that provides procedures for reporting a fire or other emergency, emergency evacuation, including type of evacuation and exit route assignments, and to be followed by all employees. Employers are required to have and maintain an employee alarm system, provide training, and review the emergency action plan with each employee covered by the plan.
OSHA: Fire Prevention Plan. Developments are required under OSHA standards to prepare a fire prevention plan that at minimum must include procedures to control accumulations of flammable and combustible waste materials, and for regular maintenance of safeguards installed on heat-producing equipment to prevent the accidental ignition of combustible materials. Furthermore, the fire prevention plan must contain the names and/or job titles of employees responsible for maintaining equipment to prevent or control sources of ignition or fires, and for the control of fuel source hazards.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-2
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA) of 2000 is a federal law that amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act). The DMA was signed into law on October 30, 2000, after being introduced by Representative Tillie Fowler (R-FL-4) on February 11, 1999. The DMA's goals include reducing injuries, loss of life, and property damage; helping communities understand and reduce their vulnerability to natural hazards; using a more proactive planning process; and developing more effective hazard mitigation plans.
State Regulations
California Public Resources Code 4290 and 4291
These regulations, which implement minimum fire safety standards related to defensible space, apply to the perimeters and access to all commercial, industrial, and residential building construction within a State Responsibility Area (approved after January 1, 1991), and within lands classified and designated as Very High Fire Hazard severity Zone (VHFHSZ) (after July 1, 2021). The person(s) who control, lease, maintain, operate, or own said building in, upon, or adjoining a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, brush-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable materials is required to preserve a defensible space of 100 feet from the perimeter of the building. The regulations shall include the following:
1. Road standards for fire equipment access.
2. Standards for signs identifying streets, roads, and buildings.
3. Minimum private water supply reserves for emergency fire use.
4. Fuel breaks and greenbelts.
These regulations do not supersede local regulations which equal or exceed minimum regulations adopted by the state.
California Building Code
The State of California provides a minimum standard for building design through the California Building Code (CBC), which is located in Part 2 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The CBC is based on the International Building Code but has been modified for California conditions. It is generally adopted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, subject to further modification based on local conditions.
Industrial buildings are plan checked by local city and county building officials for compliance with the CBC. Typical fire safety requirements of the CBC include the installation of sprinklers in all industrial buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildfire hazard areas.
California Fire Code
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 9 (California Fire Code) contains regulations for the construction and maintenance of buildings, the use of premises, and the management of Wildland-Urban Interface areas, among other issues. The California Fire Code (CFC) is updated every three years by the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-3
California Building Standards Commission and was last updated in 2022 (effective January 1, 2023). The CFC sets forth regulations regarding building standards, fire protection and notification systems, fire protection devices such as fire extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building standards, and fire suppression training. It contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings.
Topics addressed in the code also include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.
Emergency Mutual Aid Agreements
The Emergency Mutual Aid Agreements (EMAA) system is a collaborative effort between city and county emergency managers in the Office of Emergency Services (OES) in the coastal, southern, and inland regions of the state. EMAA provides service in the emergency response and recovery efforts at the Southern Regional Emergency Operations Center, local Emergency Operations Centers, the Disaster Field Office, and community service centers. The purpose of EMAA is to support disaster operations in affected jurisdictions by providing professional emergency management personnel. In accordance with the EMAA, local and State emergency managers have responded in support of each other under a variety of plans and procedures. San Bernardino County, including the City of Rialto, is in Region VI, which also includes San Diego, Imperial, Inyo, Mono, and Riverside counties.
California Vehicle Code
The California Vehicle Code is the section of the California Codes which contains almost all statutes relating to the operation, ownership and registration of vehicles. The Vehicle Code also contains statutes concerning the California Department of Motor Vehicles and the California Highway Patrol.
California Senate Bill 50 and California Government Code (Section 65995(b)) and Education Code (Section 17620)
California Senate Bill (SB) 50 places limitations on the power of local governments to require mitigation of school facilities by developers. Under the provisions of SB 50, school districts can collect fees to offset the cost of expanding school capacity, which becomes necessary as development occurs. These fees are determined based on the square footage of proposed uses. As a part of SB 50, school districts must base their long-term facilities needs and costs on long-term population growth in order to qualify for this source of funding. Payment of statutory school fees is deemed to be adequate mitigation of school impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Prior to SB 50, case law allowed cities to consider and impose conditions to mitigate impacts of new development on school facilities.
SB 50 amended California Government Code (CGC) Section 65995, which contains limitations on Education Code Section 17620, the statute that authorizes school districts to assess development fees within school district boundaries. CGC Section 65995(b)(3) requires the maximum square footage assessment for development to be increased every two years, according to inflation adjustments. Currently, the maximum impact fees allowed by SB 50 are as follows:
In the case of residential construction, one dollar and ninety-three cents ($1.93) per square foot of assessable space.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-4
In the case of any commercial or industrial construction, thirty-one cents ($0.31) per square foot of chargeable covered and enclosed space. (Gov. Code Section 65995, subd. (b)).
According to CGC Section 65995(3)(h), the payment of statutory fees is “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization...on the provision of adequate school facilities.” The school district is responsible for implementing the specific methods for mitigating school impacts under the CGC.
California State Assembly Bill 2926: Facilities Act of 1986 To assist in providing school facilities to serve students generated by new development, Assembly Bill (AB) 2926 was enacted in 1986 and authorizes a levy of impact fees on new residential, commercial, and industrial development. The bill was expanded and revised in 1987 through the passage of AB 1600, which added Section 66000 et seq. to the CGC. Under this statute, payment of school impact fees by developers serves as CEQA mitigation to satisfy the impact of development on school facilities.
Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code (Sections 66000 through 66008)) Enacted as AB 1600, the Mitigation Fee Act requires a local agency, such as the City of Rialto, establishing, increasing, or imposing an impact fee as a condition of development to identify the purpose of the fee and the use to which the fee is to be put. The agency must also demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged, and between the fee and the type of development project on which it is to be levied. This Act became enforceable on January 1, 1989.
California State Assembly Bill 97
Approved in July 2013, AB 97 revises existing regulations related to financing for public schools, by requiring state funding for county superintendents and charter schools that previously received a general- purpose entitlement. AB 97 authorizes local educational agencies to spend, for any local educational purpose, the funds previously required to be spent for specified categorical education programs, including, among others, programs for teacher training and class size reduction.
Section 35 of Article XIII of the California Constitution subdivision (a)(2) Section 35 of Article XIII of the California Constitution subdivision (a)(2) identifies that the protection of the public safety is the first responsibility of local government and local officials have an obligation to give priority to the provision of adequate public safety services.
Local Regulations
Rialto General Plan 2010
The City of Rialto developed and adopted the City of Rialto General Plan (General Plan) to include goals, policies and actions that, when implemented, provide the vision and framework for the physical development of the City. The Safety and Noise chapter of the General Plan describes hazards that exist in the City and the measures that the City is taking to address them.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-5
Goal 5-3 Increase the City’s fire protection capabilities, and implement fire prevention regulations and standards that minimize potential fire hazards and fire losses.
Policy 5-3.1 Provide for fire personnel, equipment, and fire stations to have adequate and appropriate resources to meet the needs and serve all areas of Rialto.
Policy 5-3.3 Require that development be phased in relation to the City’s ability to provide an adequate level of fire protection, as per the City standards.
Policy 5-3.4 Require that all site plans, subdivision plans, and building plans be reviewed by the Fire Department to ensure compliance with appropriate fire regulations.
Policy 5-3.7 Add service level capability and infrastructure to meet increasing demand of new development.
Goal 5-8 Provide effective and comprehensive policing services that meet the safety needs of Rialto.
Policy 5-8.1 Provide timely responses to emergency and non-emergency call for service 24 hours a day, per the City standards.
Policy 5-8.3 Continue to encourage design concepts that inhibit and discourage criminal behavior such as Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) techniques.
City of Rialto Municipal Code
Title 3: Revenue and Finance
The California Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code, Section 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection and accounting, reporting, and refunds. A development impact fee is a monetary exaction other than a tax or special assessment that is charged by a local governmental agency to an applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project.
The City has adopted development impact fee programs for various public facilities, which are outlined in the City’s Municipal Code. Title 3 of City’s Municipal Code establishes every fee that every person or development must comply with if applicable regarding utility, community and recreation center impacts, library, animal center impacts, police impacts, park in-lieu/park impacts, and fire protection fees, etc.
Title 18: Zoning
The purpose and intent of the Title 18 Zoning Code is to set standards and guidelines for the City to lessen congestion in the streets; to secure safety from fire, panic and other dangers; to promote health and the general welfare; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent the overcrowding of land; to avoid undue concentration of population; to facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements.
Title 15, Chapter 15.28: Fire Code
The City of Rialto Fire Code is described in Chapter 15.28 of the City’s Municipal Code. As discussed in Chapter 15.28 and identified in Ordinance 1491, the City has adopted and amended the CFC as permitted by Health and Safety Code Section 17958 and Government Code 50022. The City’s Fire Code identifies Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-6
methods for calculating required fire flow, hydrant placement and other requirements considered in building and site design. The Rialto Fire Department reviews Plot Plans for proposed development projects to ensure compliance with the City’s Fire Code.
Emergency Response
Procedures for mitigating emergency events, such as such wildfires, floods, windstorms, hazardous materials releases, civil disturbance, and earthquakes are outlined in the City’s Standard Emergency Management System (SEMS) Multi-Hazard Functional Plan (MHFP). The MHFP incorporates and coordinates all the facilities and personnel of the City into an efficient organization capable of responding to any emergency.
4.14.3 Environmental Setting
Fire Protection
FHSZs are mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) as set forth in PRC 4201-4204 and Government Code 51175-89. FHSZs are categorized as fire protection within a Federal Responsibility Area under the jurisdiction of a federal agency, a State Responsibility Area under the jurisdiction of CAL FIRE, or within a Local Responsibility Area under the jurisdiction of a local agency. CAL FIRE is responsible for fire protection within State Responsibility Areas, found in 56 counties in California, and provides a variety of emergency services in 36 counties.
CAL FIRE defines a State Responsibility Area as land that is not federally owned, not incorporated, does not exceed a housing density of three units per acre, contains wildland vegetation as opposed to agriculture or ornamentals, and has watershed value and/or has range/forage value (this effectively eliminates most desert lands). Where local fire protection agencies, such as the Rialto Fire Department, are responsible for wildfire protection, the land is classified as a Local Responsibility Area. The project site and adjacent areas are classified as a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Non-VHFHSZ).
The Rialto Fire Department provides fire protection services for the City of Rialto. The Fire Department provides services for over 100,000 residents in a 22-square-mile area and is led by a Fire Chief, Division Fire Chief, four Battalion Chiefs, an Emergency Medical Services Coordinator, and an Assistant Fire Marshall.1 The Rialto Fire Department deploys from five fire stations staffed 24 hours per day by career firefighters, non-safety ambulance operators and one administrative office. Daily emergency medical service and fire/rescue staffing consists of one Battalion Chief, four engine companies, one truck company, and four paramedic ambulances. The closest fire stations to the project site are Fire Station 205 (1485 Willow Avenue), located approximately 1.5 miles to the north, and Fire Station 201 (131 Willow Avenue), located approximately 3.2 miles to the north. The project site is currently served by one fire hydrant located on East Santa Ana Avenue.
Administration. Fire Department Administration provides oversight to all department operations including project development, budgeting, development of policy and protocol, personnel development, and strategic planning to ensure highly effective fire and life safety services. Fire Administration is staffed
1 City of Rialto (2023). Rialto Fire Department. https://www.yourrialto.com/233/Fire-Department. Accessed August 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-7
by the Fire Chief with an Executive Assistant, a Division Chief of Operations, Administrative Battalion Chief, and one office specialist.
Rialto Fire Prevention Division. The Fire Prevention Division engages in community risk reduction services through code compliance, plan review, public education, inspection, emergency preparedness and targeted risk-specific programs.
Ambulance Operator Program. The Rialto Fire Department has provided ambulance transportation services since 1971 using a model of deployment that includes staffing of ambulances with firefighters that are cross-trained as Paramedics and Emergency Medical Technicians. Based on service demand and cost of deployment, the current ambulance staffing model is being retooled to include single function, paramedic and Ambulance Operators to staff City-owned ambulances.
Rialto Fire Department Emergency Medical Service. The Emergency Medical Service is responsible for the planning, compliance, review, and oversight for the provisions of clinical medical care provided by the Rialto Fire Department. The Fire Department staffs one paramedic for all fire engines, trucks, and ambulances; all other positions are staffed by Emergency Medical Technicians.
Incident Response. Fire service deployment is about the speed and weight of the response. Speed refers to initial response (first due) of all-risk intervention resources (engines, ladder trucks, and squads) strategically deployed across a jurisdiction for response to emergencies within a time interval to facilitate desired outcomes. Weight refers to multiple-unit Effective Response Force (commonly referred to as a First Alarm) responses to more serious emergencies, such as building fires, multiple-patient medical emergencies, vehicle collisions with extrication required, or technical rescue incidents. In these situations, a sufficient number of firefighters must be assembled within a reasonable time interval to safely control the emergency and prevent it escalating into a more serious event.
Law Enforcement Protection
The Rialto Police Department provides law enforcement and police protection services throughout the City. The Rialto Police Department headquarters at 128 North Willow Avenue, is located approximately
3.2 miles north of the project site. With 176 employees, the Rialto Police Department is a full-service law enforcement agency that is charged with the enforcement of local, State, and federal laws, and with providing 24-hour protection. Operations within the Rialto Police Department are organized within divisions — Operations, Support Services, and Professional Standards — with bureaus, teams and units, and programs within each division.2
The Rialto Police Department participates in the California Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Plan administrated by the Governor’s OES. The law enforcement mutual aid system is an ongoing cooperative effort among law enforcement agencies to ensure an effective and organized response to a wide range of emergencies. Under the Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Plan, the City of Rialto can both provide and request law enforcement resources to and from neighboring jurisdictions. There are seven mutual aid regions in the State and each region is comprised of multiple Operational Areas and has a Regional Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Coordinator. The City is located in mutual aid Region VI, which includes the counties of San Bernardino, Mono, Inyo, Riverside, imperial, and San Diego.
2 Rialto Police Department. (2023). Our Department. https://rialtopolice.com/our-department/. Accessed August 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-8
Schools
The project site is within the boundaries of the Colton Joint Unified School District.3 Schools closest to the project site include Crestmore Elementary School located at 18870 Jurupa Avenue, located approximately
1.5 miles west; Slover Mountain High School located at 18829 Orange Street, located approximately 1.7 miles northwest; and Bloomington High School located at 10750 Laurel Avenue, located 2.9 miles west.
Parks and Recreation
Available for public use in the City of Rialto are 9 City-owned parks. The closest park to the project site is Rialto City Park located at 130 East San Bernardino Avenue, approximately 1.5 mile north of the project site.4
Other Public Facilities
Other public facilities present in the City include a Racquet and Fitness Center (1243 South Riverside Avenue), located approximately 1.5 miles north; a Community Center (214 North Palm Avenue), located approximately 3.2 miles north; Tom Sawyer Pool (152 East San Bernardino Avenue), located approximately 1.5 miles north; a Senior Center (1411 South Riverside Avenue), located approximately 1.4 miles north; and the Rialto Branch Library (1 West 1st Street), located approximately 3.2 miles north.5,6
4.14.4 Methodology
The Rialto Fire Department and Police Department were contacted to determine if the Project would significantly impact the departments’ ability to provide fire protection and law enforcement services. The following analysis considers the existing regulatory framework and available information published by the Rialto Fire Department and Police Department.
4.14.5 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for public services were derived from the Environmental Checklist in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. An impact would be considered significant and would require mitigation if it would:
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 fire protection. 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
3 Colton Unified School District Schools and Communities. (2014). https://www.cjusd.net/cms/lib/CA02218339/Centricity/Domain/89/CJUSD_Schools_Map_10-20-14.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
4 City of Rialto Parks and Facilities (2024). https://www.yourrialto.com/ImageRepository/Document?documentId=141. Accessed September 2023.
5 Ibid.
6 City of Rialto Facilities. (2024). https://www.yourrialto.com/Facilities/Facility/Details/Rialto-Branch-Library-22. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-9
construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for parks and other public facilities.
4.14.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.13-1: 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 fire protection? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Impacts related to fire protection services are assessed by the Rialto Fire Department on a project-by- project basis. A project’s land use, fire-protection-related needs, and a project site’s recommended response distance and time and fire safety requirements, as well as project design features that would reduce the demand for fire protection services, are taken into consideration. The Project does not include or require construction of any new or physically altered fire station facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. The Project would not cause any direct or indirect significant impacts resulting from the construction/reconstruction of emergency access roads as construction would not require road closures, but would result in temporary partial lane closures during specific construction phases such as connection to utilities in East Santa Ana Avenue. Construction of the buildings would not create a temporary incremental increased demand for fire protection services because the project site is currently served by the Rialto Fire Department. A Public Service Questionnaire was sent to the Rialto Fire Department on December 27, 2023, requesting information on the capacity of the fire department. No response has been received. Further, the project site is located within a Non- VHFHSZ7. Prior to commencement of construction activities, the Project plans would be reviewed by applicable local agencies to ensure compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and General Plan as well as all applicable emergency response and fire safety requirements of the Rialto Fire Department and the CFC. Further, the Project is required to pay all required impact fees as adopted by City Ordinance No. 1532. Therefore, compliance with the mentioned codes and regulations would ensure that Project
7 Cal FIRE. (2023). https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-10
construction would result in less than significant impacts in regards to performance objectives for fire protection services.
Operations
The proposed buildings on-site would have fire sprinklers and would comply with applicable uniform building and fire codes that must be continually enforced through a proactive inspection program. As discussed previously, the City’s Fire Code identifies standards for building and site design and fire protection and notification systems such as fire flow requirements, building standards, hydrant placement and other requirements considered in building and site design. It also contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings including fire department access, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.
The Project would include 31 fire hydrants serving the project site. The fire hydrants would be placed incrementally around the project site. The fire hydrants are served by 12-inch fire water mains and connect to an off-site 24-inch water main. A 26-foot-wide emergency access driveway would be located at the northeastern corner of the project site. In accordance with the City’s entitlement process, the Rialto Fire Department is to review the plot plan to ensure compliance with the City’s Fire Code.
Development of the Project would result in a minimal increase in the demand for fire protection services.
The Project would not require the construction of new or physically altered facility which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection. Further, development impact fees are paid on a project-by- project basis to ensure a proportionate fair share is contributed toward facilities, equipment, and personnel that would be needed overtime to accommodate the additional demand from the Project. The Project is required to pay all required impact fees as required by Chapter 3.33 of the City’s Municipal Code.
Therefore, upon payment of fees, impacts would be considered less than significant. In addition, the Project would implement Public Services and Utilities Mitigation Measure 5 of the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR, which would require the proposed site plan to be submitted to the fire department for review.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Public Services and Utilities Mitigation Measure 5: All Project specific site plans should be subject to review by the Fire Department in each jurisdiction to determine whether the Project design includes adequate site access provisions and does not exceed the protection abilities of the various departments.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-11
Impact 4.13-2: 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 police protection? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Impacts to police protection services are assessed on the ability of police personnel to adequately serve the existing and future population, including residents, workers, and daytime and nighttime visitors and the Rialto Police Department’s ability to meet the additional demand for protection services with the Project. The project site is in a developed area and is adjacent to existing industrial uses.
During development, construction may require services from the Police Department in the cases of trespassing, theft, or vandalism. Construction would occur during the hours defined in the construction permit, most likely during off-peak periods, and would not require full road closures. Prior to commencement of construction activities, Project plans would be reviewed by the City to ensure compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and General Plan as well as all applicable regulations associated with site signage, lighting, perimeter control, and other crime safety preventative measures. Standard Conditions (SC) PS-1 and PS-2 related to project site security, and building and site safety design recommendations would be required. SC PS-1 requires that all development plans, including the Project, be evaluated by the Rialto Police Department to ensure that public safety design measures be incorporated into the Project plans. SC PS-2 requires that the Project Applicant contract with a security service to provide security during construction and may include additional security measures, such as the installation of temporary fencing. With implementation of the Standard Conditions PS-1 and PS-2, impacts to police protection would be less than significant.
Operations
Development of the Project would result in a minimal increase in the demand for police protection services. Project implementation would result in an increase in employment opportunities resulting in an estimated 140 new employees to the project site and surrounding area. Because the project site is in a developed area of the City that is adequately served and the Project does not include residential uses, the Project is not expected to substantially increase service demand such that a new police station would need to be constructed. It is not anticipated that the addition of the Project would substantially alter the ability of the Rialto Police Department to provide police protection services. Therefore, a substantial increase in population, property, or calls for service requiring substantial increase in police patrol is not anticipated.
The Project is required to pay all required impact fees as adopted by City Ordinance No. 1532. Accordingly, development impact fees are paid on a project-by-project basis to ensure a proportionate fair share is contributed toward facilities, equipment, and personnel that would be needed over time to accommodate the additional demand from the Project. Given the Project does not propose any residential uses and is required to pay fees, impacts on service demand and response times for police would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-12
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
SC PS-1: Prior to issuance of building permits, the City of Rialto Police Department shall review development plans for the incorporation of defensible space concepts to reduce demands on police services. Public safety planning recommendations shall be incorporated into the Project plans. The Applicant shall prepare a list of Project features and design components that demonstrate responsiveness to defensible space design concepts. The Police Department shall review and approve all defensible space design features incorporated into the Project prior to initiating the building plan check process.
SC PS-2: Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit and/or action that would permit site disturbance, the Applicant shall provide evidence to the City of Rialto Police Department that a construction security service or equivalent service shall be established at the construction site along with other measures, as identified by the Police Department and the Public Works Department, to be instituted during the grading and construction phase of the Project.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.13-3: 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 schools? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
As discussed above, Section 4.13, Population and Housing, the Project would allow for the construction of one truck terminal and maintenance shop and would not result in substantial unplanned population growth within the City. Project implementation would not result in a direct increase in demand for school services. Construction workers and future employees are anticipated to commute to the project site from within the City or surrounding areas. Therefore, the Project would not indirectly increase the demand for school services. Although the Project would not require the construction or expansion of existing school facilities, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees to the Colton Joint Unified School District in compliance with Senate Bill 50, which allows school districts to collect fees from development projects to fund the costs associated with an increase in demand for school services. With the payment of the development impact fees, impacts would be less than significant.
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-13
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.13-4: 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 parks and other public facilities? Level of Significance: No Impact
As discussed above, the Project would include the construction of one truck terminal and maintenance shop and would not result in substantial unplanned population growth within the City. As such, the Project is not anticipated to result in an increase demand for other public facilities, such as parks or libraries.
Project implementation would not adversely affect other public facilities or require the construction of new of altered public facilities. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.14.7 Cumulative Impacts
For purposes of public services, cumulative impacts are considered for projects located within the City.
The Project assumes the provision of fire protection services is based on a combination of existing fire services and the use of mutual aid agreements. Additionally, all present and reasonably foreseeable future projects would be required to pay impact fees as adopted by City Ordinance 1532. As previously addressed, development impact fees are paid on a project-by-project basis to ensure a proportionate fair share is contributed toward facilities, equipment, and personnel that would be needed over time to accommodate the additional demand caused by development. The payment of fees and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements would preclude the Project’s cumulative contribution to fire protection impacts.
The Rialto Police Department’s operating budget is primarily generated through tax revenues and fees collected from penalties and requested services, and impact fees as adopted by City Ordinance 1532.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.14
Draft Environmental Impact Report Public Services
City of Rialto 4.14-14
Increased property and sales tax from cumulative projects would increase the City’s General Fund in rough proportion to population increases, providing funding for any improvements necessary to maintain adequate police protection facilities, equipment, and/or personnel. The payment of fees and compliance with applicable regulatory requirements would preclude the Project’s cumulative contribution to police protection impacts. Moreover, should any new or altered facilities be required in the future, these facilities would be subject to separate California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review. The Project would not cumulatively contribute to an impact to police protection services.
The Project would not result in an increase in demand for schools, parks, or other public services.
However, payment of the development impact fees would be appropriately allocated to all public services to fund future expansion or maintenance of public services.
4.14.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of the Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with public services.
No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-1
4.15 TRANSPORTATION
4.15.1 Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) summarizes the findings of the SB 743 VMT Analysis prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. to evaluate the potential traffic impacts associated with the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project). This study has been prepared in accordance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements to evaluate potential transportation impacts based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The SB 743 VMT Analysis is included as Appendix P of this EIR.
4.15.2 Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is contained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR, Title 23, Part 655, Subpart F). The FHWA requires that the most recent MUTCD be adopted by individual states as their legal state standard for traffic-control devices within two years of the update. The MUTCD identifies the standards that should be used to install and maintain traffic-control devices on all public streets, highways, bikeways, and private roads that are open to public traffic. The City of Rialto (City) uses the MUTCD for determining the necessary traffic- control devices (e.g., signs, barricades, gates, warning signs, object markers, guide signs, pavement and curb markings, traffic-control signs, pedestrian control signs, in-roadway lights, and flagger control) on public streets, highways, bikeways, and school areas in the City, including temporary traffic-control devices in and near construction work areas.
State Regulations
Sustainable Communities Strategies: Senate Bill 375 – Land Use Planning Senate Bill (SB) 375 provides for a planning process to coordinate land use planning and Regional Transportation Plans (RTP)s and funding priorities in order to help California meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals established in Assembly Bill (AB) 32. SB 375 requires that RTPs developed by metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) (e.g., Southern California Association of Governments [SCAG]) incorporate a “sustainable communities strategy” in their RTPs that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). SB 375 also includes provisions for streamlined CEQA review for some infill projects, such as Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs).
Senate Bill 743 – Update to the CEQA Guidelines for Transportation Impacts The Steinberg Act (SB 743) (also known as the Environmental Act) was enacted in 2013 to shift the focus of transportation analysis from driver delay to reducing GHG emissions, creating multimodal networks, and promoting mixed land uses. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to amend the CEQA Guidelines to provide alternative level of service metrics for transportation impact evaluations. In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines including the incorporation of the SB 743 modifications. The CEQA Guidelines shift traffic analysis from delay and operations to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) when evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-2
Measurements of transportation impacts may include VMT, VMT per capita, automobile trip generation rates, or automobile trips generated. According to SB 743, projects should aim to reduce VMT and mitigate potential VMT impacts through the implementation of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies. By July 1, 2020, all CEQA lead agencies were required to analyze a project’s transportation impacts using VMT.
Regional and Local Regulations
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy On September 3, 2020, the SCAG Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal, the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. This RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals.
Connect SoCal embodies a collective vision for the region’s future and is developed with input from local governments, county transportation commissions, tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local stakeholders within the counties of San Bernardino, Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and Ventura. The SCAG region strives toward sustainability through integrated land use and transportation planning. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal air quality standards and is required by State law to lower regional GHG emissions.
San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program
The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is San Bernardino’s congestion management agency. SBCTA prepares, monitors and periodically updates the County Congestion Management Program (CMP) to meet federal Congestion Management Process requirement and the County’s Measure I Program. The San Bernardino County CMP defines a network of state highways and arterials, level of service standards and related procedures; the process for mitigation of impacts of new development on the transportations system’ and technical justification for the approach.
Measure I Strategic Plan
Measure I authorizes a half-cent sales tax in San Bernardino County until March 2040 for use exclusively on transportation improvement and traffic management programs. Measure I includes language mandating development to pay its fair share for transportation improvements in San Bernardino County.
The Measure I Strategic Plan is the official guide for the allocation and administration of the combination of local transportation sales tax, State and federal transportation revenues, and private fair-share contributions to regional transportation facilities to fund the Measure I 2010–2040 transportation programs. The Strategic Plan identifies funding categories and allocations and planned transportation improvement projects in the County for freeways, major and local arterials, bus and rail transit, and traffic management systems. The City has adopted a Development Impact Fee (DIF) program that is consistent with Measure I requirements.
Rialto General Plan 2010
The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) Circulation Element governs the long-term mobility system in the City. The Circulation Element includes goals and policies that are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and are intended to provide the best possible balance between the City’s future growth and land use development, roadway size, traffic service levels, and community character. The following goals and policies apply to the Project.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-3
Goal 4-2 Protect residential neighborhoods from through traffic impacts.
Policy 4-2.1 Locate new development and their access points in such a way that traffic is not encouraged to utilize local residential streets for access to the development and its parking.
Policy 4-2.2 Discourage non-local traffic from using neighborhood streets.
Policy 4-9.1 Install sidewalks where they are missing, and make improvements to existing sidewalks for accessibility purposes. Priority should be given to needed sidewalk improvement near schools and activity centers. Provide wider sidewalks in areas with higher pedestrian volumes.
Policy 4-9.2 Require sidewalks and parkways on all streets in new development.
Policy 4-9.4 Accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists — in addition to automobiles — when considering new development projects.
Policy 4-9.6 Encourage new development to provide pedestrian paths through projects, with outlets to adjacent collectors, secondaries, and arterial roadways.
Policy 4-9.7 Require ADA compliance on all new or modified handicap ramps.
Policy 4-10.1 Designate and enforce truck routes for use by commercial trucking as part of the project approval process.
Policy 4-10.3 Develop appropriate noise mitigation along truck routes to minimize noise impacts on nearby sensitive land uses.
Policy 4-10.4 Encourage the development of adequate on-site loading areas to minimize interference of truck loading activities with efficient traffic circulation on adjacent roadways.
Rialto Active Transportation Plan
The Rialto Active Transportation Plan recommends actions meant to support and increase bicycling and walking in Rialto and to enhance non-motorized travel infrastructure and create options to support the existing population. 1 The Rialto Active Transportation Plan includes an inventory of existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure, identifies deficiencies, develops and prioritizes improvements, and produces materials for future grant applications for implementation. The Rialto Active Transportation Plan shows the portion of South Riverside Avenue west to the west of the project site as a current Capital Improvement Project (CIP) bike lane. With respect to the Safe Routes to School program, there are no proposed improvements proximate to the project site.
1 City of Rialto. January 2020. Rialto Active Transportation Plan. https://issuu.com/ktua/docs/rialto_atp_final_2020_march_low_res. Accessed October 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-4
4.15.3 Environmental Setting
Existing Transportation System
Roadway Characteristics
Regional access to the project site is provided primarily by Interstate 10 (I-10), located approximately 1 mile north of the project site. Additionally, Interstate 215 (I-215) is located approximately 4 miles to the east, Interstate 15 (I-15) is located approximately 10 miles to the west, and access the State Route 60 (SR60) is approximately 4 miles to the south.
East Santa Ana Avenue. East Santa Ana Avenue is a two lane east-west roadway. The posted speed limit on East Santa Ana Avenue is 40 miles per hour (mph) and on-street parking is permitted. East Santa Ana Avenue is designated as a Collector Street east of South Riverside Avenue and a Secondary Arterial west of South Riverside Avenue in the City’s Circulation Element. East Santa Ana Avenue is a designated truck route for its entire length within the City.
East Riverside Avenue. South Riverside Avenue is currently a four- to six-lane north-south roadway divided by a painted median through the study area. The posted speed limit is 50 mph and on-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway. South Riverside Avenue is designated as a Modified Major Arterial II between San Bernardino Avenue and Slover Avenue, and a Modified Arterial I between Slover Avenue and the southern City boundary in the City’s Circulation Element. The ultimate configuration will also accommodate a bike lane on each side of the roadway. South Riverside Avenue is a designated truck route for its entire length within the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) area. South Riverside Avenue provides direct access to the I-10 Freeway interchange to the north of the project site. The posted speed limit is 50mph.
Slover Avenue. Slover Avenue is a four-lane east-west roadway divided by a painted median through the study area. The posted speed limit is 45 mph and on-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the street. Slover Avenue is designated as a Major Arterial in the City’s Circulation Element. Slover Avenue is a designated truck route between South Riverside Avenue and Cedar Avenue.
Jurupa Avenue. Jurupa Avenue is a two-lane east-west undivided roadway. Between South Riverside Avenue and Willow Avenue, Jurupa Avenue has four lanes and remains undivided. The posted speed limit is 40 mph and on-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the street. Jurupa Avenue is designated as a Secondary Arterial in the City’s Circulation Element.
Transit Services
Transit service within the Project area is provided via the OmniTrans transit lines, which serve various cities in San Bernardino County. Bus stops in the Project vicinity are located along South Riverside Avenue and Valley Boulevard, approximately 1 mile to north and Spruce Avenue approximately 1.5 mile to the west. A description of the bus routes serving the Project area is provided below.
OmniTrans Route 22 operates between the City of Rialto and the City of Colton through Rialto along South Riverside Avenue in the Project vicinity. Route 22 operates on weekdays from 5:00 AM to 9:40 PM with approximately 1-hour headways, on Saturdays from 7:15 AM to 6:30 PM with approximately 1-hour Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-5
headways, and on Sundays from 7:30 AM to 6:40 PM with approximately 1-hour headways. Route 22 has a transfer point with Route 10 at the intersection of South Riverside Avenue and Baseline Road.
OmniTrans Route 329 operates between Bloomington and the City of Fontana Valley Boulevard in the Project vicinity. Route 329 operates on weekdays from 6:45 AM to 6:40 PM with approximately 1-hour headways and on Saturdays from 7:45 AM to 6:40 PM with approximately 1-hour headways.
Bicycle And Pedestrian Facilities
The Rialto Active Transportation Plan recommends actions meant to support and increase bicycling and walking in Rialto and to enhance non-motorized travel infrastructure and create options to support the existing population. The Rialto Active Transportation Plan includes an inventory of existing bike and pedestrian infrastructure, identifies deficiencies, develops and prioritizes improvements, and produces materials for future grant applications for implementation of improvements. The Rialto Active Transportation Plan shows the portion of South Riverside Avenue to the west of the project site as a current CIP Bike Lane.
4.15.4 Methodology
The Project is evaluated against the significance criteria/thresholds below, as the basis for determining the impact’s level of significance concerning transportation. In addition to the design characteristics of future development, this analysis considers the existing regulatory framework (i.e., laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards) that avoid or reduce the potentially significant environmental impact. Where significant impacts remain despite compliance with the regulatory framework, feasible mitigation measures are recommended, to avoid or reduce the Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts.
This analysis of impacts on transportation examines the Project’s temporary (i.e., construction) and permanent (i.e., operational) effects-based significance criteria/threshold’s application, outlined above.
For each criterion, the analyses address both temporary (construction) and operational impacts, as applicable. The impact conclusions consider the potential for changes in environmental conditions, as well as compliance with the regulatory framework enacted to protect the environment.
4.15.5 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are from State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. The Project would result in a significant impact related to transportation if it would:
Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b); Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment; or Result in inadequate emergency access.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-6
4.15.6 Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.14-1: Would the project, conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Please refer to Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, which include an evaluation of the Project’s consistency with SCAG’s Connect SoCal: 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the City’s General Plan, respectively. The project site is within the SCAG MPO region. The Connect SoCal 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS addresses regional challenges in several ways. A key, formative step is to develop a Regional Growth Forecast in collaboration with local jurisdictions, which helps SCAG identify opportunities and barriers to development. The plan forecasts the number of people, households and jobs (at the jurisdictional level) expected throughout SCAG’s 191 cities and in unincorporated areas by 2045. This information is typically a component of the City’s General Plan, and if available, the City’s traffic analysis model.
Growth assumed in the General Plan and its corresponding traffic modeling would be the information supplied to SCAG. The Project is consistent with the General Plan and zoning assumptions. Therefore, because the Project was accounted for in the City’s growth forecast, the Project would be consistent with the RTP/SCS. The analysis finds that the Project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS and the General Plan. Further, the Project’s circulation plan is consistent with the General Plan pertaining to transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Thus, impacts would be less than significant impact.
Current activities on-site are limited to mining reclamation, which is anticipated to be completed in 2024, prior to the commencement of Project construction. The project site features one driveway at the northern portion of the project site. Vehicular access to the project site would be provided via one unsignalized driveway located at the northwestern corner of the project site, which would provide access to trucks and passenger vehicles. Additionally, the Project would include one emergency access only driveway at the northeastern corner of the project site.
East Santa Ana Avenue does not contain any current bicycle facilities. As previously discussed, the nearest bicycle lane to the project site is the current CIP Bike Lane located within South Riverside Avenue to the west of the project site. Accordingly, Project implementation would not interfere with implementation of the Rialto Active Transportation Plan. The Project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-7
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.14-2: Would the proposed project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact Screening Criteria
Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was approved by California legislature in September 2013. SB 743 requires changes to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), specifically directing the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop alternative metrics to the use of vehicular “Level of Service” (LOS) for evaluating transportation projects. OPR has prepared a technical advisory (“OPR Technical Advisory”) for evaluating transportation impacts in CEQA and has recommended that Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) replace LOS as the primary measure of transportation impacts. The Natural Resources Agency has adopted updates to CEQA Guidelines to incorporate SB 743 that requires VMT for the purposes of determining a significant transportation impact under CEQA.
The City of Rialto Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service (LOS) Assessment (October 2021) provide details on appropriate screening thresholds that can be used to identify when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less-than- significant impact without conducting a more detailed level analysis. Screening thresholds are broken down into the following three criteria:
1. Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
2. Low VMT Area Screening
3. Project Type Screening
Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
A project would be considered to have a less-than-significant transportation impact if the project is located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA) as determined by the most recent SCAG RTP/SCS and the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT screening tool. Based on SBCTA VMT screening tool, the proposed project is not located within a TPA.
Low VMT Area Screening
A project would be considered to have a less-than-significant transportation impact if the project is located within a low VMT generating area as determined by the City of Rialto guidelines and the SBCTA VMT screening tool. Based on the City of Rialto VMT thresholds and the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool, the proposed project is not located within a low VMT area.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-8
Project Type Screening
A project would be considered to have a less-than-significant transportation impact if the project generates less than 110 daily vehicle trips.
The following uses would also be presumed to have a less-than-significant VMT impact:
K-12 Schools
Local-Serving retail less than 50,000 square feet
Local parks
Day care centers
Local serving gas stations
Local serving banks
Student housing projects
Local-serving hotels (e.g. non-destination hotels)
Local-serving medical
Student housing projects on or adjacent to college campuses Local-serving assembly uses (places of worship, community organizations) Community institutions (Public libraries, fire stations, local government) Local serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the RTP/SCS Affordable or supportive housing
Assisted living facilities
Senior housing (as defined by HUD)
The Project would involve the construction a 172,445 sf truck terminal and 18,700 sf ancillary maintenance shop that generate 1,922 daily PCE trips; therefore, the Project would not be screened out based on project type.
VMT Thresholds
The City of Rialto VMT Guidelines note that Project-generated VMT should be extracted from the origin- destination (OD) trip matrix from the SBTAM travel demand model and include the calculation for total VMT per service population (population plus employment).
The City’s VMT Guidelines also acknowledge that in some cases, it may be appropriate to extract the Project-generated VMT using the production-attraction (PA) trip matrix from the SBTAM model. The VMT Guidelines state that this may be appropriate when a project is entirely composed on retail, office, or industrial land uses so as to isolate home-base work (HBW) VMT for the purposes of isolating commute VMT for employees.
Based on discussions with City staff and given the employee-based use of the project and the employee- based uses surrounding the project site, the project-generated VMT efficiency metric for the proposed project was based on PA VMT per employee. As a result, for project-generated VMT, the project would Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-9
result in a significant impact if either the baseline or cumulative project-generated VMT per employee exceeds the San Bernardino County regional average baseline of 17.1 VMT per employee.
For project’s effect on VMT, the project would result in a significant impact if either the baseline link-level boundary (County of San Bernardino) VMT per service population or the cumulative link-level boundary (County of San Bernardino) VMT per service population increase under the plus project condition compared to the no project condition.
VMT Analysis
To evaluate the Project-related VMT per employee, both baseline and cumulative VMT per service population were calculated for the Project’s land use. These values were then compared to the San Bernardino County regional average of 17.1 VMT per employee for the baseline condition and 17.1 VMT per service population for the cumulative condition. As shown in Table 4.15-1: Project-Generated VMT, the Project generated VMT per employee exceeds the threshold under all Project scenarios and as such, the Project would result in a significant impact associated with VMT.
Table 4.15-1: Project-Generated VMT
Baseline 2016
With Project
Cumulative 2040
With Project
Project-Generated VMT
13,796
22,516
Employment
633
1,149
VMT per Employee 21.8 19.6
Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold
17.1 17.1
Impact Yes Yes
Required Mitigation 21.6% 12.8%
Source: Appendix P
To evaluate the Project’s effect on VMT for the region, link-level boundary VMT per service population was calculated for both baseline and cumulative conditions and compared to their respective no project conditions. Refer to Table 4.15-2: Project’s Effect on VMT.
Table 4.15-2: Project’s Effect on VMT
Baseline 2016 Cumulative 2040
No
Project
With
Project
No
Project
With
Project
Citywide link-level VMT 1,344,712 1,344,985 1,943,561 1,945,026 Citywide Service Population 117,365 117,485 133,757 133,877 Citywide VMT per Service Population Threshold 11.46 11.45 14.53 14.53 Impact No No
Source: Appendix P
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-10
Based on the results shown in Table 4.15-2, the Project effect on VMT per service population would not exceed the threshold under any Project scenario, and as such the Project is determined to have a less than significant impact associated with Citywide VMT.
VMT Reduction Strategies
TDM measures to reduce single-occupancy commute trips and encourage alternative modes of transportation such as transit, walking, and bicycling, have been reviewed for the purpose of reducing Project-related VMT impacts. The effectiveness of potential TDM measures are noted below, in accordance with the trip reduction strategies in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity:
T-7: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing (up to 4% reduction) T-8: Provide Ridesharing Program (up to 8 percent reduction) T-10: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities (up to 4.4 percent reduction) A summary table reviewing the feasibility of all VMT-related measures as noted in the CAPCOA Handbook is provided in Appendix P. As shown in Table 4.15-1, the proposed Project would require a minimum reduction of 21.6% and 12.8% under Baseline 2016 and Cumulative 2040 conditions, respectively. The mitigation measures noted above would equate to a maximum VMT reduction of
16.4%. The proposed mitigation measures are anticipated to mitigate the Project’s VMT impacts to the extent feasible.
As discussed, Project-generated VMT would exceed the Countywide per service population threshold.
To address impacts associated VMT, the Project would implement MM TRF-1, which would require the preparation of a TDM plan using feasible reduction strategies identified above. However, implementation of the TDM plan would not reduce VMT below the Countywide per service population threshold. Thus, impacts related to VMT would remain significant and unavoidable.
Traffic Impact Improvement Costs
The Project is subject to the City’s Citywide traffic impact fee program and will pay applicable DIF fees toward the Riverside Avenue Widening Project. The fees paid by the Project Applicant will be collected by the City and used toward the Riverside Avenue Widening Project, as identified in Measure I of the 2018 Nexus Study Item “Widen Riverside Avenue from South City Limit to Slover Avenue from 4 lanes to 6 lanes”. Costs of roadway improvements are identified in Appendix O.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
To the extent that a mitigation measure is included in an existing fee program, the Project’s payment of impact fees can be used to offset the costs of implementing the mitigation measures. In addition, the Project may be required to construct a needed improvement in advance of the City’s receipt of full funding, in which case the improvement may be subject to a reimbursement agreement, to allow the Project to recoup costs from future development.
SC TRA-1A: South Riverside Avenue at I-10 Eastbound Ramps. The Project Applicant shall contribute on a fair-share basis to costs associated with the widening of South Riverside Avenue.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-11
These improvements would be consistent with recommendations set forth in Measure I of the 2018 Nexus Study Item “Widen Riverside Avenue from South City Limit to Slover Avenue from 4 lanes to 6 lanes”.
SC TRA-1B: South Riverside Avenue at Solver Avenue. The Project Applicant shall contribute on a fair-share basis to costs associated with the widening of South Riverside Avenue. These improvements would be consistent with recommendations set forth in Measure I of the 2018 Nexus Study Item “Widen Riverside Avenue from South City Limit to Slover Avenue from 4 lanes to 6 lanes”.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
MM TRF-1: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project applicant shall develop a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan with TDM measures in coordination with the City of Rialto staff. The TDM plan shall be approved by the City.
Impact 4.14-3: Would the proposed project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not introduce incompatible uses to area roadways. The project site driveways and Project improvements would be designed so that adequate sight distance for drivers entering and exiting the project site is maintained. The driveway located at the northwestern portion of the project site would have a width of 32 feet. The emergency access only driveway, located at the northeastern corner of the project site, would have a width of 26 feet. The line of sight – a straight line between the driver’s eye and oncoming vehicles on the adjacent roadway – defines the “limited use area.” The limited use area for each driveway would be kept clear of visual obstructions, including Project signs, structures, and obstructive landscaping, in order to maintain adequate sight distance. The Project would be designed in compliance with all applicable State building codes and would meet City standards for design, including sight distance at all intersections.
The Project would include improvements to East Santa Ana Avenue, including mill and overlay.
Improvements will require full depth reconstruction along the Project frontage to South Riverside Avenue.
In addition, the Project would include one driveway located at the northwestern corner of the project site and one emergency access driveway located at the northeastern corner of the project site. Project construction would require the partial closure of East Santa Ana Avenue. Upon completion of construction, operation of East Santa Ana Avenue would resume similar to existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-12
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.14-4: Would the proposed project result in inadequate emergency access? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Vehicular access to the project site would be provided via one driveway located at the northwestern corner of the project site. The main driveway would be 32-feet in width and would provide both truck and passenger vehicle access to the project site. Additionally, the Project would include one emergency access only driveway located at the northeastern corner of the project site; which would be 26 feet in width and provide access to emergency vehicles. Project traffic would not result in substantial delays and congestions that would affect the circulation of emergency vehicles within the Project area. Further, emergency access to the project site and surrounding area would be maintained throughout construction activities. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
4.15.7 Cumulative Impacts
For cumulative conditions, a project that is below the VMT impact thresholds and does not have a VMT impact under baseline conditions would also not have a cumulative impact as long as it is aligned with long-term State environmental goals, such as reducing GHG emissions, and relevant plans, such as the SCAG RTP/SCS. The geographic context for the analysis of cumulative traffic impacts includes traffic volumes resulting from buildout of the City of Rialto. In addition, cumulative impacts are based on the future traffic volumes estimated by SCAG, which includes population and socioeconomic projections.
Based on the VMT analysis for the Project, the Project’s contribution of traffic would be cumulatively considerable because the feasibility of implementation of TDM measures is uncertain. The Project is consistent with the General Plan and is accounted for in the growth allocated by the General Plan and analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Based on VMT thresholds of significance, the Project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-13
4.15.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with VMT. As discussed above, Project-generated VMT would exceed the Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold of 17.1. To address impacts associated with VMT, the Project would implement MM TRF-1, which would require the preparation of a TDM plan using reduction strategies identified above.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.15
Draft Environmental Impact Report Transportation
City of Rialto 4.15-14
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-1
4.16 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Introduction
This section of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provides contextual background information on tribal cultural resources on or near the project site. The extent to which implementation of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) could impact existing tribal cultural resources is evaluated. This section also provides the results of Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) tribal consultation.
According to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, a tribal cultural resource is a site feature, place, cultural landscape, sacred place or object which is of cultural value to a California Native American tribe and is either [1] on or eligible for the California Historic Register or a local historic register; or [2] the lead agency at its discretion, chooses to treat the resource as a tribal cultural resource.
The analysis in this section was conducted in compliance with the California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5024.1 and Section 21074 to identify tribal, archaeological and historic resources in the Project area and evaluate potential impacts that could result from implementation of the Project. The impact analyses are based on the Cultural Resources Study Findings Memo for the 249 E. Santa Ana Avenue Truck Terminal Project, City of Rialto, San Bernadino County, prepared by ASM Affiliates (January 2022). Which is included in Appendix D of this EIR. The analysis also includes information obtained during consultations with Native American tribal representatives.
Regulatory Setting
State Regulations
Senate Bill 18
Senate Bill (SB) 18 (California Government Code §65352.3) requires local governments to consult with Native American tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the planning process. These consultation and notice requirements apply to the adoption and amendment of general plans and specific plans. The consultation process requires (1) that local governments send the State Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) information on a proposed project and request contact information for local Native American tribes; (2) that local governments then send information on the project to the tribes that the NAHC has identified and notify them of the opportunity to consult; (3) that the tribes have 90 days to respond on whether they want to consult or not, and (4) that consultation begins if requested by a tribe and there is no statutory limit on the duration of the consultation. If issues arise and consensus on mitigation cannot be reached, SB 18 allows a finding to be made that the suggested mitigation is infeasible. SB 18 is not applicable to the Project.
California Assembly Bill 52
On July 1, 2015, California AB 52 of 2014 was enacted and expanded CEQA by defining a new resource category, “tribal cultural resources.” AB 52 establishes that “A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC §21084.2).
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-2
AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources. The consultation process must be completed before an EIR can be released. AB 52 requires that lead agencies “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project if: (1) the California Native American tribe requested to the Lead Agency, in writing, to be informed by the Lead Agency through formal notification of proposed projects in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe, and (2) the California Native American tribe responds, in writing, within 30 days of receipt of the formal notification, and requests the consultation.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed within the jurisdiction of the Lead Agency. Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the significance of tribal cultural resources, the significance of the Project’s impacts on the tribal cultural resources, and alternatives and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe.
The parties must consult in good faith, and consultation is deemed concluded when either the parties agree on measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource (if such a significant effect exists) or when a party concludes that mutual agreement cannot be reached.
Health and Safety Code Sections 7050.5 and 7052
State Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 7050.5, declares that, in the event of the discovery of human remains outside of a dedicated cemetery, all ground disturbance must cease, and the San Bernardino County Coroner must be notified. HSC Section 7052 establishes a felony penalty for mutilating, disinterring, or otherwise disturbing human remains, except by relatives.
More precisely, if human remains are encountered, Section 7050.5 states that:
a) “Every person who knowingly mutilates or disinters, wantonly disturbs, or willfully removes any human remains in or from any location other than a dedicated cemetery without authority of law is guilty of a misdemeanor, except as provided in Section 5097.99 of the Public Resources Code.
The provisions of this subdivision shall not apply to any person carrying out an agreement developed pursuant to subdivision (l) of Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code or to any person authorized to implement Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the Coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. The Coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the Coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-3
c) If the Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the Coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission.”
Regional and Local Regulations
Rialto General Plan 2010
Relevant Rialto General Plan (General Plan) policies for tribal cultural resources are identified below.
Where inconsistencies exist, if any, they are addressed in the respective impact analysis below.
Goal 7-1 Preserve Rialto’s significant historical resources as a source of community identity, stability, aesthetic character, and social value.
Policy 7-1.1 Protect the architectural, historical, agricultural, open space, environmental, and archaeological resources in Rialto.
Policy 7-1.2 Identify, through appropriate research and surveys, the historical resources in Rialto through documentation and photography.
Goal 7-3 Identify, document, and protect significant archaeological resources in Rialto.
Policy 7-3.1 Require archaeological surveys during the development review process for all projects in archaeologically sensitive areas where no previous surveys are recorded.
Policy 7-3.2 Avoid impacts to potentially significant prehistoric and historical archaeological resources and sites containing Native American human remains consistent with State law.
City of Rialto Municipal Code
Chapter 2.20 of the Municipal Code establishes the Historical Preservation Commission. The commission is authorized to make recommendations, decisions and determinations concerning the designation, preservation, protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of these historical, and cultural resources which contribute to the culture and aesthetic values of the City. Government Code Section 37361 empowers cities to adopt regulations and incentives for the protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of such places, buildings, structures and other objects. The adoption of reasonable and fair regulations is necessary as a means of recognition, documentation, preservation and maintenance of resources of cultural, aesthetic, or historical significance. Such regulation serves as a means to integrate the preservation of resources and the extraction of relevant data from such resources into public and private land management and development process, and to identify as early as possible and resolve conflicts between the preservation of cultural resources and alternative land uses. Chapter 2.20 is intended to carry out the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Environmental Setting
Natural Setting
The project site lies in the southern portion of the City of Rialto (City). Elevations range from approximately 900 to 955 feet above mean sea level (amsl). The City is largely urbanized and surrounded by other Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-4
developed cities. The area directly adjacent to the project site to the northwest and northeast contains a quarrying operation and is flanked on the east by a wastewater treatment plant.
Prehistoric Setting
Refer to Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, regarding the ethnography of Native American tribes in the vicinity of the project site. For information regarding the cultural setting and archaeological and historical context, see Appendix D.
Methodology
NAHC Sacred Lands File Search
On April 6, 2017, ASM sent a request to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) to search their Sacred Lands File (SLF) to determine whether their files contained any information relating to the presence of Native American cultural resources within the Project parcel. Response from the NAHC was received on April 10, 2017, indicating that no such resources were found as a result of the SLF search. However, the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of Native American cultural resources within the Project area. A list of 25 tribal contacts who may have interest in the Project area was provided with the NAHC response; this response and contact list is provided as Appendix A to the Cultural Resources Memo.
AB 52 Tribal Consultation
In compliance with PRC Section 21080.3.1(b), the City of Rialto sent formal notification on February 15, 2024 to tribal representatives which may have interest in projects within the geographic area traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe(s) and have requested notifications of applicable development projects from the City. Formal notification letters were sent to representatives of the following California Native American tribes:
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
Morongo Band of Mission Indians
Gabrieleño-Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Gabrieleño-Tongva Nation
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians -Kizh Nation
The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (YSMN) responded on February 20, 2024. The mitigation measures requested by the YSMN as a result of that consultation have been included in this EIR and are further discussed below.
Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for tribal cultural resources were derived from the Environmental Checklist in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. An impact would be considered significant and would require mitigation if it would:
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-5
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 (CRHR), or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC §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 subdivision (c) of PRC §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC §5024.1, the Lead Agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
This analysis of impacts on cultural resources examines the Project’s construction and operational effects based on application of the significance criteria outlined above. The impact conclusions consider the potential for changes in environmental conditions, as well as compliance with the regulatory framework enacted to protect the environment.
Impact 4.16-1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in PRC §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 CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC §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 subdivision (c) of PRC §5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated As discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, according to the Cultural Resources Memo, the results to the records search indicate a high archaeological sensitivity for the project site. However, no cultural resources were identified within the project site during the current survey; as such, no historical resources were identified within the project site or surrounding area that would require further consideration under CEQA. However, significant impacts could occur in the event unknown resources are unearthed during Project implementation. As such, the Project would implement Mitigation Measures (MM) CUL-1 and MM CUL-2 are proposed to address the discovery of unknown cultural resources during construction activities.
Additionally, the Project would implement Archaeological/Historical Resource Mitigation Measures 2 and 3 of the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) EIR. With incorporation of mitigation, potential impacts to historical resources would be reduced to a less than significant level.
In compliance with PRC Section 21080.3.1(b), the City provided formal notification to California Native American tribal representatives that have previously requested notification from the City regarding projects within the geographic area traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe. Native American Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-6
groups may have knowledge about cultural resources in the area and may have concerns about adverse effects from development on tribal cultural resources as defined in PRC Section 21074.
As of the time of this EIR, one response was received from the YSMN. The YSMN identified measures to mitigate potential impacts to as-yet undiscovered tribal cultural resources. The mitigation measures include requirements for contacting the YSMN in the event of a find (MM TCR-1) and for any archaeological/cultural documents created as a result of the Project to be supplied to the Project applicant or lead agency for dissemination to YSMN (MM TCR-2). With the implementation of mitigation measures MM TCR-1 and MM TCR-2, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Archaeological/Historical Resources
See Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, for further details regarding Mitigation Measures 2 and 3 Project Mitigation Measures
See Section 4.4, Cultural Resources for further details regarding MM CUL-1 and MM CUL-2.
MM TCR-1 The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (YSMN) Cultural Resources Management Department shall be contacted of any pre-contact cultural resources discovered during Project implementation and be provided information regarding the nature of the find, as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA, a Cultural Resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by an archaeologist, in coordination with YSMN, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents YSMN for the remainder of the Project, should YSMN elect to place a monitor on-site.
MM TCR-2 Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the Project (isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the Project applicant and the Lead Agency for dissemination to YSMN. The Lead Agency and/or Project applicant shall, in good faith, consult with YSMN throughout the life of the Project.
Cumulative Impacts
Although the Project, in conjunction with the effects of cumulative projects, may result in the disturbance of tribal cultural resources throughout the study area, standard conditions of approval and mitigation measures required for each project would reduce the impacts to less than significant levels. Despite the site-specific nature of the resources, mitigation required for the identification and protection of unknown or undocumented tribal cultural resources would reduce the potential for cumulative impacts. On a cumulative level, data recovered from a site, combined with data from other sites in the region, would allow for the examination and evaluation of the diversity of human activities in the region. As a result, development of the Project would not contribute to a significant cumulative impact on tribal cultural resources.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-7
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of mitigation measures MM TCR-1 and MM TCR-2, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to a level considered less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.16
Draft Environmental Impact Report Tribal Cultural Resources
City of Rialto 4.16-8
This Page Intentionally Blank.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-1
4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Introduction
This section examines the public utilities and service systems that would be used by the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) and describes the potential impacts on those public systems due to the implementation of the Project. For abbreviation purposes, the general term “utilities and service systems” in this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) includes the following: water, sewer, stormwater, electricity and natural gas, and solid waste. Specifically, this section addresses the following utilities: water, wastewater, electricity, telecommunication, and solid waste. Stormwater is discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. The following utility and services are addressed in this section (the service provider is noted parenthetically):
Domestic water supply and distribution (West Valley Water District) Wastewater facilities (Rialto Water Services)
Electricity (Southern California Edison)
Natural gas (SoCalGas Company)
Telecommunications (AT&T)
Solid waste (Burrtec)
Regulatory Setting
Federal Regulations
Federal Safe Drinking Water Act
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA, Health and Safety Code, §§116350–116405) is intended to protect public health by regulating the nation’s public drinking water supply. The Federal SDWA authorizes the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set national standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally occurring and man-made contaminants.
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (33 United States Code Section 1251 et seq.) is the cornerstone of water quality protection in the United States. The statute employs a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory tools to sharply reduce direct pollutants discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.” National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program was established pursuant to the Clean Water Act to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States. Federal NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges, including point-source municipal waste discharges and nonpoint-source stormwater runoff. NPDES permits generally identify effluent and receiving water limits on allowable concentrations and/or mass Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-2
emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge; prohibitions on discharges not specifically allowed under the permit; and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger, including industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self-monitoring, and other activities.
Wastewater discharge is regulated under the NPDES permit program for direct discharges into receiving waters and by the National Pretreatment Program for indirect discharges to a sewage treatment plant. In California, the federal requirements are administered by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and individual NPDES permits are issued by the California Regional Water Quality Control Boards.
The NPDES permit applicable to the project site is issued by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.
State Regulations
California Safe Drinking Water Act
California enacted its own Safe Drinking Water Act, with the California Department of Health Services (DHS) granted primary enforcement responsibility. Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) (Division 4, Chapter 15, “Domestic Water Quality and Monitoring Regulations”) established DHS authority and provides drinking water quality and monitoring requirements, which are equal to or more stringent than federal standards.
California Recycled Water Regulations
The regulation of recycled water is vested by State law in the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the California Department of Public Health Services (DPH). DPH is responsible for the regulations concerning the use of recycled water. Title 17 (California Water Code, §§13500–13556) regulates the protection of the potable water supply through the control of cross-connections with potential contaminants, including recycled water. The established water quality standards and treatment reliability criteria for recycled water are codified in Title 22 of the California Water Code. The requirements of Title 22, as revised in 1978, 1990 and 2001, establish the quality and/or treatment processes required for a recycled effluent to be used for a non-potable application. In addition to recycled water uses and treatment requirements, Title 22 addresses sampling and analysis requirements at the treatment plant, preparation of an engineering report prior to production or use of recycled water, general treatment design requirements, reliability requirements, and alternative methods of treatment.
Urban Water Management Planning Act
The Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code, Division 6, Part 2.6, §10610 et. seq.) was enacted in 1983. The UWMP Act applies to municipal water suppliers that serve more than 3,000 customers or provide more than 3,000 acre-feet (AF) per year of water. The UWMP Act requires these suppliers to update their Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) every five years to demonstrate an appropriate level of reliability in supplying anticipated short-term and long-term water demands during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
State Water Resources Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) is the California agency focused on providing and ensuring clean sustainable water for all state residents. The SWRCB works alongside other federal programs like the Clean Water Act (CWA) to regulate water sources and uses. The agency regulates water Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-3
consumption for irrigation and drinking, as well as water discharges from construction, municipal uses, stormwater, and other sources.
Assembly Bill 1668 and Senate Bill 606 – May 31, 2018
SB 606 and AB 1668 establish guidelines for efficient water use and a framework for the implementation and oversight of the new standards, which must be in place by 2022. The two bills strengthen the State’s water resiliency in the face of future droughts with provisions that include:
Establishing water use objectives and long-term standards for efficient water use that apply to urban retail water suppliers; comprised of indoor residential water use, outdoor residential water use, commercial, industrial and institutional (CII) irrigation with dedicated meters, water loss, and other unique local uses.
Providing incentives for water suppliers to recycle water.
Identifying small water suppliers and rural communities that may be at risk of drought and water shortage vulnerability and provide recommendations for drought planning.
Requiring both urban and agricultural water suppliers to set annual water budgets and prepare for drought.1
Senate Bill 610
Under SB 610, water assessments must be furnished to local governments for inclusion in any environmental documentation for certain projects (as defined in Water Code 10912 [a]) subject to the CEQA.2
Senate Bill 221
Under SB 221, approval by a city or county of certain residential subdivisions requires an affirmative written verification of sufficient water supply. SB 221 is intended to ensure that collaboration on finding the needed water supplies to serve a new large subdivision occurs before Project construction begins.3 Assembly Bill 341
AB 341, approved in October 2011, is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by diverting commercial solid waste to recycling efforts and to expand the opportunity for additional recycling services and recycling manufacturing facilities in the state. It is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75 percent of solid waste generated be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020. This law requires California commercial businesses and public entities, that generate four or more cubic yards of commercial solid waste per week or is a multi-family residential dwelling with five or more units, to arrange for recycling services.
Each local jurisdiction is required to inform businesses about the recycling requirement and to keep track of the level of recycling within the business community. In addition, each jurisdiction is required to report
1 State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2023). California Statutes Making Conservation a California Way of Life. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/california_statutes.html. Accessed November 2023.
2 California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). (2002). Draft Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 1610 and Senate Bill 221 of 2001. Page iii. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Water-Use-And- Efficiency/Files/DT-SB-610-SB-221-PDF.pdf. Accessed November 2023. 3 Ibid.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-4
to California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), the state agency that oversees recycling and solid waste, on progress in the business community.4 Assembly Bill 939
Assembly Bill 939, the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, requires each city or county to prepare a Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to its Solid Waste Management Plan, that identifies how each jurisdiction will meet the mandatory state waste diversion goal of 50 percent by and after the year 2000. Subsequent legislation changed the reporting requirements and threshold, but restated source reduction as a priority.
Solid Waste Disposal Measurement Act of 2008
The purpose of the Solid Waste Disposal Measurement Act of 2008 (SB 1016) is to make the process of goal measurement (as established by AB 939) simpler, timelier, and more accurate. SB 1016 builds on AB 939 compliance requirements by implementing a simplified measure of jurisdictions’ performance.
SB 1016 accomplishes this by changing to a disposal-based indicator—the per capita disposal rate—which uses only two factors: (1) a jurisdiction’s population (or in some cases employment) and (2) its disposal, as reported by disposal facilities. Each year, Cal Recycle calculates each jurisdiction’s per capita (per resident or per employee) disposal rates. If business is the dominant source of a jurisdiction’s waste generation, CalRecycle may use the per employee disposal rate. Each year’s disposal rate will be compared to that jurisdiction’s 50 percent per capita disposal target. As such, jurisdictions will not be compared to other jurisdictions or the statewide average, but they will only be compared to their own 50 percent per capita disposal target. Among other benefits, per capita disposal is an indicator that allows for jurisdiction growth because, as residents or employees increase, report-year disposal tons can increase and still be consistent with the 50 percent per capita disposal target. A comparison of the reported annual per capita disposal rate to the 50 percent per capita disposal target will be useful for indicating progress or other changes over time.
California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991 The California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act require areas in development projects to be set aside for collecting and loading recyclable materials. The Act required CalRecycle (formerly the California Integrated Waste Management Board) to develop a model ordinance for adoption by any local agency relating to adequate areas for collection and loading of recyclable materials as part of development projects. Local agencies are required to adopt the model, or an ordinance of their own, providing for adequate areas in development projects for the collection and loading of recyclable materials.
Regional and Local Regulations
City of Rialto Urban Water Management Plan
Pursuant to the Urban Water Management Planning Act, the City of Rialto (City) adopts the San Bernardino Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan every five years. The current adopted plan is
4 California Legislative Information (CLI). (2011). Assembly Bill No. 341. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB341 Accessed November 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-5
the 2020 Upper Santa Ana River Watershed Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan (IRUWMP).
City of Rialto Municipal Code Chapter 18.108, Regulation of Recycling Facilities The requirements of Chapter 18.108 – Regulation of Recycling Facilities established guidelines and operating standards and procedures for the permitting of recycling facilities in the City. Recycling facilities may be located and operated in commercial and industrial zoning districts in conformance with Section 18.108.040.
Rialto General Plan 2010
The Rialto General Plan (General Plan) provides guidance to promote the City’s goals for current and future development related to solid waste, recycling, and infrastructure, including water and wastewater systems. Relevant General Plan policies for infrastructure and waste handling are addressed below.
Where inconsistencies exist, if any, they are addressed in the respective impact analysis below.
Goal 3-8 Promote affordable and quality water service capable of adequately meeting normal and emergency water demands to all areas in Rialto.
Policy 3-8.1 Require that all new development or expansion of existing facilities bear the cost of expanding the water system to handle the increased demands which they are expected to generate.
Policy 3-8.4 Advocate regular evaluation of the entire water supply and distribution system to ensure its continued adequacy, reliability, and safety.
Policy 3-8.6 Work with water agencies to aggressively recharge groundwater basins and prevent excessive water pumping when there are inadequate supplies.
Policy 3-8.7 Develop new sources of water supply, including drilling additional water wells that are free from perchlorate, and expanding recycling water opportunities.
Policy 3-8.8 Work with municipal water districts to explore new water conservation opportunities within Rialto.
Policy 3-8.9 Conserve potable water and utilize reclaimed water for meeting landscaping and irrigation demands as much as possible.
Policy 3-8.10 Support water conservation through requirements for landscaping with drought- tolerant plants and efficient irrigation for all new development and City projects.
Goal 3-9 Upgrade and maintain an improved wastewater system with adequate plant efficiency and capacity to protect the health and safety of all Rialto residents, businesses, and institutions.
Policy 3-9.1 Require that all new development or expansion of existing facilities bear the cost of expanding the wastewater disposal system to handle the increased loads which they are expected to generate.
Policy 3.9-2 Evaluate the wastewater disposal system routinely to ensure its adequacy to meet changes in demand and changes in types of waste.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-6
Goal 3-10 Minimize the volume of solid waste that enters local and regional landfills.
Policy 3-10.2 Encourage the recycling of construction and demolition materials in an effort to divert these items from entering landfills.
Policy 3-10.3 Continue to provide and improve flexible fees and schedules for solid waste collection and recycling programs.
Policy 3-10.4 Continue to educate the community regarding the benefits of solid waste diversion and recycling, and maintain programs that make it easy for all residents and businesses to work toward City waste reduction objectives.
Environmental Setting
Water Supply
Water service within the City is provided by three separate water agencies: Rialto Water Services, West Valley Water District (WVWD), and Fontana Union Water Company (FUWC). The project site is located within the jurisdiction of the WVWD.
As described in the 2020 IRUWMP, the WVWD provides water service to customers within southwestern San Bernardino County as well as a portion of northern Riverside County. Specifically, the WVWD provides service to the cities of Fontana, Rialto, Colton, Jurupa Valley, Bloomington, and unincorporated areas of San Bernardino County. As of 2020, the WVWD includes over 23,000 municipal water service connections, providing potable water to over 90,000 residents, commercial, industrial, and institutional uses.5 Recycled water is also available from the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant.
The City distributes its water to its year 2020 12,265 service connections through a 162-mile network of distribution mains with pipelines sizes ranging from two to 48 inches. The water system consists of three pressure zones and three subzones that provide sufficient water pressure to customers. Table 4.17-1:
Projected Water Supplies, identifies the anticipated water supplies for WVWD.
5 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). (2021). 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9232/637614632546570000. Accessed November 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-7
Table 4.17-1: Projected Water Supplies (AF)
Water Supply Additonal Detail on Water
Supply
2025
Water
Supply (AF)
2030
Water
Supply (AF)
2035
Water
Supply (AF)
2040
Water
Supply (AF)
2045
Water
Supply (AF)
Groundwater
(not desalinated) Bunker Hill (part of SBB) 2,052 2,353 3,554 4,754 6,455 Groundwater
(not desalinated)
Bunker Hill (part of SBB),
via Baseline Feeder) 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000
Groundwater
(not desalinated) Lytle (past of SBB) 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 Groundwater
(not desalinated) Rialto-Colton 4,426 4,538 4,650 4,761 4,873 Purchased or
Imported Water
State Water Project –
Rialto Colton Groundwater
Supplement Supply
- - - - -
Groundwater
(not desalinated) Riverside-Arlington 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,000 Groundwater
(not desalinated) Chino - 900 900 900 900
Surface water
(not desalinated) Lytle Creek 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 3,100 Purchased or
Imported Water
State Water Project –
Direct Delivery 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000
Total 26,978 28,791 30,603 32,415 34,229
Source: 2020 San Bernardino Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2021); Page 5-20 Table 5-12. Accessed from:
www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9242/637614374631830000. Accessed November 2023.
Water for the Project would be supplied by the WVWD and would connect to the existing to the existing water system in East Santa Ana Avenue. The 2020 IRUWMP anticipates adequate regional supplies for years 2025 to 2045 under multiple-dry year conditions, as summarized in Table 4.17-2: Multiple Dry Year Water Supply and Demand.6 The multiple-dry year period is reflected as the lowest annual runoff for a three year or more consecutive period. As shown in Table 4.17-2, the supply is sufficient to account for the demand during the same period. The City also determined that water demands would not increase during single or multiple dry years.7
6 SBVMWD. (2021a). 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9232/637614632546570000. Accessed November 2023. 7 Ibid.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-8
Table 4.17-2: Multiple Dry Year Water Supply and Demand Year Totals 2025
(AF)
2030
(AF)
2035
(AF)
2040
(AF)
2045
(AF)
First Year
Supply Totals 29,676 31,670 33,663 35,657 37,651
Demand Totals 25,805 27,539 29,273 31,006 32,740
Difference 3,871 4,131 4,391 4,651 4,911
Second Year
Supply Totals 29,676 31,670 33,663 35,657 37,651
Demand Totals 25,805 27,539 29,273 31,006 32,740
Difference 3,871 4,131 4,391 4,651 4,911
Third Year
Supply Totals 29,676 31,670 33,663 35,657 37,651
Demand Totals 25,805 27,539 29,273 31,006 32,740
Difference 3,871 4,131 4,391 4,651 4,911
Fourth Year
Supply Totals 29,676 31,670 33,663 35,657 37,651
Demand Totals 25,805 27,539 29,273 31,006 32,740
Difference 3,871 4,131 4,391 4,651 4,911
Fifth Year
Supply Totals 29,676 31,670 33,663 35,657 37,651
Demand Totals 25,805 27,539 29,273 31,006 32,740
Difference 3,871 4,131 4,391 4,651 4,911
Source: SBVMWD. (2021). 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9232/637614632546570000 Wastewater
Wastewater within the City is treated at the City of Rialto Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). Located east of the project site at 501 East Santa Ana Avenue in Rialto, the approximately 14-acre plant provides secondary and tertiary treatment processes with a maximum treatment capacity of 11.7 million gallons per day (mgd). It consists of five separate treatment facilities built between 1956 and 1998. The City processes over 2 billion gallons of wastewater per year at the WWTP. Processing of sewage can be accomplished in numerous ways through, mechanical, biological, and chemical treatment methods.
Primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment standards reflect the degree by which the sewage has been treated. Primary treatment includes the removal of relatively large objects such as trash, rags, cans, and gravel. Secondary treatment involves the removal of biological solids such as fat, grease, human waste, soaps, and other organic materials. Tertiary treatment further clarifies wastewater utilizing chemical washes, biological decomposition, and disinfection. Tertiary treatment involves the removal of nitrates, phosphorous, pathogens, and other microorganisms.8
Tertiary treated water can be used as reclaimed water for irrigation and other uses that can rely on non- potable water. Reclaimed water is produced at the City’s WWTP. However, there is no infrastructure for citywide use of recycled water for irrigation or other non-potable uses and there are no plans to install such infrastructure. The City’s Utilities Division is responsible for maintaining over 150 miles of sewer mains. The collection method uses gravity flow through vitrified clay pipes that flow from northwest to
8 City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan Update EIR. Accessed August 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-9
southeast. There is an existing 24-inch and 28-inch sewer mains located within East Santa Ana Avenue, which the Project would connect to.
Dry Utilities
The Project would be served by Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) and Southern California Edison (SCE). SoCalGas serves 21.1 million consumers through 5.9 million meters in more than 500 communities with its 24,000-square mile service territory through central and southern California.9 There is a high-pressure distribution line along East Santa Ana Avenue, north of the project site and a high- pressure distribution line along South Willow Avenue, northwest of the project site and South Pepper Avenue, east of the project site. There are no gas transmission lines adjacent to the project site.10 SCE delivers power to 15 million people within its 50,000-square mile service across central, coastal, and southern California. SCE’s electricity system is comprised of 125,000 miles of distribution and bulk transmission lines; 91,375 miles of distribution lines (less streetlight miles); and 1.4 million electric poles.11 A SCE utility corridor with overhead transmission and subtransmission lines is south and west of the project site and a SCE utility corridor with subtransmission lines is east of the project site. 12 A 6-foot SCE easement is located on the western portion of the project site and 10-foot and 105-foot SCE pole line easements are located on the southern portion of the project site, along with a 70-foot Southern Sierras Power Company pole line easement.
Solid Waste
Burrtec Waste Industries provides trash collection and recycling services including hazardous waste disposal and recycling services to the City of Rialto. Burrtec transports solid waste to the San Bernardino County Department of Public Works Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, located approximately 6.8 miles southeast of the project site. The Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill has a total site capacity of 408 acres and is expected to reach capacity and closure in 2045.13 The maximum permitted throughput is 7,500 tons per day and the remaining capacity is 61,219,377 cubic yards. In the event that that the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill is closed due to high winds, wastes are transferred to the San Timoteo Landfill in Redlands. The El Sobrante Landfill, in the City of Corona also serves as a backup. The San Timoteo Landfill has a total site capacity of 366 acres and is expected to reach capacity and closure in 2039.14 The maximum permitted throughput is 2,000 tons per day and the remaining capacity is 12,360,396 cubic yards. The El Sobrante Landfill has a total site capacity of 1,322 acres and is expected to reach capacity and closure in 2051. The
9 SoCalGas. (2024). Company Profile. https://www.socalgas.com/about-us/company-profile.Accessed June 2024. 10 SoCalGas. ND. Gas Transmission Pipeline Interactive Map-Riverside. https://socalgas.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=faeed481312f4e5fb056f739ff169e02.Accessed June 2024.
11 SCE. 2024. Who We Are. https://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are.Accessed June 2024. 12 SCE. 2024. SCE Power Site Search Tool.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=05a84ec9d19f43ac93b451939c330888.Accessed June 2024.
13 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), (2024). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for Mid- Valley Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0055).
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662. Accessed January 2024. 14 CalRecycle. (2024). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for San Timoteo Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0087). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1906?siteID=2688. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-10
maximum permitted throughput is 16,054 tons per day and the remaining capacity is 143,977,170 cubic yards.15
Methodology
The Project is evaluated against the aforementioned significance criteria/thresholds and information concerning current service levels and the ability of the service providers to accommodate the increased demand created by the Project.
Water Supply. The analysis of water supply is based on the change of water levels due to the Project’s projected water demand. This information used for this analysis includes the 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan.
Wastewater Capacity and Treatment Regulations. The wastewater analysis identifies the types of wastewater that is anticipated to be generated by Project implementation and wastewater treatment requirements related to wastewater. Impacts would be considered significant if the Project would not comply or would conflict with existing applicable wastewater regulations resulting in a significant environmental impact. Refer to Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, for information regarding the Project’s impacts on drainage.
Dry Utilities. This analysis addresses the Project’s potential impacts on dry utility infrastructure, including electrical, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. Energy consumption that would occur during both construction and operation of the Project and specific analysis methodologies was assessed in Section 4.5, Energy. Energy calculations are provided in Appendix F of this EIR and are based on the same assumptions used in Section 4.2, Air Quality, and Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions of this EIR.
Storm Drain Capacity. Impacts on stormwater drainage facilities include the general increase or decrease in stormwater and impact on existing drainage infrastructure that is anticipated to occur from buildout of the Project. As discussed above, issues related to stormwater drainage facilities are further addressed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Landfill Capacity. The analysis of the Project’s impact on landfill facilities is based on the anticipated generation of solid waste that would occur during construction and operation of the Project. The analysis identifies the projected amount of non-hazardous construction debris and operational solid waste that would be generated from implementation of the Project and the amount that would be disposed of in landfills after compliance with recycling/diversion requirements. The Project impact’s regarding solid waste would be significant if the Project’s anticipated solid waste generation would substantially affect landfill capacity, such that additional or expanded landfill facilities would be required to accommodate the Project.
Solid Waste Regulations: The analysis of the Project consists of the Project’s conformance of applicable solid waste regulations related to the generation or disposal of solid waste. Impacts would be considered significant if the Project would not comply with all applicable federal, state, or local statutes or regulations related to solid waste.
15 CalRecycle. (2024c). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for El Sobrante Landfill (33-AA-0217). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-11
Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria for water systems is from the Environmental Checklist in State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. An impact would be considered significant and would require mitigation if it would meet one of the following criteria:
Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects; Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years;
Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that is has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments;
Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals;
Comly with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
Project Impacts and Mitigation
Impact 4.17-1: Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Water
The Project would require the construction of new water service connection laterals that would connect to the existing water system in East Santa Ana Avenue. Impacts of required water facilities are addressed throughout this EIR in the respective EIR section(s). The majority of Project water facilities would be installed below ground and installed within existing road rights-of-way, and as such the only physical impacts would be associated with temporary impacts during construction (refer to Section 4.12, Noise, for a discussion of significant short-term noise impacts during pipeline construction). Above-ground facilities are addressed in respective EIR section(s), (addressed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics). All Project water facilities would be constructed and operated in accordance with applicable guidelines and regulations of the WVWD and City and would also follow applicable EIR mitigation measures in each topical area addressed in the EIR. In consideration of existing requirements and EIR mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated with respect to Project water facilities. Further, prior to the issuance of the final building permit, the City would determine the fees associated with connecting to the existing facilities.
Payment of fees as required by the City are intended to offset incremental impacts to water facilities by helping fund capital improvements and expenditures. Accordingly, impacts associated with the construction of water facilities would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-12
Wastewater
Construction of the Project site would result in an additional 166,555 square feet (sf) of truck terminal use and 5,890 sf of office use in the City. Prior to construction or operations of the Project, the City permitting process would ensure adequate capacity to treat the anticipated wastewater occurs before the Project is implemented through review of the Utility Plans.
As discussed above, wastewater during construction and operations from the project site would be treated at the WWTP. An existing 24-inch and 28-inch sewer mains are located within East Santa Ana Avenue. The Project would include a connection to the existing sewer utilities, ultimately conveying Project effluent to the Rialto WWTP.
While the Project would result in an incremental increase in demand for wastewater treatment services, the Project wastewater treatment demand, which is further discussed under the response to Impact
4.17-3, would not result in or require new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. Improvements to facilitate service to the project site would occur in previously disturbed or areas already proposed to be disturbed. Impacts would be less than significant.
Dry Utilities
SCE currently operates electric power in the City through electricity distribution lines both aboveground and buried lines. The Project would connect to existing SCE lines which would enable services to the site.
Although some new utility infrastructure may be required on the site, extension of services is not anticipated to require the construct of any new off-site electric power facilities in order to serve the project site. At most, it is anticipated that SCE would provide more electricity to the Project compared to what is currently consumed, due to the current vacant status of the project site. This would represent a less than significant impact and mitigation is not required.
The SoCalGas Company provides gas services to most of southern California. It is anticipated that the project site may require some amount of natural gas to support future operations. Similar to electrical services, natural gas lines already exist in the area to enable service to surrounding uses. These areas are anticipated to be heavily disturbed and would not contain any pristine resources. Additionally, it is not anticipated that new or expanded gas supply facilities would be required to serve the Project. As such, all required improvements would be made as part of the proposed improvements in areas that would be disturbed as part of Project implementation or in the aforementioned previously disturbed areas.
Therefore, these impacts would be less than significant.
The Project site would require telecommunication services to be provided by AT&T. As discussed above, existing telecommunication lines would be located within existing adjacent right-of-ways needed to serve the existing surrounding development. Service to the project site would require tying into these lines but these improvements would occur within existing areas of disturbance such as those adjacent to existing roadways. The construction of substantial new telecommunication infrastructures would not be required.
These impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-13
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.17-2: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
As shown in Table 4.17-1 and Table 4.17-2 the WVWD water supply is adequate and outpaces demand during multiple dry years through the year 2045.16 Based on the Project water demand calculations for the Project Energy Memorandum (Appendix F), Project construction would result in water demand of approximately 930,000 gallons and Project operations would result in water demand of approximately 134,259 gallons per day, or approximately 150 AF per year for both construction and operations. As shown in Table 4.17-2, the WVWD has a projected surplus of water supply compared to anticipated demand, even when considering multiple dry years. The water demand resulting from the Project would account for approximately 3.0 percent to 3.8 percent of the available surplus. However, the 2020 IRUWMP was prepared based on population and land use assumptions consistent with the SCAG 2012 Regional Transportation Plan and the Project is consistent with the City’s land use and zoning designations for the project site, therefore Project water demand falls within the 2020 IRUWMP water demand projections. 17 Further, the City’s General Plan EIR evaluated water usage for the City and it is anticipated that the City has an adequate water supply to serve the Project. Thus, given that there is adequate water supplies available to serve the Project during normal, dry and multiple dry years, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
16 SBVMWD. (2021b). 2020 San Bernardino Valley Regional Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9232/637614632546570000. Accessed January 2024. 17 Ibid.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-14
Impact 4.17-3: Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that is has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Wastewater services are provided by Rialto Water Services and as discussed above, there are existing 24- inch and 28-inch sewer mains located within East Santa Ana Avenue. The Project would include a lateral connection to an existing sewer main within East Santa Ana Avenue, to the north of the project site. The project site is currently vacant, and thus would result in an increase in wastewater treatment demand at the project site. The Project would include the construction of a truck terminal warehouse and maintenance shop on land zoned Heavy Industrial. Based on the Project water demand calculations for the Project Energy Memorandum (Appendix F), the Project would result in a demand for approximately 43 million gallons of water per year for indoor use, or 0.12 mgd. The General Plan noted that the design capacity of the Rialto WWTP exceeds 12 mgd and that, as of 2020, the City produces approximately seven to eight mgd of sewage; there is approximately four to five mgd capacity remaining. Thus, the WWTP has capacity for the wastewater generated by the Project. Further, the City’s General Plan EIR evaluated wastewater demand based on the proposed land use and zoning identified for the project site. The Project is consistent with the land use designation and zoning for the project site; therefore, it is anticipated that the City has an adequate water supply to serve the Project. The Project would not require expansion or relocation of a wastewater facility as there is sufficient capacity at the WWTP to serve the Project.
Therefore, with application of fees to sustain the wastewater treatment system and considerable existing spare capacity within the wastewater facilities, the potential impact that the Project has on the current infrastructure would be less than significant. As such, the proposed uses of the Project were anticipated within the Specific Plan.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-15
Impact 4.17-4: Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would be served by the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill (2390 North Alder Avenue), located approximately 6.4 miles northwest of the project site. The landfill has a daily throughput of 7,500 tons per day and a remaining capacity of 61,219,377 cubic yards.18 Waste generation may vary greatly depending upon individual tenants; however, the Project does not propose a land use or zone change. Although, the uses allowed to operate on the project site would be consistent with the assumptions for solid waste use in the City’s General Plan EIR. Further, the Project tenants will pay standard collection and processing fees established by the City’s franchise agreement with Burrtec. Further, compliance with all applicable regulations and laws regarding solid waste would further reduce impacts. Impacts would be less than significant.
Construction
Site preparation (vegetation removal and grading activities) and construction activities would generate typical construction debris, including wood, paper, glass, metals, cardboard, and green waste. Non- salvaged construction and demolition waste would result in an incremental and intermittent increase in solid waste disposal at the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill.
According to the EPA’s (2003) “Construction and Demolition Amounts,” the overall waste generation rate of nonresidential construction is expected to be 4.34 pounds of waste per square foot constructed. Using the EPA waste generation rates and the overall buildings square footage of approximately 191,145 sf, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 415 tons of solid waste during Project construction.19 Application of the CBC requirements would divert a minimum of 50 percent of the construction waste from the landfill, which results in a total estimated construction solid waste generation of approximately 208 tons.
As discussed above, the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill has approximately 7,500 tons per day of intake capacity; therefore, the landfill would support a temporary increase in solid waste during construction of the Project over time, in multiple phases. Recycling of construction debris would reduce the potential amount of waste disposed of at the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill and would contribute to the recycling goals set forth by the City, the CBC, and AB 939. Construction activities would be required to comply with all federal, State, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste. As a result, impacts associated with short-term solid waste would be less than significant.
18 CalRecycle. (2024). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662. Accessed January 2024. 19 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2003). Construction and Demolition Materials Amounts. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-
09/documents/estimating2003buildingrelatedcanddmaterialsamounts.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-16
Operation
Based on a generation rate of 1.42 pounds of waste per 100 square feet of industrial building area, Project operations would generate approximately 1.4 tons of solid waste per day.20 Pursuant to AB 939, A minimum of 50 percent of solid waste would be required to be recycled. Accordingly, the Project would generate approximately 0.7 tons per day of solid waste that would be directed to a landfill, which represents 0.009 percent of the Mid-Valley Landfill maximum permitted daily capacity of 7,500 tons per day. Although the Project would increase solid waste generation and decrease available capacity of the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, Project operations are anticipated to result in a minimal increase in remaining capacity of the landfill. As the Project would not exceed the permitted capacity of the landfill and solid waste infrastructure and would generate a minimal amount of solid waste compared to the permitted daily capacity at the Mid-Valley Landfill, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measures No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.
Impact 4.17-5: Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would comply with applicable regulations regarding solid waste, including those of the City of Rialto. Section 18.108 and 8.08 of the Municipal Code which provide regulations regarding solid waste handling and recycling by both customers and collectors. In accordance with Section 8.08, the Project would maintain a sufficient number of containers to hold all solid waste; deposit all solid waste, including gray container waste, non-organic recyclables, and organic waste generated or accumulated on the premises into the proper containers; and cleanup of any and all solid waste generated, accumulated, or spilled on the premises prior to collection. In accordance with the California Solid Waste and Recycling Act of 1991, the Project would provide for adequate areas for collection and loading of recyclable materials.
The City complies with Assembly Bill 939 through implementing source reduction and recycling measures which require the establishment of an integrated waste management system and a 50% waste reduction requirement that was effective beginning in the year 2000. In accordance with the Integrated Waste Management Act, the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors adopted the County of San Bernardino Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan, which outlines the goals, policies, and programs the
20 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. (2024). Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates. Accessed June 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-17
County and its cities implement to create an integrated waste management system that complies with the provisions of AB 939.
Solid waste services would be provided by Burrtec Waste Management. As previously discussed, the Mid- Valley Sanitary Landfill has a daily maximum intake load of 7,500 tons per day. The remaining disposal capacity is 61,219,377 cubic yards, which is the most current published data. Based on the remaining capacity of the transfer station and landfill, and the long-term planning programs required to meet CalRecycle requirements, there would be adequate waste disposal capacity within the permitted County’s landfill system to meet the needs of the Project. The Project would comply with applicable local, State, and federal regulations regarding solid waste. Solid waste services would be provided to the Project without significantly impacting existing and planned development within the City and county. As a result, impacts associated with solid waste compliance would be less than significant.
Mitigation Program
Standard Conditions
No standard conditions are applicable.
Mitigation Measures
Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Mitigation Measure No mitigation measures are applicable.
Project Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Cumulative Impacts
For purposes of public utilities and service systems, cumulative impacts are considered for projects on a system-wide basis and are associated with the capacity of existing and planned infrastructure from local responsible agencies. As described above, all impacts from the project site to public services and utilities systems would be less than significant in consideration of compliance with existing laws, ordinances, regulations and standards. In addition, the project site would recycle and implement measures on-site to reduce the waste stream to landfill(s) and the Project applicant would pay the applicable development impact and service fees. Impacts related to storm water drainage facilities are addressed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality. Although temporary significant impacts during construction could occur, these impacts would only occur during development of the sites, would be typical of construction, would be localized, would occur at different times, and would be required to implement site-specific erosion control BMPs. Therefore, impacts are not anticipated to be cumulatively considerable. Other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects would be anticipated to implement similar measures or implement mitigation to fully mitigates their contribution to cumulative impacts. Therefore, there are no significant cumulative impacts anticipated relative to public utility and service systems, and the Project’s contribution toward potential future utility and service system impacts in the City is not cumulatively considerable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 4.17
Draft Environmental Impact Report Utilities and Service Systems
City of Rialto 4.17-18
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with utilities and service systems. No mitigation is required.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-1
5.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS
5.1 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Section 15126.2(c) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describe any significant impacts, including those that can be mitigated but not reduced to less than significant levels. The environmental effects of the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project) are addressed in Sections 4.1 through 4.17 of this EIR. Implementation of the Project would result in potentially significant impacts for the following topical issues: biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, transportation, and tribal cultural resources. Implementation of standard conditions (SCs), mitigation measures (MMs), and additional requirements provided in Sections
4.1 through 4.17 would reduce these impacts to levels considered less than significant with the exception of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and traffic impacts. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The Project would result in air pollutant emissions that exceed SCAQMD’s operational emission thresholds. The Project would implement Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR air quality mitigation measures 2 and 4, and Project Mitigation Measures (MM) AIR-1 and MM TRF-1. However, with the incorporation of applicable mitigation, pollutant emissions would continue to exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) thresholds, resulting in inconsistency with SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan. Impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard. The Project would exceed the SCAQMD operational thresholds despite implementation of Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor air quality mitigation measure 2 and Project mitigation measures MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1. Impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Conflict or consistency with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b). The Project’s transportation impact based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is potentially significant based on the San Bernardino County’s Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold. No feasible mitigation would reduce the Project’s VMT impact below the VMT threshold. Therefore, the Project’s VMT impact is considered significant and unavoidable.
Generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment. The Project would result in GHG emissions that exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold. The Project would incorporate Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR air quality mitigation measure 2, and Project mitigation measures MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4, to reduce impacts associated with GHG emissions. Additionally, the Project would implement MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1.
However, mitigated GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold despite implementation of feasible mitigation. Therefore, Project-related GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The Project’s long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold even with implementation of applicable mitigation. As such, the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-2
Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact, Project implementation could impede California’s statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2045.
5.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE EFFECTS
Section 15126.2(d) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss the significant irreversible environmental changes that would result from implementation of a project. Examples include: primary or secondary impacts of a project that would generally commit future generations to similar uses (e.g., highway improvements that would provide access to a previously inaccessible area); uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of a project (because a large commitment of such resources make removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely); and/or irreversible damage that could result from any potential environmental accidents associated with a project.
Implementation of the Project, which is comprised of a truck terminal, would require the long-term commitment of natural resources and land. Construction and long-term operation of the Project would require the commitment and reduction of available nonrenewable and slowly renewable resources, including petroleum fuels and natural gas (for vehicle use, construction, lighting, heating, and cooling of structures) and lumber, sand/gravel, steel, copper, lead, and other metals (for use in building construction and piping). Other resources that are slow to renew and/or recover from environmental stressors would also be impacted by Project implementation; examples include air quality, through the combustion of fossil fuels and production of greenhouse gases and water supply, through the increased potable water demands for drinking, cleaning, landscaping, and general maintenance needs.
5.3 GROWTH-INDUCING EFFECTS
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(e) requires that EIRs include a discussion of ways in which a proposed project could induce growth. The State CEQA Guidelines identify a project as “growth-inducing” if it fosters economic or population growth or if it encourages the construction of additional housing either directly or indirectly in the surrounding environment. New employees from commercial or industrial development and new population from residential development represent direct forms of growth. These direct forms of growth have a secondary effect of expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area. A Project would therefore have a growth-inducing impact if it would:
Directly or indirectly foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing;
Remove obstacles to population growth;
Require the construction of new or expanded facilities that could cause significant environmental effects; or
Encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively.
A project’s potential to induce growth does not automatically result in growth. Growth can only happen through capital investment in new economic opportunities by the private or public sectors. Under CEQA, the potential for growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental nor necessarily beneficial, and neither is it automatically considered to be of little significance to the environment.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-3
5.3.1 Directly or Indirectly Foster Economic or Population Growth, or the Construction of Additional Housing
Population and Employment
According to the California Department of Finance (DOF) the estimated population of the City of Rialto (City) is 102,985 as of 2023.1 The California Employment Development Department (EDD) calculated the City’s labor force to be 46,200, with 43,800 of those persons employed and 2,400 unemployed.2 Section 4.13, Population and Housing, determined that the Project could generate 140 employees.
Because this is less than the 2,400 unemployed persons within the City as estimated by the EDD, the Project would not necessarily spur a boost in population since the employees could be found within the City’s existing residents. The Project, at the time of its implementation, would likely only have an indirect effect on the City’s population through the expansion of economic activity within the City.
Housing
The project site is undeveloped and the Project does not include the development of residential units.
Further, the Project is consistent with the General Plan designation, land use zoning, and Agua Mansa Industrial Specific Plan zoning for the project site. Therefore, the Project would not directly affect housing availability within the City.
5.3.2 Remove Obstacles to Population Growth or Require The Construction of New or Expanded Facilities that Could Cause Significant Environmental Effects
The Project would not remove obstacles to growth through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities. Although the project site is undeveloped, it is bordered by existing industrial uses and is planned for development in the City’s General Plan and the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan).
As discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, the existing utilities and service systems (i.e., water, wastewater, solid waste, and electricity) are capable of providing service to the Project. While upgrades to the existing utilities may be necessary, major infrastructure is already present in the area. The utility improvements that are being implemented are distribution lines that would serve the proposed land uses.
The Project does not propose improvements that would extend services to areas that currently are not served or provide additional capacity in these infrastructure improvements, thereby facilitating new off- site development. There are no properties adjacent to the project site that would benefit by having the utilities extended. Therefore, the Project is not considered growth inducing with respect to removal of obstacles to growth or through the provision of infrastructure.
1 Department of Finance (DOF). (2023). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2020- 2023. https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-1/. Accessed January 2024. 2 California Employment Development Department (2021). Labor Force and Unemployment Rate For Cities and Counties. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-census-areas.html.
Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-4
5.3.3 Encourage and Facilitate Other Activities That Could Significantly Affect the Environment, Either Individually or Cumulatively
Refer to Sections 4.1 through 4.17 of this EIR. The Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts associated with air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation.
Project implementation would result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts associated with the Project’s compliance with applicable air quality plan and the increase in criteria pollutants within the Project area. The Project’s operational emissions would exceed the SCAQMD threshold for NOX. The Project would incorporate project mitigation measures MM AIR-1 and MM TRF-1 and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Air Quality Mitigation Measures 1 through 4, to reduce potential impacts.
The Project’s long-term operational unmitigated GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold. To reduce impacts associate with GHG emissions, the Project would implement MM AIR-1, MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4, MM TRF-1, and Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan EIR Air Quality Mitigation Measures 1 through 4. However, Project operational GHG emissions would remain above the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold with the implementation of feasible mitigation. Thus, Project implementation could impede California’s statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2045. Project GHG impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
The Project transportation impact based on VMT is significant and unavoidable per the San Bernardino Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold. The Project is subject to the City’s citywide traffic impact fee program and will pay applicable development impact fees (DIF) toward the South Riverside Avenue Widening Project. However, DIF fees would not reduce Project impacts below the VMT threshold. As such, the Project’s VMT impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Nevertheless, this impact would not encourage other activities that could significantly affect the environment.
Implementation of the Project is anticipated to have a beneficial economic effect. Design, engineering, and construction-related jobs would be created. These jobs would span the planning to construction phases of the Project, lasting until the Project is completed and in use. This would be a direct but temporary growth-inducing impact of the Project. The Project would create employment positions.
5.4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
State CEQA Guidelines § 15065(a)(1)-(4) requires preparation of an EIR when certain specified impacts may result from construction or implementation of a project. An EIR determines a finding of significance if a project has 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 an endangered, rare or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
In practice, this is the same standard as a significant effect on the environment, which is defined in Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines as “a substantial or potentially adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance.” Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-5
An EIR has been prepared for the Project, which fully addresses all of the Mandatory Findings of Significance. This EIR in its entirety addresses and discloses all known potential environmental effects associated with the development of the Project including direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts in the following resource areas:
Aesthetics Mineral Resources
Air Quality Noise
Biological Resources Population and Housing
Cultural Resources Public Services
Energy Transportation
Geology and Soils Tribal Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
A summary of all potential environmental impacts, level of significance and mitigation measures is provided in Section 1.0, Executive Summary.
Endemic and endangered animals within California and the Project’s potential effect on those species are fully discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of this EIR. The section found that although the project site features habitat for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, existing habitat on-site has been disturbed by previous grading and is no longer suitable habitat for the species. As such, mitigation is not required.
Project implementation would have the potential to impact burrowing owl during construction activities.
As such, the Project has included mitigation for burrowing owl, as further discussed in the section.
Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of the EIR analyzed the potential historic and cultural resource impacts that could occur due to the implementation of the Project and found no recorded historic or prehistoric resources located within the project site. Mitigation proposed within the section would include the retainment of a professional archaeologist to further minimize potential effects to the City’s historical and cultural resources. The mitigation presented in the section further lowered the significance of the potential impacts to less than significant levels.
5.4.1 The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals.
The Project would occupy an area previously used by industrial land uses, including the former Rialto Plant. The Project would be consistent with the Specific Plan upon the approval of a Conditional Development Permit, as a truck terminal is considered a conditionally permitted use within industrial zones in the City.
Section 5.2, Significant Irreversible Effects, of this document addresses the short-term and irretrievable commitment of natural resources to ensure that the consumption is justified on a long-term basis. In addition, Section 1.0, Executive Summary, identifies all significant and unavoidable impacts that could occur that would result in a long-term impact on the environment. Lastly, Section 5.3, Growth-Inducing Effects, identifies any long-term environmental impacts associated with economic and population growth that are associated with the Project.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 5.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Other CEQA Considerations
City of Rialto 5-6
5.4.2 The project has possible environmental effects that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.
State CEQA Guidelines §15065(a)(3) defines “cumulatively considerable” as times when “the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” This EIR provides a cumulative impact analysis only for all thresholds that result in a less than significant impact, a potentially significant impact unless mitigated, or a significant and unavoidable impact. Cumulative impacts are addressed for each of the environmental topics listed above and are provided in Sections 4.1 through 4.17 of this EIR.
5.4.3 The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
A change to the physical environment that might otherwise be minor must be treated as significant if people would be significantly affected. This standard relates to adverse changes to the environment of human beings generally, and not to effects on particular individuals. While changes to the environment that could directly or indirectly affect human beings would be possible in all of the CEQA issue areas previously listed, those that could directly affect human beings include aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, land use and planning, population and housing, public services, transportation, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems, all of which are addressed in their respective sections of this EIR. Applicable mitigation is addressed within each section.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-1
6.0 ALTERNATIVES
6.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15126.6(a) states that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project and evaluate /-the comparative merits of the alternatives.” In selecting alternatives to the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project), the City of Rialto (City), as Lead Agency, is to consider alternatives that could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project and avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects.
Alternatives to the Project are to be evaluated based on their feasibility within the rule of reason as set by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f). The rule states that “Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project.” The selection of alternatives would also take into consideration based on “site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent).”
6.2 PROJECT SUMMARY
As proposed, the Project would allow for the development of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop on approximately 45.7 acres (Accessor’s Parcel Number [APN] 0258-141-18) with associated surface parking and landscaping. The proposed truck terminal would include 166,555 square feet (sf) of warehouse use including 5,890 square feet (sf) of office use. The proposed maintenance shop would include 17,810 sf of maintenance use and 890 sf of office use.
The Project would include 149 passenger parking spaces, 679 trailer parking spaces, and 100 tractor parking spaces (see Table 3-1 in Section 3.0, Project Description). Passenger parking would be along the northwestern boundary of the project site, trailer parking would be located within the eastern and central portion of the project site, and tractor parking would be located at the northwestern corner of the project site. The Project is described in further detail in Section 3.0, Project Description.
The project site has a Rialto General Plan (General Plan) land use designation of General Industrial with a Specific Plan Overlay. The General Industrial designation allows for a broad range of heavy industrial activities. The General Industrial designation permits manufacturing and distribution, heavy equipment operations, and similar uses.1 The designation allows for a maximum Floor to Area Ratio (FAR)2 of 1.0.
The project site is located within the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan). The project site has a Heavy Industrial (H IND) land use designation within the Specific Plan. The H IND designation allows for transit and transportation terminals, repairs, and storage facilities.
1 City of Rialto. (2010). Rialto General Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/653/General-Plan. Accessed August 2023. 2 Floor Area Ratio is the measurement of a building's floor area in relation to the size of the parcel.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-2
6.3 CRITERIA FOR SELECTING ALTERNATIVES
Several criteria were used to select alternatives to the Project, as described below.
Ability To Achieve Project Objectives
Section 15126.6(f) of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR) states:
The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a ‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. Of those alternatives, the EIR need examine in detail only the ones that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project.
For purposes of the alternative analysis, each alternative assessed in this EIR was evaluated to determine the extent to which it could attain the following objectives identified for the Project:
Objective 1: Develop the property consistent with the guidelines and policies of the City of Rialto General Plan and more specifically, the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan.
Objective 2: Develop an industrial zoned site with land uses which meet current market demands.
Objective 3: Create revenue-generating uses that provide reliable employment for the long term.
Objective 4: Provide new buildings that are compatible with the surrounding industrial uses.
Objective 5: Develop an industrial use consistent with current zoning in close proximity to designated truck routes and the State highway system to avoid or shorten truck-trip lengths on other roadways.
Objective 6: Redevelop an underutilized property in accordance with Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan.
Elimination/Reduction of Significant Impacts
Section 15126.6(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR) states that “Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code §21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly”.
Potentially significant environmental impacts that would result from the Project are evaluated in Sections 4.1 through 4.17 of this EIR. With implementation of the respective Standard Conditions and Requirements (SCs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs) identified for each topical issue, all significant impacts resulting from the Project would be reduced to a level considered less than significant with the exception of traffic impacts and operational air quality impacts. The Project’s transportation impact based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is significant based on the Countywide Per Employee Threshold. As the effectiveness of transportation demand management (TDM) measures and reduction of VMT impacts below thresholds cannot be assured, Project’s VMT impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-3
Considered but Rejected
Section 15126.6(c) notes that the EIR should identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process. Reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination may include factors such as failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, infeasibility, or inability to avoid significant environmental impacts. The City of Rialto, as the Lead Agency, did not identify additional alternatives for consideration.
Feasibility
Section 15126.6(f)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR) states:
Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent). No one of these factors establishes a fixed limit on the scope of reasonable alternatives (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; see Save Our Residential Environment v. City of West Hollywood (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1745, 1753, fn. 1).
Each alternative was evaluated for its feasibility, its ability to attain the Project’s objectives, and its ability to reduce and/or eliminate significant impacts associated with the Project.
6.4 ALTERNATIVES FOR ANALYSIS
In accordance with Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the discussion in this section of the EIR focuses on a reasonable range of alternatives. The analysis provides a comparison of the alternatives’ varying environmental effects and their merits and/or disadvantages in relation to the Project and to each other; their feasibility and ability to achieve Project objectives are also discussed. The environmentally superior alternative is identified as required by CEQA.
Three alternatives to the Project have been identified. Alternative 1: No Development
Alternative 2: High-Cube Short-Term Storage
Alternative 3: Business Park
The evaluation of each alternative uses the same thresholds of significance identified in Sections 4.1 through 4.17. Table 6-1: Summary of Proposed Project and Alternative Impacts, compares the alternative’s anticipated environmental impacts with the implementation of mitigation, as required. Table 6-2: Project Objectives Consistency Analysis, summarizes each alternative’s ability to achieve the Project objectives.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-4
Table 6-1: Summary of Proposed Project and Alternative Impacts Topic Proposed Project Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Aesthetics LS ─ = =
Air Quality SU ─ ─ ─
Biological Resources LS/M ─ = =
Cultural Resources LS/M ─ = =
Energy LS ─ ─ +
Geology and Soils LS/M ─ = =
Greenhouse Gas Emissions LS/M ─ ─ ─
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials LS ─ = =
Hydrology and Water Quality LS ─ = =
Land Use and Planning LS ─ = =
Mineral Resources LS ─ = =
Noise LS ─ ─ ─
Population and Housing LS ─ = =
Public Services LS ─ = =
Transportation SU ─ = =
Tribal Cultural Resources LS/M ─ = =
Utilities and Services Systems LS ─ + +
LS = Less than Significant
LS/M = Less than Significant with Mitigation/Standard Conditions S/U = Significant Unavoidable Impact
(─) The alternaƟve would result in less of an impact than the proposed Project or no impact. (+) The alternative would result in greater impacts than the proposed Project. (=) The alternative would result in the same/similar impacts as the proposed Project. (*) The alternative would reduce/eliminate a significant and unavoidable impact.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-5
Table 6-2: Project Objectives Consistency Analysis
Project Objective
Alternative 1:
No Development
Alternative 2:
High-Cube Short-
Term Storage
Alternative 3:
Business Park
Consistent?
Develop the property consistent with the guidelines
and policies of the City of Rialto General Plan and more specifically, the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan. No Yes Yes
Develop an industrial zoned site with new truck and
trailer parking to respond to current market demands. No No No Create revenue-generating uses that provide reliable
employment for the long term. No Yes Yes
Provide new buildings that are compatible with the
surrounding industrial uses. No Yes Yes
To develop a truck terminal facility in close proximity to designated truck routes and the State highway system
to avoid or shorten truck-trip lengths on other
roadways. No No No
To redevelop an underutilized property in accordance
with Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. No Yes Yes
For the alternatives, it is assumed that relevant regulatory requirements, applicable project design features, and project-specific mitigation measures identified for the Project would also be implemented with each alternative, and thus serve to reduce or avoid potential significant impacts similar to the Project.
Alternative 1: No Development Alternative
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6, requires an evaluation of the “No Project” alternative for decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving a project with the impacts of not approving it. The No Development Alternative assumes that the Project would not be developed, which means there would be no warehouse facilities, landscape improvements, or surface lot improvements developed on the project site. In its existing condition, the site would remain vacant and disturbed.
Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that when the project is not a land use or regulatory plan, the “no project” alternative:
…is the circumstance under which the project does not proceed. Here the discussion would compare the environmental effects of the property remaining in its existing state against environmental effects which would occur if the project is approved. If disapproval of the project under consideration would result in predictable actions by others … this “no project” consequence should be discussed.
Therefore, although this alternative assumes “No Development” (as required by CEQA), this is considered a speculative assumption as the land is assumed to remain in private ownership (as there are no offers to purchase the land for public open space use). As such, it is likely the land would eventually be developed with industrial uses in the future, as the land has an industrial land use designation under the City’s Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-6
General Plan land use designation and is zoned for industrial use under the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan.
Alternative 1: Impact Comparison to the Proposed Project Aesthetics. Under the Alternative 1 scenario, no development would occur, and the project site would remain vacant. There would be no buildings on site and no related on-site improvements, including landscaping, would be provided. Because Alternative 1 would not involve development of the project site, there would be no new sources of lighting. Neither the Project nor Alternative 1 would result in significant impacts regarding aesthetics.
Air Quality. With Alternative 1, because there would be no development, no air quality emissions would be generated. The Project would generate emissions during construction and operational activities that require mitigation. Although Alternative 1 would not have any air quality impacts, all significant air quality impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Biological Resources. This alternative would have no impacts to biological resources, including potential impacts to the burrowing owl. Trees and other vegetation on the project site that currently could be used for nesting by migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) would remain because no existing vegetation would be removed. Although Alternative 1 would not have any biological resources impacts, all potentially significant impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Cultural Resources. Under Alternative 1, the project site would remain in its current condition and would therefore prevent potential impacts to cultural resources. No construction or grading activities would occur. Therefore, the potential to discover and impact previously undisturbed cultural resources, including archaeological resources, would not occur. Although this alternative would have no impact on cultural resources, impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Energy. The energy usage during construction associated with water usage for dust control, diesel fuel consumption from on-road hauling trips and off-road construction diesel equipment, and gasoline consumption from on-road worker commute and vendor trips would not occur because no construction or development would occur. However, it is noted that the Project implementation would not result in significant impacts concerning energy usage. Therefore, Alternative 1 would have no impact on energy, whereas the Project would result in a less than significant impact.
Geology and Soils. No development would occur on the project site. Therefore, the potential to expose additional people or structures to adverse effects of seismic ground shaking, ground failure, landslides, expansive soils, or other unstable geologic hazards would not occur. No soil erosion or loss of topsoil would occur since the project site would remain in its existing conditions. Although this alternative would have no impact on soils and geology or paleontological resources, impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to less than significant level.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Under Alternative 1, there would be no construction activities or associated construction equipment operations or operational activities. Therefore, there would be no short-term greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from construction activities or long-term GHG emissions from vehicles or the consumption of electricity, natural gas, and water associated with operations of the land uses assumed as a part of the Project. Although this alternative would not generate additional GHG emissions, Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-7
it should be noted that the Project’s impact would be less than significant based on the significance criteria set forth in this EIR.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The project site is currently vacant and therefore does not generate, use, or transport any hazardous materials. The current uses on the project site do not generate any hazardous materials that could be accidentally released into the environment, and they do not create a safety hazard as it pertains to an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan because the project site is not located within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. Although this alternative would have no impact regarding hazards and hazardous materials, impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to less than significant level.
Hydrology and Water Quality. Alternative 1 assumes no development would occur on the project site.
Because there would be no subsurface excavation, the potential to encounter groundwater would not occur. The existing on-site drainage pattern and runoff quantities would remain the same, and this alternative would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
Site development would alter the project site’s existing drainage pattern because the site would change from a currently undeveloped to a developed site. However, the proposed drainage facilities would be sized to adequately treat runoff water from the project site, and the site does not include discharge to any streams or rivers. The Project would be required to prepare an erosion control plan and implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize on-site and off-site erosion and siltation. Therefore, Alternative 1 would have no impact on hydrology and water quality, whereas the Project’s impacts would be less than significant.
Land Use and Planning. Under Alternative 1, the project site would remain vacant. Neither Alternative 1 nor the Project would physically divide an established community through the introduction of physical or community barriers, or cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. The Project would comply with the design guidelines contained in the Specific Plan. This alternative would have no impact on land use and planning because no development would occur. The Project would comply with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan and impacts would be less than significant.
Mineral Resources. Under Alternative 1, the project site would remain vacant. Neither Alternative 1 nor the Project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. The previous Rialto Plant ceased operation in 1990 and there are no future plans to resume mining activity at the site. Although Alternative 1 would result in no impacts to mineral resources, the Project would result in less than significant resources regarding mineral resources.
Noise. With Alternative 1, there would be no construction activities or associated construction equipment operations or development. Therefore, there would be no construction noise impacts. There would be no substantial temporary increase in noise levels or exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards. Therefore, this alternative would avoid construction and operational noise impacts associated with the Project, whereas the Project’s noise impacts would be less than significant.
Population and Housing. Alternative 1 would not create any new jobs; involve the development of additional housing; or cause increases in the residential population of the City. Therefore, there would be Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-8
no impact associated with inducing substantial population growth. This alternative would maintain the site in its existing condition. The Project would not induce substantial unplanned population or displace any existing housing and impacts would be less than significant.
Public Services. The public services evaluated in this EIR are fire protection and police protection. Because Alternative 1 would not involve new development, no impacts to public services would occur.
Development of the Project would incrementally increase the demand for fire and police protection services; however, the Project is not expected to substantially increase service demand such that new or physically altered fire and police facilities would need to be constructed of which would cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire and police protection. Therefore, this alternative would have no impact on public services. The Project would have a less than significant level on police and fire service.
Transportation. Under Alternative 1, the project site would remain vacant and would not generate any additional vehicle trips, compared to the 1,922 passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips that would be generated by the Project (see Table 4.15-1: Project Trip Generation). While this alternative would have no transportation impacts, the Project’s vehicular traffic impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Tribal Cultural Resources. Tribal cultural resource impacts are primarily dependent upon the construction and operations footprint of each development, as well as depth of excavation. Alternative 1 would not involve any construction or excavation activities. Therefore, this alternative would have no impact on tribal cultural resources, whereas potential impacts associated with the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Utilities and Service Systems. The EIR evaluated potential impacts on the following: water supply and facilities, wastewater infrastructure and facilities, and solid waste. Because Alternative 1 would not involve the development of industrial land uses or the generation of any new employees, no impacts to utilities and service systems would occur. Since this alternative would not provide new facilities or infrastructure, there would be no physical impacts associated with construction or operation of facilities or accelerated physical deterioration associated with increased usage of existing facilities. In addition, since there would be no development of industrial land uses or generation of new employees, demand for water, wastewater facilities, and or solid waste disposals would not be required. Although the Project would increase the demand, a less than significant impact would occur.
Alternative 1: Conclusion
Alternative 1 would have no significant impacts when compared to the Project because no development would occur. Significant unavoidable traffic impacts associated with the Project would not occur. No mitigation would be required to reduce potential significant impacts to a less than significant level. All impact areas which were anticipated to cause a less than significant impact, less than significant with mitigation measures, or a significant and unavoidable impact due to implementation of the proposed Project would be eliminated under the No Project Alternative; see Table 6-1.
However, this alternative fails to meet the Project’s basic objectives. The No Project Alternative would fail to redevelop underutilized property or create revenue-generating uses within the City.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-9
Alternative 2: High-Cube Short-Term Storage
The High-Cube Short-Term Storage Alternative would involve the development of one short-term storage warehouse. The building would be one story with approximately 500,000 sf of warehouse space.
Alternative 2 would be required to provide 7 loading docks and 255 parking spaces. As identified in Table 6-3: Alternative 2 and Project Comparison, Alternative 2 is more total square footage than the Project.
Alternative 2 requires more square footage than the Project because a high-cube short-term storage facility requires more developed building space to be feasible compared to the proposed truck terminal facility, which includes more space dedicated to trailer parking. The development of Alternative 2 would comply with the development standards of the Specific Plan.
Table 6-3: Alternative 2 and Project Comparison
Development
Standard Alternative 2
Project
Truck Terminal
Maintenance
Shop Total
Building Area 500,000 sf 172,445 sf 18,700 sf 191,145 sf Alternative 2: Impact Comparison to the Project
Aesthetics. Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 would comply with development requirements of the Specific Plan which are included in Table 4.1-1: Development Standard Consistency Summary. Both the Project and Alternative 2 would comply with applicable light and glare regulations, such as compliance with General Plan policy 2-14.3, which requires the use of building materials that do not produce glare.
As a result, neither Alternative 2 nor the Project would result in significant visual impacts. Further, similar to the Project, Alternative 2 would include surface parking and landscaping. Both Alternative 2 and the Project would have a less than significant impact on aesthetics.
Air Quality. Under Alternative 2, construction maximum daily emissions would be the same or similar to the Project Therefore, Alternative 2 and the Project would result in less than significant construction emission impacts.
Operational emissions associated with Alternative 2 would decrease, as Alternative 2 would result in approximately 1,173 PCE trips per day, which is less than the 1,922 total PCE trips and 1,545 PCE truck trips estimated to result from the Project. This reduction in truck trips would also result in less truck emissions. Alternative 2 would not significantly reduce stationary emission sources from mechanical equipment (e.g., HVAC units) and landscaping equipment for project site maintenance. Similar to the Project, air quality impacts associated with Alternative 2 would be significant and unavoidable.
Biological Resources. Biological resources are primarily dependent upon the construction and operations footprint of each development. Like the Project, Alternative 2 assumes that the entire project site would be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where project site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 2, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts to biological resources. Therefore, as with the Project, Alternative 2 would result in a less than significant with mitigation incorporated impact on biological resources.
Cultural Resources. Cultural resources are primarily dependent upon the construction and operations footprint of each development. Like the Project, Alternative 2 assumes that the entire project site would Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-10
be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where project site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 2, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts for cultural resources. Therefore, as with the Project, this alternative would result in a less than significant with mitigation incorporated impact on cultural resources.
Energy. The energy usage during construction associated with water usage for dust control, diesel fuel consumption from on-road hauling trips and off-road construction diesel equipment, and gasoline consumption from on-road worker commute and vendor trips would be the same or similar to the Project.
Both Alternative 2 and the Project’s implementation would result in less than significant impacts concerning energy usage as both the Alternative 2 and the Project would require limited energy use during operation. Both the Project and Alternative 2 would include mitigation to further reduce potential impacts during operation. Specific impacts include Public Services and Utilities Mitigation Measure 5 of the Specific Plan EIR and project mitigation measures MM GHG-1 and MM GHG-2. Alternative 2 would result in less than significant impacts than the less than significant impacts associated with the Project.
Geology and Soils. Potential geological, soil, and paleontological resource impacts would be similar to the Project because it would be developed within the same footprint and under the same geologic unit and soil conditions. The potential for seismic ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, or collapse would be the same or similar. Development under this alternative would also be required to comply with California Building Code standards and applicable construction and operational BMPs to reduce impacts related to geologic hazards. Overall, impacts associated with both Alternative 2 and the Project would be reduced to less than significant impacts with the implementation of required development standards and MM GEO-1.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Both Alternative 2 and the Project would result in direct emissions of GHGs from construction activities. The approximate quantity of daily GHG emissions generated by construction equipment would be the same or similar to the Project; however, it would occur over a reduced time period. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease. The SCAQMD recommends that construction emissions be amortized over a 30-year project lifetime. Therefore, projected GHGs from construction are quantified and amortized over 30 years. The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions. Climate and Air Quality Mitigation Measures 2, which recommends that employers take steps such as preferential parking to encourage car-pooling and van-pooling, and Mitigation Measure 3, which recommends that local governmental entities should enforce emission standards on equipment used during the construction and operation of industrial facilities, would be applicable to Alternative 2 and the Project. Alternative 2 would result in 251 fewer total project trips compared to the Project. As such, Alternative 2 would result in reduced GHG emissions compared to the Project, during operation. Impacts associated with Alternative 2 and the Project would be less than significant with mitigation.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar to the Project. The project site is not on the Cortese list of hazardous materials sites and is not located in a designated fire hazard zone. Operation of Alternative 2 would include operation of a storage facility.
Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 is not anticipated to be exposed to airport hazards, affect aircraft operations, or create an airport safety hazard for Project employees. Neither the Project nor Alternative 2 would result in the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment due to the proposed uses of the projects. Overall, impacts would be similar and less than significant.
Hydrology and Water Quality. The development footprint for Alternative 2 would be similar to the Project. Therefore, under both development scenarios, the amount of pervious surface would decrease Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-11
because of project site development of buildings and parking lots. Construction and operational BMPs, including low impact development, detailed in the Project’s Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) would also be implemented under Alternative 2 to mitigate surface runoff and reduce water quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Land Use and Planning. As with the Project, the Alternative 2 development scenario would not physically divide an established community through the introduction of either physical or community barriers and would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect. Alternative 2 would comply with the existing land use designation and zoning of the site. Similar to the Project, any proposed warehouse uses associated with Alternative 2 would require a Conditional Development Permit (CDP). Additionally, neither scenarios would introduce any roadways or infrastructure that would bisect or transect surrounding land uses.
Therefore, both Alternative 2 and the Project would have a less than significant impact associated with land use and planning.
Mineral Resources. Potential mineral resources impacts would be similar to the Project because it would be developed within the same footprint and would follow implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. As with the Project, Alternative 2 would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designation of the project site. Neither the Project nor Alternative 2 would result in the loss of availability of a significant mineral resource. Impacts would remain less than significant.
Noise. The development footprint for both scenarios would be the same. During construction, noise levels would be similar or the same as those associated with the Project. The types of equipment and the daily use of the equipment is anticipated to be the same. Construction noise impacts for Alternative 2 and the Project would both be less than significant.
Operational noise impacts would be similar to the Project. Operational noise sources from vehicle trips or stationary sources (e.g., HVAC units and landscaping equipment) would be slightly reduced under Alternative 2 because of the reduction in proposed truck trips. Operational noise impacts would be less than significant.
Population and Housing. Both the Project and Alternative 2 would generate new permanent employment opportunities. The Project proposes one truck terminal and one maintenance shop and would employ approximately 140 employees. Alternative 2 would involve the development of one warehouse building, which would have employment opportunities. Similar to the Project, future employees are anticipated to travel to and from the site from within the City and surrounding area. Neither Alternative 2 nor the Project would require the construction of additional residential units that could induce substantial unplanned population growth not analyzed in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, both Alternative 2 and the Project would have a less than significant impacted associated with population and housing.
Public Services. Development of both Alternative 2 and the Project would incrementally increase the demand for police and fire protection services; however, neither scenario is expected to substantially increase service demand such that a new or physically altered facility would need to be constructed, which would cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police and fire protection. Further, development impact fees are paid on a project-by-project basis to ensure a proportionate fair share is contributed toward facilities, equipment, and personnel that would be needed over time to accommodate the additional demand from Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-12
the Project. Public service impacts would be the same or similar to Project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Transportation. The Project would have a significant unavoidable impact based on the VMT thresholds of significance. The VMT impacts are measured based on the Citywide VMT per Service Population Threshold and the Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold. The Project generated VMT per Employee exceeds the Countywide VMT per Employee threshold under all Project scenarios resulting in a significant impact associated with VMT. The Citywide per Service Population VMT and the Countywide VMT per Employee Thresholds are based on recommendations in the OPR Technical Advisory, which indicates that projects generating less than 110 daily trips could be considered to have less than significant VMT impact. Since Alternative 2 is anticipated to generate approximately 700 daily trips (1,173 PCE trips), which is greater than the 110 daily trips threshold recommended by OPR, the alternative would not be screened out from VMT analysis. Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 would result in a significant VMT impact. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the VMT impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.
Tribal Cultural Resources. Tribal cultural resources are primarily dependent upon the construction and operations footprint of each development. Like the Project, Alternative 2 assumes that the entire project site would be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 2, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts for tribal cultural resources. Therefore, as with the Project, this alternative would result in a less than significant with mitigation incorporated impact on tribal cultural resources.
Utilities and Service Systems. When compared to the Project, Alternative 2 would result in an increase in demand on utilities, as the Alternative would result in an increase in 308,855 sf. However, Alternative 2 would be consistent with the Specific Plan and the uses would be anticipated within the Specific Plan and General Plan. Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 would result in less than significant impacts associated with utilities and service systems.
Alternative 2: Conclusion
Alternative 2 would have a building area of approximately 500,000 sf. This is an increase in development when compared to the Project. However, uses of Alternative 2 would be consistent with the Specific Plan and impacts would be similar to that of the Project, as identified in Table 6-1.
Like the Project, this alternative assumes that the entire project site would be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where project site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 2, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts. This would be the case for the topics of biological resources, cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources. As with the Project impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Neither Alternative 2 nor the project would result in significant aesthetic impacts. The building heights would be similar and although the building square footage associated with Alternative 2 would be more, the remaining project site area would be developed with parking lots and site landscaping.
With respect to traffic, the Project would have a significant unavoidable impact based on the VMT thresholds of significance. The VMT thresholds were based on the Citywide Per Service Population Threshold and the Countywide per Employee Threshold. The Project would result in 951 total Project trips, compared to the 700 total project trips generated by Alternative 2. Similar to the Project, Alternative 2 Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-13
would result in a significant VMT impact. However, it is unknown whether the impacts could be fully mitigated because of the feasibility of VMT reductions. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the VMT impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.
The decrease in total project trips of Alternative 2 would likely create reduced air quality and GHG emission impacts compared to the Project. The reduced total project trips associated with Alternative 2 are also likely to reduce impacts to air quality and noise as mobile sources would be reduced compared to the Project. Although this alternative would result in reduced air quality, GHG emissions, and noise, as well as an incremental reduction in the use of energy, it may not provide the production potential and revenue for the City that the Project would provide. Alternative 2 would likely result in reduced economic activity for the City than the Project which would not contribute as much to the City’s goal of expanding its economic base and providing revenue-generating uses.
Alternative 3: Business Park
Under the Business Park Alternative, the project site would be developed as a 500,000-sf business park.
The business park would include two to three warehouse buildings/incubator buildings, which can be developed to accommodate a variety of uses including warehouse spaces, flexible office space, meeting rooms, or event space. Alternative 3 would be consistent with the Specific Plan. The buildings would be one story and building height would be consistent with development standards included in the Specific Plan. Table 6-4: Alternative 3 and Project Comparison, identifies an increase in 308,855 sf when compared to the Project.
Table 6-4: Alternative 3 and Project Comparison
Development Standard Alternative 3
Proposed Project
Truck Terminal
Maintenance
Shop Total
Building Area 500,000 172,445 18,700 191,145
Alternative 3: Impact Comparison to the Proposed Project Aesthetics. Similar to the Project, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the development standards of the Specific Plan, which are included in Table 4.1-1: Development Standard Consistency Summary. Both the Project and Alternative 3 would comply with applicable light and glare regulations, such as compliance with General Plan policy 2-14.3, which requires the use of building materials that do not produce glare.
Neither Alternative 3 nor the Project would have shade and shadow impacts. Further, although the building square footage would increase, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the visual quality of adjacent industrial land uses. Alternative 3 would include surface parking and landscaping, similar to the Project. Therefore, both Alternative 3 and the Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with aesthetics.
Air Quality. Alternative 3 would require construction of a larger facility than the Project. Therefore, a longer construction schedule, a more intensive site preparation and grading phase of construction, and the use of more construction materials and equipment is anticipated. Accordingly, maximum daily emissions would likely be greater than the Project. Therefore, Alternative 3 would result in greater construction emission impacts than the Project.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-14
Alternative 3 would result in a decrease in total project trips, compared to the Project. Although this alternative would result in less truck traffic which would reduce diesel air quality emissions, the number of passenger automobiles would increase. Further, the larger building size of Alternative 3 is expected to result in an increased reduction in air quality impacts when compared to the Project. Alternative 3 would not significantly reduce stationary emission sources from mechanical equipment (e.g., HVAC units) and landscaping equipment for project site maintenance. Alternative 3 would reduce the significant and unavoidable impact of the Project.
Biological Resources. Like the Project, Alternative 3 assumes that the entire project site would be graded.
Therefore, for environmental issues where site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 3, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts. This would be the case for biological resources; therefore, as with the Project, impacts to biological resources associated with Alternative 3 would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Cultural Resources. Like the Project, Alternative 3 assumes that the entire project site would be graded.
Therefore, for environmental issues where site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 3, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts. This would be the case for cultural resources; therefore, as with the Project, impacts to cultural resources associated with Alternative 3 would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Energy. The energy usage during construction associated with water usage for dust control, diesel fuel consumption from on-road hauling trips and off-road construction diesel equipment, and gasoline consumption from on-road worker commute and vendor trips would be greater than the Project due to the longer construction schedule, more intensive site preparation and grading phase of construction, and the use of more construction materials and equipment. Accordingly, Alternative 3 would result in an increase in energy usage given this alternative would result in an increase of 308,855 sf of development.
Geology and Soils. Potential geological, soil, and paleontological resource impacts would be similar to the Project because it would be developed within the same footprint and under the same geologic unit and soil conditions. The potential for seismic ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, or collapse would be the same or similar. Development under Alternative 3 would also be required to comply with California Building Code standards and applicable construction and operational BMPs to reduce impacts related to geologic hazards. Overall, impacts associated with both Alternative 3 and the Project would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Both Alternative 3 and the Project would result in direct emissions of GHGs from construction activities. The approximate quantity of daily GHG emissions generated by construction equipment would be similar to the Project. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease. The SCAQMD recommends that construction emissions be amortized over a 30-year project lifetime. Therefore, projected GHGs from construction are quantified and amortized over 30 years. The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions.
Alternative 3 would result in 96 less total project trips compared to the Project. As such, Alternative 3 would result in reduced GHG emissions compared to the Project, during operation. Both the Project and Alternative 3 would implement Climate and Air Quality Mitigation Measure 2 which recommends that employers take steps such as preferential parking to encourage car-pooling and van-pooling. Impacts associated with Alternative 3 and the Project would be less than significant with mitigation.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-15
Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be similar to the Project. The project site is not on the Cortese list of hazardous materials sites and is not located in a designated fire hazard zone. Similar to the Project, Alternative 3 is not anticipated to be exposed to airport hazards, affect aircraft operations, or create an airport safety hazard for Project employees.
Operation Alternative 3 would include the operation of warehouse/incubator buildings, and would not result in the release of hazardous materials. Overall, impacts would be similar and less than significant under both scenarios.
Hydrology and Water Quality. The development footprint for Alternative 3 and the Project would be the same. Therefore, under both development scenarios, the amount of pervious surface would decrease associated with buildings and parking. Construction and operational BMPs, including low impact development, detailed in the Project’s Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) would also be implemented under Alternative 3 to mitigate surface runoff and reduce water quality impacts to a less than significant level.
Land Use and Planning. As with the Project, the Alternative 3 development scenario would not physically divide an established community through the introduction of either physical or community barriers and would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted to avoid or mitigate an environmental effect as development of Alternative 3 would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designation of the project site. Similar to the Project, any proposed warehouse uses associated with Alternative 3 would require a CDP. Additionally, neither scenarios would introduce any roadways or infrastructure that would bisect or transect surrounding land uses. Therefore, both Alternative 3 and the Project would have a less than significant impact concerning land use and planning.
Mineral Resources. Potential mineral resources impacts would be similar to the Project because it would be developed within the same footprint and would follow implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. As with the Project, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designation of the project site. Neither the Project nor Alternative 3 would result in the loss of availability of a significant mineral resource. Impact would remain less than significant.
Noise. Although Alternative 3 would have less truck traffic, the number of passenger vehicles would increase compared to the Project. The increase in building size of Alternative 3 is not expected to result in a significant increase in noise impacts when compared to the Project. Like the Project, these impacts would be less than significant.
Population and Housing. Both the Project and Alternative 3 would generate new permanent employment opportunities. The Project proposes one truck terminal and one maintenance shop and would employ approximately 140 employees. Alternative 3 would involve the development of two to three warehouse buildings/incubator buildings, which would have the same or similar employment opportunities. Similar to the Project, future employees are anticipated to travel to and from the site from within the City and surrounding area. Neither Alternative 3 nor the Project would require the construction of additional residential units that could induce substantial unplanned population growth not analyzed in the City’s General Plan. Therefore, both Alternative 3 and the Project would have a less than significant impacted associated with population and housing.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-16
Public Services. Development of both Alternative 3 and the Project would incrementally increase the demand for police and fire protection services; however, neither scenario is expected to substantially increase service demand such that a new or physically altered facility would need to be constructed, which would cause significant environmental impacts, to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police and fire protection. Further, development impact fees are paid on a project-by-project basis to ensure a proportionate fair share is contributed toward facilities, equipment, and personnel that would be needed overtime to accommodate the additional demand from the Project. Public service impacts would be the same or similar to Project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Transportation. The Project would have a significant unavoidable impact based on the VMT thresholds of significance. The VMT impacts are measured based on the Citywide VMT per Service Population Threshold and the Countywide VMT per Employee Threshold. The VMT thresholds were based on recommendations in the OPR Technical Advisory, which indicate that projects generating less than 110 daily trips could be considered to have less than significant VMT impact. Alternative 3 is expected to generate 1,433 daily PCE trips, with 144 morning peak hour trips and 152 evening peak hour trips. Because the daily trip generation is greater than the 110 daily trips threshold recommended by OPR; the alternative would not be screened out from VMT analysis. Similar to the Project, Alternative 3 would result in a significant VMT impact.
Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the VMT impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.
Tribal Cultural Resources. Like the Project, Alternative 3 assumes that the entire project site would be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where site disturbance would be the same for the proposed Project and Alternative 3, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts. This would be the case for tribal cultural resources; therefore, as with the Project, Alternative 3 would result in less than significant impacts to tribal cultural resources with mitigation incorporated.
Utilities and Service Systems. When compared to the Project, the reduction in development associated with Alternative 3 would result in an increase in demand on utilities, as the Alternative would result in an increase in 308,855 sf. Although a water supply assessment was not performed for the alternative, it can be assumed that an increase of 308,855 sf would require increased water and wastewater demand compared to the Project during construction and operations. A larger building would also result in an increased demand for electrical power and natural gas. Assuming a generation rate of 1.42 pounds of waste per 100 square feet of industrial building area, Alternative 3 operations would generate approximately 3.5 tons of solid waste per day, with approximately 1.8 tons being diverted to the Mid- Valley Sanitary Landfill. While this reflects an increase compared to the solid waste expected to result from the Project, it would not exceed the permitted capacity of the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill. Although Alternative 3 utilities and service systems impacts would be greater than the Project, Alternative 3 would be consistent with the Specific Plan and the uses anticipated within the Specific Plan and General Plan; impacts would be less than significant.
Alternative 3: Conclusion
Alternative 3 would have a building area of approximately 500,000 sf. This is an increase in development when compared to the Project. However, uses of Alternative 3 would be consistent with the Specific Plan and impacts would be similar to that of the Project, as identified in Table 6-1.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-17
Like the Project, this alternative assumes that the entire project site would be graded. Therefore, for environmental issues where project site disturbance would be the same for the Project and Alternative 3, there would be no change in the significance of potential impacts. This would be the case for the topics of biological resources, cultural resources, and tribal cultural resources. As with the Project impacts would be mitigated to a less than significant level.
Neither Alternative 3 nor the Project would result in significant aesthetic impacts. Although the building square footage associated with Alternative 3 would increase, the remaining project site area would be developed with parking lots and site landscaping.
With respect to traffic, the Project would have a significant unavoidable impact based on the VMT thresholds of significance. The VMT thresholds were based on the Citywide Per Service Population Threshold and the Countywide per Employee Threshold. Additionally, the Project would result in 951 total project trips, compared to the 855 total project trips generated by Alternative 3. Similar to the Project, Alternative 3 would result in a significant VMT impact. However, it is unknown whether the impacts could be fully mitigated because of the feasibility of VMT reductions. Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, the VMT impact is expected to remain significant and unavoidable.
The decrease in total project trips of Alternative 3 would likely create less air quality and GHG emission impacts. The reduced total project trips associated with Alternative 3 are also likely to lessen impacts to air quality and noise as mobile sources would be less. Although this alternative would result in reduced air quality impacts, GHG emissions, and noise, it would also result in increased use of energy, and it may not provide the production potential and revenue for the City that the Project would provide. Alternative 3 would likely result in less economic activity for the City than the Project, and therefore would not contribute as much to the City’s goal of expanding its economic base and providing revenue-generating uses.
6.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
State CEQA Guidelines requires that an Environmentally Superior Alternative be identified; that is, an alternative that would result in the fewest or least significant environmental impacts. If the “No Project” Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2) requires that another alternative that could feasibly attain most of the Project’s basic objectives be chosen as the environmentally superior alternative.
The context of an environmentally superior alternative is based on the consideration of several factors including the reduction of environmental impacts to a less than significant level, the Project objectives, and an alternative’s ability to fulfill the objectives with minimal impacts to the existing site and surrounding environment. As such, the No Project Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative because it would eliminate all of the potentially significant impacts of the Project. However, while the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, it is not capable of meeting any of the basic objectives for the Project or the General Plan.
The CEQA Guidelines state that should the No Project Alternative be the Environmentally Superior Alternative, the EIR shall identify another Environmentally Superior Alternative among the remaining Alternatives. Aside from the No Project Alternative, the environmentally superior Alternative to the Project is the one that would result in the fewest or least significant environmental impacts. Based on the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 6.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Alternatives
City of Rialto 6-18
evaluation undertaken, it is assumed that Alternative 2: “High-Cube Short-Term Storage” is the environmentally superior Alternative. This is an environmentally superior project alternative because Alternative 2 would reduce the impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, and noise, while Alternative 3 would result in increased impacts to air quality, energy, and utilities and service systems. Alternative 2 meets the requirements of the Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan development standards and therefore would be in conformance with all applicable City regulations. This Alternative still meets most of the Project objectives and meets the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 7.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Rialto 7-1
7.0 EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall focus on the significant effects on the environment, discussing the effects with emphasis in proportion to their severity and probability of occurrence. The City of Rialto, the lead agency for the Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project (Project), is subject to specific environmental review under CEQA. CEQA Guidelines Section 15063 provides that if a lead agency determines that an EIR will clearly be required for a project, an Initial Study is not required. In this case, the City determined that an EIR will need to be prepared based on the Project’s potential to create short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts. California Public Resources Code (PRC) §21100 (c) states that an EIR shall contain a statement briefly indicating the reasons that a project’s various possible significant effects were determined not to be significant and were, therefore, not discussed in detail in the EIR (PRC §21000 et. seq.). The Draft EIR further evaluates all of the Project’s possible significant effects in accordance with the State CEQA Guidelines. Where it was determined that the Project would have “less than significant impact” or “no impact,” these threshold issues have not been addressed in the EIR, except to be listed in this section. The following identifies the threshold and a discussion of why the “less than significant” or “no impact” determination was reached.
Agriculture and Forestry Services
Impact 7.2-1: Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Level of Significance: No Impact
According to the California Department of Conservation’s California Important Farmland Finder the project site is comprised of Urban and Built-Up Land.1 As such, the Project would not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Farmland of Local Importance. In addition, the project site is zoned Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan) within the Rialto General Plan (General Plan) and has a land use designation of Heavy Industrial (H IND) within the Specific Plan and following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the site would be largely graded and leveled. Because implementation of the Project would not involve the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non- agricultural use, no impact would occur.
Impact 7.2-2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Level of Significance: No Impact
As previously discussed, the project site is zoned for industrial uses and consists of Urban and Built-Up Land.2 The project site has a land use designation of H IND under the Specific Plan, which does not permit
1 California Department of Conservation (DOC). (2024). California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed February 2024. 2 DOC. (2024). California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed February 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 7.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Rialto 7-2
agricultural use. Additionally, the project site is not under an active Williamson Act contract.3 Therefore, no impacts associated with an active Williamson Act or agricultural zoning would occur.
Impact 7.2-3: 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))?
Level of Significance: No Impact
Impact 7.2-4: Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Level of Significance: No Impact
The project site would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g)) given that the property and surrounding properties are zoned for industrial land uses. The project site is currently undeveloped. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the majority of the project site would be graded and leveled. Development of the project site would not result in rezoning of forest land as it proposes one truck terminal and one maintenance shop on land zoned for industrial uses.
Operation activities for the Project would not involve logging, forestry, or agricultural uses. Therefore, no impacts associated with conflicts with existing zoning for forest land or timberland would occur.
Impact 7.2-5: Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Level of Significance: No Impact
Due to the lack of existing farmland, forest lands, or areas zoned for agriculture, or timberlands on the project site or immediately surrounding areas, development of the project site would not involve 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.
The nearest designated farmland and active agricultural operations are located approximately 1.16 miles west of the project site. Construction of the Project would be limited to the boundaries of the project site and would not impact existing off-site agricultural operations. Further, operations for the Project would not involve logging, forestry, or agricultural uses. No impact would occur.
3 DOC. (2017) State of California Williamson Act Contract Land. https://planning.lacity.gov/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial%20Study/Attachment%20B %20References/California%20Department%20of%20Conservation%20Williamson%20Map%202016.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 7.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Rialto 7-3
Recreation
Impact 7.3-1: 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?
Level of Significance: No Impact
The Project would include construction and operation of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop on vacant, undeveloped land zoned for industrial land use. The project site is surrounded by land zoned for industrial uses. As discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, Project implementation is not anticipated to result in substantial unplanned population growth within the City. The Project would employ approximately 140 employees. Future employees are anticipated to commute to the project site from within the City and surrounding area. As such, the Project would not result in an increase in demand of neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. No impact would occur.
Impact 7.3-2: 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?
Level of Significance: No Impact
The Project would include the construction and operation of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop on land zoned for industrial uses. The Project does not include recreational facilities. Further, the Project is not anticipated to result in substantial unplanned population growth requiring the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No impact would occur.
Wildfire
Impact 7.4-1: Would the Project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
The City has adopted an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), which provides comprehensive policy and guidance for emergency and response operations to natural and manmade hazards. The Project would require the temporary partial closure of East Santa Ana Avenue during construction of the proposed improvements. The proposed improvements would require full depth reconstruction of East Santa Ana Avenue, including mill and overlay, along the Project frontage to South Riverside Avenue. However, emergency access to the project site and surrounding area would be maintained. Additionally, the Project would include an emergency access only driveway at the northeastern corner of the project site to provide site access to emergency personnel and vehicles during Project operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 7.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Effects Found Not to be Significant
City of Rialto 7-4
Impact 7.4-2: Would the Project, 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? Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
According to CAL FIRE’s Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Viewer, the project site is located within a non- Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA).4 The nearest VHFHSZ is located 0.9 miles to the southeast. Following implementation of the Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan, the project site would consist of largely graded and level land. The project site would not include features which would exacerbate wildfire risks or expose Project occupants to pollutant concentrations of the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Impacts would be less than significant.
Impact 7.4-3: Would the Project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
Refer to Impact 7.4-1 above. The Project would include construction of one truck terminal and one maintenance shop, with parking and landscaping included. Additionally, the Project would include improvements to East Santa Ana Avenue, which would include undergrounding of overhead utilities, which would reduce wildfire risk. The Project does not include components that would exacerbate wildfire risk. Impacts would be less than significant.
Impact 7.4-4: Would the Project 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?
Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact
The project site consists of vacant, undeveloped land. Because the project site is located within a urbanized area, it would not expose people or structures to significant risks as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes. As discussed in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, the project site is not located within a landslide zone. Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, the project site is classified as Zone X, which identifies areas of minimal flooding. Similar to existing drainage conditions, upon completion of construction, water would infiltrate into the ground over a duration of time. Impacts would be less than significant.
4 CAL FIRE. (2024). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 8.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Preparers and Contributors
City of Rialto 8-1
8.0 PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
8.1 EIR PREPARERS
City of Rialto (Lead Agency)
Daniel Casey .............................................................................................................................Senior Planner Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Casey Schooner, AICP .......................................................................................................... Project Manager Madison Brown. .......................................................................................................... Environmental Analyst Trevor Briggs, P.E. ................................................................................................................. Traffic Manager Ace Malisos ............................................................................. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Noise Manager Olivia Chan ................................................................................ Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, Noise Planner
8.2 CONTRIBUTORS
Rock Biological Resources .................................................................................. Biological Resources Report ASM Affiliates ...........................................................................................................Cultural Resources Mem LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. .............................................................................. Geotechnical Investigation Natural History Museum of Los Angeles....................................... Paleontological Resources Search Results Environ .......................................................................... Phase II Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 8.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report Preparers and Contributors
City of Rialto 8-2
This Page Intentionally Blank
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-1
9.0 REFERENCES
American Planning Association. (2004). A Planner’s Dictionary, Page 444. https://www.planning.org/publications/report/9026853/. Accessed August 2023.
ASM Affiliates. (2022). Cultural Resources Memorandum. Prepared January 2022.
BP Global. (2021). Statistical Review of World Energy. https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business- sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2021-full- report.pdf. Accessed April 2024.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2008). CEQA and Climate Change White Paper. https://www.counties.org/resource-document/capcoa-white-paper-ceqa-and-climate- change. Accessed September 2023.
California Air Resources Control Board (CARB). (2000). Risk Reduction Plan to Reduce Particulate Matter Emissions from Diesel-Fueled Engines and Vehicles.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/diesel/documents/rrpfinal.pdf. Accessed May 2023.
California Air Resources Control Board (CARB). (2017). California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
Accessed April 2024.
California Air Resources Control Board (CARB). (2022). Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2023-04/2022-sp.pdf. Accessed April 2024.
California Air Resources Control Board (CARB). (2023a). Overview: Diesel Exhaust & Health, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview‐diesel‐exhaust‐and‐health. Accessed May 2023.
California Air Resources Control Board (CARB). (2023b). SB 375 Regional Plan Climate Targets. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/sustainable-communities-program/regional-plan- targets. Accessed April 2024.
California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15064.4a. Accessed May 2024.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). (2017). State of California Williamson Act Contract Land. https://planning.lacity.gov/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial%20St udy/Attachment%20B%20References/California%20Department%20of%20Conservation%20Will iamson%20Map%202016.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). (2023a). Mineral Lands Classification. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc. Accessed October 2023.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). (2023b). CalGEM GIS Well Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/. Accessed September 2023.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). (2024). California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/ciff/. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-2
California Department of Finance (DOF). (2011). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011-2020, with 2010 Benchmark. Retrieved from: Retrieved from:
https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Finance (DOF). (2021). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2011-2020.
https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/estimates-e5-2010-2020/. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Finance (DOF). (2023). Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, January 1, 2020-2023. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e- 5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2023/. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire). (2024). Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/03beab8511814e79a0e4eabf0d3e7247/.
Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2023). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662. Accessed October 2023.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2024a). Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates.
Accessed June 2024.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2024b). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0055). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2024c). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for San Timoteo Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0087). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1906?siteID=2688. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2024d). SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details for El Sobrante Landfill (33-AA-0217). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/2280?siteID=2402. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Tax and Fee Administration. (2022). 2022 – Motor Vehicle Fuel 10 Year Reports. https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/spftrpts.htm. Accessed April 2024.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). (2024a). Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List - Site Cleanup (Cortese List). https://dtsc.ca.gov/dtscs-cortese-list/. Accessed January 2024.
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). (2024b). Envirostor. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?global_id=60003205. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-3
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2023). California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap- liv-i-scenic-highways. Accessed July 2023.
California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). (2002). Draft Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 1610 and Senate Bill 221 of 2001. Page iii. https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR- Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Files/DT-SB-610-SB-221-PDF.pdf.
Accessed November 2023.
California Department of Water Resources (CDWR). (2003). Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 1610 and Senate Bill 221 of 2001. Page iii. Accessed November 2023.
California Employment Development Department (CEDD). (2023). Labor Force and Unemployment Rate for Cities and Counties. https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and- unemployment-for-cities-and-census-areas.html. Accessed January 2024.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2021). Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total- system-electric-
generation#:~:text=Total%20generation%20for%20California%20was,from%2090%2C208%20G Wh%20in%2020. Accessed April 2024.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2023a). 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency- standards/2022-building. Accessed April 2024.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2023b). CED 2021 Baseline Forecast – SCE High Demand Case.
Accessed April 2024.
California Geological Survey (CGS). (2017). State Mining and Geology Board. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/smgb/reports/Documents/Designation_Reports/San_Bernard ino_Designation_Report_No.14.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
California Legislative Information (CLI). (2011). Assembly Bill No. 341. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201120120AB341. Accessed November 2023.
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2023a). CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Results (October 2021 Update). https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen‐40.
Accessed September 2023.
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2023b). SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities (2022 Update). https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535. Accessed September 2023.
Colton Unified School District Schools and Communities. (2014). https://www.cjusd.net/cms/lib/CA02218339/Centricity/Domain/89/CJUSD_Schools_Map_10- 20-14.pdfDepartment of Conservation (DOC). (2023a). Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/eqzapp/app/. Accessed September 2023.
EDR. (2023). The EDR Radius Map Report for Santa Ana Avenue, Rialto, California. Prepared November 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-4
ENVIRON. (2010). Phase II Soil and Groundwater Investigation Report for 249 East Santa Ana Avenue, Rialto, California. Prepared October 2010.
Hendriks, Rudolf W., California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels. 1985. https://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/trr/1985/1033/1033-010.pdf. Accessed May 2024.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2013). Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.climatechange2013.org/ images/report/WG1AR5_ALL_FINAL.pdf. Accessed April 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2023a). Traffic Study. Prepared April 2023.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2023b). Water Quality Management Plan. Prepared March 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024a). Air Quality Assessment. Prepared May 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024a). Acoustical Assessment. Prepared May 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024b). Energy Memorandum. Prepared May 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024c). Final Drainage Report. Prepared March 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024d). Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment. Prepared May 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024e). Health Risk Assessment. Prepared May 2024.
Kimley-Horn and Associates. (2024f). VMT Analysis. Prepared April 2024.
LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (2016). Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. Prepared February 2016.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Weather Prediction Service. (2023).
Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service.
https://water.weather.gov/precip/index.php?analysis_date=1546300800&lat=34.1204394164&l ocation_name=sgx&location_type=wfo&lon=-
117.3842106189&precip_layer=0.75&product=departure&recent_type=false&rfc_layer=- 1&state_layer=-1&hsa_layer=-1&county_layer=-
1&time_frame=year2date&time_type=year&units=eng&zoom=14&domain=current#. Accessed October 2023.
Natural History Museum Los Angeles County. (2023). Paleontological Resources Records Search.
Prepared October 2023.
Rialto, City of. (1986). Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan. http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/lus/specificplans/amsp.pdf. Accessed August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (1986). Agua Mansa Industrial Corridor Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report. State Clearing House Number 1984111203.
Rialto, City of. (1990). Rialto Plant Reclamation Plan. California Mine ID# 91-36-0004. Accessed August 2023.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-5
Rialto, City of. (2010). Rialto General Plan.
https://www.yourrialto.com/DocumentCenter/View/1494/2010-General-Plan. Accessed August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2010). Rialto General Plan Update EIR. State Clearinghouse Number 2008071100.
Accessed August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2020). Rialto Active Transportation Plan. https://issuu.com/ktua/docs/rialto_atp_final_2020_march_low_res. Accessed October 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2021). Rialto Climate Adaptation Plan. https://www.yourrialto.com/DocumentCenter/View/1761/Rialto-Climate-Adaptation-Draft- Plan-July-2021. August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2023). Rialto Fire Department. https://www.yourrialto.com/233/Fire-Department.
Accessed August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2024a). Facilities: Rialto Branch Library. https://www.yourrialto.com/Facilities/Facility/Details/Rialto-Branch-Library-22. Accessed June 2024.
Rialto, City of. (2024b) Municipal Code.
https://library.municode.com/ca/rialto/codes/code_of_ordinances. August 2023.
Rialto, City of. (2024c). City of Rialto Facilities.
https://www.yourrialto.com/Facilities/Facility/Details/Rialto-Branch-Library-22. Accessed October 2023.
Rialto, City of. (No Date Available). City of Rialto Parks and Facilities Map. https://www.yourrialto.com/ImageRepository/Document?documentId=141. Accessed September 2023.
Rialto Police Department. (2023). Our Department. https://rialtopolice.com/our-department/. Accessed August 2023.
Rocks Biological Consulting. (2024). Biological Technical Report. Prepared June 2024.
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). (2021a). 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs.
www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9242/637614374631830000. Accessed November 2023.
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD). (2021b). 2020 Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 4: UWMP Agency Supporting Information. https://www.sbvmwd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/9284/637614643241100000.
SoCalGas. (2024). Company Profile. https://www.socalgas.com/about-us/company-profile. Accessed June 2024.
SoCalGas. (No Date Available). Gas Transmission Pipeline Interactive Map-Riverside. https://socalgas.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=faeed481312f4e5fb056f7 39ff169e02. Accessed June 2024.South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-6
(1993). CEQA Air Quality Handbook.https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air- quality-analysis-handbook/ceqa-air-quality-handbook-(1993). Accessed June 2024.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2003). White Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution, Appendix D. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/Agendas/Environmental-Justice/cumulative- impacts-working-group/cumulative-impacts-white-paper.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2009a). South Coast Air Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009). https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse- gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008-2009/ghg-meeting-13/ghg-meeting-13- minutes.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2009b). Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #8. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-thresholds/year-2008- 2009/ghg-meeting-8/ghg-meeting-8-minutes.pdf. Accessed September 2023.
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). (2014). High Cube Warehouse Truck Trip Study White Paper Summary of Business Survey Results. https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/ceqa/handbook/high-cube-warehouse-trip-rate-study-for-air-quality-analysis/business- survey-summary.pdf. Accessed September 2023. Accessed September 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). (2020a). 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocation Methodology. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/6th- cycle-rhna-proposed-final-allocation-plan.pdf?1614911196. Accessed October 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). (2020b). 2016-2040 RTP/SCS Final Growth Forecast by Jurisdiction. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/2016_2040rtpscs_finalgrowthforecastbyjurisdiction.pdf?1605576071. Accessed October 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). (2020c). Connect SoCal: Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. Accessed October 2023.
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). (2020d). 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan_0.pdf?1606001176. Accessed October 2023.
Southern California Edison (SCE). (2024a). Who We Are. https://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are.
Accessed June 2024.
Southern California Edison (SCE). (2024b). SCE Power Site Search Tool. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=05a84ec9d19f43ac93b451939c330 888. Accessed June 2024.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2019). Santa Ana Region – Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs).
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-7
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/docs/2019/Ne w/Chapter_6_June_2019.pdf. Accessed October 2023.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2023a). California Statutes Making Conservation a California Way of Life.
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/conservation_portal/california_statut es.html. Accessed November 2023.
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). (2023b). Construction Stormwater Program. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/construction.html.
Accessed October 2023.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2023). Web Soil Survey. https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed August 2023.
United States Department of Energy. (2024). National Renewable Energy Laboratory PVWatt Calculator:
https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php. Accessed September 2023.
United States Department of Homeland Security: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2023). National Flood Hazard Layer Viewer. https://hazards- fema.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=8b0adb51996444d4879338b5529aa 9cd&extent=-117.3667679130852,34.04522156648235,-
117.32522585986149,34.06299944290883. Accessed October 2023.
United States Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2006). Roadway Construction Noise Model.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/. Accessed May 2024.
United States Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (2018). Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.
https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit- noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf. Accessed May 2024.
United States Energy Information Administration (2020). Table F33: Total Energy Consumption, Price, and Expenditure Estimates. https://www.eia.gov/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_te.html.
Accessed April 2024.
United States Energy Information Administration. (2021). California State Profile and Energy Estimates, California Energy Consumption by End-Use Sector. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA#tabs-2.
Accessed April 2024.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2018). Radon Zones Map. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/radon-zones-map.pdf. Accessed April 2024.
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2003a). Construction and Demolition Materials Amounts. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2017-
09/documents/estimating2003buildingrelatedcanddmaterialsamounts.pdf. Accessed January 2024.
Santa Ana Truck Terminal Project Section 9.0
Draft Environmental Impact Report References
City of Rialto 9-8
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2023b). Frequent Questions about General Conformity. Available: https://www.epa.gov/general-conformity/frequent-questions-about- general-conformity. Accessed April 2024.
United States of America. (1996). United States Code, Title 30. https://uscode.house.gov/browse/prelim@title30&edition=prelim. Accessed April 2024.
United States Geological Survey. (2013). Federal Standards and Procedures for the National Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD). Pages 14 and 19. Reston, Virginia: United States Geological Survey. https://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/11/a3/pdf/tm11-a3_4ed.pdf. Accessed October 2023.
United States Geological Survey. (2018). Santa Ana Basin, National Water Quality Assessment Program. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/enforcement/complaints / docs/investigation/40_usgs_s
anta_ana_basin_national_water_quality_assessment_program.pdf. Accessed October 2023.