Item 21 - Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Case No. 24-044 GPA SPA — Yucaipa City Council, September 23, 2024 (part 4 of 5)

Santa Monica and Santa Ana populations, with estimated effective population sizes of 6 and 4, respectively, are likely to become extinct within 50 years if gene flow with other mountain lion populations is not improved (Benson, Mahoney, et al., 2016; Benson et al., 2019; Gustafson et al., 2018). This is detailed in the Center's petition to the California Fish and Game Commission to protect Southern California and Central Coast mountain lions under the California Endangered Species Act (Yap et al., 2019).

The Project area is located between the San Gabriel/San Bernardino (SGSB) population and the Eastern Peninsular Range (EPR) population, and the Santa Ana Mountains (SAM) population is nearby to the southwest. Scientists have documented physical and reproductive signs of inbreeding depression in local mountain lions (from the EPR and Santa Ana mountains, as well as the nearby Central Coast South [i.e. Santa Monica Mountains]) due to being boxed in by roads and development (Huffineyer et al., 2021). Researchers have found that, of the California mountain lion subpopulations, the SGSB population has the smallest effective population size and the smallest area of available habitat (Dellinger et al., 2020; Gustafson et al., 2021). Scientists suggest that the SGSB population "may be approaching levels of genetic drift and inbreeding similar to the well -monitored and genetically depauperate Santa Ana and Central Coast South populations (Ernest et al., 2014; Gustafson et al., 2017; Riley et al., 2014)" (Gustafson et al., 2021), which are predicted to have a 99% chance of becoming locally extinct within 50 years if inbreeding depression continues. (Benson et al., 2019). This emphasizes the importance of protecting the remaining SGSB population, specifically through maintaining and enhancing connectivity among and between the subpopulations.

Numerous studies highlight the impacts of human activities on mountain lions. For example, Shilling et al. (2019) reported 299 observed roadkill mountain lions throughout the state from 2015 to 2018, but these deaths are likely underreported. Former CDFW biologist Justin Dellinger estimates there could be 200 puma deaths on roads every year (Price, 2020).

And a recent UC Davis special report identified a 58% reduction in mountain lion road mortalities after a 71 % decrease in road use due to COVID-19 pandemic "stay-at-home" orders (Nguyen et al., 2020). This report highlights how roads and traffic are deadly barriers to puma movement and gene flow.

In addition to causing direct mortality in pumas, human activities also alter these large carnivores' behavior in ways that likely further impede important movement and gene flow. For example, Smith et al. (2017) found that mountain lions are so fearful of humans and noise generated by humans that they will abandon the carcass of a deer and forgo the feeding opportunity just to avoid humans.' The study concluded that even "non -consumptive forms of human disturbance may alter the ecological role of large carnivores by affecting the link between these top predators and their prey" (Smith et al., 2017). In addition, mountain lions have been found to respond fearfully upon hearing human vocalizations, avoiding the area and moving more cautiously when hearing humans (Smith et al., 2017; Suraci et al., 2019).

Other studies have demonstrated that mountain lion behavior is impacted when exposed to other evidence of human presence, such as lighting or vehicles/traffic (Smith et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2017a; Wilmers et al., 2013). In addition, preliminary results from a study by researchers at UC Davis and University of Southern California, as well as those by other ' See also Sean Greene, "How a fear of humans affects the lives of California's mountain lions," Los Angeles Times (June 27, 2017), available at https://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn- pumas-human-noise-20170627-story.html
January 24, 2023

Page 3 ends

researchers, suggest that the light, noise, and other aspects of highways can have negative impacts on wildlife numbers and diversity near the highways (Shilling, 2020; Vickers, 2020). The researchers found a significant difference between species richness and species type (mammals, including mountain lions), with lower richness and fewer species at crossing structures compared to background areas 1 km away from the roads (Shilling, 2020). They also found that as traffic noises surpassed 60 dBC, the number of visits by small to large mammals decreased and most of the species in their study avoid traffic noise (Shilling, 2020). It is clear that different species have variable sensitivities to noise and light associated with development and transportation infrastructure; this can lead to changes in species distributions near roads and development, which can have ecosystem -level impacts (e.g., Suraci et al. 2019). Thus, roads, traffic, and development have negative impacts on puma survival and behavior, which can reduce the genetic health of populations and ultimately diminish their chances of long-term survival.

Yovovich et al. (2020) further documented the impacts of human activities on mountain lions in the Santa Cruz Mountains, specifically on communication and reproductive behaviors important for their survival. Males use scrapes to delineate territories as well as attract potential mates (Allen et al., 2015, 2016), and the males in the study preferred to use relatively flat areas away from human influence as scrape habitat (Yovovich et al., 2020). Similarly, when nursing females (with kittens less than 8 weeks old) shrank their home ranges to an average of 9 km2 while their young were most vulnerable, they also selected undeveloped lands away from human disturbance, opting for habitat with protective cover and sufficient water and prey availability (Yovovich et al., 2020). The loss of adequate undisturbed communication and nursery habitat could disrupt important communication and reproductive behaviors that facilitate social structure and overall survival. The authors predicted that future development within the Santa Cruz Mountains could reduce nursery and communication habitat by 20% and 50%, respectively, while further fragmenting the landscape. Such patterns likely extend to other regions within the proposed Southern California/Central Coast ESU.

Other studies document nuanced sensitivities of California mountain lions to human presence, activities, and infrastructure while also providing glimpses of how humans and mountain lions can safely coexist. Pumas in the Santa Cruz Mountains were found to less likely occur in areas with higher development densities (i.e., areas with greater road and/or building densities) (Nickel et al., 2020). This aligns with other studies that have demonstrated that mountain lion avoidance behavior increases with greater development densities (Smith et al., 2015, 2019; Wang et al., 2017a; Wilmers et al., 2013). In addition, Nickel et al. (2020) found that in open space areas where recreational activities are allowed (e.g., hiking, biking), mountain lions generally avoided human presence and became more nocturnal as human presence increased. Similar shifts in puma behavior in response to human activities have been documented in other studies (Lucas, 2020; Smith et al., 2017; Suraci et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2015, 2017a). There is often a cost of these behavioral shifts, such as increased energy expenditure that could potentially reduce fitness. Studies have found that pumas expend more energy by increasing their kill rates in high housing density areas (Smith et al., 2015) and having higher nighttime activity in developed areas (Wang et al., 2017b). This is further supported by a study that found mountain lions increased movement efficiency during the Covid-19 shutdown, which suggests that they incur energetic costs by increasing movement and space -use when avoiding human activity (Benson et al., 2021).

In a study conducted from 2002 to 2019 in the Santa Monica Mountains, (Benson, Sikich, et al., 2020) found high human -caused mortality rates in puma adults and high January 24, 2023

Page 4 ends

intraspecific mortalities among subadults. Most known causes of death among adults and subadults (14/20) were directly human -caused: vehicle strikes, rodenticide poisoning, poaching, and wildfire. The remaining six known causes of deaths were intraspecific killing (Benson, Sikich, et al., 2020). And while intraspecific killings have been documented to naturally occur in mountain lion populations, it was likely exacerbated in the Santa Monica Mountains with the presence of significant movement barriers that prevent subadults from being able to adequately disperse, which likely led to increased conflicts with territorial males (Benson, Sikich, et al., 2020; Riley et al., 2014). The Santa Monica Mountains puma population is relatively small, extremely isolated, and geographically limited. Demographic and environmental stochasticity and high mortality rates increase the risk of local extinction, particularly when combined with small population size, low density, female -biased sex ratios, and skewed male reproductive success (Benson et al., 2019; Benson, Sikich, et al., 2016; Ernest et al., 2014; Gustafson et al., 2018; Riley et al., 2014; Vickers et al., 2015). Increased human -caused mortalities of adult males could lead to occasional male extinctions, which have been documented in the Santa Ana Mountains puma population (Beier & Barrett, 1993). Lack of breeding males would disrupt reproduction and could severely limit the short- and long-term viability of a population (Beier, 1993; Benson, Mahoney, et al., 2016; Benson et al., 2019; Benson, Sikich, et al., 2020). This highlights the need to reduce human -caused mortalities, in part, by improving connectivity.

There are numerous scientific studies that provide insights on the profound impacts human activities and infrastructure have on mountain lion survival, and they emphasize the need to adequately assess and mitigate impacts to these CESA candidate species in the Project area. These studies add to the accumulating evidence that mountain lions require a habitat mosaic that provides sufficient room to roam away from human -disturbed areas and connected to expansive, intact, heterogeneous habitats (Beier et al., 1995; Dickson et al., 2005; Dickson & Beier, 2002; Kertson et al., 2011; Zeller et al., 2017). Continued construction of roads and development in mountain lion habitat with little regard for their movement and behavioral needs has direct and indirect lethal and sublethal impacts that threaten the persistence of Southern California and Central Coast puma populations.

Mountain lions are a key indicator species of wildlife connectivity and healthy ecosystems. As the last remaining wide-ranging large carnivore in the region, the ability to move through large swaths of interconnected habitat is vital for genetic connectivity and their long- term survival. Local extinction of mountain lions in the region could have severe ecological consequences. Many scavengers, including many raptors, foxes, and numerous insects, would lose a reliable food source (Barry et al., 2019; Elbroch et al., 2017; Ruth & Elbroch, 2014). Fish, birds, amphibians, reptiles, rare native plants, and butterflies could potentially diminish if this apex predator were lost (Ripple et al., 2014; Ripple & Beschta, 2006, 2008). Loss of this ecosystem engineer and important predator -prey dynamics could have cascading effects on other plant and animal species, potentially leading to a decrease in biodiversity and diminished overall ecosystem function (Ripple et al. 2014; Elbroch et al. 2017; Barry et al. 2019; Benson et al. 2020b).

C. The 2005 EIR for the Project Do Not Address the Project's Impacts to Mountain Lions.

Virtually all of the studies cited above regarding the extinction vortex faced by mountain lions in Southern California were conducted and released after the EIR was certified for the Project in 2005. As such, the 2005 EIR does not —and cannot —adequately analyze or mitigate impacts of the Project on mountain lions, a CESA provisionally -listed species. This fact alone January 24, 2023

Page 5 ends

necessitates recirculation of a new EIR before the City undergoes any approvals or extensions of approvals on the Project. Here, a supplemental EIR for the Project can and should contain analysis of how the Project can improve wildlife movement by removing obstacles to wildlife movement (e.g., by restoring or enhancing culverts, implementing overcrossings and/or underpasses, and conserving, restoring, and adaptively managing in perpetuity land adjacent to such areas). The supplemental EIR must also consider alternatives to the Project that do not cause impacts on mountain lions, and adopt all feasible mitigation measures to reduce impacts.

D. Conclusion
Ensuring regional wildlife connectivity and protecting local mountain lions will require cooperation from conservation groups and state and local officials. As noted in our recent report entitled California Connections: How Wildlife Connectivity Can Fight Extinction and Protect Public Safety, a lack of adequate crossing infrastructure harms both people and wildlife (Yap et al., 2021). But preserving existing connectivity and building wildlife crossings to enhance connectivity at existing barriers will help protect California's rich biodiversity while making ecosystems and human communities more resilient to climate change.

We respectfully urge the City to conduct a thorough assessment of the Project's impacts on mountain lions and wildlife connectivity and incorporate sufficient mitigation measures.

Sincerely,
J.P. Rose
Senior Attorney & Policy Director, Urban Wildlands
Center for Biological Diversity
0rose(a biologicaldiversity.orq
Tiffany Yap, D.Env/PhD
Wildlife Corridor Advocate
Center for Biological Diversity
tyap(a)-biologicaldiversity.org
January 24, 2023

Page 6 ends

References
Allen, M. L., Wittmer, H. U., Houghtaling, P., Smith, J., Elbroch, L. M., & Wilmers, C. C. (2015).

The role of scent marking in mate selection by female pumas (Puma concolor). PLoS ONE, 10(10), e0139087.

Allen, M. L., Yovovich, V., & Wilmers, C. C. (2016). Evaluating the responses of a territorial solitary carnivore to potential mates and competitors. Scientific Reports, 6.

Barry, J. M., Elbroch, L. M., Aiello-lammens, M. E., Sarno, R. J., Seelye, L., Kusler, A., & Quigley, H. B. (2019). Pumas as ecosystem engineers: ungulate carcasses support beetle assemblages in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Oecologia, 189, 577-586.

Beier, P. (1993). Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars.

Connervation Biology, 7(1), 94-108.

Beier, P., & Barrett, R. H. (1993). The cougar in the Santa Ana Mountain Range, California - Final Report Orange County Cooperative mountain lion study.

Beier, P., Choate, D., & Barrett, R. H. (1995). Movement patterns of mountain lions during different behaviors. Journal of Mammalogy, 76(4), 1056-1070.

Benson, J. F., Abernathy, H. N., Sikich, J. A., & Riley, S. P. D. (2021). Mountain lions reduce movement, increase efficiency during the Covid-19 shutdown. Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 2(3), 1-14.

Benson, J. F., Mahoney, P. J., Sikich, J. A., Serieys, L. E. K., Pollinger, J. P., Ernest, H. B., & Riley, S. P. D. (2016). Interactions between demography, genetics, and landscape connectivity increase extinction probability for a small population of large carnivores in a major metropolitan area. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 283(1837), 20160957.

Benson, J. F., Mahoney, P. J., Vickers, T. W., Sikich, J. A., Beier, P., Riley, S. P. D., Ernest, H.

B., & Boyce, W. M. (2019). Extinction vortex dynamics of top predators isolated by urbanization. Ecological Applications, 29(3), e01868.

Benson, J. F., Mahoney, P. J., Vickers, T. W., Sikich, J. A., Beier, P., Riley, S. P. D., Ernest, H.

B., & Boyce, W. M. (2020). Conserving ecological roles of top predators in isolated mountains. Ecological Applications, 30(1), e02029.

Benson, J. F., Sikich, J. A., & Riley, S. P. D. (2016). Individual and population level resource selection patterns of mountain lions preying on mule deer along an urban-wildland gradient. PLoS ONE, 11(7), 1-16.

Benson, J. F., Sikich, J. A., & Riley, S. P. D. (2020). Survival and competing mortality risks of mountain lions in a major metropolitan area. Biological Conservation, 241, 108294.

Dellinger, J. A., Gustafson, K. D., Gammons, D. J., Ernest, H. B., & Torres, S. G. (2020).

Minimum habitat thresholds required for conserving mountain lion genetic diversity.

Ecology and Evolution, 10, 10687-10696.

Dickson, B. G., & Beier, P. (2002). Home -range and habitat selection by adult cougars in Southern California. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 66(4), 1235-1245.

Dickson, B. G., Jennes, J. S., & Beier, P. (2005). Influence of Vegetation, Topography, and Roads on Cougar Movement in Southern California. Journal of Wildlife Management, 69(1), 264-276.

Elbroch, L. M., O'Malley, C., Peziol, M., & Quigley, H. B. (2017). Vertebrate diversity benefiting from carrion provided by pumas and other subordinate, apex felids. Biological Conservation, 215, 123-131.

Ernest, H. B., Boyce, W. M., Bleich, V. C., May, B., Stiver, S. J., & Torres, S. G. (2003). Genetic structure of mountain lion (Puma concolor) populations in California. Conservation Genetics, 4, 353-366.

Ernest, H. B., Vickers, T. W., Morrison, S. A., Buchalski, M. R., & Boyce, W. M. (2014).

January 24, 2023

Page 7 ends

Fractured genetic connectivity threatens a Southern California puma (Puma concolor) population. PLoS ONE, 9(10).

Frankham, R., Bradshaw, C. J. A., & Brook, B. W. (2014). Genetics in conservation management: Revised recommendations for the 50/500 rules, Red List criteria and population viability analyses. Biological Conservation, 170, 56-63.

Gustafson, K. D., Gagne, R. B., Buchalski, M. R., Vickers, T. W., Riley, S. P. D., Sikich, J. A., Rudd, J. L., Dellinger, J. A., LaCava, M. E. F., & Ernest, H. B. (2021). Multi -population puma connectivity could restore genomic diversity to at -risk coastal populations in California. Evolutionary Applications.

Gustafson, K. D., Gagne, R. B., Vickers, T. W., Riley, S. P. D., Wilmers, C. C., Bleich, V. C., Pierce, B. M., Kenyon, M., Drazenovich, T. L., Sikich, J. A., Boyce, W. M., & Ernest, H. B. (2018). Genetic source -sink dynamics among naturally structured and anthropogenically fragmented puma populations. Conservation Genetics, 20(2), 215-227.

Gustafson, K. D., Vickers, T. W., Boyce, W. M., & Ernest, H. B. (2017). A single migrant enhances the genetic diversity of an inbred puma population. Royal Society Open Science, 4(5).

Huffmeyer, A. A., Sikich, J. A., Vickers, T. W., Riley, S. P. D., & Wayne, R. K. (2021). First reproductive signs of inbreeding depression in Southern California male mountain lions (Puma concolor). Theriogenology, 177, 157-164.

Kertson, B. N., Spencer, R. D., Marzluff, J. M., Hepinstall-Cymerman, J., & Grue, C. E. (2011).

Cougar space use and movements in the wildland - urban landscape of western Washington. Ecological Applications, 21(8), 2866-2881.

Lucas, E. (2020). Recreation -related disturbance to wildlife in California -better planning for and management of recreation are vital to conserve wildlife in protected areas where recreation occurs. California Fish and Wildlife, Recreation Special Issue, 29-51.

Nguyen, T., Saleh, M., Kyaw, M.-K., Trujillo, G., Bejarano, M., Tapia, K., Waetjen, D., & Shilling, F. M. (2020). Special Report 4: Impact of COVID-19 Mitigation on Wildlife -Vehicle Conflict.

Nickel, B. A., Suraci, J. P., Allen, M. L., & Wilmers, C. C. (2020). Human presence and human footprint have non-equivalent effects on wildlife spatiotemporal habitat use. Biological Conservation, 241, 108383. https:Hdoi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108383 Price, A. (2020, May 29). How the West is Learning to Live with Mountain Lions. Bitterroot Magazine.

Riley, S. P. D., Serieys, L. E. K., Pollinger, J. P., Sikich, J. A., Dalbeck, L., Wayne, R. K., & Ernest, H. B. (2014). Individual behaviors dominate the dynamics of an urban mountain lion population isolated by roads. Current Biology, 24(17), 1989-1994.

Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2006). Linking a cougar decline , trophic cascade , and catastrophic regime shift in Zion National Park. Biological Conservation, 133, 397-408.

Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2008). Trophic cascades involving cougar, mule deer, and black oaks in Yosemite National Park. Biological Conservation, 141, 1249-1256.

Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., Schmitz, O. J., Smith, D. W., Wallach, A. D., & Wirsing, A. J. (2014). Status and ecological effects of the world 's largest carnivores. Science, 343(6167), 1241484.

Ruth, T. K., & Elbroch, L. M. (2014). The carcass chronicles: carnivory, nutrient flow, and biodiversity. Wild Felid Monitor, 14-19.

Shilling, F. M. (2020). Wildlife Behavior in Response to Traffic Disturbance Wildlife Behavior in Response to Traffic Disturbance.

Shilling, F. M., Waetjen, D., Harrold, K., & Farman, P. (2019). 2019 Impact of Wildlife -Vehicle Conflict on California Drivers and Animals.

Smith, J. A., Duane, T. P., & Wilmers, C. C. (2019). Moving through the matrix: Promoting January 24, 2023

Page 8 ends

permeability for large carnivores in a human -dominated landscape. Landscape and Urban Planning, 183, 50-58.

Smith, J. A., Suraci, J. P., Clinchy, M., Crawford, A., Roberts, D., Zanette, L. Y., & Wilmers, C.

C. (2017). Fear of the human `super predator' reduces feeding time in large carnivores.

Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284(1857), 20170433.

Smith, J. A., Wang, Y., & Wilmers, C. C. (2015). Top carnivores increase their kill rates on prey as a response to human -induced fear. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1802).

Suraci, J. P., Clinchy, M., Zanette, L. Y., & Wilmers, C. C. (2019). Fear of humans as apex predators has landscape -scale impacts from mountain lions to mice. Ecology Letters, 22(10), 1578-1586.

Traill, L. W., Brook, B. W., Frankham, R. R., & Bradshaw, C. J. A. (2010). Pragmatic population viability targets in a rapidly changing world. Biological Conservation, 143, 28-34.

Vickers, T. W. (2020). Project Title: Santa Ana Mountains to Eastern Peninsular Range Conservation Connectivity Infrastructure Planning Project for Interstate 15 and Closely Associated Roadways.

Vickers, T. W., Sanchez, J. N., Johnson, C. K., Morrison, S. A., Botta, R., Smith, T., Cohen, B.

S., Huber, P. R., Ernest, H. B., & Boyce, W. M. (2015). Survival and mortality of pumas (Puma concolor) in a fragmented, urbanizing landscape. PLoS ONE, 10(7), 1-18.

Wang, Y., Allen, M. L., & Wilmers, C. C. (2015). Mesopredator spatial and temporal responses to large predators and human development in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California.

Biological Conservation, 190, 23-33. https:Hdoi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.05.007 Wang, Y., Smith, J. A., & Wilmers, C. C. (2017a). Residential development alters behavior, movement, and energetics in a top carnivore. PlosOne, 1-17.

Wang, Y., Smith, J. A., & Wilmers, C. C. (2017b). Residential development alters behavior, movement, and energetics in a top carnivore. PlosOne, 12(10), e0184687.

Wilmers, C. C., Wang, Y., Nickel, B., Houghtaling, P., Shakeri, Y., Allen, M. L., Kermish-Wells, J., Yovovich, V., & Williams, T. (2013). Scale dependent behavioral responses to human development by a large predator, the puma. PLoS ONE, 8(4).

Yap, T. A., Rose, J. P., Anderson, I., & Prabhala, A. (2021). California Connections: How Wildlife Connectivity Can Fight Extinction and Protect Public Safety.

Yap, T. A., Rose, J. P., & Cummings, B. (2019). A Petition to List the Southern California/Central Coast Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) of Mountain Lions as Threatened under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA).

Yovovich, V., Allen, M. L., Macaulay, L. T., & Wilmers, C. C. (2020). Using spatial characteristics of apex carnivore communication and reproductive behaviors to predict responses to future human development. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29(8), 2589- 2603.

Zeller, K. A., Vickers, T. W., Ernest, H. B., & Boyce, W. M. (2017). Multi -level, multi -scale resource selection functions and resistance surfaces for conservation planning: Pumas as a case study. PLoS ONE, 12(6), 1-20.

January 24, 2023

Page 9 ends

PUBLIC COMMENT 44

No to the proposed Warehouse off Live Oak Canyon Road
Deepak Gopalakrishnan
Mon 8/26/2024 1:31 PM
To:Public Comment
H i,
Being a resident of Beaumont, I reject this proposal of opening a new warehouse off Live Oak Canyon Road.

The roads are already saturated with traffic in the rush hours and adding new warehouses that will increase the number of trucks on 110 is unimaginable.

Until and unless the roads are expanded to solve the current congestion, new load on the existing road infrastructure is going to cripple the traffic for the office goers like me and in turn affect our health and safety as we will be forced to start earlier than now.

Kindly consider our requests.

Regards,
Deepak

PUBLIC COMMENT 45

Opposition to to the 2 million sq. ft. warehouse in Live Oak Canyon Kathleen
Mon 8/26/2024 1:38 PM
To:Public Comment
Dear Yucaipa City Council,
I oppose the proposed use of land at Live Oak Canyon for warehouse use. I implore the council to take a stand for future generations and to even seek seeing the mouth and entrance of the canyon put into a land conservancy or state park for open land conservation. The fact is that with the encroachment of development onto the remaining open space our area still has, thoughtful open land preservation needs to happen.

It is noted nationally that warehouse development needs have steeply declined and that vacancies in our area are rapidly growing. This would involve putting this beautiful open space at the mouth of a historic and scenic canyon at risk to see it developed in a manner that may or may not add to the economy decades down the road. Open land is one of the greatest assets our area has as people move here seeking open vistas and open space to hike and breathe. The traffic and concrete from the warehouses has hurt our air quality and driven temperatures up. I am a lifelong local area resident who cannot even recognize our local communities anymore, however, the loss of the natural beauty of Live Oak Canyon would be travesty of travesties if this development is allowed to take place. I am not a Yucaipa resident, but live in Redlands. We have seen the harm that these warehouses have done to our local natural beauty and I implore you to not make the same mistakes.

I urge the council to reject the proposal and stand up for its citizens and the land for which we are only temporary stewards before it is passed along to the next generations who will wonder why we didn't stand up for them.

Thank you,
Kathleen Beall

PUBLIC COMMENT 46

Public comment - 08/26/2024 re: freeway corridor plan
Brooke's Yahoo
Mon 8/26/2024 1:32 ....

TaPublic Comment
Good evening, members of the City Council,
My name is Brooke Allert, and I have been a proud resident of this small town for 34 years; I have chosen to stay in this town to raise my family and three young children. I am here to voice my concerns and opposition to the proposed freeway corridor plan in our community. As someone who deeply cares about the future of our town, I believe this development poses several significant risks that outweigh its potential benefits.

Firstly, our town is already struggling with insufficient infrastructure. We all know our streets are not designed to handle the increased traffic that would come with new warehouses and duplexes. The additional trucks and vehicles would lead to congestion, increased wear and tear on our roads, and a heightened risk of accidents. We need to prioritize upgrading our existing infrastructure before considering any new developments.

Secondly, our schools are already overcrowded. Adding more duplexes means more families and more children, which would strain our education system even further. Our current schools are not equipped to handle this increase in student population, which could result in larger class sizes and diminished educational outcomes.

Instead of building new housing, we should be focusing on improving and expanding our educational facilities to meet the current demand.

Moreover, the introduction of warehouses could significantly alter the character of our small town. Warehouses often bring noise, pollution, and increased truck traffic, which would negatively impact our residents' quality of life. Our town's charm and appeal lie in its quiet, residential nature. Allowing such developments would detract from what makes our town special and could lead to a decline in property values and the well-being of our residents.

Additionally, the environmental impact of constructing new warehouses and duplexes cannot be ignored. These developments would require significant land use changes, potentially damaging local ecosystems, increasing stormwater runoff, and affecting our town's natural beauty. We need to consider sustainable growth that respects our environment and maintains our community's character.

Finally, we must think about the long-term vision for our town. What kind of community do we want to be? Do we want to preserve the small-town feel that attracts residents and visitors, or do we want to transform into a hub of industrial and high -density residential developments? I believe that with careful planning and thoughtful consideration of our community's needs, we can find a balance that supports growth while preserving the unique qualities that make our town a great place to live.

In conclusion, I urge the City Council to reconsider these developments and explore alternatives that align with our community's needs and values.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

PUBLIC COMMENT 47

PUBLIC COMMENT 48

(No subject)
gideon crandell
Mon 8/26/2024 1:48 PM
To:Public Comment
I oppose the proposed warehouse plan

PUBLIC COMMENT 49

New developments proposed for the Live Oak Canyon corridor Erica Serrao
Mon 8/26/2024 1:59 PM
TaPublic Comment
Cc:Kim J Metzler, CIVIC, CPM
Staff and Honorable Councilpersons of Yucaipa:
am writing to you to express my opposition to any construction that would adversely affect the rural nature of Live Oak
Canyon.

There are many known cultural resource sites in the Canyon within both Redlands and Yucaipa boundaries. I presently work with Redlands Conservancy and would greatly appreciate if Yucaipa would work collaboratively with Redlands to preserve open space
and the rural character of lands South of 1-10 in Live Oak Canyon and what is known as the Serengeti in the cycling community.

As someone who was born and raised in Redlands and has been living in Live Oak Canyon for 15 years, the proposed construction would detrimental to Live Oak Canyons open spaces, wildlife and residents. The road is already extremely dangerous and busy as it is used as short cut for commuters. Because of this, the speed limit is not being honored and there are monthly car accidents due to the overuse of this windy road.

Yucaipa has done a spectacular job revitalizing their historic downtown and preserving the Crafton Hills in collaboration with Redlands and the county. I invite the city of Yucaipa to work with Redlands and develop an extension of Herngt 'Aki' Preserve in adjacent lands within Yucaipa. This will preserve the character of Live Oak Canyon, provide Yucaipa residents living South of Crafton Hills access to a network of hiking, cycling and equestrian trails that connect us all to our history and protect a critical wildlife corridor used by endangered Southern California Mountain Lions and other threatened and endangered species.

Erica Serrao
Administrative Assistant
Redlands Conservancy

REDLANDS

CONSERVANCY

PUBLIC COMMENT 50

oppose the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update
mb
Mon 8/26/2024 2:21 PM
To:Public Comment
I am pleading with you to oppose the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update. I live on I was raised in this area of Yucaipa, have raised my children here and have grandchildren growing up in this area as well.

Sincerely,
Mary Brown

PUBLIC COMMENT 51

Large warehousing
Lisa Long
Mon 8/26/2024 2:22 PM
TaPublic Comment
Please, no more large warehousing in the area. The freeways are terrible and congested and don't we already have enough?
Sent from my iPhone

PUBLIC COMMENT 52

Public Comment Council Meeting 9-26-2024
Lucinda Brinks
Mon 8/26/2024 2:25 rrvi
TaPublic Comment
August 26, 2024
Yucaipa City Council members,
I write to you today pleading with you to deny the changes to the General Plan and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan and vote no on the updated Freeway Corridor Specific Plan including the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center.

My first concern is the poor/unhealthy air pollution it will cause. This is not a "might" cause, it is a WILL cause.

Our air quality is already poor, adding 1,100 daily diesel truck trips is estimated to increase diesel particulate matter by nearly 30% and generate 2,808 tons of greenhouse gases per year. These identified polluting gases cannot be mitigated. The noise pollution cannot be mitigated as well. Please don't sacrifice the health of Yucaipa citizens for this warehouse project.

My second concern is the traffic it will generate. City Council recently approved a year round use permit to the Pumpkin Patch. The horrible traffic at Interstate 10 and Live Oak Canyon Road will no longer be limited to the fall and early winter. Can you imagine trying to cross the street with youngsters while big rigs zoom past? It is a tragedy in the making. Will you feel guilty? Will the city be sued yet again? This area is beautiful agricultural land. A two million square foot warehouse does not belong in our rural city. It certainly doesn't "create a place that reflects the unique character Yucaipa and ultimately supports the community's need into the future." Why not move the "wine country" here? The rolling hills could be covered in grape vines and the wineries, tasting rooms, restaurants and B&B's could be easily accessible from the freeways without driving through residential streets.

The Planning Commission voted NO on the approval of this plan. The city's stance that they made "no recommendation" is misleading. The majority of Commissioners voted against recommending the project.

I hope you were able to read and digest the 600+ pages in the agenda packet. Ask the hard questions.

Councilman Venable, do not disappoint your constituents who live in the area. I hope you all realize the proper vote is NO. Please, do not approve this monstrous and unhealthy project.

Lucinda Brinks
District 1.

PUBLIC COMMENT 53

warehouse houses on wildwood canyon
Bonnie Parker
Mon 8/26/2024 2:45 PM
TaPublic Comment
I cannot attend meeting this evening regarding buildings being proposed off wildwood canyon Road. NO! NO!

PUBLIC COMMENT 54

Proposed Warehouses in Live Oak Canyon
Steven T. Spillei
Mon 8/26/2024 2:46 PM
TaPublic Comment
Dear Mayor and Members of the Yucaipa City Council,
The proposed warehouse project by Pacific Industrial is a slap in the face of local communities who treasure Live Oak Canyon and what it has to offer in its present, semi rural agricultural and natural state. We have seen too often where one warehouse begets more and more of the same. One only has to drive down the 1-10 and see what has happened in Redlands and other communities in the Inland Empire. Traffic, air pollution, noise, and the elimination of treasured spaces for concrete monoliths with no redeeming value. I urged you to reject Pacific Industrial's proposal.

Sincerely,
Steven T. Spiller
Redlands, CA

PUBLIC COMMENT 55

URGENT - Proposed Warehouse off Live Oak Canyon Road
Joanne Morse
Mon 8/26/2024 2:4. ....

TaPublic Comment
Yucaipa City Council Members:

I am opposed to the proposed warehouse off of Live Oak Canyon Road that comes before you tonight.

As someone who has grown up in this area and lives along San Timoteo Canyon, I have witnessed the impact on the open space, traffic, wildlife, quality of life, and beauty of the area that comes along with each added warehouse built.

The Live Oak and San Timoteo Canyons are historic to our area and should be protected and preserved. There are efforts underway by conservancy groups to protect these special places for generations to come to enjoy them. San Timoteo Canyon has already become very congested and impacted by commuter and big rig traffic. This proposed warehouse would only compound what is already a large issue.

I ask the council to seriously consider the long-term impact of your decision. Do your part to protect us from out -of -control warehouse building and destruction of our history and quality of living that are the very things that have brought and kept people in this beautiful area for generations.

You have the responsibility to protect us. I sincerely hope you vote NO.

Thank you for your consideration.

Joanne E. Morse

PUBLIC COMMENT 56

Honorable Mayor Beaver
City Council Members
City of Yucaipa
Re: FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN &FSP UPDATE
Public Comment for August 26,2024 Meeting

FOR THE RECORD
Dear Mayor and Council:

I vehemently oppose this Plan it its entirety and ask that you work with the Yucaipa Conservancy and Redlands Conservancy's to preserve all of the grasslands and grazing lands on both sides of the 1-1 freeway. These canyon lands and precious hillsides are rare across the State of California and are your community's link to early California history. This is all we have left of Yucaipa's cultural landscape that tells generations who was here, why they came here, and the contributions they made. This is not now or ever will be a sustainable place for logistics and housing.

No one wants to live alongside the most traveled and congested freeway in the United States. Sound walls do not mute the constant thundering roar, the sirens, or continuous accidents from Ford Street to County Line Rd. The air pollution will not be controlled, no matter how you think this impact, alone, can be mitigated. The land vibration is felt across my property hourly. The sky glow from the parking lot lights, though aimed downward, will still create a gray canopy over this area to completely wipe out the view of the night sky. All of this upheaval of the natural environment will destroy the perfectly balanced ecosystem and destroy the many wildlife habitats and corridors you don't see. I lived in the canyon and on West County Line Rd. We rode our horses down to the Pumpkin Patch land and beyond through the Palmer ranch.

The future cannot promise you econonical gains and financial stability! The people here and now are your future and no out of county developers who care not an Oak tree or leaf about your community's quality of life, health, or happiness --or why the love the rural life here.

Please say NO to this desperate measur. No problem is so big that not a reasonable and more beneficial solution cannot be found.

Sincerely,
Pamela Smyth

Redlands with Yucaipa shared boundary lines

PUBLIC COMMENT 57

Freeway Corridor specific plan update
Scott Quinnell
Mon 8/26/2024 3:00 PM
To:Public Comment
H i,
I object to the building of wherehouses on Live Oak Canyon. The increase in truck traffic at the freeway ramps mixing with residential traffic will be unbearable to those of us who live here and use the Interchange. The impact on natural resources, wildlife, increased light glare, and scenic views will be adverse and forever changed. No mitigation will alleviate the permanent impact to Yucaipa.

Thank you,
Scott Quinnell
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get Outlook for Android

PUBLIC COMMENT 58

FW: 24-044/GPA/SPA and Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Case No.21-196 Ana Sauseda, MMC
Mon 8/26/2024 3:05 PM
To:Tara Davis
Ana Sauseda, MMC
Director of General Services/City Clerk
City of Yucaipa
City Hall • 34272 Yucaipa Blvd • Yucaipa, CA 92399
Office: 909-797-2489 Ext. 230
www.yucaipa.gov
-----Original Message -----
From: SUSAN BLAS
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2024 4:02 PM
To: Ana Sauseda, MMC
Subject: 24-044/GPA/SPA and Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Case No.21-196 I oppose the warehouse and Pacific One Commerce Center projects to be located off Live Oak Canyon Road and outer Hwy 10 in the City of Yucaipa.

Susan Blas

PUBLIC COMMENT 59

EN1¢f MEN
August 26, 2024
City of Yucaipa — Planning Division
34272 Yucaipa Blvd
Yucaipa, CA 92399
RE: Proposed revisions to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan.

Dear City Council,
West Coast Entitlement, on behalf of Robinson Ranch, is formally requesting that the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) update be postponed until the September 23, 2024, City Council meeting, Robinson Ranch is the majority landowner within the FCSP area, encompassing more than 560 total acres. In its current configuration, Robinson Ranch does not support the FCSP; however, if certain changes were made to the FCSP, then Robinson Ranch would be in support of the FCSP update, On July 1611, West Coast Entitlement and City Staff held a meeting to discuss the disagreement the Robinson's had toward the plan and some potential solutions to resolve that disagreement with the main limiting factor being the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the FCSP. On August 131h, another meeting was held where West Coast Entitlement presented a list of proposed changes to City Staff to which the City was mostly agreeable and offered some alternatives. On August 2211, West Coast Entitlement submitted the Robinson's Errata Sheet along with accompanying exhibits. Prior to the aforementioned meetings, the Robinson's had not been contacted or consulted by the City for the proposed changes, regardless of their status as majority landowner. It was not until West Coast Entitlement reached out to the Robinson's to offer their services that the Robinson's became aware of the upcoming changes. There simply has not been enough time to work through the valid issues and concerns raised by the Robinson's and an additional 30 days is necessary to assure every stakeholder within the FCSP Area has been adequately and appropriately represented in this matter.

Specifically, the Robinson's are requesting:

1. The City revise the FCSP to identify a suitable water tank location on city -owned property (APN: 0318-181- 21), adjacent to the Hoover Egg Ranch.

2. The City shall vacate unused portions of Right -Of -Way (ROW) near the intersection of Oak Glen Road & Calimesa Blvd. Additionally, ROW owned by the City in front of APN: 0301-221-09 shall be vacated back to the Robinson's; however, if ROW is owned by CalTrans, then the City will offer a letter of support to vacate this area.

3. The FCSP shall include language that provides a mechanism for a City and developer to enter into a cost - sharing agreement for any environmental review costs and waiver of application review tees to develop Open Space & Conservation areas.

4. The FCSP Land Use Plan shows the development potential of the area with Hillside Overlay District requirements applied; however, when a development is submitted, this area will change depending on the developer. The City shall update the FCSP Land Use Plan to remove the pre-emptive application of the hillside requirements.

5. The City shall re -distribute Commercial area from the water -company -owned property (APN: 0318-111-02) to the Robinson's property directly west (APN: 0318-071-07).

6. The City shall re -distribute approximately 6-7 acres of Business Park Zoning from elsewhere within the FCSP to BPS. Potential locations that could involve redistribution are BP1, BP2, & BP3. 543 W. County Line Road
Calimesa, CA 92320
909,335,1665

'Vli�t C `ast
EN�''I�iMENT
The City Manager as of this morning, August 26, 2024, has verbally agreed to items 1-3; however, West Coast Entitlement nor the Robinson's have received any documentation from City staff other than an updated errata sheet received at 2:13pm this afternoon. The City should make the changes and have them reviewed and agreed to by the Robinson's prior to any decision being made by the City Council. Further, items 4-6 are important to assure the Robinson's are not affected by inverse condemnation as the changes being made to the FCSP significantly hinders the development potential of the Robinson -owned properties. The Freeway Corridor is one of the last great opportunities in the City of Yucaipa as this is a statement piece for those traveling through town, and it is imperative that this plan be reviewed meticulously and not rushed through the system. It is my understanding that an additional 30-days will not impact the warehouse project — other than delay — so this request for additional time to work through these issues will not prevent the pending project.

Sincerely,
Craig HeaOs V
Managing Member
West Coast Entitlement
(909) 335-1665
Cc: Chris Mann, City Manager Councilman Jon Thorp
Steven Graham, City Attorney Councilman Chris Venable
Councilman Matt Garner Mayor Justin Beaver
Councilman Bobby Duncan Benjamin Matlock, City Planner
543 W. County Line Road
Calimesa, CA 92320
909.335,1665

PUBLIC COMMENT 60

FW: Proposed warehouse off Live Oak Canyon Road
Public Comment
Mon 8/26/2024 3:54 PM
To:Tara Davis
This one was on time but in the junk folder.

City of Yucaipa
• , CA
Office:
www.yucaipigov
From: Juli Spiller
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 2:41 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: Proposed warehouse off Live Oak Canyon Road
I am disturbed to hear of yet another proposed warehouse in this area. This would create multiple problems for the surrounding areas, especially since this is being proposed for an area so inappropriate.

We have had worsening air quality, extreme additions of truck and other vehicle traffic with a multitude of new warehouses. This is impacting our communities in a negative manner.

I understand there will be parking for 1100 trucks and 986 cars. This obviously will involve that number if vehicles not only "parking" but traveling these roads. This seems an extreme number of additional vehicles added to already heavily traveled roads.

Our communities are becoming a nightmare of huge cement complexes lining our roads and Hillside much less causing extreme traffic and wear on our roads. Our air quality had significantly improved since I moved here in 1969. Now it seems it is published and common knowledge that we have the worst air quality.in the country?
These warehouses must stop being approved. We need to keep our open areas and stop polluting our communities.

Please DO NOT approve yet another warehouse! Vote for the people, not the $.

Juli Spiller

PUBLIC COMMENT 61

Public Comment Re: Live Oak Canyon Proposed Warehouse
Kara Torbert
Thu 9/12/2024 1:59 PM
To:Public Comment
To the Members of the Yucaipa City Council:

I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development of a 2,054,000-square- foot warehouse on Live Oak Canyon Road.

1. Traffic Impact: Live Oak Canyon Road is a small, two-lane road used by travelers, commuters, residents, and seasonal visitors to the Christmas Tree Farm. The addition of truck traffic from a facility with over 1,000 truck parking stalls would overwhelm the road's capacity and create significant disruptions for regular traffic.

2. Environmental Concerns: The proposed development would drastically alter a historically rural and natural landscape. Situated across from preserved natural areas like the Herngt 'Aki' Preserve, this project would permanently change the land's character and negatively affect one of the few local spaces where residents of Redlands and Yucaipa can enjoy hiking, biking, and connecting with nature.

I urge you to consider the long-term impact on future generations and whether this development truly serves the best interests of our community. Thank you for taking the time to hear my concerns.

Sincerely,
Kara Torbert
Redlands, CA 92373
Kara Torbert (she/her)

PUBLIC COMMENT 62

Warehouse plans.

Jenny Najjar
Sun 9/15/2024 11:09 AM
To:Public Comment
I oppose the plans related to the warehouse.

Jenny Najjar
Yucaipa resident.

Sent from my Phone

PUBLIC COMMENT 63

Warehouse Development Disaster
Sun 9/15/2024 10:43 PM
To:Public Comment ;kevertsPucaioa.com
The negative effects of this proposed development far, far outweigh any of the supposed benefits.

1.) The water outflow from all those paved areas and rooftops will cause the rapidly -eroding Yucaipa Creek in Live Oak Canyon to redouble it's erosive/destructive effects on all the privately -owned properties downstream, leaving the City Of Yucaipa liable for millions of dollars in civil damages when they lose the ensuing lawsuits. (As they surely will if this project is allowed to proceed.

You can't knowingly cause future flood damages and expect "Oops!" to pay the piper when the eventual bills come due. Those will inevitably fall on Yucaipa's head.)

2.) The huge amounts of pollution, traffic, and noise this development would bring to the City would completely change its character. And it's that present character that caused most Yucaipans to choose to live here in the first place. Yucaipa is a semi -rural residential community, not an "industrial" city, and its residents want to keep it that way.

3.) The idea that these major commercial developments "will be good for the City financially" is an over -used red herring, largely promoted by (Suprise!) developers.

While the City's tax base may benefit to some extent from a lot of commercial development the property values of the average home in Yucaipa will quite likely drop for the simple reason that nobody in their right mind wants to live anywhere close to a warehouse -or it's side -effects. Particularly when you're planting that major commercial development in a semi -rural residential community.

As an example of how a lack of heavy commercial development can actually benefit the local population, look at Carmel, California, where I once lived. It's intentionally been kept "rural" to an extent that makes Yucaipa look like downtown Los Angeles by comparison, but as a result it delivers some of the very highest property values in the entire state of California to it's extremely happy residents.

Given the choice between living in a semi -rural town that looks as Yucaipa does today or living among a conglomeration of warehouses and businesses that resemble modern Bloomington, who would choose to live in Bloomington? -Pete Roehling

PUBLIC COMMENT 64

Live oak canyon warehouse and housing tract
Brian
Mon 9/16/2024 3:31 PM
To:Public Comment ;Kim J Metzler, CIVIC, CPM
I live several miles from the area but what I want to say is... Can't we leave anything alone??? It is a beautiful area.

More truck traffic, more auto traffic, more pollution, more health impacts, more climate change, less wildlife. We just don't know where to stop. Redlands tore out so many orange groves in order to steep themselves in warehouses. A big mistake. Fontana is a disaster. Its all done because the cities want the money. Find another way - Period.

Tighten the belt. Don't let hters elect councilmembers because they will support development in order to boost salaries. I r who has always been against that kind of politicking. Leave Live Oak Canyon alone. Be sensib
Brian and Tracey Roche Redlands, Ca, 92373

PUBLIC COMMENT 65

Warehouse project
Hu, Brian
Mon 9/16/2024 9:38 PM
To:Public Comment ;Kim J Metzler, CIVIC, CPM
Dear city council,
I am writing to express my strong support against the warehouse project that was rejected by the planning commission. This project is wrong for Yucaipa and wrong for the canyon. It will be bad for traffic and bad for wildlife. This hope of a potential windfall for the city is hollow and will ultimately be harmful to Yucaipa and its residents.

I will be attending the meeting next Monday to show opposition this project.

Best,
Brian Hu
Get Outlook for iOS
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail communication and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information for the use of the designated recipients named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, disclosure, dissemination, distribution or copying of it or its contents is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by replying to this message and destroy all copies of this communication and any attachments. Thank you.

PUBLIC COMMENT 66

Live oak canyon warehouse
Sharon Wang
Mon 9/16/2024 9:42 PM
To:Public Comment ;Kim J Metzler, CIVIC, CPM
To the city council,
I would like to express my opposition to the large warehouse project that will be before the council next week. I walk and bike in the canyon weekly and first-hand see the beauty of Yucaipa. I urge the council to help preserve this vital landscape and wildlife corridor.

Sharon Wang

PUBLIC COMMENT 67

To: City Council for Yucaipa
From: Mike McCuistion
Date:8/14/24
Re: Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP)
My name is Mike McCuistion and I live on in Yucaipa. Ben Madlock was kind to review the overall FCSP update with me and Chris Palmer is a personal friend who explained his part of the SP to me regarding the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (POCC) proposal. For the good of our beloved community, I have prepared this document to encourage you to vote in favor of both the FCSP Update and the POCC.

About Me and my wife Cindy of 54 years:
*Built first house as owner -builders in Yucaipa in 1976 (we've lived in Yucaipa for some 40 years) *Cindy has a General Contractors license and I'm a High School retired History teacher for 25 years *We have built many homes for ourselves, our family and some friends —including three subdivisions '"We understand the Development side and the State's demands on local communities for affordable housing and ADU's
*1 had the privilege of serving on the General Plan committee, Vector Control, Little League and in my local church. I've help start two Christian schools in Yucaipa *We initially moved here from San Bernardino for Yucaipian cultural values, school system, for planting our own fruit trees, our own garden, horses and rural living. *Last year we built our last house on an acre of land in the North Bench for much the same reasons — rural living. However, we do have two attached ADU's that we rent out to our adult grandchildren *We understand the need in the North Bench to stand up to Sacramento and maintain our rural living and Open Space.

Personally, I have tried to listen with an open mind to both sides of the FCSP proposal. I met Kristine Mohler on a committee chaired first by her and then by Donna Snodgrass regarding the Wine Country.

I've learned that former city manager Ray Kasey was trying to proactively get ahead of Sacramento on both the WCSP and the FCSP. I've had discussions with Kevin Miskin and Joel McCabe and met twice with Donna (and Ray) Snodgrass. These are all good and well meaning people who love Yucaipa. City Manager Chris Mann was kind to meet with me specifically on the Freeway Corridor. I've also met with 4 of the five city councilmen on both Specific Plan proposals. I think I understand the passionate desire by some to resist development proposals stated in these Specific Plans. I do not condone personal attacks of any kind. That behavior does not represent the vast majority of well mannered Yucaipians.

I think I understand how we got into the city's debt concern as I've met separately with both Greg Franklin and Chris Mann on the matter. The city has always been known to be frugal with expenditures, but now finds a need to increase revenue going forward. As I understand it, the city is considering an alternative proposal for a city-wide sales tax increase on its citizens. Also, the city is considering cutting back on law enforcement protections because of current insufficient city revenues. We all know that projects and businesses that can create revenue and jobs will help our city significantly. The Pacific Oaks Commerce Center is a responsible, significant, rare, and unique opportunity which can add significant revenues and benefits to the city, year after year.

The Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update appears to be a well -considered and balanced plan developed by the city and its professional consultants to meet important and required state and regional requirements, community needs, and refinements to the existing Freeway Corridor Specific Plan. I believe we as a community should be appreciative of our dedicated city leadership, city staff, and professional consultants. Also, to have confidence in their nearly 3 years of work to balance all the many 1 issues, requirements, and interests to develop this zoning Update in a way to better help our community. In several instances the Update lessens the burdens or impacts on the community, and yet creates a zoning plan that meets current and foreseeable standards and conditions to help facilitate reasonable and balance growth (which can be very beneficial for the wellbeing of the community). I understand that the majority of landowners within the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan area (those most affected) support the Update.

The Pacific Oaks Commerce Center is in the best possible location for Yucaipa to provide the best benefit with the least impacts. Pacific Oaks Commerce Center is a unique; Class A logistics project consisting of two buildings with modern farmhouse building architecture to blend with the surrounding canyon. The POCC proposal is located at the far southern end of the city, south of the freeway, far away from the main parts of town, and nearly hidden from view. Further, the POCC meets or exceeds the new and up-to-date development standards proposed by the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update. The proposal shows 96 acres of that land set aside as permanent open space with multi -purpose public access trail.

From the 1-10 off ramp, the Live Oak Road would be widened from two lanes to four lanes to the project road where a traffic signal is installed. The total infrastructure developmental cost is in excess of $35M on streets, a four mile water line (originating from Ave D), a sewer line and storm drainage improvements to serve the project and improve existing conditions. The developer will use solar power with EV charging and donate $490,000 for Fire Station2 to purchase a much needed new fire ladder truck. This is a good and responsible project that can provide our city with a rare and unique opportunity for significant initial and ongoing city revenue and with both temporary and permanent community jobs.

There are one-time DIF and permit fees and recurring property tax revenues to the City of Yucaipa. No other type of use or place in Yucaipa can achieve as much benefit with the fewest impacts.

I believe the city should take advantage of this rare opportunity.

The Pacific Oaks Commerce Center is on the Palmer family land owned since 1954, which spans three generations of stewardship. The Palmers have tried to be good members of the community and business owners in Yucaipa. Chris Palmer lived in Yucaipa for years and is a friend of mine for over twelve years now. I know him to be a man of integrity. For 30 years, Gregg Palmer created and grew the Christmas Tree Farm and Pumpkin Patch business with passion and love for his customers. David Palmer served for decades on several city and county committees wanting to help protect and improve the community.

Chris Palmer shared his heart with me recently regarding the POCC when he said, "The Palmer family wants to leave a lasting positive heritage in the city of Yucaipa. We have owned this land for 70 years and have put a lot of thought and prayer into having this property in order for it to be a benefit to the community. We have intentionally turned down other big corporate developer bids, and chose Pacific Industrial because of their high integrity, desire and ability to find good, responsible, fair, and workable solutions, and for their long-term commitment to ownership." I support this project and feel it would be a huge benefit to our community. Please vote in favor of the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update and the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center tonight. Thank you for all you do.

Sincerely, Mike McCuistion

PUBLIC COMMENT 68

Benjamin Matlock
From: Arnie Chapman - >
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2024 10:17 PM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: 1-10 Corridor Development Case No 21-196 - Awaiting your reply Hello Mr. Matlock,
I am very concerned about the development that is being discussed forthe warehouses, housing tract planning and the amount of traffic, congestion and other issues that this plan would bring to our area.

Here are my concerns:
• Amount of cars on the road
• Weight on our Schools
• Weight on our local parks and recreation
• Road quality
• Stress on our local stores
• Pollution
• Zoning for our area
• Loss of beauty
• Loss of rural "feel"
How is the council planning on voting for this? Has there been any push back from the local residents? I see the houses on the West side of Oak Glen Road are boarded up and have been told there will be a gas station there? Why are we pushing for development in this area? I believe this will change our area forever!!! We moved here to get away from the developments, this will make our serene area a busy, compact area that will forever be changed!!!!
Please tell me that you are in the government to make sure the residents are being taken seriously about our needs and wants for our area.

Are there any other steps I can take that would help support the Council saying "NO" to the developers? Thankyou!!
Amie Chapman

PUBLIC COMMENT 69

AQUA CAIICNTC BAND OF CAMUILLA INDIAN )
VINHAL HISTows: Prd=SFFFVATM',i
03-044-202-7-005
June 21, 2024
[VIA EMAIL TO:[email protected]]
City of Yucaipa
Mr. Benjamin Matlock
34272 Yucaipa Blvd,
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Re: Final SEIR Freeway Corridor Specific Plan
Dear Mr. Benjamin Matlock,
The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (ACBCI) appreciates your efforts to include the Tribal Historic Preservation Office (THPO) in the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) project. We have reviewed the documents and have the following comments:
*Before ground disturbing activities begin please contact the Tribal Historic Preservation Office at [email protected] to arrange cultural monitoring.
*An informational meeting with the developer, lead agency, and archaeologist regarding cultural compliance procedures for this project.

Again, the Agua Caliente appreciates your interest in our cultural heritage. If you have questions or require additional information, please call me at (760) 883-1137. You may also email me at [email protected].

Cordially,
Luz Salazar
Cultural Resources Analyst
Tribal Historic Preservation Office

AGUA CALIENTE BAND

OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
U I UID1 A. iI SI+{.., �, I. Di I'vt. Pat p !'w, FUINli'., r,. A 922tiQ L. .. A 4 , 1 A a h 1 � _. v L t J _ !I V

PUBLIC COMMENT 70

Benjamin Matlock
From: Tom Robinson <
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2024 9:47 AM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: New Specific Plan
Ben
Per our earlier conversation can you provide this e-mail to the Planning Commissioners for the discussion on the new Specific Plan.

Please review and consider reducing the large amount of open space especially adjacent to the commercial components. This is a very well located property compared too many others in the City and can bring great services, businesses, and living areas that other properties in the City would not attract. It would seem prudent to make sure as much as possible is available for use and generating income in the City..

The Open Space Conservation areas should have some flexibility for the property owners. They should not be forced to dedicate land if they can mitigate in another area inside or outside the specific plan. Additionally any Land that is set aside should allow the owner to get mitigation credit from any agencies such as California Fish and Wildlife and U.S. Fish and Wildlife. If these agencies will not give mitigation credit then the owners should have the flexibility to take out of conservation area.

Thank You for your diligence on this project it should be a great addition to the City.

Tom Robinson
VantageOne Real Estate Investments, LLC
TREH Partners, LLC
4 Corporate Plaza, Suite 210
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 631-6620 office
(949) 903-3818 mobile
r-�
\ . ntaq One
k=AL E S I A ' E INVES-r.'=';CS
vantageoneinvestments. cam
When One tugs at a single thing in nature, they find its attached to the rest of the world John Muir

PUBLIC COMMENT 71

Maria Koolhoven
From:

Christian Farmer
Sent:

Wednesday, June 5, 2024 3:03 PM
To:

Benjamin Matlock; Madeline Jordan
Cc:

Maria Koolhoven
Subject:

FW: Planning commission mtg June 5
Christian Farmer
Assistant Planner
City of Yucaipa
City Hall • 34272 Yucaipa Blvd • Yucaipa, CA 92399
Office:909-797-2469 E--J %70
WMV.�ucai p i.`ao%t
From: Leola Green
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2024 3:02 PM
To: Christian Farmer
Subject: Planning commission mtg June 5
hops_//ri_n_g.cot-n/sham/6ar4a217-1613-4t287_a0a5.-2fe8_G3a7b026 I am writing about the freeway corridor why would this
council agree to this to turn our roads into a warehouse we don't need our roads clogged with trucks unless this council wants to pave the road every month, lose more
people, businesses. We don't want to be like Redlands
where the access to their roads are clogged with trucks making deliveries. Because you have to much people
already the trash had to make another trip the next day at 7 am in the morning I sent a copy of the video. So why 1 tear our beautiful mountains and hills for the look of warehouses. We also do not want to look like cherry
valley they had a nice look of rolling hills now they are big warehouses. This council turned down Walmart why
are you giving a way for them to come in or Amazon this is Yucaipa not Los Angeles. This city is a mountain area not a flat piece of land. We do not want reaching out the window to ask the neighbor for sugar. So why would we
want living near warehouses that trucks are delivering at all hours of the day. This also goes for the starling
heights project we don't need more houses if you're
trash and emergency services can not reach people in
time or on the trash schedule. This city doesn't need to lose more animals and people. There are people put
homes up for sale after the approval of the
grapevine. This city has lost philly, Dennys, fantastic Sam's, hallmark so you need to protect what you have
left. The animals, businesses and environment this city used to have no 90 type days because of the trees and
the hills protecting us now Chapman heights come in
and the weather changes so do you really want to have
people crawling on each other and stepping on you. Do
not approve these projects.

Thankyou
Green family
Northbench
z

PUBLIC COMMENT 72

820 STATE STREET, 4T" FLOOR
SANTA BARBARA, CA 93101
OFFICE (805) 966-7000
FAX (805) 966-7227
1'ALIVER • LARGF - ARcHBALD - SPRAY

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
June 5, 2024
City of Yucaipa
The Development Services Department
Attn.: Benjamin Matlock,
Deputy Director of Community Development
OLIVIA K. MARR

PARTNER
DIRECT (805) 966-7199
[email protected]
Via Email
[email protected]
Re: Planning Commission Agenda Item 1 - Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update (Case No. 24-044/GPA/SPA) — Live Oak Canyon Pumpkin Farm Comments
Dear Mr. Matlock:

Our office represents Live Oak Canyon Investments, LLC ("Live Oak"), the owner of the three (3) properties totaling approximately sixty-three (63) acres that comprise the Live Oak Canyon Pumpkin Farm located at 32335 Live Oak Canyon Road (the "Pumpkin Farm") in the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan area of the City of Yucaipa ("City"). Our client appreciates the opportunities they have had to discuss the City's proposed amendment to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (the "FCSP Amendment") with you and your willingness to receive their feedback.

As you are aware, the Pumpkin Farm has been a staple in the area for over thirty (30) years and in 2022, Live Oak secured the ability to continue operation of the Pumpkin Farm year after year via a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"). Since 2022, Live Oak has invested substantial sums of money to comply with the terms and conditions of the CUP, including dedicating land to the City and widening Live Oak Canyon road including installing curb, gutter and sidewalk. Live Oak made these investments in reliance on the City's commitment to honoring the CUP and they intend to continue to take all actions needed to comply with all conditions of the CUP.

The Pumpkin Farm is currently designated as Regional Commercial, and the FCSP Amendment proposes to modify the designation to a new Agricultural Tourism ("AT") land use.

If approved, Live Oak's property will be the only property within the City with this land use designation. It is our understanding that one of the intents of the FCSP Amendment is to allow for

City of Yucaipa
The Development Services Department
June 5, 2024

Page 2 of 3 ends

and promote the continued operation of the Pumpkin Farm. To that end, in your meeting with Live Oak on June 4, 2024, you indicated your support for the following changes to the FCSP Amendment:
(1) The FCSP Amendment indicates that an "Amusement Enterprise" may operate in the AT area pursuant to an Administrative Use Permit ("AUP") (see Table 4.2. Permitted Uses, p. 4-3). However, in small print under the previous Table 4.1. "Permitted Uses" on page 4-2, it states "[A]musement enterprises shall be subject to a Development Agreement." While a Development Agreement with the City might be beneficial in the future, it should not be required for the continued operation or modification of the Pumpkin Farm under the existing CUP. To promote and preserve the Pumpkin Patch, operational flexibility is crucial without expecting that any changes will necessitate negotiating a Development Agreement with staff and obtaining City Council approval.

Such a requirement could be more burdensome than the CUP process and may cause the Pumpkin Farm to stagnate for fear of losing its CUP or making unaffordable commitments in a Development Agreement.

Live Oak intends to continue to comply with the commitments made in its CUP. When the time comes to alter the Pumpkin Farm operations, Live Oak requests that its application be processed as an AUP without requiring a Development Agreement. (2) The FSCP Amendment indicates that "amusement rides that do not require state approval" are a part of the "Amusement Enterprise" use subject to an AUP. However, "amusement rides that require state approval" are subject to a Conditional Use Permit approval. You agreed that this directive would be clearer if it stated that any amusement ride over forty-five (45) feet in height and permanently affixed to the ground requires a CUP and all others are subject to the AUP process.

In addition, Live Oak has further comment that were not specifically discussed in your meeting yesterday. First, it appears the intent of the FSCP Amendment is to allow agricultural uses (growing of crops, etc.) in the Open Space Land Use Area. However, such use does not appear in the Permitted Uses table and we suggest that it be added and specifically referenced as well as all accessory uses (small barns, irrigation, etc) supporting the agricultural use. Further, agricultural use could be separately identified as a permitted use in the AT Land Use area otherwise it is only mentioned as a part of an Amusement Enterprise use.

Second, Live Oak wants to ensure seasonal parking in areas designated Open Space and Open Space -Conservation is permitted consistent with the existing CUP.

FLAS310456

PUBLIC COMMENT 73

City of Yucaipa
The Development Services Department
June 5, 2024

Page 3 of 3 ends

Further, we want to inquire whether the AUP process will be further defined in the future.

At this time, it appears an AUP is equivalent to what is referred to as "Administrative Review" in the City's Development Code section 83.010215. However, the Administrative Review process appears to be poorly defined, setting forth very few standards, which raises concern over whether the review process will be applied objectively and uniformly by the reviewing authority.

We appreciate your time and look forward to you addressing these requests with the Planning Commission at the hearing this evening. Our client will attend the meeting and be available to answer any questions you or the Planning Commission may have about these requests or the Pumpkin Farm operations as a whole.

Sincerely,

FAUVER, LARGE, ARCHBALD & SPRAY, LLP
Olivia K. Marr, Partner
OKM:ab
FLAS310456

PUBLIC COMMENT 74

Public Comment
Good evening, my name is Steven Piepkorn and I'm with the Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance. We submitted a comment letter to the Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. Our letter identified several deficiencies with the SIR.

During these turbulent times, we as citizens expect and deserve our local government's elected and appointed officials to protect us from environmental and social injustice, to aid in the preservation and rehabilitation of the environment in which we all share, and to ensure accountability and responsibility regarding the environmental decisions they may make.

We stand by our comment letter and believe that the SIR is flawed, and must be redrafted and recirculated for public review. In closing we call on this commission to be a leader on the aforementioned issues and be the first line of defense for our citizenry and environment. Only by working together can we continue to be excellent stewards of our environment, outstanding stewards to our citizens and each other. Thank you.

PUBLIC COMMENT 75

Benjamin Matlock
City Planner
Deputy Director of
Community Development
City of Yucaipa
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399

BLUM, COLLINS & HO LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

AON CENTER
707 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD
SUITE 4880
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
(213) S72-0400
March 25, 2024
VIA EMAIL TO:
[email protected]
Subject: Comments on Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Subsequent SIR (SCH NO. 2006041096) Dear Mr. Matlock,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Subsequent EIR (SIR) for the proposed amendments to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan. Please accept and consider these comments on behalf of Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance (GSEJA). Also, Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance formally requests to be added to the public interest list regarding any subsequent environmental documents, public notices, public hearings, and notices of determination for this project. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance P.O. Box 79222 Corona, CA 92877.

1.0 Summary
The project proposes amendments to the existing Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP). The proposed project would result in a total of 2,472 residential units and 5,093,265 square feet of nonresidential uses (3,992,503 square feet of Business Park (industrial) uses and 1,100,761 square feet of Regional Commercial uses). The proposed project results in an increase of 25 residential units, 2,786,461 square feet of Business Park (BP), and a reduction of 2,278,976 square feet of Regional Commercial (RC) existing FCSP.

The proposed project also includes the construction and operation for buildout of the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center (two fulfillment center warehouse buildings totaling 2,054,000 square feet in area) in planning areas BP 2 and BP 3 of the proposed FCSP. Building 1 proposes 1,032,500 square feet of warehouse are and 20,000 square feet of office use, for a total of 1,052,500 square feet of building floor area. Building 2 proposes 981,500 square feet of warehouse and 20,000

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 2 ends

square feet of office use, for a total of 1,001,500 square feet of building area. Each building also would allow up to 25 percent of the building square -footage for cold -storage uses.

Each warehouse building provides 178 truck docking bays for a total of 356 truck docking bays in the project area. Building 1 provides 410 truckparking stalls and 515 passenger car parking spaces.

Building 2 provides 326 truck parking stalls and 475 passenger car parking spaces. Building 2 is also connected to an additional parking lot that provides 322 truck/trailer parking stalls in a tandem and triple tandem configuration. This parking lot would be on a separate parcel and would be used either for overflow parking or as a standalone use. As a result, the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center would provide for a total of 1,058 truck parking stalls and 986 passenger car parking spaces.

The following discretionary actions are necessary to implement the proposed project:

1. Adoption of the proposed amendments to the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan.

2. General Plan Amendment to change the Land Use Map to correspond to the updated FCSP land use plan and Hillside Overlay.

3. Certification of the SEIR.

4. Approval of a Tentative Tract Map (TTM) 20533 for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Project.

5. Adoption of the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations due to the project's significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise.

6. Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Program.

5.3 Air Quality, 5.6 Energy, and 5.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Please refer to attachments from SWAPE for a complete technical commentary and analysis.

The EIR does not include for analysis relevant environmental justice issues in reviewing potential impacts, including cumulative impacts from the proposed project. The EIR provides general information about the census tract's CalEnviroscreen scores but does not provide meaningful analysis regarding the health impacts and effects of severe pollution rates. This is especially significant as the surrounding community is highly burdened by pollution. According to CalEnviroScreen 4.0', CalEPA's screening tool that ranks each census tract in the state for pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability, the proposed project s census tract (6071008500) ranks worse than 80% of the rest of the state in overall pollution burden. The proposed project's census tract and surrounding community bears the impact of multiple sources of pollution and is more ' CalEnviroScreen 4.0 littps://oehlia ca gov/calenviroscreen/reporUcalenviroscreen-40

Bciijainin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 3 ends

polluted than average on several pollution indicators measured by CalEnviroScreen. For example, the project census tract ranks in the 100th percentile for ozone burden, the 53rd percentile for PM

2.5 burden, the 55th percentile for diesel particulate matter burden, and the 69th percentile for traffic impacts. All of these environmental factors are attributed to mobile source emissions from passenger cars and heavy truck/trailer activity in the area, which will increase as part of the proposed project. Ozone can cause lung irritation, inflammation, and worsening of existuig chronic health conditions, even at low levels of exposure 2. The very small particles of diesel PM can reach deep into the lung, where they can contribute to a range of health problems. These include irritation to the eyes, throat and nose, heart and lung disease, and lung cancer3.

The census tract ranks in the 76th percentile for contaminated drinking water and 60th percentile for groundwater threats. Poor communities and people in rural areas are exposed to contaminants in their drinking water more often than people in other parts of the state'. People who live near contaminated groundwater may be exposed to chemicals moving from the soil into the air inside their homes5.

The census tract also ranks in the 78th percentile for hazardous waste facility impacts. Hazardous waste generators and facilities contribute to the contamination of air, water and soil near waste generators and facilities can harm the environment as well as people.

The census tract also bears more impacts from cleanup sites than 58% of the state. Chemicals in the buildings, soil, or water at cleanup sites can move into nearby communities through the air or movement of water 7. The census tract also ranks in the 45th percentile for toxic releases. People living near facilities that emit toxic releases may breathe contaminated air regularly or if contaminants are released during an accident'.

The State of California lists three approved compliance modeling softwares9 for non-residential buildings: CBECC-Com, EnergyPro, and IES VE. CalEEMod is not listed as an approved 2 OEHHA Ozone https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/air-quality-ozone 3 OEHHA Diesel Particulate Matter littps://oeliha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/diesel-particulate- matter
a OEHHA Contaminated Drinking Water https:Hoehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/drinking-water s OEHHA Groundwater Threats httl2s://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/groundwater-threats OEHHA Hazardous Waste Generators and Facilities
https://oehha . ca. Qov/calenviroscreen/indicator/hazardous-waste-generators-and-facilities OEHHA Cleanup Sites https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/cleanup-sites s OEHHA Toxic Releases httl2s•//oeliha ca.gov/calenviroscreen/indicator/toxic-releases-facilities 9 California Energy Commission 2022 Energy Code Compliance Software https://www.ener.izy.ca.gov/programs-aiid-topics/proprams/building-energy-efficieucy-standards/2022- building-energy-efficiency-1

Benjarr in Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 4 ends

software. The CaIEEMod modeling does not comply with the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and under -reports the project s significant Energy impacts and fuel consumption to the public and decision makers. Since the EIR did not accurately or adequately model the energy impacts in compliance with Title 24, it cannot conclude the project will generate less than significant impacts and a finding of significance must be made. A revised EIR with modeling using one of the approved software types must be prepared and circulated for public review in order to adequately analyze the projects significant environmental impacts. This is vital as the EIR utilizes CaIEEMod as a source in its methodology and analysis, which is clearly not an approved software.

5.11 Land Use and Planning
The SEIR provides a statement that, "Since the EIR was certified, the City has updated its General Plan (2016), which now includes the land uses in the Approved Project. As a result, the Approved Project and Proposed Project would be consistent with the land uses in the 2016 General Plan and its policies pertaining to land use and planning for residential and nonresidential uses." This statement is nonsensical, erroneous, and misleading to the public and decision makers. The proposed project is clearly not consistent with the land uses of the 2016 General Plan. This is illustrated by Table 3-6 Project Approvals Needed that states the proposed project requires an "Amendment of the General Plan Land Use Map to correspond to the updated FCSP land use plan and Hillside Overlay." The EIR has not provided any meaningful discussion of the proposed land use changes or the project's inconsistency with the existing Land Use Map.

The EIR is inadequate as an informational document and a revised EIR must be prepared with a consistency analysis with all General Plan goals and policies, including the following:

1. Housing Element Strategy 4: Freeway Corridor Specific Plan

2. Housing Element Program 11: Freeway Corridor Specific Plan

3. Goal HN-2: Housing Sites. Adequate sites through General Plan land use designations and specific plans that provide opportunities for a range in type, tenure, and affordability of housing in appropriate locations.

4. Policy CDL-1.1 Places to Live. Provide sites for a range of housing types, locations, and densities in a variety of neighborhood settings equipped with amenities that support a high quality of life.

5. Policy CDL-1.2 Places for Commerce. Provide sites for a range of commercial uses, including shopping, dining, entertainment, and offices that provide a strong employment base and offer local services; improve commercial properties along I-10 through infrastructure, aesthetics, and development strategies.

Beujainin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 5 ends

6. Policy CDL-7.2 Housing. Expand the range of housing opportunities (single, multiple -family, and/or mixed -use housing) to meet the needs of a variety of household types, sizes, and income levels.

7. Policy CDL-7.4 Safe and Efficient Circulation. Ensure a safe and efficient circulation system that adequately supports the anticipated level of traffic in and around the specific plan area.

8. Policy CDL-7.6 Adjacent Development. Comprehensively plan the area with consideration of other contiguous areas to ensure compatible and complementary development, circulation patterns, infrastructure, and services.

9. Policy CDL-7.7 Rural Character. Comprehensively plan the area so that the important rural community character and sense of place is retained, as reinforced by significant views to open space and hillsides.

10. Policy CDL-7.8 Hillside Development. Ensure that the plan and subsequent development complies with the City s development code related to hillside development; protect ridgelines and scenic views. CDL-7.9 Area Resources. Protect and preserve sensitive wildlife habitat, waterways, wildlife corridors, cultural and paleontological resources, and other assets in accordance with state and federal law.

11. GOAL CDL-10: DESIGN QUALITY Thoughtfully designed projects and buildings evidenced by creative site design, quality architecture, integration with the natural environment, and sensitive land use transitions.

12. Policy CDL-10.6 Parking. Design parking lots and structures to be functionally and visually integrated and connected with the comprehensive project design; off-street parking Iots should not dominate the street scene.

13. Policy CDL-10.8 Safe Community Design. Require the use of CPTED principles (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design), including creating opportunities for eyes on the street" and clearly distinguishing between public and private spaces to enhance community safety.

14. Policy CDL-10.9 Building Materials. Use high -quality, natural building materials that evoke a sense of quality and permanence, such as stucco, plaster, stone, and wood; natural colors and textures are preferred.

15. Policy CDL-10.10 Building Massing. Reduce the bulk and perceived size of large buildings by dividing their mass into smaller parts, stepping down to adjacent structures, recessing openings for doors/windows, and using pedestrian -scale features; single -plane massing is discouraged.

16. Policy CDL-10.12 Architectural Detail. While recognizing sensitivity to budget, require publicly visible sides of a building to contain architectural detail and fagade articulation, strong patterns of shade and shadow, and integrated architectural detail; blank walls are discouraged.

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 6 ends

17. Policy CDL-11.2 Land Use Change. Where opportunities for land use changes arise, seek input from property owners, the surrounding neighborhood or district, and other stakeholders during the consideration process so as to determine appropriateness or inform strategies.

18. Policy CDL-11.3 Project Compatibility. Strive to ensure appropriate transitions in scale, density, and intensity between residential and nonresidential uses; between adjacent residences or uses within a defined neighborhood; and within areas of different densities.

19. Goal ED-3: Freeway Corridor. A fully developed Freeway Corridor that provides office -based employment, accommodates large format retailers, and attracts consumer spending from the region while maintaining and enhancing a unique sense of place in Yucaipa.

20. Goal ED-4: Fiscal Balance. A fiscally well-balanced City that generates sufficient revenues to continuously reinvest in public facilities, infrastructure, and community services that support the premier quality of life in Yucaipa.

21. Policy ED-4.1 Fiscal Return of Land Use and Development. Ensure that shorter -term actions and longer -term development patterns result in a mix of land use and types of development that will generate 10 percent more in municipal revenues than they will demand in costs for public facilities and services.

22. Policy T-1.1 Roadway Buildout. Complete the circulation system by constructing or improving roadways consistent with Figure T-1; allow modified standards where appropriate to allow for transit, bicycle facilities, sidewalks, and on -street parking to be sensitive to adjacent land uses, districts, and roadway users.

23. Policy T-2.1 Level of Service. To promote the safe and efficient movement of vehicular traffic, maintain a minimum level of service (LOS) C on all intersections and road segments except for two conditions: 1)At roadway intersections where traffic movements are controlled by roundabouts, LOS D shall be acceptable (e.g., average control delay of 30 seconds per vehicle or better). 2) On roadway segments where a roundabout controls at least one of the intersections at the ends of the segment, the lower half of LOS D shall be acceptable (e.g., V/C ratio of 0.849 or better).

24. Policy S-6.3 Noise Insulation and Vibration Standards. Require new projects to comply with noise insulation and vibration reduction standards in local, regional, state, and federal regulations, as applicable.

25. Policy 5-6.5 Development Patterns. Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for the use. Limit development of noise -producing uses adjacent to noise -sensitive receptors and require that noise producing land uses have adequate mitigation.

26. Policy 5-6.6 Land Use -Noise Compatibility. Require mitigation of exterior and interior noise to the levels in Table S-1. Encourage the use of building design, site planning, landscaping, and other features to reduce noise levels.

27. Goal S-7: Air Quality and Climate Change. Clean and healthfiil air resources that promotes public health, protects the natural environment, and mitigates local impacts to climate change.

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 7 ends

28. Policy S-7.1 Integrated Planning. Integrate air quality planning with land use, economic development, and transportation -related planning to allow for the control and management of air quality.

29. Policy S-7.3 Sensitive Land Uses. Protect residents from health risks by avoiding the placement of sensitive uses and land uses generating high levels of pollutants within close proximity to one another. Appropriate distances shall be determined based on best available knowledge.

30. Policy S-7.6 Greenhouse Gas Reductions. Reduce community -wide greenhouse gas emissions locally through the implementation of Yucaipa s Climate Action Plan; actively support regional efforts to reduce greenhouse gases throughout the county.

Table 5.11-1 2020-2045 RTP/SCS Consistency Analysis provides a misleading and erroneous consistency analysis with SCAG's 2020-2045 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS. Due to errors in modeling, modeling without supporting evidence (as noted throughout this comment letter and attachments), and the EIR's conclusion the project will result in significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impacts to Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise, the proposed project is directly inconsistent with Goal 5 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality, Goal 6 to support healthy and equitable communities, and Goal 7 to adapt to a changing climate. Additionally, the table provides other misleading analysis such as concluding the proposed project is consistent with RTP/SCS Goal 9 to encourage development of diverse housing types because the project is consistent with the City's 6th Cycle Housing Element, even though the proposed project is directly inconsistent with the Housing Element and RHNA sites inventory as described in the Population and Housing discussion below. The EIR must be revised to include a finding of significance due to these direct inconsistencies with SCAG's 2020-2045 Connect SoCal RTP/SCS.

Further, the EIR omits discussion and analysis regarding the project's inconsistency with other land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. For example, the project will have a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact to Air Quality because it will exceed the assumptions ui the AQMP and generate construction and operational -source emissions that exceed the applicable thresholds. The project will also have a significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impact to Greenhouse Gas Emissions because the operational emissions will exceed the applicable thresholds and will impede long-term GHG reduction goals of various plans at the State and Regional level (e.g., for 2030 and 2050) adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The Land Use and Planning analysis omits any discussion regarding inconsistencies with the AQMP and California s statewide GHG reduction goals for 2030 and 2050. The EIR must be revised to

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 8 ends

include these significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable impacts for analysis and include a finding of significance.

The EIR does not include any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's General Plan in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis. The EIR must be revised to provide the horizon year of the City's current adopted General Plan, the total developable building floor area analyzed within the Industrial land use designation, and cumulative development since adoption of the General Plan to ensure that the proposed project is within the General Plan EIR's analysis, particularly since the EIR tiers from the General Plan EIR. For example, Table CDL-2: Yucaipa Buildout Summary of the General Plan indicates that the entirety of all Industrial land use designations will accommodate 1,100,000 square feet of building area.

The proposed project's 3,992,503 square feet of Business Park (industrial) building area exceeds the entirety of the planned industrial growth for the entire incorporated City area by nearly four times. Table CDL-2 also states the the entirety of all Industrial land use designations will generate 1,203 jobs, and the proposed project's 2,682 jobs is more than twice the identified growth. The growth generated by the proposed project was not accounted for by the General Plan or its EIR as the project requires a GPA to proceed. The growth generated by the proposed project was not anticipated by the City's General Plan, RTP/SCS, or AQMP. A revised EIR must be prepared with a finding of significance.

5.14 Population and Housing
The project faces two significant inconsistencies with statutory requirements. The first is inconsistency with State Housing Element Law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 6586310, a jurisdiction shall ensure that its housing element sites inventory "can accommodate, at all times throughout the planning period, its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need allocated pursuant to Section 65584" and "at no time ... shall a city, county, or city and county by administrative, quasi-judicial, legislative, or other action permit or cause its inventory of sites identified in the housing element to be insufficient to meet its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need for lower and moderate -income households." Further, this Section states the following:
"No city, county, or city and county shall, by administrative, quasi judicial, legislative, or other action, reduce, or require or permit the reduction of, the residential density for any parcel to, or allow development of any parcel at, a lower residential density, as defined in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (g), unless the city, county, or city and county makes written findings supported by substantial evidence of both of the following:
10 Government Code Section 65863
https:Hleginfo.leizislature.ca.gov/faces/codes displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&sectionNum=65863

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 9 ends

(A) The reduction is consistent with the adopted general plan, including the housing element. (B) The remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to meet the requirements of Section 65583.2 and to accommodate the jurisdictions share of the regional housing need pursuant to Section 65584. The finding shall include a quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction s share of the regional housing need at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the housing element to accommodate that need by income level." The City's HCD Certified Housing Elemental identifies multiple parcels within the project site with residential land use designations as part of its identified sites inventory to accommodate its RHNA allocation in Table 4-6: Summary of Housing Sites. Notably, one parcel within the proposed project proposes changes that are not consistent with the requirements of the Housing Element:

Housing Element
APN 030120135
Size: 10.0 Acres
RHNA: 200 Lower Income units (Extremely low, very low, and low income) Proposed Project
PA 8
98 DU

4.1 Acres
PA 9
91 DU

3.8 Acres
C2

7.7 Acres
The parcel 030120135 is identified as part of the City's RHNA sites inventory to accommodate 200 lower income units. This corresponds to proposed project areas PA 8, PA 9, and C2. The residential areas of the parcel are significantly smaller (7.9 acres) than the area identified in the � � httpss://vucaipa. eov/wp-
content/uploads/dev secs/housingelement/Yucaipa Housin$Element Final October6 2022 pdf? t=1665 101647

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 10 ends

Housing Element. They also accommodate fewer dwelling units (189 emits assumed to be market rate as the EIR has not provided any affordability analysis) than the Housing Element's identified 200 lower income units.

The EIR does not state that the proposed project will provide any lower income housing units, including the required capacity for 200 lower income units on parcel 030120135. Additionally, Table 4-7 Summary of Credits toward the 2021-2029 RHNA within the Housing Element states that Site Strategy #4: Freeway Corridor Specific Plan will provide for the development of 390 Lower Income Units. The EIR has not provided any information stating the project site will comply or facilitate development of 390 lower income (extremely low, very low, and low income) dwelling units. The EIR has not provided any analysis to demonstrate that the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 65583.2 and to accommodate the jurisdiction s share of the regional housing need pursuant to Government Code Section 65584 through the end of the 2021-2029 planning period, including the lower income RHNA. The EIR has not demonstrated that the City's Housing Element can accommodate at all times throuizhout the planning period its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need. The EIR must be revised to include a finding of significance because it has not demonstrated that the City can continue to accommodate its RHNA following the potential approval of the proposed project.

Additionally, the proposed changes to the RHNA sites inventory of the Housing Element due to the proposed project necessitate a General Plan Amendment application with required review and approval by HCD. The revised Housing Element must be submitted to HCD for review and certification prior to adoption of the proposed project in order to demonstrate the project will have less than significant impacts.

Further, the EIR has not demonstrated compliance with the Housing Crisis Act (HCA) of 2019/Senate Bill (SB) 33012/SB 813. Government Code Section 66300.5 and 66300.6 requires that all existing on -site housing (the EIR is deficient and misleading in that it does not state the actual quantity of residences on the project site and only provides a statement that the site includes "a limited number of residences") be replaced. Replacement housing must be offered to the existing occupants, and the replacement units must be affordable to lower income households. The EIR must be revised to demonstrate compliance with the Housing Crisis Act/SB 330/SB 8 in its entirety.
12 Housing Crisis Act of 2019/SB 330
littps:Hle.info legislature ca gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill id=201920200SB330 13 SB 8 littps:Hleginfo legislature ca 2ov/faces/billTextClient.xhtmt?bill id=202120220SB8

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 11 ends

The EIR states that, "the Proposed Project would create 1,709 jobs (not including employment from the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center project). With the inclusion of the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center project, the total proposed employment of the FCSP would be 2,682 jobs." However, it does not discuss the methodology that resulted in this calculation. This does not comply with CEQA's requirements for adequate informational documents and meaningful disclosure (CEQA § 15121 and 21003(b)). A revised EIR must be prepared to include detailed information on the methodology for quantifying the project's operational jobs for review, analysis, and comment by the public and decision makers in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis. There is also no quantification of construction employees required during the construction of the proposed project, or the areas from which construction/operational employees are traveling from. The EIR must be revised to include this information for analysis.

SCAG s Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast14 notes that the City will add 6,800 jobs between 2016 - 2045. Based on the EIR's calculation of 2,682 jobs for buildout of the entire project site, the project represents 39% of the City's job growth over 29 years. A single project accounting for this amount of the projected employment growth over 29 years represents a significant amount of growth. The EIR has not provided a cumulative analysis discussion of projects approved since 2016 and projects in the pipeline" to determine if the project will exceed SCAG s employment growth forecast or the City's General Plan growth projections.

5.17 Transportation
The EIR is misleading to the public and decision makers in its conclusion that the proposed project will have less than significant VMT impacts. For example, Table 5.17-4: Project Generated VMT Comparison of the Proposed Project to the Approved Project concludes that the proposed project will generate approximately 2.7 VMT (baseline year) and 6.1 VMT (horizon year) less than the existing FCSP, indicating less than significant impacts. However, this is nonsensical as it is essentially comparing the project to itself as the applicable threshold in lieu of comparing it to Citywide VMT. The EIR states that the Citywide VMT/SP threshold is 30.1 VMT. The proposed project's 31.2 VMT (baseline year) and 32.4 VMT (horizon year) per SP exceed this threshold and a finding of significance is required.

The VMT analysis has also underestimated the significance of the proposed project's VMT generation. The EIR has not analyzed the project's truck/trailer/delivery van activity. A revised " SCAG Connect SoCal Demographics and Growth Forecast adopted September 3, 2020 https:Hscag_ca gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal demographics-and-growth- forecast.pdfl 1606001579

Benjamin Madock
March 25, 2024

Page 12 ends

EIR must be prepared to include all truck/trailer/delivery van activity for quantified VMT analysis.

The operational nature of industrial/warehouse uses involves high rates of truck/trailer/delivery van VMT due to traveling from large import hubs to regional distribution centers to smaller industrial parks and then to their final delivery destinations. Once employees arrive at the proposed project for work, they will conduct their jobs by driving truck/trailer/delivery vans across the region as part of the daily operations as a warehouse, which will drastically increase project - generated VMT. The project's truck/trailer and delivery van activity is unable to utilize public transit or active transportation and it is misleading to the public and decision makers to exclude this activity from VMT analysis. A revised EIR must be prepared to reflect a quantified VMT analysis that includes all truck/trailer and delivery van activity.

The EIR has not adequately analyzed the project's potential to substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses; or the project's potential to result in inadequate emergency access. There are no exhibits adequately depicting the available maneuvering and queueing space for trucks/trailers at the intersection of the project driveways and the adjacent streets. There are also no exhibits adequately depicting the onsite turning radius available for trucks maneuvering throughout the site. Notably, several areas for conflicts between passenger cars and trucks/trailers exist throughout the entirety of the proposed amendment to the FCSP and at the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center. For example, Figure 3-12 - Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Site Plan depicts the truck/trailer parking stalls on the west side of Building 2 in a tandem configuration within the truck/trailer loading dock court. -These parking stalls may be in use at any time and restrict movement on the site during maneuvering, particularly to accommodate the tandem configuration. The same is true for the the truck/trailer parking stalls on the north and south sides of Building 1 and the additional truck/trailer parking lot site to the west of Building 2, which includes parking stalls in both tandem and triple tandem configurations.

Additionally, the EIR has not provided any analysis of the available horizontal and vertical sight distance at the intersection of the project driveways and adjacent streets. Sight distance is the continuous length of street ahead visible to the driver. At unsignalized intersections, corner sight distance must provide a substantially clear line of sight between the driver of the vehicle waiting on the minor road (driveway) and the driver of an approaching vehicle. A revised EIR must be prepared with this analysis based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Stopping Sight Distance requirements.

7.0 Alternatives
The EIR is required to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project which will avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project (CEQA § 15126.6.)

Benjamin Matlock
March 25, 2024

Page 13 ends

The alternatives chosen for analysis include the No Project (Approved Project) Alternative (existing FCSP alternative), Reduced Warehousing Intensity Alternative, and the Increased Open Space —Conservation Alternative. The EIR does not evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives as only two alternatives beyond the required No Project alternative are analyzed. The EIR does not include an alternative that meets the project objectives and also eliminates all of the project's significant and unavoidable impacts. The EIR must be revised to include analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives and foster informed decision making (CEQA § 15126.6). This could include alternatives such as development of the site with a project that reduces all of the proposed project's significant and unavoidable impacts to less than significant level, and/or a mixed -use project that provides affordable housing and exclusively local -serving commercial uses that may reduce VMT, GHG emissions, and improve Air Quality.

9.0 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes due to the Proposed Project and 10.0 Growth Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project
A revised EIR must be prepared to include an accurate cumulative analysis discussion here to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project in a cumulative setting. The EIR does not include any information regarding the buildout conditions of the City's'General Plan in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmental analysis. The EIR must be revised to provide the horizon year of the City's current adopted General Plan, the total developable building floor area analyzed within the Industrial land use designation, and cumulative development since adoption of the General Plan to ensure that the proposed project is within the General Plan EIR's analysis, particularly since the EIR tiers from the General Plan EIR. For example, Table CDL-2: Yucaipa Buildout Summary of the General Plan indicates that the entirety of all Industrial land use designations will accommodate 1,100,000 square feet of building area. The proposed project's 3,992,503 square feet of Business Park (industrial) building area exceeds the entirety of the plarmed industrial growth for the entire incorporated City area by nearly four times. Table CDL- 2 also states the the entirety of all Industrial land use designations will generate 1,203 jobs, and the proposed project's 2,682 jobs is more than twice the identified growth. The growth generated by the proposed project was not accounted for by the General Plan or its EIR as the project requires a GPA to proceed. The growth generated by the proposed project was not anticipated by the City's General Plan, RTP/SCS, or AQMP. A revised EIR must be prepared with a finding of significance.

The EIR does not discuss its own conclusion that implementation of the proposed project and required GPA will result in significant and unavoidable cumulatively considerable Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Noise impacts. The EIR must be revised to include a finding of significance due to the project's significant and unavoidable Greenhouse Gas Emissions (cumulatively considerable), and Noise impacts and direct contribution to climate change.

Bcnjainii► Matlock
March 25, 2024
Page; 14
The EIR does not adequately discuss or and analyze the commitment of resources is not consistent with regional and local growth forecasts (AQMP, General Plan, SCAG, etc) and does not address the EIR's own conclusion that the project will result in impacts (Air Quality, GHG) that exceed with the forecasts of the applicable plans (AQMP, 2030/2050 GHG reduction goals). As noted throughout this comment letter, the project represents a significant amount of growth in the City and exceeds the developable Industrial building area anticipated by General Plan buildout and exceeds the City's employment growth forecast for a 29 year period. This is especially notable as the project requires a GPA to proceed, indicating the proposed project was not anticipated in any General Plan buildout projection or SCAG growth forecast. The EIR has not provided an adequate or accurate cumulative analysis discussion here to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project in a cumulative setting. For example, the project represents 39% of the City's job growth over 29 years. This number increases exponentially when the City's other industrial and commercial development activity is added to the calculation. A revised EIR must be prepared to include an accurate cumulative analysis on this topic and include a finding of significance.

Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, GSEJA believes the EIR is flawed and a revised EIR must be prepared for the proposed project and recirculated for public review. Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance requests to be added to the public interest list regarding any subsequent environmental documents, public notices, public hearings, and notices of determination for this project. Send all communications to Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance P.O. Box 79222 Corona, CA 92877.

Sincerely,
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho LLP
Attachments:

1. SWAPE Technical Analysis

PUBLIC COMMENT 76

Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
JSWAPE Litigation Support for the Environment
2656 291h Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949)887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
March 20, 2024
Gary Ho
Blum, Collins & Ho LLP
707 Wilshire Blvd, Ste. 4880
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Subject: Comments on the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Project (SCH No. 2006041096) Dear Mr. Ho,
We have reviewed the February 2024 Subsequent Environmental Impact Report ("SEIR") for the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Project ("Project") located in the City of Yucaipa ("City"). The Project proposes to construct 2,472 residential units and 5,093,265-square-feet ("SF") of nonresidential uses on the 1,238-acre site.

Our review concludes that the SEIR fails to adequately evaluate the Project's air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts. As a result, emissions and health risk impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project may be underestimated and inadequately addressed. A revised Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") should be prepared to adequately assess and mitigate the potential air quality, health risk, and greenhouse gas impacts that the project may have on the environment.

Air Quality
Failure to Implement All Feasible Mitigation to Reduce Emissions The SEIR estimates that the Project's construction -related and operational emissions would exceed the applicable South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") thresholds. Specifically, regarding the Project's construction -related impacts, the SEIR states:
"Construction of the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds. As shown in Table 5.3-23 above, implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-6 would reduce VOC emissions to below the regional significance threshold.

However, construction activities associated with the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center would

continue to generate NOX and CO emissions that exceed the respective South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds. Therefore, Impact 5.3-2 as it pertains to the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center project would be significant and unavoidable" (p. 5.3-68) Furthermore, regarding the Project's operational impacts, the SEIR states:
"Long-term operation of the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center project would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional significance thresholds. Table 5.3-25, Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Maximum Daily Regional Operational Emissions: With Mitigation, shows the maximum daily operational phase emissions with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-2 and AQ-4, and AQ-7 through AQ-11. As shown in the table, though mitigation would reduce emissions, the regional significance thresholds for VOC and NOX would still be exceeded. Impact 5.3-3 would be significant and unavoidable for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center project" (p. 5.3-69) As discussed, the SEIR concludes that the criteria air pollutant impacts associated with both construction and operation of the Project would be significant -and -unavoidable. While we agree that the Project would result in significant air quality impacts, the SEIR's assertion that this impact is significant -and - unavoidable is unreliable. According to California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines § 15096(g)(2):
"When an updated EIR has been prepared for a project, the Responsible Agency shall not approve the project as proposed if the agency finds any feasible alternative or feasible mitigation measures within its powers that would substantially lessen or avoid any significant effect the project would have on the environment."
The SEIR is required under CEQA to implement all feasible mitigation to reduce impacts to the maximum extent feasible. While the SEIR implements Mitigation Measure ("MM") AQ-1 through MM-AQ-11, the SEIR fails to implement allfeasible mitigation (p. 1-28 —1-32, Table ES-5). Therefore, the SEIR's conclusion that Project's air quality emissions would be significant -and -unavoidable may be unsubstantiated. To reduce the Project's air quality impacts to the maximum extent possible, additional feasible mitigation measures should be incorporated, such as those suggested in the section of this letter titled "Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions." The Project should not be approved until a revised EIR is prepared, incorporating all feasible mitigation to reduce emissions to the maximum extent feasible.

Disproportionate Health Risk Impacts of Warehouses on Surrounding Communities Upon review of the SEIR and associated documents, we have determined that the development of the proposed Project may contribute to disproportionate health risk impacts on community members living, working, and going to school within the immediate area of the Project site. According to SCAQMD:

"Those living within a half mile of warehouses are more likely to include communities of color, have health impacts such as higher rates of asthma and heart attacks, and a greater environmental burden."'
In particular, the SCAQMD found that more than 2.4 million people live within a half mile radius of at least one warehouse, and that those areas not only experience increased rates of asthma and heart attacks, but are also disproportionately Black and Latino communities below the poverty line.' Another study similarly indicates that "neighborhoods with lower household income levels and higher percentages of minorities are expected to have higher probabilities of containing warehousing facilities."' Additionally, a report authored by the Inland Empire -based People's Collective for Environmental Justice and University of Redlands states:
"As the warehouse and logistics industry continues to grow and net exponential profits at record rates, more warehouse projects are being approved and constructed in low-income communities of color and serving as a massive source of pollution by attracting thousands of polluting truck trips daily. Diesel trucks emit dangerous levels of nitrogen oxide and particulate matter that cause devastating health impacts including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), cancer, and premature death. As a result, physicians consider these pollution - burdened areas 'diesel death zones."'^
It is evident that the continued development of industrial warehouses within these communities poses a significant environmental justice challenge. However, the acceleration of warehouse development is only increasing despite the consequences on public health.

In April 2022, the American Lung Association ranked San Bernadino County as the worst -for ozone pollution in the nations This year, the County continues to face the worst ozone pollution, as it has seen the highest recorded Air Quality Index ("AQI") values for ground -level ozone in California.' The U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") indicates that ozone, the main ingredient in "smog," can cause 1 "South Coast AQMD Governing Board Adopts Warehouse Indirect Source Rule." SCAQMD, May 2021, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/news-archive/2021/board-adopts-waisr-maV7-2021.pdf?sfvrsn=9 . ' "Southern California warehouse boom a huge source of pollution. Regulators are fighting back." Los Angeles Times, May 2021, available at: https://www.latimes,com/california/story/2021-05-05/air-quality-officials-tarset- warehouses-bid-to-curb-health-damaging-truck-pollution. 3 "Location of warehouses and environmental justice: Evidence from four metros in California." Metro Freight Center of Excellence, January 2018, available at:
https://www.metrans.org/assets/research/MF` /`201.lg Location%20of%20warehouses%20and%20environmental %20iustice Final%20Report 021618.pdf, p. 21.
° "Warehouses, Pollution, and Social Disparities: An analytical view of the logistics industry's impacts on environmental justice communities across Southern California." People's Collective for Environmental Justice, April 2021, available at.
https://earthiustice.org/sites/default/files/files/warehouse research report 4.15.2021.pdf, p. 4. ' "State of the Air 2022." American Lung Association, April 2022, available at:
https://www.l ung.org/research/sota/key-findings/most-polluted-places. 6 "High Ozone Days." American Lung Association, 2022, available at:
https://www.l ung.org/research/sota/city-ran kings/states/california.

several health problems, which includes aggravating lung diseases and increasing the frequency of asthma attacks. The U.S. EPA states:
"Children are at greatest risk from exposure to ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are more likely to be active outdoors when ozone levels are high, which increases their exposure. Children are also more likely than adults to have asthma."' Furthermore, regarding the increased sensitivity of early -life exposures to inhaled pollutants, the CARB states:
"Children are often at greater risk from inhaled pollutants, due to the following reasons:
• Children have unique activity patterns and behavior. For example, they crawl and play on the ground, amidst dirt and dust that may carry a wide variety of toxicants. They often put their hands, toys, and other items into their mouths, ingesting harmful substances. Compared to adults, children typically spend more time outdoors and are more physically active. Time outdoors coupled with faster breathing during exercise increases children's relative exposure to air pollution. • Children are physiologically unique. Relative to body size, children eat, breathe, and drink more than adults, and their natural biological defenses are less developed. The protective barrier surrounding the brain is not fully developed, and children's nasal passages aren't as effective at filtering out pollutants. Developing lungs, immune, and metabolic systems are also at risk.
• Children are particularly susceptible during development. Environmental exposures during fetal development, the first few years of life, and puberty have the greatest potential to influence later growth and development."'
A Stanford -led study also reveals that children exposed to high levels of air pollution are more susceptible to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases in adulthood.9 Given that children are more susceptible to the negative health impacts of air pollutants, and that warehouses release more smog - forming pollution than any other sector, it is necessary to evaluate the specific health risk that warehouses pose to children in the nearby community.

According to the above -mentioned study by the People's Collective for Environmental Justice and University of Redlands, a half mile radius is commonly used for identifying sensitive receptors. There are 640 schools in the South Coast Air Basin that are located within half a mile of a large warehouse, most of ' "Health Effects of Ozone Pollution." U.S. EPA, May 2021, available at: https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone- pollution/health-effects-ozone-pollution.
8 "Children and Air Pollution." California Air Resources Board (CARE), available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/children-and-a ir-pollution. 9 "Air pollution puts children at higher risk of disease in adulthood, according to Stanford researchers and others." Stanford, February 2021, available at: https•//news stanford edu/2021/02/22/air-pollution-impacts-childrens- health .
4 them in socio-economically disadvantaged areas.10 According to the SEIR, Mesa View Middle School is located 0.27 miles south of the Project site (p. 5.9-12). The location of a school within half of a mile of the Project site poses a significant threat because, as outlined above, children are a vulnerable population that are more susceptible to the damaging side effects of air pollution. If approved, the Project would contribute to the detrimental short-term and long-term health impacts that warehouses pose on local children.

A revised EIR should be prepared to evaluate the contribution to the disproportionate impacts that warehouses pose on the community adjacent to the Project, including an analysis of the impact on children and people of color who live and attend school in the surrounding area. In order to evaluate the cumulative air quality impact from the several warehouse projects proposed or built in a one -mile radius of the Project site, the analysis should prepare a revised cumulative health risk assessment ("HRA") to quantify the adverse health outcome from the effects of exposure to multiple warehouses in the immediate area in conjunction with the poor ambient air quality in the Project's census tract. This recommendation is consistent with guidance provided by the California Department of Justice ("DOJ").11 Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Inadequately Evaluated The SEIR concludes that the proposed Project would result in a less -than -significant health risk impact based on a quantified construction and operational HRA, as detailed in the Health Risk Assessment Report ("HRA Report"), provided as Appendix D to the SEIR. Specifically, the SEIR estimates that the maximum cancer risk posed to nearby, existing residential sensitive receptors associated with construction and operation would be 4.4 in one million, which would not exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold of 10 in one million (see excerpt below) (p. 5.3-75, Table 5.3-29).

Table 5.3.29 Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Operation Plus Construction Health Risk Results: With Miticlation
canter
million
chrome Hazard kdoc
Maximum Exposed Individual Residerr: — Consvixbon

0.8 0.003
Maximum Exposed Individual Resident —Operation

3.6 O.W
Comb ned Total

4.4 0.0038
Current South Coast AND Pr*d Threshold
10 1.0
South Coast ACAU Threshold
5 1.0
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
SoAnxs: /spperdn D. Heath fi`sx fuses~,
However, the SEIR's evaluation of the Project's potential health risk impacts, as well as the subsequent less -than -significant impact conclusion, is incorrect. 11 "Warehouses, Pollution, and Social Disparities: An analytical view of the logistics industry's impacts on environmental justice communities across Southern California." People's Collective for Environmental Justice, April 2021, available at:
https://earthiustice.ors/sites/default/files/files/warehouse _ research report 4.15.2021.pdf, p. 4. 11 "Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act." State of California Department of Justice, September 2022, available at:
https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/media/warehouse-best-practices.pdf , p. 6.

The SEIR's operational HRA underestimates the Fraction of Time At Home ("FAH") values for the third trimester, infant, and child receptors. Specifically, the HRA Report utilizes an FAH value of 0.85 for the third trimester (age -0.25 to 0) and infant (age 0 to 2) receptors, and an FAH value of 0.72 for the child receptors (age 2 to 16) (see excerpt below) (Appendix D, p. D-20).

Age Groups BR/BBC' (L/h -dar) ED _NSF FAH
Third trunester
361

0.25 10

0.85 0-2 age group
1,090
2 10

0.35 2-9 age group
S61
7 3
Q.7?
2-16 age. group
745
14 3

0.72 16-30 age group
335

1.1 1

0.73 However, the FAH values used for the third trimester, infant, and childhood receptors are incorrect, as SCAQMD guidance clearly states:
"For Tiers 1, 2, and 3 screening purposes, the FAH is assumed to be 1 for ages third trimester to

16. As a default, children are assumed to attend a daycare or school in close proximity to their home and no discount should be taken for time spent outside of the area affected by the facility's emissions. People older than age 16 are assumed to spend only 73 percent of their time at home."12
Per SCAQMD guidance, the HRA Report should have used an FAH of 1 for the third trimester, infant, and child receptors. By relying on incorrect FAH values, the SEIR underestimates the cancer risk posed to nearby, existing sensitive receptors as a result of Project operation. As such, the Project's HRA cannot be relied upon until the necessary changes are made in accordance with SCAQMD guidance.

Greenhouse Gas
Failure to Adequately Evaluate Greenhouse Gas Impacts
The SEIR estimates that the Project would generate net annual GHG emissions of 48,775 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year ("MT CO2e/year"), which would exceed the no -net -increase threshold (0 MTCO2e/year) for GHG emissions (see excerpt below) (p. 5.8-32, Table 5.8-8). 12 "Risk Assessment Procedures." SCAQMD, August 2017, available at: http://www.agmd.gov/dots/default- source/rule-book/Proposed-Rules/1401/riskassessmentprocedures 2017 080717.pdf, p. 7.

Table 5.8-8 Pacific Oaks Commerce Center GHG Emissions Inventory, With Mitigation Source
Building 1 (BP 2)
MTCOx
Building 2 & Trailer
Parking (BP 3)
MTCOte
Total
MTCO2e
Percent of Total
Mobile'
2,610
3,047
5,657
12%
Mobile - Trucks'
7,685
23,445

31.130
64%
Areaz
0 0
0 0%
Energy

2.286
2,239
4,525
9%
Water
82 97
179
<1%
Solid Waste
2,127
2,514
4,641
10%
Refrigerants
1,161

1.105
2,266
5%
Off -Road EquipmertV
0 0
0 0%
Transport Refrigeration Unjt54
0 1 0 1
0 u I
Amortized Conslructions
nla
n.a
377
1%
Total Emisslons
15,952
32,446
i
48,775
i
100%
Exceeds No Net Increase Threshold?
Yes
Yes
Yes
—
Source: CalEEMod v. 2022.1. (See Appendix C)
Note. NA = not applicable; 0 = negative value
1 Based on calendar year 2026 CalEEMod default vehicle emm*ns data. Vehicle Beet mix for the Proposed Project based on default CalEEMod vehicle Beet nix adjusted to vehicle fleet mix provided by Translulions for the proposed warehousing. t Implementation or Mitigation Measure AQ-11 would require use of electric -powered landscaping equipment only 1 Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-7 would require use of only electric -powered off -road equipment. 4 Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-8 would require use of EIS TRUs R Conslruc6on enassions are amortized over a 30-y6or project lifetime per recommended South Coast AQMD methodology (South Coast AQMD 2009) However, the SEIR states that with the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project's GHG emissions will be reduced to less than significant levels:
"The Proposed Project would be potentially inconsistent with CARB's 2022 Scoping Plan unless it achieves the three priority areas for ensuring carbon neutrality. Implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 would ensure that development projects accommodated under the FCSP comply with the CALGreen voluntary Tier 2 EV parking standards in addition to buildings designed to be all electric. Thus, with mitigation, the Proposed Project would be consistent with the transportation electrification and building decarbonization priority areas of the Scoping Plan. Therefore, Impact 5.8-2 would be reduced to less than significant" (p. 5.8-33).

As discussed, the SEIR claims that through the implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG- 2, the Project would comply with the CALGreen voluntary Tier 2 EV parking standards and consequently result in a less -than -significant GHG impact. However, while the SEIR concludes that the Project would not generate GHG emissions that would have a significant effect on the environment, the SEIR fails to quantify the Project's GHG emissions whatsoever. Until the SEIR provides a quantitative analysis regarding the Project's GHG emissions, the SEIR's claim that the Project would result in a less -than - significant GHG impact is unsubstantiated.

Mitigation
Feasible Mitigation Measures Available to Reduce Emissions Our analysis demonstrates that the Project would result in potentially significant air quality, health risk, and GHG impacts that should be mitigated further. In an effort to reduce emissions, the Project should

consider the implementation of the following mitigation measures found in the California DOJ Warehouse Project Best Practices document.13
• Requiring off -road construction equipment to be hybrid electric -diesel or zero emission, where available, and all diesel -fueled off -road construction equipment to be equipped with CARB Tier IV -compliant engines or better, and including this requirement in applicable bid documents, purchase orders, and contracts, with successful contractors demonstrating the ability to supply the compliant construction equipment for use prior to any ground -disturbing and construction activities.
• Prohibiting off -road diesel -powered equipment from being in the "on" position for more than 10 hours per day.
• Using electric -powered hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers, and providing electrical hook ups to the power grid rather than use of diesel -fueled generators to supply their power. • Designating an area in the construction site where electric -powered construction vehicles and equipment can charge.
• Limiting the amount of daily grading disturbance area. • Prohibiting grading on days with an Air Quality Index forecast of greater than 100 for particulates or ozone for the project area.
• Forbidding idling of heavy equipment for more than three minutes. • Keeping onsite and furnishing to the lead agency or other regulators upon request, all equipment maintenance records and data sheets, including design specifications and emission control tier classifications.
• Conducting an on -site inspection to verify compliance with construction mitigation and to identify other opportunities to further reduce construction impacts. • Using paints, architectural coatings, and industrial maintenance coatings that have volatile organic compound levels of less than 10 g/L.
• Providing information on transit and ridesharing programs and services to construction employees.
• Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations for construction employees.
• Requiring all heavy-duty vehicles engaged in drayage to or from the project site to be zero - emission beginning in 2030.
• Requiring all on -site motorized operational equipment, such as forklifts and yard trucks, to be zero -emission with the necessary charging or fueling stations provided. • Requiring tenants to use zero -emission light- and medium -duty vehicles as part of business operations.
• Forbidding trucks from idling for more than three minutes and requiring operators to turn off engines when not in use.
11 "Warehouse Projects: Best Practices and Mitigation Measures to Comply with the California Environmental Quality Act." State of California Department of Justice, September 2022, available at:
https://oag.ca.aov/system/files/media/warehouse-best-practices.pdf , p. 8 —10.

• Posting both interior- and exterior -facing signs, including signs directed at all dock and delivery areas, identifying idling restrictions and contact information to report violations to CARB, the local air district, and the building manager.
• Installing solar photovoltaic systems on the project site of a specified electrical generation capacity that is equal to or greater than the building's projected energy needs, including all electrical chargers.
• Designing all project building roofs to accommodate the maximum future coverage of solar panels and installing the maximum solar power generation capacity feasible. • Constructing zero -emission truck charging/fueling stations proportional to the number of dock doors at the project.
• Running conduit to designated locations for future electric truck charging stations. • Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the title of the underlying property ensuring that the property cannot be used to provide refrigerated warehouse space, constructing electric plugs for electric transport refrigeration units at every dock door and requiring truck operators with transport refrigeration units to use the electric plugs when at loading docks.
• Oversizing electrical rooms by 25 percent or providing a secondary electrical room to accommodate future expansion of electric vehicle charging capability. • Constructing and maintaining electric light -duty vehicle charging stations proportional to the number of employee parking spaces (for example, requiring at least 10% of all employee parking spaces to be equipped with electric vehicle charging stations of at least Level 2 charging performance)
• Running conduit to an additional proportion of employee parking spaces for a future increase in the number of electric light -duty charging stations.
• Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer's recommended maintenance intervals, air filtration systems at sensitive receptors within a certain radius of facility for the life of the project.
• Installing and maintaining, at the manufacturer's recommended maintenance intervals, an air monitoring station proximate to sensitive receptors and the facility for the life of the project, and making the resulting data publicly available in real time. While air monitoring does not mitigate the air quality or greenhouse gas impacts of a facility, it nonetheless benefits the affected community by providing information that can be used to improve air quality or avoid exposure to unhealthy air.
• Requiring all stand-by emergency generators to be powered by a non -diesel fuel. • Requiring facility operators to train managers and employees on efficient scheduling and load management to eliminate unnecessary queuing and idling of trucks. • Requiring operators to establish and promote a rideshare program that discourages single - occupancy vehicle trips and provides financial incentives for alternate modes of transportation, including carpooling, public transit, and biking.
• Meeting CalGreen Tier 2 green building standards, including all provisions related to designated parking for clean air vehicles, electric vehicle charging, and bicycle parking.

• Designing to LEED green building certification standards. • Providing meal options onsite or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations. • Posting signs at every truck exit driveway providing directional information to the truck route. • Improving and maintaining vegetation and tree canopy for residents in and around the project area.
• Requiring that every tenant train its staff in charge of keeping vehicle records in diesel technologies and compliance with CARB regulations, by attending CARB-approved courses. Also require facility operators to maintain records on -site demonstrating compliance and make records available for inspection by the local jurisdiction, air district, and state upon request. • Requiring tenants to enroll in the United States Environmental Protection Agency's SmartWay program, and requiring tenants who own, operate, or hire trucking carriers with more than 100 trucks to use carriers that are SmartWay carriers.
• Providing tenants with information on incentive programs, such as the Carl Moyer Program and Voucher Incentive Program, to upgrade their fleets.

These measures offer a cost-effective, feasible way to incorporate lower -emitting design features into the proposed Project, which subsequently, reduce emissions released during Project construction and operation.

As it is policy of the State that eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources supply 100% of retail sales of electricity to California end -use customers by December 31, 2045, we emphasize that the energy mix that will charge the batteries and power electrical equipment must be 100% renewable energy resources. Until the feasibility of charging the batteries with renewable energy resources only is evaluated, the Project should not be approved.

A revised EIR should be prepared to include all feasible mitigation measures, as well as include updated air quality, health risk, and GHG analyses to ensure that the necessary mitigation measures are implemented to reduce emissions to the maximum extent feasible. The revised EIR should also demonstrate a commitment to the implementation of these measures prior to Project approval, to ensure that the Project's potentially significant emissions are reduced to the maximum extent possible.

Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery regarding this project. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.
10 Sincerely,
Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Attachment A: Matt Hagemann CV
Attachment B: Paul Rosenfeld CV
11 PUBLIC COMMENT 77

Attachment A
SWAPETechnical Consultation, Data Analysis and
Litigation Support for the Environment
2656 29`h Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
Geologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
CEQA Review
Education:

M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA,1984.

B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA,1982.

Professional Certifications:

California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:

Matt has 30 years of experience in environmental policy, contaminant assessment and remediation, stormwater compliance, and CEQA review. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA's Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and directed efforts to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring. For the past 15 years, as a founding partner with SWAPE, Matt has developed extensive client relationships and has managed complex projects that include consultation as an expert witness and a regulatory specialist, and a manager of projects ranging from industrial stormwater compliance to CEQA review of impacts from hazardous waste, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.

Positions Matt has held include:
• Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 — present); • Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 — 2104, 2017; • Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 -- 2003);

• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001- 2004);
• Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989- 1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 - 2000); • Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 - 1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990-1995); • Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986-1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984-1986).

Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:

With SWAPE, Matt's responsibilities have included:

Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 300 environmental impact reports and negative declarations since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at more than 100 industrial facilities.
• Expert witness on numerous cases including, for example, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) contamination of groundwater, MTBE litigation, air toxins at hazards at a school, CERCLA compliance in assessment and remediation, and industrial stonnwater contamination. • Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. • Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. • Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. • Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California.

With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt's duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. • Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. • Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York.

• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production -related contamination in Mississippi. • Lead author for a multi -volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. • Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators.

Executive Director:

As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council.

Hydrogeology:,
As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.

At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui.

As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted 3 public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation.

Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer.

Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote "part B" permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective -Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.

EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor's investigations of waste sites.

With the National Park Service, Matt directed service -wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed -scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park.
• Identified high -levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup.
• Co-authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation- wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi -Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan.

Policy:

Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9.

Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies.
• Shaped EPA's national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPA's scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the regions 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific

principles into the policy -making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents.

Geology:

With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:

Supervised year -long effort for soil and groundwater sampling.

Conducted aquifer tests.

Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt is currently a part time geology instructor at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California where he taught from 2010 to 2014 and in 2017.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).
5 Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.

Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.

Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter -Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.

Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.

Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. _ . Potential W a t e r Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.

Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.

Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L.,1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996.

Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP-61.

Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup at Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.

Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater.

Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL- contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 7 Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.

Other Experience:

Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examinations, 2009-2011.

PUBLIC COMMENT 78

Attachment B
Technical Consultation, Data Analysis and
JSWAPE Litigation Support for the Environment
Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Principal Environmental Chemist
Education

SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: prosenfeldQswane.com
Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling
Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.

M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.

B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Focus on wastewater treatment.

Professional Experience
Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years of experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.

Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, industrial, military and agricultural sources, unconventional oil drilling operations, and locomotive and construction engines. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities. Dr. Rosenfeld has also successfully modeled exposure to contaminants distributed by water systems and via vapor intrusion.

Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, creosote, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at sites and has testified as an expert witness on numerous cases involving exposure to soil, water and air contaminants from industrial, railroad, agricultural, and military sources.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 12 October 2022

Professional Histo
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel; San Diego, California, 1999 — 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 — 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist Publications:

Rosenfeld P. E., Spaeth K., Hallman R., Bressler R., Smith, G., (2022) Cancer Risk and Diesel Exhaust Exposure Among Railroad Workers. Water Air Soil Pollution. 233, 171.

Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48 Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342
Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C., (2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.

Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks ofH=rdous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.

Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113-125.

Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 12 October 2022

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527- 000530.

Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near a Fortner Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.

Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.

Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater, Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.

Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food, Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science and Technology. 49(9),171-178.

Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor -Quality -Wheel Classification Scheme For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation's Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) 2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities, and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199. - Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using High -Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS-6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 12 October 2022

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.

Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.

Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users Network, 7(1).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.

Presentations:

Rosenfeld, P.E., "The science for Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFAS): What makes remediation so hard?" Law Seminars International, (May 9-10, 2018) 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 101 Seattle, WA.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 441h Western Regional Meeting, .American Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.

Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom -Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.

Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom -Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis, Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS) Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United States" Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Jf7ater Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 23 d Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 12 October 2022

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium -Contaminated Water Into A Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23",Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 23' Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3- Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala, Alabama. The AEHSAnnual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 — 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants — DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting & Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts, Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

Mealey's C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia, PA.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel, Irvine California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey's Groundwater Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.

Paul. Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Lail, Conference.

Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 200E National Groundwater Association Ground Water and Environmental Lail, Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundvi,ater Association. Environmental Laiv Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 12 October 2022

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.

Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.

Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.

Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.

Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February- 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southivest Focus Conference. iVater Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wasteivater and Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.

Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High -Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from Indianapolis, Maryland.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. N"ater Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Ocean Shores, California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High -Carbon Wood -Ash. [Vater Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil Science Society ofAmerica. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 12 October 2022

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldivell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High -Carbon Wood -Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Teaching Experience:

UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science 100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on the health effects of environmental contaminants.

National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks.

National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.

California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.

UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.

University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.

U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.

Academic Grants Awarded:

California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.

Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.

Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.

Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.

King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, P1i.D. Page 7 of 12 October 2022

James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered Poplar trees with resistance to round -up. 1996.

United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the Tahoe National Forest. 1995.

Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts in West Indies. 1993
Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:

In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Billy Wildrick, Plaintiff vs. BNSF Railway Company
Case No. CIVDS1711810
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-17-2022
In the State Court of Bibb County, State of Georgia
Richard Hutcherson, Plaintiff vs Norfolk Southern Railway Company Case No. 10-SCCV-092007
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2022
In the Civil District Court of the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana Millard Clark, Plaintiff vs. Dixie Carriers, Inc. et al.

Case No. 2020-03891
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-15-2022
In The Circuit Court of Livingston County, State of Missouri, Circuit Civil Division Shirley Ralls, Plaintiff vs. Canadian Pacific Railway and Soo Line Railroad Case No. 18-LV-CC0020
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-7-2022
In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jonny C. Daniels, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc.

Case No. 20-CA-5502
Rosenfeld Deposition 9-1-2022
In The Circuit Court of St. Louis County, State of Missouri Kieth Luke et. al. Plaintiff vs. Monsanto Company et. al.

Case No. 19SL-CC03191
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-25-2022
In The Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit Court, Hillsborough County, Florida Civil Division Jeffery S. Lamotte, Plaintiff vs. CSX Transportation Inc.

Case No. NO. 20-CA-0049
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-22-2022
In State of Minnesota District Court, County of St. Louis Sixth Judicial District Greg Bean, Plaintiff vs. Soo Line Railroad Company
Case No. 69-DU-CV-21-760
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-17-2022
In United States District Court Western District of Washington at Tacoma, Washington John D. Fitzgerald Plaintiff vs. BNSF
Case No. 3:21-cv-05288-RJB
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-11-2022
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 12 October 2022

In Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, Macon Illinois Rocky Bennyhoff Plaintiff vs. Norfolk Southern
Case No. 20-L-56
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-3-2022
In Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County Ohio
Joe Briggins Plaintiff vs. CSX
Case No. A2004464
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-17-2022
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Kern George LaFazia vs. BNSF Railway Company.

Case No. BCV-19-103087
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-17-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Bobby Earles vs. Penn Central et. al.

Case No. 2020-L-000550
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-16-2022
In United States District Court Easter District of Florida Albert Hartman Plaintiff vs. Illinois Central
Case No. 2:20-cv-1633
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-4-2022
In the Circuit Court of the 4`h Judicial Circuit, in and For Duval County, Florida Barbara Steele vs. CSX Transportation
Case No. 16-219-Ca-008796
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2022
In United States District Court Easter District of New York Romano et al. vs. Northrup Grumman Corporation
Case No. 16-cv-5760
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-10-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Linda Benjamin vs. Illinois Central
Case No. No. 2019 L 007599
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Donald Smith vs. Illinois Central
Case No. No. 2019 L 003426
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-24-2022
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Jan Holeman vs. BNSF
Case No. 2019 L 000675
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-18-2022
In the State Court of Bibb County State of Georgia
Dwayne B. Garrett vs. Norfolk Southern
Case No. 20-SCCV-091232
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-10-2021
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 12 October 2022

In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Ruepke vs. BNSF
Case No. 2019 L 007730
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-5-2021
In the United States District Court For the District of Nebraska Steven Gillett vs. BNSF
Case No. 4:20-cv-03120
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-28-2021
In the Montana Thirteenth District Court of Yellowstone County James Eadus vs. Soo Line Railroad and BNSF
Case No. DV 19-1056
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-21-2021
In the Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al.cvs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc.

Case No. Oi9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-14-2021
Trial October 8-4-2021
In the Circuit Court of Cook County Illinois
Joseph Rafferty vs. Consolidated Rail Corporation and National Railroad Passenger Corporation d/b/a

AMTRAK,
Case No. 18-L-6845
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-28-2021
In the United States District Court For the Northern District of Illinois Theresa Romcoe vs. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation d/b/a METRA Rail Case No. 17-cv-8517
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona In and For the Cunty of Maricopa Mary Tryon et al. vs. The City of Pheonix v. Cox Cactus Farm, L.L.C., Utah Shelter Systems, Inc.

Case No. CV20127-094749
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-7-2021
In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Beaumont Division Robinson, Jeremy et al vs. CNA Insurance Company et al.

Case No. 1:17-cv-000508
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-25-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino Gary Garner, Personal Representative for the Estate of Melvin Garner vs. BNSF Railway Company.

Case No. 1720288
Rosenfeld Deposition 2-23-2021
In the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, Spring Street Courthouse Benny M Rodriguez vs. Union Pacific Railroad, A Corporation, et al.

Case No. 18STCV01162
Rosenfeld Deposition 12-23-2020
In the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri
Karen Cornwell, Plaintiff, vs. Marathon Petroleum, LP, Defendant.

Case No. 1716-CV 10006
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-30-2019
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 12 October 2022

In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.

Case No. 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition 6-7-2019
In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M/T Carla Maersk vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS "Conti Perdido' Defendant.

Case No. 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237
Rosenfeld Deposition 5-9-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles — Santa Monica Caro le-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants Case No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition 1-26-2019
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles — Santa Monica The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants Case No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19
In United States District Court For The District of Colorado Bells et al. Plaintiffs vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants Case No. 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018
In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 11211 Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No. 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-17-2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa Simons et al., Plaintifs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants Cause No. C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition 11-20-2017
In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. Oi9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-23-2017
In United States District Court For The Southern District of Mississippi Guy Manuel vs. The BP Exploration et al., Defendants
Case No. 1:19-cv-00315-RHW
Rosenfeld Deposition 4-22-2020
In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warm Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No. LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018
In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2017
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Pagel 1 of 12 October 2022

In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants Case No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial March 2017
In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants Case No. RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2015
In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants Case No. LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition August 2015
In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.

Civil Action No. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition June 2015
In The Iowa District Court for Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant Case No. 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition May 2015
In the Circuit Court of the 1711 Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.

Case No. CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition December 2014
In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.

Case No. cc- 11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial April 2014
In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case No. 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987)
Rosenfeld Deposition October 2012
In the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Northern Division James K. Benefield, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. International Paper Company, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 2:09-cv-232-WHA-TFM
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2010, June 2011
In the Circuit Court of Jefferson County Alabama
Jaeanette Moss Anthony, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Drummond Company Inc., et al., Defendants Civil Action No. CV 2008-2076
Rosenfeld Deposition September 2010
In the United States District Court, Western District Lafayette Division Ackle et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Citgo Petroleum Corporation, et al., Defendants.

Case No. 2:07CV 1052
Rosenfeld Deposition July 2009
Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 12 of 12 October 2022

PUBLIC COMMENT 79

, ror meJ7,0
NP
e
r
0 y
Groen Jobs & Clear? Communities
P.O. Box 79222
Corona, CA 92877
To: City of Yucaipa Planning Commission
From: Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance
Subject: Freeway Corridor Specific Plan SIR
I=
This letter is to serve as further comment in addition to all previously submitted comments and documents by Golden State Environmental Justice Alliance.

CalEnviroScreen Information
CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution, and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution's effects. CalEnviroScreen uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic information to produce scores for every census tract in the state. The scores are mapped so that different communities can be compared. An area with a high score is one that experiences a much higher pollution burden than areas with low scores. CalEnviroScreen ranks communities based on data that are available from state and federal government sources. CalEnviroScreen is updated and maintained by The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, on behalf ofthe California Environmental Protection Agency.

CalEnviroScreen Data on : Freeway Corridor Specific Plan SIR Project Location/Area The above listed project is in census tract (6071008500). Refer to the following chart for information from the CalEnviroScreen data regarding the census tract the project is located.

Yucaipa — FCSP SIR
Census Tract: 6071008500
Population: 8,540
Overall Percentiles:-
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile
43%
Pollution Burden Percentile
80%

Exposures
%
Ozone
100%
Traffic
69%
Diesel Particulate Matter
55%
Particulate Matter 2.5
53%
Drinking Water
76%
Environmental. Effects
%
Cleanup Sites
58%
Groundwater Threats
60%
Hazardous Waste
78%
Sensitive Populations
%
Cardiovascular Disease
61%
Socioeconomic Factors
%
Unemployment
550/0

Conclusion
Consider the above referenced information when making this important decision. Realize that you and the citizens of this area face some of the WORST POLLUTION in the entire state of California.

It is the responsibility of the City's elected and appointed officials to make environmentally responsible development decisions. Based on the CalEnviroScreen data, this is more than sufficient evidence of the further air quality impacts that the citizenry of Yucaipa will continue to encounter with further development of another warehouse. We are not against development, as we believe it is necessary for further economic growth in our current society. Development needs to be conducted with the highest of expectations to ensure the local population does not suffer further air quality burdens.

We stand by our comments and believe the SIR is flawed and should be redrafted and recirculated for public review.

Respectfully Submitted,
51tv41 Nef "
Steven Piepkorn
GSEJA
Source -
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/4af93 cf9888a42448 l d2868391 af2d82/p age/home/?data_id=dataSource_2-1754d6afdb4- layer- 9%3A7306 Glossary of Terms
Ozone - Amount of daily maximum 8-hour Ozone concentration Particulate Matter 2.5 - Annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations Diesel Particulate Matter - Diesel PM emissions from on -road and non -road sources Toxic Releases - Toxicity -weighted concentrations of modeled chemical releases to air from
facility emissions and off -site incineration.

Traffic -Traffic density, in vehicle -kilometers per hour per road length, within 150 meters of the census tract boundary.

ATTACHMENT 9

2 Agenda Item No.

City of Yucaipa

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of June 5, 2024
A Regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Yucaipa, California was called to order in the Council Chambers, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, on June 5, 2024, at 6:30 PM.

PRESENT: J.R. Allgower, Chair
Richard Beck, Commissioner
Stacey Chester, Commissioner
David Higginson, Commissioner
Donna Snodgrass, Commissioner
Lyle Vick, Commissioner
ABSENT: None
CITY STAFF: Benjamin Matlock, Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney
Katrina Kunkel, Associate Engineer
Christian Farmer, Assistant Planner
Maria Koolhoven, Planning Commission Assistant

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:36 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Lyle Vick.

ROLL CALL
Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney informed the Commissioners that Tony Hicks resigned his seat as a Planning Commissioner before the start of the meeting.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

The following members of the public spoke:
• Hansen Wang
Planning Commission Minutes Page 1
6-5-24

PUBLIC HEARINGS
The order of Business for the Public Hearing Shall Be:

A. Open Public Hearing
B. Disclosure of Ex Parte Communications
C. Staff Presentation
D. Applicant/Representative Presentation (if necessary) E. Public Comments
F. Applicant Rebuttal (if necessary)
G. Public Hearing Closed
H. Commission Discussion

1. SUBJECT: FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE (CASE NO. 24- 044/GPA/SPA) & PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER (21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM): THE

EXISTING FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN (FCSP), ADOPTED IN NOVEMBER 2008, ALLOWS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 2,447 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON 424.7 ACRES AND UP TO 4,585,779 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES ON 242.7 ACRES WITHIN THE 1,242-ACRE PLAN AREA. THE PROPOSED UPDATE TO THE FCSP (CASE NO. 24-044/GPA/SPA) WOULD RESULT IN A TOTAL OF 2,472 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 5,093,265 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES. AS A RESULT, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF 25 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 2,786,461 SQUARE FEET OF BUSINESS PARK (BP), AND A REDUCTION OF 2,278,976

SQUARE FEET OF REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC) COMPARED TO THE EXISTING FCSP. THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES DEVELOPMENT OF THE PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER (21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM), WHICH CONSISTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO (2) BUILDINGS WITH WAREHOUSE AND OFFICE SPACES, TOTALING 2,054,000 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING SPACE, AS WELL AS TRUCK

PARKING AND DOCKING BAYS, CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS INCLUDED IN THE FCSP UPDATE.

RECOMMENDATION:

Depending on the Planning Commission's review and recommendation, several potential motions can be made and are as follows:

Recommendation in support of the FCSP Update:

Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
6-5-24

If the Planning Commission is in support of the FCSP, the following recommendation to the Council is provided:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-06, approving the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update; certifying that the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); accepting the mitigation measures identified in the Final SEIR; adopting Findings of Fact; and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
2) Approve first reading, by title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 448, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yucaipa, California, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending of the official land use plan and zoning ordinance of the City of Yucaipa; and 3) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (Case No. 21-196), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and if acceptable, approve the Architectural Design and preliminary landscaping, for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Project (POCC); and 4) Adopt the Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and 5) Approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and direct Staff to file a Notice of Determination.

Recommendation aizainst the FCSP Update:

If the Planning Commission is not in support of the FCSP, the following recommendation to the Council is provided:
1) Direct Staff to prepare a Resolution to deny the approval of the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update; and
2) Direct Staff to prepare Findings for denial, based on the Planning Commission's consideration of the Project with respect to Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code; and 3) Deny Conditional Use Permit (Case No. 21-196), as it is inconsistent with the land use designations of the existing Freeway Corridor Specific Plan; and 4) Determine that the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.

Alternatives -
The Planning Commission can make any additional recommendations to modify the FCSP Update that are deemed necessary to meet the Findings specified by Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code, or that would better meet the Goals, Policies, and/or Objectives of the General Plan.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
6-5-24

Draft Findings of Approval, as well as the Draft Resolution and Ordinance are provided for the Planning Commission's reference and review. Modifications can be made based on the deliberations of the item and will be presented for the City Council's final action.

DISCUSSION:

The following ex parte communications were disclosed. Commissioner Chester met with Pacific Oaks for a meeting about the project and met with the Pumpkin Patch to see how this would affect them and their operation. Commissioner Vick noted that he met with the Pumpkin Patch owners and had a meeting with Pacific Oaks. Commissioner Snodgrass met with Tyler Rameson with the Pumpkin Patch and had a meeting with Pacific Oaks and spoke with Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Bengamin Matlock and Commissioner Chester. Commissioner Beck had no ex parte to disclose.

Commissioner Higginson had a meeting with Pacific Oaks and met with representatives from the Pumpkin Patch. Staff noted that the meetings with Pacific Oaks consisted of materials that were presented in the agenda packet.

Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock presented the Agenda Report.

Commissioner Chester noted traffic concerns and asked staff if the number of big rig trucks staging throughout the city were accounted for in the traffic study. Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock stated that the traffic study does address the operations based on the layout of the street that will be developed. Associate Engineer Katrina Kunkel informed the Commission that the traffic study will account for peak hour traffic and that the infrastructure is designed to accommodate when there would be the most concentration of trucks.

Chair Allgower asked staff if the future residential component was included in the traffic study. Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock noted that the traffic study assessment included the full build out construction plan.

Commissioner Beck asked staff what tenants/businesses would be occupying the warehouses. Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock stated that the buildings speculative, but would let the applicant provide additional information.

Commissioner Chester asked staff if there would be any restriction that that city would impose on the Pumpkin Patch to restrict their current operations. Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock informed the Commission that there are no current provisions that would restrict their operations.

Commissioner Higginson noted that he understands the streamlining and focus to protect the Pumpkin Patch. He stated that the Commission does not want to diminish their operation, and that the Pumpkin Patch is a vital business to the community.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
6-5-24

Terri Allen with Pacific Industrial introduced the rest of the Pacific Industrial staff in attendance with her.

Ms. Allen noted that there is no tenant at this time for either warehouse. Terri Allen thanked staff for the presentation and proceeded with a PowerPoint presentation.

Commissioner Vick stated that the Pacific Industrial plans were a good and well thought out project.

Commissioner Higginson complimented the project and location and appreciated the time put into this project by the applicant. Commissioner Higginson noted that the mix of uses has been apart of the original FCSP and that the update is a refining to the project.

PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke:
• Elijah Silva
• David Martinez
• Zach Strasters
• Hansen Wang
• John Sisley
• Timothy Slade
• Robert Lugan
• Eddie Campos
• Thomas Ruiz
• Tyler Rameson
Dan Floriani with Pacific Oaks noted that he appreciated all the comments. He stated that he loves the Pumpkin Patch and doesn't want to see it go anywhere. He appreciates the Commissions commitment to protect the Pumpkin Patch. Mr. Floriani noted that he is in full support of the Pumpkin Patch and would like to help their operation.

The Public HearinLy was then closed.

Commissioner Higginson stated that he appreciates the support, time and effort for the project and the presentations.

Commissioner Chester thanked staff for the presentation and expressed appreciation for all the hard work they do. She noted that the Pumpkin Patch has put the City of Yucaipa on the map and is very passionate about the Pumpkin Patch.

Commissioner Beck stated that he likes development, but has concerns about impacts coming from the warehouses.

Commissioner Vick noted that the million square foot warehouses have the lowest vacancy.

Commissioner Vick stated that he does not have a problem with the development, and he appreciates the proposal of the project.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
6-5-24

Commissioner Snodgrass stated that she is concerned about the future projects across the county line and how that will affect the city.

Chair Allgower noted that he does not agree with the zoning change for the Pumpkin Patch. He stated that the open space could be better utilized.

ACTION: MOTION TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING ON JULY 17, 2024, BY Commissioner Beck, SECOND BY Commissioner Vick, CARRIED, 5-1-0-0, FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 1.

2. SUBJECT: STARLING HEIGHTS SPECIFIC PLAN (CASE NO. 22-129/GPA/SP/TTM 20372): THE STARLING HEIGHTS SPECIFIC PLAN PROVIDES THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A 14.78-ACRE SITE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INCLUDES TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) 20372 TO FORMALLY CREATE A 127-UNIT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION AND ASSOCIATED

COMMUNITY FEATURES INCLUDING A RECREATION CENTER, ACTIVE PARK, DOG

PARK, ENTRY MONUMENTS, AND DETENTION BASINS BASED ON THE SPECIFIC PLAN. A MINOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT IS ALSO PROPOSED TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE SITE SHOWN ON GENERAL PLAN FIGURE CDL-2, LAND USE MAP, FROM RS-20M (SINGLE -RESIDENTIAL, 20,000 SQUARE FOOT

MINIMUM) TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT), AND A MODIFICATION TO GENERAL PLAN FIGURE, CDL-3, LAND USE MODIFICATIONS, TO ADD THE STARLING HEIGHTS SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED AT THE NE CORNER OF 12TH STREET AND AVENUE E; APNS: 0318-021-18, 19, -44 & -58.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, and pursuant to Sections 82.0101 and

83.020305 of the Yucaipa Development Code, provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Starling Heights Specific Plan (SHSP) and the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), as well as the associated Tract Map (TTM 20372).

Depending on the Planning Commission's review and recommendation, several potential motions can be made and are as follows:

Recommendation in support of the SHSP Update:

If the Planning Commission is in support of the SHSP, the following recommendation to the Council is provided:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-33, approving the Specific Plan for the proposed Starling Heights Specific Plan and the associated minor General Plan Amendment / Land Use District Change of a property from RS-20M Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum lot size) to the land use designation of PD (Planned Development); and
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
6-5-24

2. Approve first reading, by the title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 449, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending the Official Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance as adopted by the City of Yucaipa; and
Approve the Tentative Tract Map No. 20372 (Case No. 22-129/TTM 20372), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in this Agenda Report; and

4. Adopt the Findings as contained in this Agenda Report; and

5. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, finding the mitigation measures and standard measures and procedures will reduce the potential level of environmental impact to less than significant; and

6. Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination; and,

7. Review, and if it is considered acceptable, approve the architectural design and conceptual landscaping for the proposed Project.

Recommendation against the SHSP:

If the Planning Commission is not in support of the SHSP, the following recommendation to the Council is provided:

1. Direct Staff to prepare a Resolution to deny the approval of the Starling Heights Specific Plan; and

2. Direct Staff to prepare Findings for denial, based on the Planning Commission's consideration of the Project with respect to Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code; and

3. Deny Tentative Tract Map 20372 (Case No. 22-129), as it is inconsistent with the land use designations of the existing Land Use District; and

4. Determine that the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15270 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves.

Alternatives:

The Planning Commission can make any additional recommendations to modify the SHSP that are deemed necessary to meet the Findings specified by Section 8 3.0203 10 of the Yucaipa Development Code, or that would better meet the Goals, Policies, and/or Objectives of the General Plan.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
6-5-24

DISCUSSION:

Assistant Planner Christian Farmer presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, William Rockwell, was in attendance via conference call. Mr. Rockwell thank the Commission and Assistant Planner Christian Farmer for his presentation. He noted that both the initial and current concern is density and he tried everything in his power to mitigate that.

Commissioner Beck asked the applicant for the average lot size. Mr. Rockwell informed the Commission that the average lot size is roughly 3,000 sq. ft.

PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke:
• Mike Simpson
• Jillian Simpson
• Brian Taylor
• Hansen Wang
Mr. Rockwell thanked all the public speakers for their comments and stated that they focused on affordability.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

Commissioner Higginson noted that applicant has done a good job with the variety of the aesthetics, and it is a creative use of the land.

Commissioner Chester noted ingress and egress concerns.

Commissioner Beck does not agree with the density of the project.

Commissioner Vick stated that he is tired of the higher -density projects and that these homes are not priced for starter families.

Commissioner Snodgrass expressed density concerns, noting that this project is in the wrong area, and that she also does not like the architectural design.

ACTION #1: MOTION TO APPROVE BY Commissioner Higginson, NOT CARRIED, FOR AGENDA ITEM NO.2.

ACTION #2: MOTION TO DENY THE TENTATIVE TRACT MAP AS IT IS

INCONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROJECT BY Commissioner Chester, SECOND BY Commissioner Snodgrass, CARRIED, 5-1-0-0, FOR AGENDA ITEM NO.2.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
6-5-24

3. SUBJECT: CASE NO.24-046/GPA: CITY OF YUCAIPA GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and provide a recommendation to the City Council to:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 2024-09, adopting the Safety Element Update to the General Plan; and

2. Determine that the update to the Safety Element is within the scope of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared pursuant to the provisions of Section 15168 of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, for the City's General Plan; and

3. Adopt the Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and

4. Direct staff to file a Notice of Determination.

DISCUSSION:

Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner presented the Agenda Report.

PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment speaker slips were received for this item.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Chester, SECOND BY Commissioner Snodgrass, CARRIED, 6-0-0-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.

ANNOUNCEMENTS: Deputy Director /City Planner Benjamin Matlock noted that the next scheduled Planning Commission Meeting will be held in the middle of July since Chair Allgower will not be available, and we do not have a Vice Chair at this time.

ADJOURNMENT:

The meeting adjourned at 10:48 PM.

Benjamin Matlock
Deputy Director/City Planner
JR Allgower
Chair of the Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
6-5-24

Page 9 ends

ATTACHMENT 10

Agenda Item No.

City of Yucaipa

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of July 17, 2024
A Regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Yucaipa, California was called to order in the Council Chambers, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, on July 17, 2024, at 6:30 PM.

PRESENT: J.R. Allgower, Chair
Stacey Chester, Commissioner
David Higginson, Commissioner
Donna Snodgrass, Commissioner
Lyle Vick, Commissioner
ABSENT: Richard Beck, Commissioner
CITY STAFF: Benjamin Matlock, Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Michael Reiter, Assistant City Attorney
Fermin Preciado, Director of Development Services / City Engineer Christian Farmer, Assistant Planner
Katie Syme, Development Services Technician
Maria Koolhoven, Planning Commission Assistant

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:31 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Lyle Vick.

ROLL CALL
Commissioner Richard Beck had an excused absence.

SELECTION OF INTERIM VICE -CHAIR
A. ACTION: MOTION BY Chair Allgower, SECOND BY Commissioner Snodgrass TO SELECT STACEY CHESTER AS INTERIM VICE -CHAIR, MOTION CARRIED 5-0- 1-0.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 1
7-17-24

PUBLIC COMMENT:

The following members of the public spoke:
• Chris Venable
• Hansen Wang
• Dr. Newman

CONSENT AGENDA
The following Consent Agenda items are expected to be routine and non -controversial. The Planning Commission will act upon them, at one time, without discussion. Any Commissioner or staff member may request removal of an item from the Consent Agenda for discussion.

1. SUBJECT: APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MAY 1, 2024.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Snodgrass, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, CARRIED, 4-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. (INTERIM VICE -CHAIR CHESTER WAS NOT IN ATTENDANCE AT THE MAY 1, 2024, PC MEETING).

2. SUBJECT: APPROVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 2024.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Snodgrass, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, CARRIED, 5-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 2. (WITH THE CORRECTION ON PAGE 8 OF COMMISSIONER CHESTER'S LAST NAME CORRECTED).

DISCUSSION ITEMS

3. SUBJECT: JOHN NEJAD (CASE NO. 23-109/DBA/CUP/ARC): A DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT TO ALLOW A 100 PERCENT INCREASE IN UNIT DENSITY ON A

RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PARCEL, AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 52-UNIT, AGE -RESTRICTED, SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT THAT INCLUDES TWO (2) ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADDS), THAT CONSISTS OF FOUR (4), TWO-STORY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS

INCLUDING A CLUB HOUSE, BARBEQUE AREA, COMMUNITY GARDEN AND SITE LANDSCAPING AT 34567 WILDWOOD CANYON ROAD; APNS: 0319-191-19, -27, -28, -29, & -34.
(Continued from May 1, 2024)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission review the proposed colors, materials, and architectural design and, if acceptable, approve Case No. 23-109/PUP/ARC/DBA.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
7-17-24

DISCUSSION:

Assistant Planner Christian Farmer presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, John Nejad, was in attendance, and stated that he was available to answer any questions the Commission may have.

Commissioner Snodgrass stated the project was 100 percent improved and thanked the applicant for the updates.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

The following members of the public spoke:
• Hansen Wang
ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Snodgrass, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, CARRIED, 5-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO.3.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
The order of Business for the Public Hearing Shall Be:

4. SUBJECT: FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE (CASE NO.24-044/GPA/SPA) & PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER (21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM): THE EXISTING FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN (FCSP), ADOPTED IN NOVEMBER 2008, ALLOWS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF UP TO 2,447 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON 424.7 ACRES AND UP TO 4,585,779 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES ON 242.7 ACRES WITHIN THE 1,242- ACRE PLAN AREA. THE PROPOSED UPDATE TO THE FCSP (CASE NO. 24-044/GPA/SPA) WOULD RESULT IN A TOTAL OF 2,472 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND 5,093,265 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES. AS A RESULT, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE OF 25 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 2,786,461 SQUARE FEET OF BUSINESS PARK (BP), AND A REDUCTION OF 2,278,976 SQUARE FEET OF REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC) COMPARED TO THE EXISTING FCSP. THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALSO INCLUDES DEVELOPMENT OF THE PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER (21-196/CUP/ARC/TPM), WHICH CONSISTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO (2) BUILDINGS WITH WAREHOUSE AND OFFICE SPACES, TOTALING 2,054,000 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING SPACE, AS

WELL AS TRUCK PARKING AND DOCKING BAYS, CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS INCLUDED IN THE FCSP UPDATE.
(Continued for June 5. 2024)
RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, and pursuant to Sections 82.0101 and 83.020305 of the Yucaipa Development Code, provide a recommendation to the City Council regarding the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (FCSP) and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), as well as Case No. 21-196 for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center. If the Planning Commission is in support of the FCSP, the following recommendation to the Council is provided:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-19, approving the Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Update; certifying that the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) has been completed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); accepting the mitigation measures identified in the Final SEIR; adopting Findings of Fact; and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
2) Approve first reading, by title only, as read by staff, of Ordinance No. 448, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Yucaipa, California, amending Ordinance No. 343, amending of the official land use plan and zoning ordinance of the City of Yucaipa; and 3) Approve the Conditional Use Permit (Case No. 21-196), subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report, and if acceptable, approve the Architectural Design and preliminary landscaping, for the Pacific Oaks Commerce Center Project (POCC); and 4) Adopt the Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and 5) Approve the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and direct Staff to file a Notice of Determination.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
7-17-24

Based on the Commission's discussion at the prior Public Hearing, modifications to the FCSP have since been added to the Errata sheet that reflect the interests of the "Pumpkin Factory." Alternatives:

The Planning Commission can make any additional recommendations to modify the FCSP Update that are deemed necessary to meet the Findings specified by Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code, or that would better meet the Goals, Policies, and/or Objectives of the General Plan.

DISCUSSION:

Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock presented the Agenda Report.

Representatives from Pacific Industrial were in attendance but did not wish to make a presentation.

PUBLIC COMMENT
The following members of the public spoke:
• Tyler Rameson
• Edward Timmons
• Hansen Wang
• Bill Sellers
• Kathy Sellers
• Colleen Wang
• Kevin Miskin
The Public Hearine- was then closed.

The following ex parte communications were disclosed. Commissioner Vick noted that spoke with Craig Heaps and Ken Robinson regarding the project provisions on his property.

Commissioner Higginson asked for clarification on the infrastructure aspects of the project. Director of Development Services / City Engineer Fermin Preciado stated that both the FCSP Update and the Pacific Oaks Project both contain Conditions of Approval that were derived from various studies as part of the environmental review. All improvements are required to be completed prior to occupancy of the warehouse and the remaining infrastructure requirements for traffic and transportation are associated with the remaining development with the FCSP.

Commissioner Chester noted traffic concerns and asked if the traffic study considered the trucks that would be parked along the roads throughout the city and causing congestion. Director of Development Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
7-17-24

Services / City Engineer Fermin Preciado noted that the trip generation numbers were taken into consideration.

Commissioner Vick asked for clarification regarding the industrial and regional commercial zoning and what that would mean. Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner Benjamin Matlock noted that that this would help protect against the freeway adjacent commercial pads from being warehouses but would allow regional commercial uses such as retail.

Commissioner Snodgrass asked for clarification on where the County line is and stated that she is concerned about the future projects in Calimesa that may affect the city.

ACTION: MOTION TO RECOMMEND THE ITEM FOR CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE ERRATA SHEET EXCEPT FOR ITEM #13, BY Chair Allgower, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, NOT CARRIED, 2-3-1-0, (INTERIM

VICE CHAIR CHESTER, COMMISSIONER SNODGRASS, AND COMMISSIONER VICK VOTED NO) FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 4:

5. SUBJECT: APT TOWERS (CASE NO. 24-011 /CUP); A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE REVIEW OF A 75-FOOT-TALL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY DESIGNED AS A EUCALYPTUS TREE, WITH A 200 SQUARE FOOT LEASE AREA FOR THE

ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT WHICH WILL BE SURROUNDED BY AN EIGHT -FOOT -TALL BLOCK WALL LOCATED AT 12954 BRYANT STREET, APN 0319-172-08.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, and; A) Review the design and location of the proposed telecommunications facility, and if it is acceptable, approve Conditional Use Permit No. 24-011, subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in the Agenda Report; and
B) Adopt the Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and C) Adopt a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, Section 15303 (Class 3); and D) Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

DISCUSSION:

Commissioner Vick recused himself from the agenda item due to proximity to the site.

Assistant Planner Christian Farmer presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, David Elliott, was in attendance and available to answer any questions the Commissioners may have.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
7-17-24

Commissioner Higginson asked the applicant to explain the safety aspects regarding the cell tower. The applicant, David Elliott, noted that all cell towers are regulated by the FCC and every antenna is very strictly monitored and maintained. Commissioner Snodgrass noted that the EF radiation from the tower has no impact to those below.

PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment speaker slips were received for this item.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

ACTION #1: MOTION TO APPROVE BY Commissioner Snodgrass, WITH THE

CONDITIONS TO HAVE A SHIELDED CABLE AND EMF SHIELDING PAINT INSIDE THE ELECTRICAL VAULT, NOT CARRIED, FOR AGENDA ITEM NO.5.

ACTION #2: MOTION BY Interim Vice Chair Chester, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, CARRIED, 4-0-1-1, FOR AGENDA ITEM NO.5.

6. SUBJECT: ROBERT AND VIOLA CRABB (CASE NO. 24-032/SUP/ARC): A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A 1,890 SQUARE FOOT AND 17-FOOT-

TALL STEEL RV CARPORT PROPOSED ON A SINGLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 36320 WOODBRIAR STREET; APN: 1242-451-08.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and:

A) Review the architectural design of the proposed metal structure, and if it is acceptable, approve the design subject to the Conditions of Approval; and
B) Adopt the Special Use Permit Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and C) Adopt a Categorical Exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended, Section 15303 (Class 3); and D) Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

DISCUSSION:

Development Services Technician Katie Syme presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, Robert Crabb, was in attendance and stated that he just needs to cover up his motorhome and thanked the Commission for their time.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
7-17-24

PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment speaker slips were received for this item.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Vick, SECOND BY Interim Vice -Chair Chester, CARRIED, 5-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO.6.

7. SUBJECT: MIKE HAMMER (CASE NO.24-048/SUP/ARC): A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW OF A 17.25-FOOT-TALL AND 1,200 SQUARE FOOT STEEL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE ON A SINGLE -RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 12728 DOUGLAS STREET; APN: 0322-103-27.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, and:

DISCUSSION:

Development Services Technician Katie Syme presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, Mike Hammer, was in attendance and stated that he would like to store his tools and trailers.

PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment speaker slips were received for this item.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Higginson, SECOND BY Interim Vice -Chair Chester, CARRIED, 5-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 7.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
7-17-24

8. SUBJECT: SHAUN BORDEN (CASE NO. 24-063/PUP/MNV): A PLANNING USE PERMIT TO REAUTHORIZE AN EXPIRED USE PERMIT FOR CASE NO. 17-012, WHICH CONSISTS OF ADDING THIRTEEN (13) SINGLE -STORY RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS ARRANGED AS DUPLEXES TO A 1.85 ACRE PROPERTY THAT FEATURES AN EXISTING RESIDENCE, LOCATED 34757 AVENUE H, EAST OF THE CORNER OF AVENUE H AND 3RD STREET,

AND A MINOR VARIANCE FOR A REDUCTION OF THE REAR YARD REQUIREMENTS TO ALLOW FOR A 10 FOOT, 6 INCH SETBACK IN LIEU OF A 15 FOOT SETBACK.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing, and:

A) Approve Planning Use Permit No. 24-063 subject to the Conditions of Approval as contained in this Agenda Report; and
B) And then close the public hearing, and then Planning Commission review the proposed architecture and conceptual landscape design, and if it is acceptable, approve the design C) Adopt the Findings as contained in this Agenda Report; and D) Adopt the Minor Variance Findings as contained in the Agenda Report; and E) Adopt a Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15305 (Class 5) and 15332 (Class 32) of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and the CEQA Guidelines, as amended; and F) Direct Staff to file a Notice of Exemption.

DISCUSSION:

Assistant Planner Christian Farmer presented the Agenda Report.

The applicant, Bryce Borden, was in attendance and stated Assistant Planner Christian Farmer covered the project in his presentation.

PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment speaker slips were received for this item.

The Public Hearing was then closed.

ACTION: MOTION BY Commissioner Vick, SECOND BY Commissioner Higginson, CARRIED, 5-0-1-0, TO APPROVE AGENDA ITEM NO. 8.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 9
7-17-24

ANNOUNCEMENTS: Deputy Director /City Planner Benjamin Matlock thanked all in attendance. Mr.

Matlock thanked the Commissioners for their input on the FCSP that will be included as part of the information presented to the City Council.

ADJOURNMENT:

The meeting adjourned at 8:22 PM.

Benjamin Matlock
Deputy Director/City Planner
JR Allgower
Chair of the Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
7-17-24

Page 10 ends

Attachment 11
Draft Environmental Impact Report (under separate cover) EIR Link: FCSP Draft SEIR
Appendices accessible here: City's Environmental Review Page Attachment 1
Final Environmental Impact Report (under separate cover) FSEIR Link: FCSP Final SEIR
Attachment 13
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (under separate cover) MMRP Link: FCSP MMRP

ATTACHMENT 14

AOL
a�
OD c)/
)/
I-
° - BUILDING 1
ED
JD
0 (DID
ED
BUILDING 2
(a)/
a�
ED
i

PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

YUCAIPA, CALIFORNIA
8841 RESEARCH DR
SUITE 200
IRVINE • CA 92618
949.387.1323
RIDGELA.CCIM

PACIFIC OAKS

COMMERCE CENTER
0 60 120 240 360
9/13/2023 SCHEMATIC DESIGN
1/14/2022 SCHEMATIC DESIGN
11/17/2021 DRAFT SCHEMATIC DESIGN

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-2A2-1
DRAWN BY:

RLA
CHK'D BY:

RLA
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
SHEET TITLE:

J:\Dwgs\RGA\Pacific Oaks\l-SD\po-plp.dwg, 9/13/2023 3:34:15 PM, DWG To PDF.pc3

j
J
ARCHITECT:

NFW I nT I INF
16uPP
Sta
N
y
Y
APPLICANT:PACIFIA L C PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

I N D U T R

YUCAIPA, CA
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
°'"" SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN

PROJECT INFORMATION
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.

PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE:

D MAX. BUILDING HEIGHT:

D CONSTRUCTION TYPE:

D USE:

CT DATA
0301-201-40, 41, 42
0301-211-10, 12
0301-221-10
0301-201-26
0301-191-21
B-P
62'
III-B
S-1
(WAREHOUSE / LIGHT INDUSTRIAL)
BUILDING 1
BUILDING 2
TOTAL
2,625,382 SF
2,838,221 SF
5,463, 603 SF

60.270 AC

65.157 AC
125.427 AC
AREA 1,052,500 SF
1,001,500 S F
2,054,000 SF
i E 40.09%

35.29%

37.59%

AREA BY USE
E
20, 000 S F
20,000 S F
40,000 SF
-HOUSE
1,032,500 SF
981,500 SF
2,014,000 SF
EKING
) PARKING
;E
80 80
160
0 SF
_
:HOUSE
1,033
982
2,014 _
)00 SF
QUIRED
1,113
1,062
2,174

PROVIDED
_

DARD STALLS
453
418
870 _
STALLS
11 10
21 'ALLS
52 48
_
99 _
,OVI D ED
515
475
990
IRED 4 4 8
'I D ED 178 178 356
'ARKING
'I D ED 410 326 736
SD 1/14/22 2ND PLANNING SUBMITTAL
SD 11/19/21 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION
SCALE: 1" = 120'-0"
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-A1-1P
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHK'D BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE
Al

ARCHITECT:
/ N
- - - - - - - - - - - - T - - - - - - - NEW LOT LINE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - —------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- 8'H-TUBESTEEL FENCE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- `y
' Lo 8'H TUBE ,
8'H TUBE STEEL FENCE
--------------------------------------------J 12'X55'TRAILERSTALLS ' ' i STEEL FENCE
Lo
I N
Lu Lu
O Q Q Lo
CD CD
T
T
I M co
/ O O
co co
N N '
I T
,
,
27 40,
22' 40' 57.4'
26' 26' 12' 12, 26' 26'
,
IMP,
z CD
z_
, J
Lu
/ o
co 178 DO K PO ITIO S F
ol 5 15 AUTO STALLS
/ 6'H TRASH111-113

ENCLOSURE IESFR SPRIN LERS '
MAX. HEIGHT: 62 FT. '
/ 50,
M
� I
® I
® I I
/77
r
r ® I — — — , r — — —
OFF
/ — — — — co
co
KL�_
--- --- i
co
_ N co co
T
LLJ
LLJ
co
\ — — Lo 6' '
\ _ _
L_____________________________ 12'X55'TRAILER STALLS-
Lo
- /
' co 8'H TUBE STEEL FENCE
.............................................. *
.........

I. SECONDARY
FIRE ACCESS I ��

DRIVE (SEE CIVIL)
SCALE: 1" = 80'-0"
APPLICANT: PACIFIC PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

I N D U S T R I A L
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
EMAIL:

YUCAIPA, CA
SCHEMATIC SITE PLAN - BUILDING 1
SD 1/14/22 2ND PLANNING SUBMITTAL
SD 11/19/21 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-A1-1P
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHK'D BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE
Al -1-i

ARCHITECT:
� 1
C.

I
BUILDING 1
SEE SHT. Al-1
I/ � / 5p ►
ol
26,
25 ,
le
I 1
I / /
6'H TRASH
le ENCLOSURE `
/ / 3
i a ,
I
\
\OFF -= -
n3
INV
IN
-------- - I -I -I
rO
gyp`
Vt
/ 5p ,
S �
`a NIS6p' `
q i �?
55 L N 2
J5 ,17$__0 CK PaSfT]bNS
CAP
55 \26 TRAILER STALLS;
5 W TO STALLS
CONST. TYPE III'-B _
�o SFRk PRINKLERRS
a
U X. H IGHT' F.
l
,
,
,I X
,
,
,
O-\AFAN
APPLICANT:
i
I F I

I N D U S T R I A L
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
EMAIL:

PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

SCHEMATIC

YUCAIPA, CA

SITE PLAN
BUILDING 2
,
,
,
,
,
,
SD 1/14/22 2ND PLANNING SUBMITTAL
SD 11/19/21 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION
SCALE: 1" = 100'-0"
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-A1-1P
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHK'D BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE
Al
-2-1

ARCHITECT:

I r_A7l Qn
Q
CD
Cfl
Lid
Cfl
Co
LS7
c�
co
co
0')
CV
Eo
N
ti
ti
CXi
N
Cc
CIOo
N
N
N
L J
o\i
N
C)o
CIO
0 CIO
N
�LL� Eo
r N
L J
N
En
BU
LDING 1
2750 SF
CUPANCY -1
110
O
o
c
N
ES
MAX.

R SPRINKLERS
HEIGHT: 62 FT.
o
N
ti
ti
Eo
N
80 N
M
CYO
O7
c�
co
O7
Lo
E
OFFICE
OFFICE ~ ENTRY
Lo
i
MAIN
ENTRY;
E)o
5 48'
12'
119,
1,176'
119'
12'
48' 5
1, 544'
APPLICANT:

PA I F I

I N D U S T R I A L
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
EMAIL:

PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

YUCAIPA, CA
SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING 1
SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" 0' 50' 100' 200' 5(
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-1A2-1
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHK'D BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE
A2-1 - 1-i

ARCHITECT:
1 476'
=
Lo
co -A
OFFICE
CIEo
co
O
SCALE: 1" 50'-0" 0' 10' 20' 50' 100'
5' 48' 12' 65' 1,346'
a
<
�
I I
_MAIN

I ENTRY,

PACIFIC PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE CENTER

YUCAIPA, CA
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
`""` SCHEMATIC FLOOR PLAN -BUILDING 2A2-1 -2-1
RGA PROJECT N0:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-1A2-1
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHK'D BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE

b-10
LAND USE. N
orERs-r

VICINITY MAP
GENERAL COMMERCIAL / \
>.

A
T
C,
E
}"/G
H00 Ffty Z_"
/A -W5
SITS
LAND USE:
' MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL
CO
Lhx�Ri1. // LAND USE: �� 7��// _�/� J /��ll
/ GENERAL COMMERCIAL \ `_ /� / / / ` - - - - \ - _ \\ \ \ 1 \ Il�ll \ `./ I�
.. EXISTING BUILDING � \� . - ` �I I / / - - -I\\\��
115 LF FROM PIL L65 �/� �� II� \ ___`J� U J 1 \ 1 \) \ \ \ \ \ 7 1 N, u,
gll
0 - - -- - -- �_ �/
VICINITY MAP - = _jS
/ .�9� ( _-L7 L79- � �,�✓/ _r- .1� ��+++ + ++ /�I\J\� PARCEL 4 NORTH _ \ O \ \\ -_` OPEN SPACE
NTS EXISTING BUILDING �a C (� \ 8 '� 31 -_ J _ +�+ +-\ \\\+ - "c � / 12 LF FROM PL \ \ �\\\\ i �' - -- -�' -\\\\� + + \ \ / ) )`,� \�\_ \ - �� - \ + \ \�� `34� / lq'C33.,C32�: 6 5 +50= 1 + + + / +` J / � `� I (�� L12 . ((; \ \ �, 5p + + + +\\ \�\\�\ . L7s L7 --- / 8 f 2 `L -22 + } r �� + l /� 1 / V lI`l i�\\ -\�- '\ \ G L� �+ � � \ ---- nn-rnjam\ + �+ 00 � + + +�+ J, \�, / ) / ``\ \ . - LAND USE.
/+� � �'2088j�� _ '` �-?-- � 0� / / � _� 1,-�� + / ) � � - \ , \l \ / EXISTING SITE �� \ ! �\
/,� f / / \\\\ )\ I� \l \\\ s\ SINGLE FAMILY
-- "^ t ,.�(lC�� \ �-
_ _ OPEN SPACE \
L14 _ - �Ti + �s + +�+� + \\ � � + + + \ \�",�-=2135��: + I + + /+ + +�+ �2175�,. �---=�� i+ + +��} � � � ��2�''�-1 \ 2125 11 \ \\ %_ ,
=2 ------ - -----------------------------� , ,i >> \�))) P L15 \� - 18 _ -L84 ---- - - 22
0+ ' \ \ \ 2 00 -_- ----- / �N/ 11(l(�L\ �\�� \ /��/PUBLIC ROAD FUTURE _ 'j+��i \\ \ r -\�`\\\oil \\l +� - - F1 8 TYP. /+ \\` \ C �� = i (i- �+ +++ r + .'4+++-\ -2225+ \ \\\ \ _ o + ( /-,\�\\� =\l\ JJ/ �� ALIGNMENT PENDING- J+ r� T / + + + + p - IINIII1IIII I �• ��\C \^l r/
-� ,i% �� _ \ \ �11 �� o o I i \ I = 01 O \ --) ll �1\� % \\\�,�f�i- /' CITY COORDINATION` L13 / + + ` - - / / � 2250 �� o. W 0 ' �\ I \\C \ \\� _ / I

LINE TABLE

LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH

BEARING
LINE
LENGTH

BEARING
L2
1618.24
S22°24'56.59"E
L22
303.09
N63°01'34.95"W
L3
371.76
N64°02'30.92"E
L23
368.97
N72°07'55.67"W
L4
361.98
N8*48'13.13"E
L24
334.90
N52°58'04.82"W
L5
257.77
N35°22'28.42"W
L25
525.03
N70°00'12.53"W
L6
1012.73
N3°50'09.39"E
L26
350.71
N87°27'54.84"E
L7

56.22 N44°50'31.72"W
L27
2012.34
S77°21'21.90"E
L8
125.37
S82°33'51.28"W
L28
368.04
S8°46'49.84"W
L9

38.11 S73°56'36.95"W
L29
214.33
S35°22'28.42"E
L10
207.02
S47°27'22.55"W
L30
519.77
N87°57'01.30"W
L11
274.27
S64°53'25.55"W
L31
1319.19
S78°53'41.70"W
L12

62.74 S69°54'18.60"W
L32
142.48
S31 °53'22.87"W
L13

42.15 S76°33'04.60"W
L33
167.36
S48°18'54.62"W
L14

38.75 N88°26'47.40"W
L34
215.47
N22°16'56.86"W
L15

16.58 N66°3909.40W
L35

95.25 N60°52'07.49"W
L16
154.61
S34°09 54.bU W
L36
112.23
S60°01' 5b.b,5 W
L17

32.78 S64°56'08.74"E
L37
154.18
N77°46'00.00"W
L18
350.71
N87°27'54.84"E
L38

54.89 N1 °06'23.94"W
L19
260.58
N84°28'37.51 "E
L39

85.90 N26°30'43.06"E
L20

58.87 N73°49'10.72"W
L40
421.03
N47°51'17.94"W
L21

82.34 S60°01'13.33"W
L41
203.72
N44°20'38.56"W
J/ c21+� + + �+��=_= l ��>>� 1 _
\+\ l�/� / \\\\ 5 I _ J�J 1/-z + + 11 /I IIII F1 - -\
Ji � ti n r 11 I -
/+�+�+ + + + �v, PARCEL 2 + v+� �-/ i ,��:� �,�� _z2��205��Jy�//J �+ ++ I� D5 ++++ -++ ++ p�� v -
/ + + - + + + + + �� + FUTURE RESIDENTIAL \ (\ J+ ( (�� 4p• O V' . " A - - II / I W2 FUTURE RESIDENTIAL + + + + + + rt rt rt � - art, -� � rt ,� + ,� - � \ / +, +++ +�/+ + ++��-+ + I((J� N 1 PARCEL3 \1111LL,+ ++ �,rtf �`/ +/ /�\ `// - D2 q4( Ls 2 �__ WAREHOUSE L \ 2 / /l I / i -o\
LAND USE: /'us, \� + ; \` / ///l / �. \�� // =40.0 + + "` -� i �-_ + + FUTURE ROAD ACCESS_ -�jj / ��2155/>+f+ \\+ + �- -- `� - /�'� 1\+ // SINGLE RESIDENTIAL y , 2 �� ;-� �// �.�� = � �� / +r+\� �_��_+ ;+-+_- � / � +� l�\��\ �--� 9 / (NOT A PART OF PROJECT - ROAD - ��\ ` ti + 1 �% / / \ 1 / / ++/+ + + -+�/+ \-* BUILDING 1 � + +�ll� \� \�� r r ' + + + + /r l+ �� - 1 052 500 SF / /+- + \\\�\\\"�C�+
(( DESIGN SUBJECT TO ENGINEERING ¢,� + /// �� / + + R20 cv; TRASH ENCLOSURE 2 178 DOCK POSITIONS - / /�/ - J S� // ./ + / / \ 2 F1 2 TYP. (I+\Y=
/� + +, �� UNDER SEPARATE SUBMITTAL WITH + \„( / �=2250 \+�/ + + +TYP.) , S ( J I �, - D7 II f .2225 + -,�Jll ^\ 410 TRAILER STALLS \ C� 2' D7 / �O + + _ FURTHER CITY APPROVAL REQUIRED.) �I _ + �\ ;� + 2 TYP. F1 \ - J ��1'1 - //%\\\' - \ ,n o_�))+� �S + + T - + \\ , �2 ��\ ��, W1 W4 ////��, / /(�`�lL\ \�� 515 AUTO STALLS �) \ o N I)J} + +�+\✓ ,/T F�05. �\ + /� + %% = II(\1\ �- '� \� _ = ) J N'N+� / + + + D1 + F1 7�y . 2200�-_�_` l�-ter.°) \�� SPRINKLER - (/�� cvtN,� �, >>\ C25 + L17+' + + + + + +\ $ C24 +� /�� C29 + + z.. + / _ \ )/J/ / //�\\l > r^ N (I 1 + - F1 - T`iP •� i I \ \ ( I + \ + + + + + + +.L19✓ D7 / + + + + 21�5\ + + - + +�+ + , \, �//�\J��\\�/, f/�' / MAX HEIGHT 62 FT/\\�I / \ �I r*I� ; \\ + D1 + + + + + +- - 0 1 + D1 - + + + + +,'' 0`_�- W3 W1 W4 " ` �g0 CONSTRUCTION TYPE III-B �J%///��11�-'� S3 \ 20 \ + / TRASH ENCLOSURE y -- - ' - • +-_ � S1 - � � /�2 �✓r-= _ v vJ''��/� �� P•� / -' _ + + ++-
\ y / ' I\ 1 .° - I � \S2 205
+ \ / �i- O_ - - - \� �� W\ W +/ S1 /+ LAND USE:

C2® -L26- _ - - �=2100 - 11 - �� / r i :) \ S3 ///// 'L`L/ - - - \� \ \ 1 ` II �� \ H W3111 \l 1 +� D7 \\� 1 -� D3 �;2
\ > _ _ - F1 _ _ 25 �` ` / r ..0 _ - S1 D7 5 W4 OPEN SPACE ✓ EXISTING BUILDING -' �-
78 LF FROM PL _-- 1 A F1 _ 21
� � - -% � � � , PROPOSED
Ro. %/'�� ////ti % !_-- _75 \\ F1 L ��1\111,,` W o
� PARCEL 5 PUBLIC ROAD �� -Z��\ -215p�. O D7 cgs 13 ' o.

EXISTING OPEN SPACE 'S - S1 / I I
_ _ - a\� �� / N 12/ / / �8 / 4 TYP.

OPEN SPACE j� '_ _ �.'_ _ /ice '/\�/��f 1� L44 D7 \�� `'. D7 ----- 11 S3 D4 i F1 7 D ��/\�� \ =+ S1 D2 \ - _ \�\ \
"- ------------------:

OPEN SPACE / 1===-= __---- L\L _ -\\
L36 _ _L 0-i^ �\ �l11 (/( i� \�/1\� 1\�� \`:. \ \� )
D7
+ +
( \ � . 721� /� I) I (((_ �/
,, ?j ll %5 = `
\ � D7 \ \
W2
�� 1 L35 � �\\\ii , o-�w� i// ��V��•�� JII�/� � � \ / // �Z Z a�� - 1 l) -� 2?0, lll((�.\�(C I 1 I II �\.,•.,1 + t \ ��//JJ / 1 \ / 0• - 178 DOCK POSITIONS 1
f'( /per 326 TRAILER STALLS
W1
471 AUTO STALLS \ a \

SPRINKLER
Jr�\ 2180; a
MAX HEIGHT 62 FT
/`� F1 7+TYP.\\
� CONSTRUCTION TYPE III-B \ \ I
\ + \ I;`-
\ .$
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

GOVERNMENT LOTS 3 AND 4 OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY, IN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, AND LOTS 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 AND 9 OF BLOCK 79 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN BOOK 7, PAGE 2 OF MAPS, IN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.

EXCEPTING THEREFROM THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 7, 8 AND 9 OF SAID BLOCK 79 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO WHICH LIES NORTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF U.S. INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 10 AS SAID SOUTHERLY LINE HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY DEEDS RECORDED JUNE 03, 1949 IN BOOK 2412, PAGE 156, RECORDED IN BOOK 3730, PAGE 306, AND RECORDED APRIL 19, 1962 IN BOOK 5684, PAGE 977, ALL OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY.

ALSO EXCEPTING THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 4, 5 AND 7 OF SAID BLOCK 79 WHICH LIES WESTERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY OF THE SOUTHEAST LINE OF LIVE OAK CANYON ROAD AS ESTABLISHED JULY 1950 BY THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SURVEYOR.

ALSO EXCEPTING FROM LOT 7 IN SAID BLOCK 79 THAT PORTION OF LIVE OAK CANYON ROAD AS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 09, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-269725 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING FROM LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID BLOCK 79 THOSE PORTIONS WHICH LIE SOUTH AND WESTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:

COMMENCING AT A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID BLOCK 79, OF SAID RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO, WHICH IS NORTH 89°54'15" EAST 1618.66 FEET FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID LINE WITH THE LINE BETWEEN SECTIONS 8 AND 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 2 WEST, SAN

BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO GOVERNMENT SURVEY, SAID POINT BEING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE LAND CONVEYED BY H. S. POWERS TO BREEDING FARM AND HATCHERY COMPANY, BY DEED DATED JUNE 05, 1950 AND RECORDED IN BOOK 2589, PAGE 552 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID LAND, NORTH 27°56'45" WEST 1076.25 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85°58'45" WEST 666.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01°51'15" EAST 252.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 82°5345" WEST 293.90 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE NORTHEASTERLY BOUNDARY OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO MARSHALL G. RICHARDSON, ET UX., BY DEED FROM HERSCHEL S. POWERS AND WIFE, DATED JANUARY 08, 1954 AND RECORDED JANUARY 25, 1954 IN BOOK 3316, PAGE 18 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, NORTH 25°49' EAST, 90.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°09' WEST 160.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 02°20' WEST 138.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 23°20' EAST 111.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°20' WEST 581 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE CENTER LINE OF LIVE OAK CANYON ROAD.

ALSO EXCEPTING FROM LOTS 2 AND 9 OF SAID BLOCK 79 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO AND GOVERNMENT LOT 3 OF SECTION 10 THOSE PORTIONS LYING EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE:

BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 3, BEARING SOUTH 89°38'45" WEST, 1084.31 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 10°38'43" WEST, 272.54 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°54'32" EAST, 749.13 FEET; THENCE NORTH 26°07'02" WEST, 443.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 80°38'14" WEST, 188.56 FEET; THENCE NORTH 21 °58'28" WEST, 1112.94 FEET; THENCE NORTH 11 °02'30" EAST, 648.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 38°38'03" WEST, 407.10 FEET; THENCE NORTH 03°23'58" WEST, 541.62 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID U.S. INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 10.

ALSO EXCEPTING FROM LOTS 2, 3 AND 4 OF SAID BLOCK 79 OF RANCHO SAN BERNARDINO ANDGOVERNMENT LOT 4 OF SECTION 10 THOSE PORTIONS DESCRIBED AS PARCEL 9-TP-1 IN EXHIBIT "A", AS CONDEMNED BY THE YUCAIPA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, IN THAT "ORDER CORRECTING ERRORS AND AMENDING JUDGMENT", RECORDED MAY 28, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 92-224083 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. (NOTE: SAID ORDER AMENDED THAT FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED MAY 15, 1981 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 81-107293 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.)
ALSO EXCEPTING FROM LOTS 4 AND 5 OF SAID BLOCK 79 THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND LYING WITHIN AN 88 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF LAND CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO BY GRANT DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 09, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-426315 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM A PORTION OF SAID LOT 7 OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LAND WHICH WAS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO IN DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 09, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84-269725 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING THOSE PORTIONS CONDEMNED IN FEE, IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, BY FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION, CASE NO.

SCVSS146785, A CERTIFIED COPY THEREOF BEING RECORDED JANUARY 19, 2012 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 21483, AND RECORDED OCTOBER 01, 2013 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 427523, AND BY AMENDED FINAL ORDER OF CONDEMNATION RECORDED JUNE 01, 2018 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2018-0199960, ALL OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE YUCAIPA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, A PUBLIC AGENCY OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BY DEED RECORDED APRIL 09, 2014 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 125397 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.

ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PORTION OF SAID LAND LYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF PARCEL MAP NO. 19967, IN THE CITY OF YUCAIPA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 251 PAGES 33 THROUGH 36, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.

APN: 0301-201-40, -41 & -42, 0301-211-10 & -12, 0301-221-10, 0301-201-26, 0301-191-21 UTILITY COMPANIES �� v,.,• ++++� +��?� v �,5-/�v��ov,, ,, PARCEL 6 \\ ° ��.\\ `O, ( PARKING
TELEPHONE AT&T C'� + ++ ++ \� 2�20�/� °�.1 ��\ (SEE PARCEL DESCRIPTION NOTE) (844) 723 - 0252 NN�

ELECTRIC

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
(800) 655-4555
SEWER

YUCAIPA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
12770 2ND ST
YUCAIPA, CA 92399
(909) 797-5117
WATER

YUCAIPA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
12770 2ND ST
YUCAIPA, CA 92399
(909) 797-5117

STORM SEWER

YUCAIPA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
12770 2ND ST
YUCAIPA, CA 92399
(909) 797-5117
GAS

SOCAL GAS
(909) 307-7070
LEGEND
- - PROPERTY LINE
- - - - - - - - - - - EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166 PROPOSED CONTOUR
-2166- - EXISTING CONTOUR

TERRIS DRAIN

PAVEMENT
+ HYDROSEED
. .. ....... . . .. LANDSCAPING

UTILITY LEGEND

W PROPOSED DOMESTIC WATER LINE

PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER LINE

IR PROPOSED IRRIGATION LINE

PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LINE
F*- PROPOSED FIRE WATER LINE

PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT
- U(\v

PUBLIC ROAD NOTE

PUBLIC ROAD FUTURE ALIGNMENT
PENDING CITY COORDINATION.

PUBLIC STREET LENGTH 6,801'.

EXISTING STRUCTURES

ALL EXISTING BEEHIVES ENCOUNTERED
TO BE REMOVED PROPERLY.

STRUCTURES
NO EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN 30' OF PROJECT PROPERTY

NO EXISTING STRUCTURES ON PROJECT SITE

FIRE WATER NOTES
F1 PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANT.

DOMESTIC WATER
W1 INSTALL BACKFLOW IN CAGE.

W2 INSTALL 12" DOMESTIC WATER PIPE.

W3 BUILDING POINT OF CONNECTION.

E4 INSTALL DOMESTIC WATER METER.

W5 WATER MAIN LINE TO BE BORED UNDER HIGHWAY.

SANITARY SEWER
S1 INSTALL SEWER LATERAL.

S2 CONNECT TO EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
S3 BUILDING POINT OF CONNECTION.

STORM DRAIN
D1 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN.

D2 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN PIPELINE.

D3 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN LATERAL.

D4 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN DETENTION SYSTEM.

D5 PROPOSED DEBRIS BASIN.

D6 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN OUTLET STRUCTURE.

D7 PROPOSED STORM DRAIN MANHOLE.

IRRIGATION WATER
11 TIE INTO PROPOSED WATER LINE.
12 INSTALL 3" DOMESTIC WATER METER.
13 INSTALL 3" BACKFLOW IN CAGE.

L23\ o + + 2175�
\\ +\ ,+
+ + + L20�
F1 6 TYP.

O > C,4 �\
O _ cJ c- fly__
PARCEL 7 �-A �C-4 Av/<
W2 WAREHOUSE(-112230)
EXISTING SITE \\ ?205�\` J ' /
U OPEN SPACE \\ ///(a \ /w+ / j ( )),t I
/ I
\N1
i'/ F1
=0--12mww
III
LA
IIII

LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH

BEARING
L62

64.46 N51°52'49.75"E
L63
109.34
S71 °34'36.44"E
L64
536.49
N20°26'39.08"E
L65
398.95
N81 °26'01.41 "E
L66
306.17
N63°38'52.41 "E
L67
295.93
N53°06'00.41"E
L68
199.18
S65°52'36.59"E
L69
113.54
S73°12'16.18"E
L71

58.08 N52°45'20.14"E
L74

71.28 N74°27'01.64"E
L75

78.72 N83°10'42.57"E
L76
125.30
S87°29'34.72"E
L78
214.92
S52°15'03.88"E
L79
305.73
N80°06'25.28"E
L80
300.75
N74°40'11.28"E
L82
935.43
S12°38'37.99"W
L83
230.18
S61 *10'25.81 "W
L84
1861.38
N90°00'00.00"W
L85
1097.20
NO°00 00.00 E
L86
674.74
N77°21'21.90"W

LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH

BEARING
L88
161.12
S64°02'30.92"W
L90
798.53
S50°23'48.15"W
L92
294.43
S76°22'48.54"W
L93
264.74
N76°22'48.54"E
L95
798.53
N50°23'48.15"E
PARCEL DESCRIPTION ��r L52
PARCEL 1 = 29.53 AC. (GROSS)
PARCEL 2 = 32.04 AC. (GROSS)
PARCEL 3 = 60.27 AC. (GROSS) PROJECT DATA
PARCEL 4 = 65.82 AC. (GROSS) , BUILDING 1 BUILDING 2 I TOTAL PARCEL 5 = 30.04 AC. (GROSS)
PARCEL 6* = 29.68 AC. (GROSS) SITE AREA 2,625,332 SF 2,83$221 SF7 5,463,603 SF PARCEL 7 = 65.53 AC. (GROSS) E. 60-270 AC 85.15T AC i_ IZ5-427 AC TOTAL AREA = 312.91 AC. (GROSS)
*CONDITIONED TO REQUIRE PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS IF UTILIZED BY BUILDING 2 (PARCEL 7) BUILDING AREA U-52,500 SF 1,001,500 SF 2,054,000 SF BUILDING SETBACKS -i-
PROPOSED: IB ZONE COVERAGE 4 - '� 35.291A 37-SO°'a
FRONT SETBACK: 15' BUILDING AREA BY USE
REAR AND SIDE SETBACK: 10' -
OFFICE _j 20.000 SF 20,000 SIF j_ 40,0W SIF
ACCESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBERS WAREHOUSE 1 1.C32.5M SF 981,500 SF 2,014.000 SF 0301-201-40, -41 & -42, 031-211-10 & -12, 4__
0301-201-26, 0301-191-21 AUTO PARKING
REDUIRED PARKING.

PROPOSED SITE BREAKDOWN OFFICE $) 80 160„
11250SF
LANDSCAPE: 68%
PAVED: 17% WAREHOUSE 1,s33 982 ; 2,014
BUILDING: 15% 1 / 1.CWSF
EXISTING EASEMENTS TOTAL REQUIRED 1.113 1,D62 : 174
PARKING PRDVIDED I _
12 SLOPE EASEMENT TO YUCAIPA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT PER STANDARD STALLS 452 413 866 RECORDING NO. 81-107293 ADA STALLS 11 10 �#
16 SLOPE EASEMENT TO THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PER EV STALLS 48 '99 RECORDING NO. 89-426317 TOTAL PROVIDED #5 471 986
23 ACCESS EASEMENT PER RECORDING NO. 2018-0448807

DOCK LOADING ZONES
LAND USE REQUIRED A .4 a
PROVIDED 1E7 I
EXISTING LAND USE: VACANT
PROPOSED LAND USE: WAREHOUSE / FUTURE RESIDENTIAL TRAILER PARKING (,FnIp:RLkI PI ,&nl I DnII'•1 I IMF PROVIDED 10 . J,
EXISTING LAND USE: OPEN SPACE / SINGLE RESIDENTIAL / MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL PROPOSED LAND USE: OPEN SPACE / BUSINESS PARK / MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL

LINE TABLE
LINE
LENGTH

BEARING
L42
243.47
S74°34'36.16"W
L43
253.05
N58°03'07.45"W
L44
244.36
N32°57'02.11 "W
L45
236.40
S5°00'51.71 "E
L46
138.45
S81 °03'20.06"W
L47
238.30
N54°03'24.96"W
L48
128.04
N84°45'02.66"W
L49
751.86
N36°48'05.29"W
L50
240.27
N73°49'10.72"W
L51
329.91
N17*50'16.43"W
L52
564.77
S89°12'16.54"W
L53
272.54
S11 °0511.46"E
L54
749.13
S47°28'03.54"W
L55
443.81
S26°33'30.46"E
L56
188.56
S81 °04'42.46"E
L57
1112.94
S22°24'56.46"E
L58
439.21
S10°36'01.54"W
L59
407.10
S39°04'31.46"E
L60
541.88
S3°50'26.46"E
L61
971.07
S76°23'22.40"E

CURVE TABLE
CURVE
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
DELTA
C34
428.81'
119.88'
119.49'
16°01'03"
C33

65.37'

49.55'

48.37'
43°25'48"
C32

67.61'

67.54'

64.77'
57*14'07"
C37
533.00'
241.71
239.65
25°5900"
C36
467.00'
111.22'
110.96'
13°38'43"
C31

88.52'

78.80'

76.22'
51 *00'18"
C35
967.00
651.50'
639.25'
38*36'07"
C39
533.00'
126.94'
126.64'
13°38'43"
C38
467.00'
211.78'
209.97'
25°59'00"
C30

81.24'

61.57'

60.10'
43*25'14"
C28

50.00'

38.28'

37.35'
43°52'05"
C27
2967.00'
940.75'
936.81'
18*10'01"
C26
1005.50'
484.34'
479.67'
27°35'56"
C25
1844.00'
171.59'
171.53'
5*19'54"
C29
3033.00'
495.42'
494.87'
9°21'32"
C24
1939.50'
101.15'
101.14'
2*59'17"
C23
939.50'
452.55'
448.19'
27°35'56"
C22
1844.00'
509.92'
508.30'
15°50'39"
C21
1756.00'
214.54'
214.40'
7°00'00"
17 1033.00'
655.58'
644.63'
36°21'43"

CURVE TABLE
CURVE
RADIUS
LENGTH
CHORD
DELTA
18 50.00'

42.24'

41.00'
48°24'26"
19 50.00'

38.50'

37.55'
44°06'45"
20 1 88.85'

72.73'

70.71'
46°53'53"

LAND OWNER

PALMER GENERAL CORPORATION
32335 LIVE OAK CANYON RD
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(909)-534-6958

APPLICANT

TERRI ALLEN

PI DEVELOPMENT, LLC
6272 E. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, STE E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
(714) 717-7843

SURVEYOR
PBLA SURVEYING, INC.
1481 FORD ST., STE 201
REDLANDS, CA 92373
(888) 714-9672

CIVIL ENGINEER

JACOB GLAZE

KIMLEY-HORN
1100 W TOWN AND COUNTRY, SUITE 700
ORANGE, CA 92868
(714) 705-1374
RGA
Kiom ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM
D A
QRpFESS/phgC
S
0 J m
w
* C 8793470
9TF CIV1\ F(D
°F cA\-1
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922
Y U C A�PA CA

CONCEPTUAL OVERALL SITE PLAN
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 # # # # # #
SCALE: 1 " = 200'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

LEGEND
- - PROPERTY LINE
- - - - - - - - - - - EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE

SECTION OUTLINE

TERRIS DRAIN

PAVEMENT
+ + + + + HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
b.10 INTER
H/GHI
7 7
+
+
+ +
R GA
Klomley)))Horn
O 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM
:D AC C OA S COVV C C
PROF ESS / pNq<
F,� S
� F'- i
WOi i''�`" m
C 87934 A
sT Q
9TF CIVIL
OF CA0
Office of Architectural
Design
g
15231 Alton Parkway,SUlte 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922

YUCA PA C A
9 CONCEPTUAL GRADNIG OVERALL PLAN
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 100 200 400
SCALE: 1 " = 200'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

/
\ I I
LEGEND
- - PROPERTY LINE
--�- - - - - - - - - - - EASEMENT LINE
- STREET CENTERLINE
2166 PROPOSED CONTOURS
/ -
- - 2166 - EXISTING CONTOURS
S/ u GB PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
\\ R
\ \ PROPOSED RIDGE

DAYLIGHT LINE

TR TOP OF RAMP
\ TW TOP OF WALL
\ TC TOP OF CURB
\ FS FINISHED SURFACE

TS TOP OF STAIRS
I

BS BOTTOM OF STAIRS
/ HP HIGH POINT
2166.50 TC
(2166.00 FS) EXISTING GRADE
/ 2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS PROPOSED GRADE

TERRIS DRAIN
/ PAVEMENT
/ HYDROSEED
I
\� LANDSCAPING
y PROPOSED SLOPE
2050.00 F
Q
A II
// /!
1996.52"FS
/ 1996.48 TC
/ /1995.9&FL /+= 1998.21 FS
/ / 11/1996.15 LIP 2001.24'TC
/ 1996.550HP,
/ 2000.74,FL\ 1996.48;TC ''' 2000.85 LIPS
11995.98 FL 1998.25 HP
1996.15 LIP
J / 1996.52 FS
o
CD
� N \
Ar
052.26-FL
052.43.LIP- '
2000.85-LIP
1998.22 FS
° �`o� - - - - �� i - - / 2040.90 FS - 2052.44 LIP
-2040.87°TC- - - - - - - 2052.79 FS
° 2036.14 f S - - 2040. 37 FL
/ 2019.90-FS 2036.11-TC _ _ - - _ L -2040.53 LIP/-
\ 2019.87 TC 2035.61:FL / / - _ - - 2040.93;HP --
\ -2019.37:FL '2035.77 LIP_
2040.8\7TC
2035.53LIP 2035 640203617'HP 2040.37FL
POLE 2019.93 HP- 045- -2040.53,LIP2036.11-T
2035.61'FL-
- �2\\\0`\ 0\`vF`S-2019.87 TC ? - - - - - /////\`
-205p -4.9
/2019.37 FL- 2035.771I
2035.53:LIP 06207�0FS 2019.920 2100
2��5�2j20
5 �// /�//�// /j jiijj✓ / / jjjjjjj/�/jj jj�j// /X �'`� II i I/ / \` / L 7� --_ RGA
Kim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM
PROFESS/ONq(
c� m
C 87934
sT Q
9TF cjv�\-
OF cA��
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922
Y U C \�PA CA
i
'CONCEPTUAL GRADflG AND DRA NAGE PLAN I
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

71 IAA K
X X
- = I
<
o POLE
206
2065
20 2085 I �� \\\ \ \ _---------
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 21 / 1 \ \\ \ ��\� \ ----- ------ --- \------------------_---_'�'/
\� 2110
\2120
\ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \\71\ \ \ 2130
2140
/ \ 2 65 J j \
216
A \ I \ 21g0 \ _ _ -- - 2155 95 / I \ \ \ \ \\\\\\�I\ \ \ \� �\ \ \ 21955-II i ir- 7,77
_2205' \ \ 217.00FS
�2150.00TS/ _�2210
��2215
2161..27-_TIC
2160.7722%-.220 25 216178TC
2250.00=FS 2161.28=FS2-250 2235S
�
2240\
- 2245
a°
0 - _ _ _ � \ V -7, \ � \ � fi \ \ 2250
2200 0/0'FS / \ 225 _ - _ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ -_- -
_ I 1 X
-
/ 1 / �6
-75
\ \ I 11 l / / /i /
// / I / 2170.74FS
'20 2080----/ \
o. 8s / \ I \ \ 1 I III\\I I\ /
I
gs /
-2100- \j 1
71 '-21 \273 _-2130_-�\� \\\ \ \ � ,/ \ \ \ \\ okoLO
21 N"
_ N" S\��\F0 's�\7+ I I I /" / gy(V, I-
\-w 40
/ / \ _ 1 (V co co /
per` �_ J
21ap -\ '�---2185E-_ \�\�\\\��\�\ \\''�� \ � \\ - � /' `2 � _ \
ZL
75 \60`___=
21-55
_-2250.0o Fs / / / / / \ / -215�-
/
2120-__-%/i
/ / /j/ I /� / ` �--------�\ ` ---- 2152.07_TC i N' -� co �23S / / // 1/ 2115 ////�i ''///ii/ / / / / l / \\ �' - -�� /i/ / /N' / Ln / �//j�//�// �j�= -I�\ \\ 2151.57FS_ /
/ 2152.36TC, /2176.02FS
2220 / L / ' / / // 2151.86�FS -
\ ROAD ACCESS (CONCEPT) / �\ \ _2151.44'TC
2219.65 FSI i + -2250.00 FS- �� / / \� \ 2150.94 FS
2210 C 21S
2149.71T5.1%
\
22151.29
� -
---- _ \ 21gp�� _ ---_ / I \ �- \\ \ \ \ - / \ ,�\\ \��-// -// ' �- 1 I I I �� 2150.79FS/ \ � 2149.45FS
i �5
I \ _ 2161.87•1 S o 7 /p �\
21 2750 2178.54.S-/
�21 / / I
/ 1,50 ` - _ �\ 45
� - \89\
2250.00 FS
2164.-0FS - _\ \ / \ \\ ` \ / \ \ \ \\Ln
2100.00-FS 2100 - \ \ _ _- _ / \
-- _ \ \ _ -_- \ � \per N
2p95 - - - - \ - t� \ r_ \
d-Lo_�c0�_� 00 \
2140
2150
CIA
:2095 = Nrn- 1 p _ \ - -_ _ - - 70 6 \/' -- - 2135
�o �- I - \g
2130.43;TC \
2115, 21102105=/i2129.931`S
=-2130 2125/ 2120 2098.98'FS
---//// ---- ��///// --------- 2140=214p2135 �_ 2098.95_TC -��o� - - - �\ / '/ 2127.81TC / /�, - 2192.15E _-_ ��E�2098.6111P-
098.45-FL I - �// _
_ � / - 2127.31:FS \ / / �/ / / / / / 0 CURB \
_ 2150_ - \ 0�.0%- �� \ /
5=2155/ 2126.97�FS / 2130.43'TC 2129.06�FS \ \
--_ 2170 - - \ \\ _ �\ , / /
-2165 N �2126.94 TC \ l / 2129.93 FS 2162.21 FS \�
2170 - 2098.95 TC \ \ \ n • \ _ ,2126.44 FL 21 I I / -2185- \ � 3 41 // / 2180- 2098.45�FL \ \ \
2126.601E \ \ \ I \
2185 2098.61;LIP \ \ \ \\ `� \ \ 1 l / 0 CURB \ \
-----2190-- 2195 2190- - - \ \ \ \\-� N� \ \ / / I 2128.85•FS - - - - - /-- - 2098.98•FS \ \ \\ \ \ I / 1 \ \ I I \ -`\� -\ \\� �\ J / / -------------/----- --- \ \ \ _ \ N \ \\ \ 2128.95•FS \ /� 5 2790_-- \�� //��_\ _-�� \\� I \ \ \ \ �\ -- \ 1 ` Jl 2128.92TC �218 -_ -- -// /� = \\ � \ / )/ I \ \ � i \`- \ \ _ N - � 2128.42•FL 2128.58•1 IP
2128.98-HP
/2=16-5'2/��• s� -\ \ \--/// /\-��\ 1\\�I / \\
0\ \\\ 2127.00-HP /
� �
--t 3S�A \ I ` \\ \\ \\ �\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ 2126.94TC
2126.44•FIL
\ // / - \_'�� / /�\ \ 1 \\\\ \ \ \ \ LIP
2128.92.TC
2126.97 FS
_/ \ \ \_�
_---;-'i/o �o� \\\� // / \ \\`__\\ �\ \I I \\\ \`\ \ \
\\ \`______
/
2128.42.FL
2128.58.LIP- \
<2128.95•FS
LEGEND
- -

PROPERTY LINE
- - - - - - -
- - -
- EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166

PROPOSED CONTOURS
- - 2166
-

EXISTING CONTOURS

PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
GB

PROPOSED RIDGE
R

DAYLIGHT LINE
11 TR

TOP OF RAMP
TW

TOP OF WALL
TIC

TOP OF CURB
FS

FINISHED SURFACE
TS

TOP OF STAIRS
BS

BOTTOM OF STAIRS
HP

HIGH POINT
2166.50
TC
(2166.00
FS)

EXISTING GRADE
2166.50
TC
2166 00
FS

PROPOSED GRADE
-_ - TERRIS DRAIN

PAVEMENT

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
y PROPOSED SLOPE
f 180.0' 50.0' f 122.0'

PROPOSED HYDROSEED PROPOSED ROAD PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
2'1
�l�Xq

A -A SECTION

NOT TO SCALE
R GA
Kim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM

PROFESS/O/V
S C<9c� cZ
c� m
C 87934
sT Q
9TF 0jV�� Fob`,
OF cp'0
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922

Y U C A P A C A
i
CONCEPTUAL GRADNG AND DRAhAGE PLAN 2
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION
2�g

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

6 -2185 / / \ / / / \ // I ((/
I
LEGEND
LEGEND
-
/`Z, / i21ap,
,21
,Z�g 22gg

17.00. \-\2163.85`_TC�-
`------� - --- -----------� -- ----------� ---- ��-------� -------------� '--- --- --- -�- - ------ � ---- �------ �------�'--- - I - `-- - - -=- -�-�- - -- ----------� ------ � �� 05 /22\p 2217.00.FS�Tr/ - \ \ 2163.35-FS --------- ---� -- --_ - - -- - - - \ - _ - ---- - - - 2163.35-FS•- - 22 -
jz
2162.23,FS \ 2162.757C/r 1�1
\ \
IF
2162.25 FS / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ /
2 \2730
635C \\X
2161.35TC
I
2160.85FS \\\ Illot�\\\\ \ \�_ / / \\\\�\\__�/ �� I `2J3 / /' - \\ ) I �l \ �( \ \ \\ I I / 2160.85FS 2161.85TC I I I I \ \ 1 l\ \_ \ / \
2161.35FS2J1p-
//
/ 2166.00FS \\ //// / //\ \ \ \�-- ////- \ 1 1 \\\\ �S / //-_\\ \ \\ / \_\) \ \ ) / 1 ��' \ 2161.35FS I� 2166.00FS0
o
2165-=/
2180= 2175= /, - 9p�/� \\ \�\ \ \ \ .. / 1 / '\ l L . I I - / / \ \ \ 1 1 i/2166.00 TW / .21 \ \ \ / \ \ I I L - - I / 2162.00 FS
2165.72 TIC \ \ \ km�j - 2185 _ _
2165.22FS_- 2166.00TW =220 \
l� 2162.00FS r / \\ \\\� :2_210-2205_��/%-\\\\\\-
2166.00FS - \ 2220-_=-2215-
- 2225
IV I
\ \ /
FFE: 2166.00
2162.07 TIC
2161.57 FS
2159.12-TC
2158.62 FS \ 2162.35 TIC / \
/\ I \ / / / i / , V \�(
2158.79 TIC \ 2161.85 FS / \ \ / / \ \ / / / I / - / / / / / \ 2158.29-FS2220-
,-
N
/ / I ( \ \ \ \\ /
I I \// O
/ � \ / III �\ I 1 ► / / � � , / \ �\- / �\�\
\\'9
\�\-�llI I \\� \ --' S_ /'�' l
2160
_
Ln
-2155- \ I \ 1 1 1 \
/ t / / / / --- \ ► I I 1 I l \ --- \ \ \ I III I
---2165.72TC® - \ --\--_ 2162.00FS (\ \ \
-� 2166.00TW _J /// / / __----_ \ \ \\ > I I 1 1 �\ \ \ \ I 2165.22 FS 2166.00 TW / / / / / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ - \ � � • 1 \ 1 1 \ 2162.00TC'-\, 2162.00FS / //�j/// / --'/ \�\ \\` \. \ \`. - --� \ \ \ \ 2\ 600FS.\ 1 1 \\\\\ \\ 2161.50.FS- - - \ J 1
- - 0 - �2161.90-TC' - \ \ \ \ \ \ \ .. .. \ 2162.00 TC S 2165.85.TC 2161.40'FS \ \\\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ - - - - _ - 2161.50 FS I I 2165.35.FS\ / // // \\ \ - -_ \ ,\ �\
\ - / // / 1 \ \ _ oI ` 2161.90 TC \\ / I I I I /
\ / \ \ \x \ / - - - �l 2161.40 FS \
\ 2165.5tFS 2161.40 FS \ \/' / / / - - / l I l (/ / 2161.40 FS \ \ \ \� I� I I I �2161.75TC
\o\\/ / - \\ \ \ \ \ \ / ///// / - II \ \< \ i 2161.75TC ✓/ / 2161.25FS \ \ \\ \ I\\- / \ \ _-J \) \\�\\\\ ,\ 2161.25FS I I ✓ 2161.05 TIC
\ w 2160 ✓ 2160.55,FS''; \ \ \ \\ \ b�
I /
,2155
\ 2141.28.FS�2150_�/
2145
Vr
"2159.55'TC------------- \.\ ---- ---- ----- --- 2158.52:TC 1 / 2159.05 FS \ 2158.02 FS
Ff-
( / I-157.97 TIC I
2157.47FS�
-----------�-- �-�-- -�= -- - - - --- - - --=-- _ - - ----- - - -F---- - - ----------- - -- - ---- �- -2160= -- --- =-- ---------- - -- -- --------�-�------------ -- -- ------------------------------------ 2160.10 TC 2146.67 FS / / / / I/ v v I I _ 1 <- / / �\ -- - -2 8 �='�0 _ - 2159.60-FS- _ � � /
2145 25'FS - - - - / - 2183.80'FS
/ 2190��2211.29-FS 7- v _ / 2153.79 FS
N _ \ 2145.23 TIC / 2200- 2� 2153.77.TC
�\ \ 2144.73fl- 2150.78=FS 2152.43-FS 2153.27�FL
2144_.89_-.LIP/ �- �- . 55-� 9i 214618TC '2150.76-TC
2152.40TC_
2153.43 LIP
2146.21FS 2150.26FL 22153.83 HP2144.54'FS .2, 2150.32'LIP \\'2144.01,TC 2g0 2151.06-LIP
1FL .2150.72.HP 215246HP 2153
S.\2144.01L 21 2145.85LIP2144.17LIP C 2152.40.TC 2153.2777 ,FTL70 2150.66.T
2146.247HPT�2150.16TL C i
2160 2146.18-TC 2149.43 FS 2150.32 LIP 2151.90 FL 2153.43 LIP -2155 2151.06; IP-2153.80FE
/ / I ` \ \ - - 2145.68-FL 0 CURB
/ ((� \\\ \\ O 27 g2145.85LIP 21492150.68 FS
9 _ 1 I I �_ -� = -2150 -.40-TC i
\ \ \ \\ \ \ \ Ill 1 ` \ \\ \\ �• O 12144.57,HP
214624;FS 2148.90-FL 2149.061LIP
.�
0 CURB / � 2152.14 FS
\\��215\ \ / / /��'� 2145.29HP l
2 \ \ \ I \ \ \ 2144.51'TC, �s
�2 0S �,\ / \ \ \ / 2144.01 FL -2144.91 FS-
0-\\��_� / /\\\\\ \ \\\ / 2144.17LIP\ \\ -/ / /
�19\�--' _/ / /� // \� \ \\\ \ (-2144.54-FS��/
- -2144.34 - -
- 02 \- // / \\ \ I / / / \\\ \\ \\ \ \ \� // \ _--
2165 \\\ \18S-_/.-/ \\\\\ \\\ I \ / \ �( / //\\ \\ C\\ \ \ \\ 2143.84FS\ \ \\ / / / 2143.12TC / 2145
t�:\ \ -/ 2145.63TC
12142.62'FS. 2145.13FS
V
\2143.27 T1 \1\1\ 2142.77'FS /
_50.97 F
-----
-
2150.26TC
2149.76:FS
2149.46 HP
•2149.40•TC
2152.95.TC�
2148.90 FIL
2152.45 FS
-2149.06_LIP
�% I
2149.43 FS
i
2152.20 TIC
2151.70 FS
/
2 j2184.19,FS
� 2
/ / r
� 1-7
\ \\ \\
- -

PROPERTY LINE
- - - - - - -
- - -
- EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166

PROPOSED CONTOURS
- - 2166
-

EXISTING CONTOURS

PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
GB

PROPOSED RIDGE
R

DAYLIGHT LINE
11 TR

TOP OF RAMP
TW

TOP OF WALL
TIC

TOP OF CURB
FS

FINISHED SURFACE
TS

TOP OF STAIRS
BS

BOTTOM OF STAIRS
HP

HIGH POINT
2166.50
TC
(2166.00
FS)

EXISTING GRADE
2166.50
TC
2166 00
FS

PROPOSED GRADE
-_ TERRIS DRAIN

PAVEMENT

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
y PROPOSED SLOPE
f 9 2.0' 5.0' 44.0' 1 6.0' 1 5.0' 1 f 6 9.0'

B-B SECTION

NOT TO SCALE

PROPOSED
HYDROSEED - 5.0' 44.0' 6.0' 5.0' f174.0'

GC SECTION

NOT TO SCALE
RGA
Koim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM

PROFESS/OV
S C<9c� cZ
c� m
C 87934
�r _
sT Q
9TF CV��
OF cA��
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922

Y U C A P A C A
i
CONCEPTUAL GRADNG AND DRAhAGE PLAN
3 MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE
(3
3'�'
0 LEGEND
— — PROPERTY LINE
— — — — — — — — — — — EASEMENT LINE
i
// / / /-------- 7//
4000�<
jj �i / /// / j / j �� `\ _ _ �✓--- — �i i �/ ///�i_--/'' \ \\�� \\\ _ \ \ \\1 \\� 212 0T�25- —\ \ \\ \ _—__—2140
2192FS_—� \ 21<2145
2214.60•FS 2j7S5-2155
'2
\\\ \
2135_\40
—�
213\p2125
L— /— � �oI/��
2, Lr)
p )I II 2 ps
7p s c2(V N 100f) 2—2200
� N
2�7NO7S 70
2165 .+
0�2N 22IIo s 2221j78S.0
O.FS
N
SS 205
11 1,J 21gs— /� N
�5�/5
�220 I / —go_
o / 11 11 I // / l // �� 2�g5_

STREET CENTERLINE
2166 PROPOSED CONTOURS
- 2166 — EXISTING CONTOURS

GB PROPOSED GRADE BREAK

R PROPOSED RIDGE
-11 DAYLIGHT LINE

TR TOP OF RAMP

TW TOP OF WALL

TC TOP OF CURB

FS FINISHED SURFACE

TS TOP OF STAIRS

BS BOTTOM OF STAIRS

HP HIGH POINT
2166.50 TC
(2166.00 FS) EXISTING GRADE
2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS PROPOSED GRADE
-----------------

TERRIS DRAIN

PAVEMENT

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
X.X% PROPOSED SLOPE
RGA
Koim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY—HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY—HORN.COM
:D
PROFESS/ONq(
S C<9c� cZ
c� m
C 87934
sT Q
9TF CIV��
OF CA,-�
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922
Y U C \�PA CA
i
CONCEPTUAL GRADflG AND DRA NAGE PLAN
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

Al
2196.83 FS � 1 I / / / / I \ \ \
N ^ L0 o
I \ ^
00 / °,oCIV
1 I 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
�2200 -�`L(�
2220//
/ // // // /� \ \_ / I \ \\ \ N\ \ - � 1 II 1 // /�� /22�/ / / / -----_---�- - � � \ \ - \ j- / /2167.03`TC+} i \ \ \ 1 \ \ ( - - \ \ \ / // 2235- / / i - - - - - - I 2166.53.FS-�_"-\� \-- \ \ \ \ \ \ -J I i �� i / / / r� I _ -- 2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS
- - - - - - - - - - - ----__
2165.72.TC_ \\ \v/ ------ _
' 2165.22FS I � - \� \ / / \ \ - - - - - ---- / ��
� I' it Y � \� �/ �--------- �_-- � J / I -+ // � / I I I I I \ _ \/ � / � 2187.43FS ///� \ \ 2 /\�- �2182.72FS _- - -
/ / / \ �9 2182.72.TC- 2187.43TC
-------------� \\ / i / / / �- � I I 1 \ �-/ 2182.22-FL \� \\------------------ �\ \ /// 2182.38LIP-- �2187.09LIP _ _ _ - _ \ \ I I I \ \ I / I �\ \ / / - / / ) I I I 1 2182.78=HP 2187.49 HP //-\\\\\\\ \ S d� 2187.43TC
------- 3F86.932FLN 2187.09LIPN
U_ N 2176.53
2187.46FS -
°� I o2176.53 TC
N' / \ \ C / / / % / \ \ \ _ / \ 2176.03 FL 2i� N /
N ' - - \/\ +/ / / j / / /� \\\\ \ ` _ + - 6.19'LIP i ' 2182.72 TC _ \ c:� Sri' 2176.59 HP� / / 278 L 2182.22,FL
N NI 0 / � 2182.38LIP
2182.75'FS
\ I _
2178.35 TC /
2177.85 FL /
2230 _ / / / \ \ \ I / /
/�' -/ I ( + 1 \ I 0 CURB/ / /2178.38 FS /
\\�, \\- \\ / I �/ I 1 I 1 II 2176.15FS / /
/ i \ III \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ �\ `L/ J \\ I \ / - / 1 / I, / - / 2178. 70 TC �O - // \\ \ �\ \ / \ I I / / I , 2175.78'TC / 2178.20 FS/ /-�`'��`� � ( + / /-2175.28 FL .� 2176.19
/ \ \ 1 \ - �) I I < < 2175.44`LIP
/ \ \ \ / 12175.81;FS/ /' ///
�20- l \ \ �/ \ \ \ 1 J
/ � 1 � � '•� \ 1 �1 I � I \ S, �'� � + I I � 1 I \ � � � 2175 �, � � �, / / � / , / / � / ( \ \ � � - J \ \ 1 2190'/' \ / /' I 1 I \ / -` �� , / 2179.42'TC
�/ \ \ \ \
} / 2178.92 FS I
/ '"' / / \' ' \ \ I g0 - - �� - +/ �'` \ \ \ / s 2178.92 FS / / / l 1 '21 / / i / / \ \ / 2179.42 TC /
°° /
2171.38'TC
2170.88 FL
2171.04LIP
/ 2171 41•FSI 2193.34 FS
o -
i 2179.16 - I \ \ \ l
1 I / 2234.49-FS 2�� I / / / / I 2171,11 FS ,� ��
U" CURB / 2171.79 TC i g0 i ' - - \ \
+ �� `L ! � � �"- � \ 2178.66FrS
2171.17 FS 2171.29 FS/ / _ - 2177.38 TC
2162.45-TC i \ /
I I I " / o ,� / / -
/ I I \ 0 CURB i `L 2176.88 FS-
/ I((/ 2161.95-FS \ \\ �- / I I ( \ / 2170.45FS � �' '
I I I I 2162.85 TC \ - I �' \ \ \ / / 1 N / 2193 34 FS
III 2162.35 FSL -
/
/ 2165.14 TC-
2164.64 FS \\ \\ I \ \ I
2165.14TC
2164.64 FS� '2161.74 TIC / \
_ 2161 24 FS� /
1\ 1\ \ \ \ 2162.14 TC
1 216 4.5 4 TC�\ \ \ _ �+ +/ 2185.56 FS
2164.04.FS`� I I \
2161.10 TC
2160.60 FS I /
�
2160 71 TC
0" CURB
2170.27 FS
2170.11.TC
\ I 20022� �/2169.61 FL /
2169 76-LIP 2171.7
�°�/ 0�2�90 // /'2170.13,FS / 2171.2
2163.75 N�
i
2163.75'TC
2163.25,FL-
I 2163.39LIP
2163.80-HP *"2 81.7 F1 S
5 �
216TFS,
2161.83'TC-
2161.33'FL
2161.449,LIP /
2161.89`HP
\\ 2160.21 FS
I I \
\ 2161.17,TC
1 F\ \ / it-2160.67 FS 2159..62 FS /
2160.31,TC \ 2159.68 HP
2159.8S11
2179.58 TC / /' - / / //
2179.08 FS C14
2180.08�TC �_ o
qI A No�
197.44FS
9 TC" 4 - 2179.58 FS -� cv o �
2i � / / // ° � --- -- � �
00 2178.642178.14 FS / / \ \ \\ I 1 -� / _ \ I I I I \ \✓ / /, I I / // / \\ ,2178.14-1-
S
o I /
2179.20TC
2178.70 FS
\ \ / 2178.701TC \ \ I I I
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ 2178.20 FS\\ - _ °\ \ I I
21 , .50'TC
LEGEND
- -

PROPERTY LINE
- - - - - - - - -
- - EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166

PROPOSED CONTOURS
- - 2166 -

EXISTING CONTOURS
GB

PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
R

PROPOSED RIDGE
11 DAYLIGHT LINE
TR

TOP OF RAMP
TW

TOP OF WALL
TC

TOP OF CURB
FS

FINISHED SURFACE
TS

TOP OF STAIRS
BS

BOTTOM OF STAIRS
HP

HIGH POINT
2166.50 TC
(2166.00 FS)

EXISTING GRADE
2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS

PROPOSED GRADE

TE R R I S DRAIN

PAVEMENT
+

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING

PROPOSED
HYDROSEED - 5.0' 44.0'

PROPOSED PROPOSED ROAD
TERRA
DRAIN
X. PROPOSED SLOPE

6.0' 5.0'

PROPOSED PROPOSED

SIDEWALK TERRA
DRAIN

D-D SECTION

NOT TO SCALE

PROPOSED
HYDROSEED - 5.0' 44.0' 6.0' 5.0'

PROPOSED PROPOSED ROAD PROPOSED PROPOSED

TERRA SIDEWALK TERRA

DRAIN DRAIN

2.• �
IIi��X9•
��`2177.00,FS
\ 2183.2&TC
\ 218aFS TC
2178.85.FS-\ V v \V A V/
-2183.45 FS \ _ 2178.83 FS\ _ - �,+ \ \ �/ E
/6N 2183.45TW
2179.45FS \ \
�2207.69 FS
0" CURB-
/ Oc, CURB // / 2160 / / / / \ r00-
�� _2157.60FS �i/ / ' 2161.83TC / �/`�
2157.25 FS // / / - 2180.00'TC �9 ( / ( i \ r` \ (0-
2161.33-FL - 2179.50,FS + \\
/2157.22,TC / 2161.49 LIP
�- 2156.72 FL / / / / �/ 2161.86.FS
2156.88-LIP
2157 2;HP' �. \� i/ 1 \\ - - - -2
2212.79-FS --' I I-_�� I I I \ 1l0.-_ _2159_.62"TC
2159.12FL 2180.99-TC
,-( 5�
2159.28'LIP 2179.23;TC- 2180.49 FS�� 21565;FS 2178.73FS_ FFE: 2183.45 - -'
- -- +
-
2179.23-TC-
i/ 2155
2157.22-TC 1�5 2 0 0 �' /� l l / I 1 \ / / / \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ / i / 2156.72•FL, -
/ 2156.88-LIP 2�g5� ? -- / III / / ' \ / < 2179.35 TC� \ \ \ \ \ / \ \ / / ' \ I I ]" �� / / / \ \ \\\ - - - - / / / / o / Z�gS / \ / ( ( l - 2178.85 FS�`ti / _ / - cA
2157.25'FS �/ _ / I I � \ \ \ - - _ / \ \ 1 /
I \ \ / \ \ \ \ \ , \ / 1 / \ \ 1 / _ _/ N s�
�/ ' ,� 9°✓ 1a5 _21a� i / //"� ` �\ \ \ 1 2183.45FS \ \ \\ \ \ \ ' / ' 'J// // / - s,o��''• 21 ? �`-�
0i 2183.45TW
2179.45 FS
A/ \ \�\ I ICI I 12179.20TC / / \ \ 1 I \\ \ \ \ \ \v/// /-\ \ \vl / /j-\ \ \ I °� o/ `vi- 1 / / / / l \ / / I / ��% 2178.70FS / j ll/ / I / \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ / \\ \ 0)ivl
\ / / \ l / \ wl
L \ 2178.70-TC,
i � \u�2178.20-F- S--,278.85FS ✓ lNcv1 I C', \
N
�C`I'
/2177.55T2177.05FS
2205.30TC
�LID
. ` ` I \ � _ --�/ /� � �, �\\ 220� ; � � - � , �, �, \ \ /, _ _ __ � / / / � / / / / /' � - --, \ \ \ / � \\\ \\ \ .� / / / �/ / / / �• � \ III I I I I � - � �' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ', z1 b�. i4 1(-, 2180.66 TC - - \
2163.24•FL 2180.16 FS
/ 2163.39 LIP
/-163.76 FS /

E SECTION

NOT TO SCALE
R G A
Koim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM

PROFESS/OIV
S C<9c� cZ
c� m
C 87934
�r -
sT Q
9TF CIV��

OF CAI-
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922

Y U C A P A C A
i
CONCEPTUAL GRAD�NG AND DRAhAGE PLAN
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION
T.
f 145.0'

PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
f112.0'

PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
280
P�1° \�

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

,I/
- - / T I�_�,
I �, TC V h 3.2% \ \ \\ \ - / /�- _�
2156.6&FS
1,01
\ .2
�00� _ ' ( �� / / 2� \\\\ \ /
CN
j
\ \ \ \ -2213.00=FS\�
°° \ �\\\\ \— _2^\�p^ S R /"/
° 2110 o\ 2�2o`N — I I I \\ N �_ / // \
_ \° \ \\ /j��l// I /� `�/ 111 \
\
Sp /1D
/ _ \
2135.05FS / + / I ( //� c3` \\ \\ \ NV -Ott`
2159.38,TC�
\�-'2158. &Fs \� yo,
/ J I I I I ( - \ \ ca \ _2205.30;TC
\
— / — — 219U\
2195-
/ / 2160.39 FS .N o \ - _ _ - - \ \ // / -
-\\\
2182.13 FS / d' / / / i - o ��n' o;'iri-o \ J / \ `
2160.19 TC �� \ \ �w � ' \� \ \ - \ \ / / \ \ / 221p�-
/ / / / / / I I /2159.69 FS / /� \ \ \ \ \ \� \ �N�N��-, .�- � N- \ \ — - \ \ \ / / / � \ \ / / -\ \\ � � 2 2215_ 21,25
/ C.

I
2� 15
/ o\ ,
—
_
pl
l ,
\ \\\--------—2125,\°--_—_ x�—x 1 \ + c9� +\\ �8S
--- 2130->
�_ \ �x� \ \ \\ \ \ I
�'��, \
`
�'�2135
2145,\
\ \ �2160 1 I / I \
— 2205.68 FS 215
\a2205.68 FS
2215.04 TC
2214.54FS
\ \ \\ \\ \\ \ I ,
2213.89'TC
�� / / / - \ \ \ ✓ / _ - - 2213.39.FS
'2213.89'TC
2213.39,FS
\\ —
—
a
\
\
\
LEGEND
— —

PROPERTY LINE
— — — — — — — — —
— — EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166

PROPOSED CONTOURS
— — 2166 —

EXISTING CONTOURS
GB

PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
R

PROPOSED RIDGE
11 DAYLIGHT LINE
TR

TOP OF RAMP
TW

TOP OF WALL
TC

TOP OF CURB
FS

FINISHED SURFACE
TS

TOP OF STAIRS
BS

BOTTOM OF STAIRS
HP

HIGH POINT
2166.50 TC
(2166.00 FS)

EXISTING GRADE
2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS

PROPOSED GRADE
______ _ ___ __ _

TE R R I S DRAIN

PAVEMENT

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
y PROPOSED SLOPE
RGA
Kim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY—HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY—HORN.COM
PROFESS/ONq(
c� m
C 87934
�r _
sT Q
9TF 0jv�\_
OF cA��
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922

Y U C A P A C A
i
CONCEPTUAL GRADNG AND DRA�NAGE PLAN 6
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 30 60 120
SCALE: 1 " = 60'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

LEGEND
2205
\ \ \ \ \ s 2210
\\\� cam\
\ \
\o
a \\\\ \
FIFE: 2183.45
\\\ \
2270
c'�
co 00
\ I
\\1\ 2255?6'0
`
2250 \ — _ _ / I I 1 \ / \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ I 1 ` \ \ \ ✓ / / / / \ \ \ \ o
��
\ N� \ \ ,,\ 1 / / /� �____
_7 / / l /\ \ \
2177.5&TC
00 FS
2178.84FS ! �2178.60TC
2178.10FS
/°/ // \
2179.45 FS
217888TC
2178.38:FS
/0/
1 \ _
, I / / I // / �\\\�✓i� \\\1\I�I\1 � //// �/I J I I I /\\\� / I 1 I / \ \\\ I � I / // \ \\ / � /� /I�%/ / / / j /% \\_\ \\ \\ \� �� 2183.78 TC111
2183.28"FS�
2180
2179.45,FS
\ \ \\s I I 2178.85FS
—2 ;7
s >
65 160
1SS C � 2178.74 TC
/ \
\\_2178.24-FS
0 \\ \ \ ---
_\ \ oP&Q0 X
\\\\\X�\�
— —

PROPERTY LINE
-----------

EASEMENT LINE

STREET CENTERLINE
2166

PROPOSED CONTOURS
— - 2166 —

EXISTING CONTOURS
GB

PROPOSED GRADE BREAK
R

PROPOSED RIDGE
11 DAYLIGHT LINE
TR

TOP OF RAMP
TW

TOP OF WALL
TC

TOP OF CURB
FS

FINISHED SURFACE
TS

TOP OF STAIRS
BS

BOTTOM OF STAIRS
HP

HIGH POINT
2166.50 TC
(2166.00 FS)

EXISTING GRADE
2166.50 TC
2166.00 FS

PROPOSED GRADE

TE R R I S DRAIN

PAVEMENT

HYDROSEED

LANDSCAPING
y

PROPOSED SLOPE
RGA
Koim ey))) Horn
© 2021 KIMLEY—HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1100 W. TOWN AND COUNTRY RD, SUITE 700, ORANGE, CA 92868 PHONE: 714-939-1030
WWW.KIMLEY—HORN.COM

PROF E S S / C)/V
y ��OO� S C<9c� cZ
c� m
C 87934
sT Q
9TF CIAO-
°F cA��
Office of Architectural
Design
15231 Alton Parkway,Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
T 949-341-0920
FX 949-341-0922
YUCA�PA CA
i
CONCEPTUAL GRADNG AND DRAhAGE PLAN 7
MARK
DATE

DESCRIPTION

GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET
0 ## ## ##
SCALE: 1 " = 20'

WHEN PRINTED AT FULL
SIZE 30"X42"
RGA PROJECT NO:
20128.00
CAD FILE NAME:

DRAWN BY:

TA
CHK'D BY:

JR
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
OF

SHEET TITLE

FINISH LEGEND:

ARCHITECT:

WEST ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION
OTAAInIAVl Prnnn 7111A/Inr nr\/rAl nAIKITrn n(lhrnIT PTnnInIKirl Prnnn qv Mini— nr\/rAl hI rnrPTnn\/ 711 lAllnr nn/FAI III minr nr\/rAl

EAST ELEVATION

NORTH ELEVATION
APPLICANT:
f PA
6272 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE #E
LONG BEACH, CA 90803
TEL:

CONTACT: TERRI ALLEN
EMAIL:

IFI PACIFIC OAKS COMMERCE

YUCAIPA, CA
SCHEMATIC ELEVATIONS PLAN - BUILDING 1
CENTER
P-1:

FIELD PAINT - SW7666 WESTHIGHLAND WHITE
P-2:

ACCENT PAINT - SW7634 PEDIMENT
P-3:

ACCENT PAINT - SW7024 FUNCTIONAL GRAY
P-4:

ACCENT PAINT - SW7025 BACKDROP
P-5:

ACCENT PAINT - SW6251 OUTERSPACE
GLAZING:

PPG SOLARCOOL PACIFICA BLUE
STOREFRONT: AB6 DARK BRONZE
SIDING:

STANDING SEAM VERTICAL METAL

SIDING AT ENTRY TOWER
SCALE: 1" = 30'-0" 0' 10' 20' 50' 100'
SD 1/14/22 2ND PLANNING SUBMITTAL
SD 11/19/21 PLANNING SUBMITTAL SET

MARK DATE DESCRIPTION
RGA PROJECT NO:
19123.00
CAD FILE NAME:
19123-00-2A3-1
DRAWN BY:

CS
CHKID BY:

CS
COPYRIGHT: RGA, OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

SHEET TITLE
A3-1 - 1-i

Pacific Oaks Industrial LLC
Case No. 21-196 CUP/TPM - Conditions of Approval

Page 1 of 25 ends

Yucaipa City CouncilSeptember 23, 2024

Yucaipa City Council
September 23, 2024