Yucaipa City Council
October 28, 2024

Agenda Item No.

CITY OF YUCAIPA

AGENDA REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Fermin Preciado, Director of Development Services/City Engineer Benjamin J. Matlock, Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Christian Farmer, Associate Planner C f
FOR: City Council Meeting of October 28, 2024 (Continued from August 12, 2024) SUBJECT: Starling Heights Specific Plan (24-071/APP)
An appeal of the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial of Case No. 22- 129/GPA/SP/TTM 20372, for The Starling Heights Specific Plan which 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.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council conduct a public hearing and consider the appeal request regarding the Planning Commission's recommendation of denial of the Starling Heights Specific Plan (SHSP) and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, as well as the associated Tract Map (TTM 20372).

Potential motions (referenced in italics) include:

Motion in support of the SHSP:
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 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
3) 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.

Motion against the SHSP:
1) Adopt a Resolution denying the approval of the Starling Heights Specific Plan; and 2) Adopt Findings for denial, with respect to Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code; and
3) Deny Tentative Tract Map 20372 (Case No. 22-129), finding that 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.

Alternative Actions:

The City Council can make additional modifications to 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.

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

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Surrounding Land Uses:

Area Land Use Designations; Improvement Levels; and existing Land Uses:

Site:

RS-20M (Single Residential, 10,000
square foot minimum lot size)
IL-1
Existing SFR and accessory structures
to be demolished; Vacant
North:

RS-20M
IL-1
Single Family Residences
South:

RS-20M
IL-2
Single Family Residences
East:

RS-20M and FW (Floodway)
IL-1
Single Family Residences and Wilson
Creek
West:

IN (Institutional)
IL-1
Dunlap Elementary School
Location and Setting:

The proposed Project is located on four (4) contiguous parcels (APNs 0318-021-18, -19, -44 & -58) which total approximately 14.78 gross acres located at the northeast corner of Avenue E and 12th Street. The area is currently designated as RS-20M, or Single Residential, with a minimum lot size requirement of 20,000 square feet. As a part of the Project, one (1) residential building and the associated structures are to be demolished on the eastern portion of the site. As part of the analysis completed for the Initial Study prepared as a part of this Project, these structures were found to have no historical or cultural significance. The site is comprised of four (4) lots that have been previously disturbed through former residential uses and discing for weed abatement. The lot is relatively flat with a general slope from north to south toward the intersection of Avenue E and 12th Street. A mixture of vacant land and single-family development surrounds the Project site to the north, east and south, with a flood control channel to the east and Dunlap Elementary School to the west. The Project has frontage as well as access along both 12th Street and Avenue E. The Project is within close vicinity to a variety of institutional uses, such as Dunlap Elementary School, the 13th Street Sports Complex and Yucaipa High School, and is also two (2) miles away from Crafton Hills Community College.

2 ti �,nrF!
Project Site
11F, 4
44 c ..4 „- t
Planning Commission Meeting for Specific Plan:

The proposed Project was initially presented and discussed at the regular Planning Commission hearing on June 5, 2024, with public comments provided during that hearing. The key elements deliberated as part of the Public Hearing pertained to the potential traffic impacts of the Project, safety for the adjacent school, parking requirements, the density and its associated fit within the area, the affordability of the Project, and concerns with architecture. The Planning Commission ultimately recommended a denial of the Tentative Tract Map, finding that it was inconsistent with existing Land Use Designation, and did not provide a formal motion on the Specific Plan and its related findings. A summary of the key elements identified are as follows:

Traffic Impacts:

The Planning Commission discussed the traffic that would be generated with the Project. As part of the traffic assessment required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) was found to be less than significant. The Project's assigned traffic analysis zone (TAZ) of 29.8 VMT per day is less than the City's baseline VMT jurisdiction of 30.7 VMT per day, and therefore meets the City's screening criteria for Projects that are located within low VMT areas. The proposed use would also provide housing for families within walking distance of several schools and City amenities.

While Level of Service (LOS) impacts are no longer a criterion for significant impacts under CEQA, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) technical study was prepared to address project -related impacts at the adjoining intersections to ensure efficient vehicular movement within the area. There is an existing condition of poor circulation caused by Yucaipa High School during student drop off to a LOS "F" and LOS "D" at the intersection of Yucaipa Boulevard and 12th Street that would remain at the same LOS with implementation of this Project. However, proposed Conditions of Approval for the restriping of certain streets will result in an improvement from existing

conditions. Separate efforts are being implemented to lessen the impact of the peak hour traffic specific to Yucaipa High School.

Safety at the adjacent school:

The meeting included a discussion about the safety of children walking to the nearby school given the additional vehicles in the area. As a part of the Project, the Applicant will be required to underground the existing utility poles located along the frontage of the subject site and will also be required to construct the necessary sidewalk, curb and gutter, which will improve pedestrian connectivity in the area. An internal pedestrian network will also be provided for the benefit of the future residents and will provide direct walking access to the adjacent school rather than requiring those families to drive their children to school. Other higher density residential developments have been approved that prioritize family -oriented housing near schools. The City Council may consider additional pedestrian improvements for the area.

R
iereLip
`
1 �40_fj�
� ,a � _ -_. ���1►� � r � �r ! f - +fir ,
t
Is-
�' s. �. _`• .�'�\ '*rr. mow, � �:
}
t r
is ' +-�,�; - �, :►�• �t1 �� �.A � � `� � ' y
AQft
Aerial Image Showing Dunlap Elementary School
Parking Concerns:

Concerns were raised regarding the total parking spaces that will be provided by the Project. It should be noted that, although the Project is utilizing a Specific Plan that can create its own unique standards, the total parking provided meets the City's current multiple family development requirements, where 496 parking spaces are required, and 541 parking spaces are provided. The Project is also proposed as a gated community, which typically results in residents/guests parking on -site rather than on surrounding streets.

Density Fit within the area:

Several Planning Commissioners noted concerns regarding the proposed density within the context of the surrounding area. While there are several larger lots near the subject site and throughout the Dunlap area, this development pattern was largely due to physical impediments of the area caused by the Wilson Creek flood control facility and associated floodplain, as well as a lack of sewer, that had precluded development. However, several capital improvement projects have resulted in sewer access in the Dunlap area and have substantially reduced the floodplain area. These improvements have reduced flood insurance requirements and related property risks to the community, while also allowing for new developments to occur. An additional consideration may be that there are several homes directly north, within the same block, that are located on substandard lot sizes for the existing Land Use District, and Multiple Family Residential - designated parcels are also located less than 400 feet from the proposed Project site.

N ,D
Avenuo D Avonue D Av■ ue _ A•,e•iuedp 16
G
o;
q
yB'
:A
S �1
f
i.
n
5•
7,
S+
U�
�0
A va_ o
.o
D
f
1 q ve�vo F ti�
- a� �aIOL
I o
4 ion
i
_.en�aa
Land Use Map
Architecture:

One Planning Commissioner, who is an architect, commended the design of the proposed homes while another commissioner noted that the elevation design seemed "boring," but did not provide actionable feedback on potential improvements. The City Council may consider the architectural design as proposed, or they may offer guidance on recommended changes and direct staff to implement those changes with the developer. Such suggestions may include additional architectural styles, additional detailing or additional colors.

Project Affordability:

The Planning Commission had an extended discussion regarding the proposed market cost of the units, noting that they would not be affordable. While affordable housing is a key priority, the Applicant noted that the cost to underground utilities and bring sewer improvements to the site, in combination with the cost of construction and agency fees, makes the development of the site under the existing requirements untenable. The affordability provisions of a Project is not directly within the purview of Planning Commission, as defined affordability rates apply to projects that follow the density bonus process, and the implementation of an "Inclusionary Housing" Ordinance to mandate affordable units within each residential project would be a policy directive from the City Council.

Prior City Council Meeting for Specific Plan:

The proposed Project was initially scheduled for the regular City Council Meeting of August 12, 2024, was continued at the Applicant's request to allow time for modifications. Following the continuance, the Applicant hosted a community outreach event at Dunlap Elementary School.

They have since indicated that no further changes are planned.

Project Design and Description:

Starling Heights Specific Plan
A Specific Plan provides policymakers with the ability to prepare and adopt development and/or design standards and guidelines within a targeted area of the City. Although it is not a part of the General Plan, a Specific Plan must adhere to, and be consistent with, the City's land use policies that are established in the General Plan. Ideally, a Specific Plan provides guidance to landowners or developers without stifling opportunities or imposing inflexible regulations that preclude creative development responses. With its tailored standards and general direction for future development within a specific area of a community, Specific Plans work to leverage the opportunities of the area beyond what could otherwise be achieved through a city-wide zoning ordinance.

The Applicant's stated goal is to create a housing option that is attainable for young professionals and families, especially given the limited options that are currently in Yucaipa. Rather than only utilizing a General Plan Amendment to rezone to one of the City's multiple family land use districts; the Applicant has instead provided a Specific Plan to memorialize the Project standards. This approach is intended to provide a "what you see is what you get" outcome with tailored development standards of the ultimate development, rather than a General Plan Amendment that would allow any other similar density project, such as an apartment complex, that could then be permitted.

The SHSP provides development standards for a "small lot" style single-family residential development, which includes tailored requirements for circulation, community amenities, landscaping, grading, design guidelines and requirements for layout, especially along the exterior edges of the Project. The Specific Plan further includes restrictions unique to the Specific Plan, such as a prohibition on SB-9 subdivisions (where allowable by state law), a lower maximum height than provided in other residential districts, requirements for the layout of parking areas and perimeter

landscaped edges, a requirement for the formation of a Homeowners Association (HOA), and additional amenity requirements.

Findings:

Prior to taking an action to adopt or amend a Specific Plan, the Planning Agency shall find that the proposed Specific Plan satisfies all of the following findings:
a) Is consistent with the General Plan
b) Specifies through text and/or diagrams the distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan c) Specifies through text and/or diagrams the proposed distribution, location, and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan
d) Specifies through text and/or diagrams the standards and criteria by which development will proceed and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable
e) Specifies a program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works project, and financing measures necessary to carry out Findings (b), (c) and (d) above
f) Includes a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable plan
g) Addresses any other subjects which are necessary for implementation of the General Plan Decision makers need to identify the elements for the Findings and confirm that any such Specific Plan meets these requirements to formally approve the policy.

General Plan Amendment:

Because the City utilizes a one -map system, a General Plan Amendment (GPA) is being processed concurrent with the Specific Plan to ensure that there are no conflicts between the Land Use District and the SHSP, as required by state law (AB 821). The Project therefore includes a minor General Plan Amendment application to change the land use designation of four (4) parcels totaling approximately

14.78 gross acres from the City's Single Residential (RS-20M) Land Use Designation to Planned Development (PD) Land Use Designation. The proposed PD Land Use Designation would permit residential development consistent with the standards required by the SHSP. A modification to Figure CDL-3, Land Use Modifications, would formally identify the SHSP within the PD-designated area.

The application also includes a Tentative Map and Architectural Review to permit 127 two-story single-family residences with attached 2-car garages, private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on -street guest parking within the gated community. Pursuant to the City's development review procedures, the proposed Specific Plan and associated minor General Plan Amendment is a policy decision to be considered by the City Council following recommendation from the Planning

Commission. As noted previously, the Planning Commission recommended the denial of the subdivision finding that the Project was inconsistent with the existing Land Use District. No formal action was taken in relation to the Specific Plan itself, which therefore defaults to a recommendation of denial.

Tentative Tract Map:

A Tentative Tract Map (TTM 20372) has been submitted concurrent with the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment and has been designed to comply with the proposed Specific Plan requirements. The Applicant proposes to construct a 127-unit single-family residential Project with associated amenities to be implemented through a one -lot subdivision. Construction is anticipated to commence in early 2025 and to be constructed over fifteen (15) phases with approximately eight (8) units constructed per phase. All conditions of the Project will apply to each phase. The Project also includes a community recreation center located within the central portion of the development, an open space area to serve as a game park located in the northeast corner, and an active -community park located in the southeast corner of the site.

JIMLUJI2
I'iv,-,i i7ntin"
Access to the Project site is provided via a 24-foot-wide driveway on Avenue E, and a 24-foot-wide driveway on 12th Street. Circulation throughout the residential development is provided via a two- lane, 24-foot-wide private road. Elongated driveways, 24-foot-wide, extend from the private road to provide direct access to individual residences. The site features an internal walking path along a

central loop that would provide pedestrian connectivity to the recreational features provided in the development. Additionally, the proposed Project would complete the street improvements along the Project frontages of 12th Street and Avenue E, including curb, gutter, sidewalks, matchup paving, and would also include any necessary gutter transitions to the adjacent properties as well as additional improvements as previously noted.
i Y
,� IE GChL
�C ._? i s E'•._ __•._
FIGURE 2-6

VFHICU PLAN
Vehicular Circulation Plan
Drainage. -
The site has been designed to maintain historic flows and includes measures that will ensure that the Project complies with the onsite water retention and City/state water quality requirements. The existing drainage on site flows from north to south. The proponent is leveraging the existing drainage patterns and previous improvements implemented by the City to direct the overall drainage of the site and proposed grading to convey run-off water towards two landscaped basins at the southeast and southwest corners of the property.

Am nitIP.0 •
Private amenities to serve the residents of the development are provided as part of the Project and are identified by the Specific Plan and required with the implementation. Common areas proposed for the Project include the following: open lawn play areas, enclosed dog park, benches, picnic tables with shade structure, barbeque areas (with charcoal grills), tot lot, bocce ball court, cornhole courts, ping pong tables, game tables, fire pit, recreation center buildings, outdoor dining tables, and internal connecting sidewalks. Each residential unit is also provided with a private yard and the development includes community open space and landscaping. The development also includes a landscaped drainage detention basin that will maintain the historic drainage flows.

.VF _MW
_.�
• � � � � r � Try'—._ �f �' ,
4 it
'
�!
Proposed Amenities
1 1 err. �i•,4 i �
%
n
_ �---
}
i a
Front Elevation, Plan I
The Applicant has submitted an architectural design package and conceptual landscape architecture design for the proposed Specific Plan and requests approval of the architecture at this time as required in the Conditions of Approval. The buildings feature a peak height that ranges from 27' 5" to 28' 9".

There are three (3) building types which each have three (3) elevation schemes and additional enhanced elevations for units which are street facing. Additionally, the Project includes eight (8) unique color schemes. Each building is designed with a "Farmhouse" architectural influence and will include simple, two-story forms accented with forward and side facing gables and asymmetric proportions. Additionally, the units will feature a variety of roof pitches with prominent gables

featured throughout as well as earth colored stucco with vertical battens and horizontal wood siding.

The Applicant has identified that the Project is to be geared to young professionals and families with floor plans that includes Plan One, a 1,920 square foot, three -bedroom plan, Plan Two, a four - bedroom, 2,392 square foot floor plan, and Plan Three, a four -bedroom, 2,554 square foot floor plan.

Conceptual landscaping is also provided for the City Council's review, and shows the approximate location and types of shrubs, groundcover, and trees to be planted onsite. The landscape palette includes a mixture of drought tolerant trees, shrubs, and ground cover, which will be reviewed as a Condition of Approval by the City's Contract Landscape Architect to verify consistency with the City administrative design guidelines and to ensure that the palette will best perform in Yucaipa's climate zone. In addition, the landscape plans are conditioned to be in conformance with the City's Water Conservation requirements, which will be substantiated during the plan check process.

SAM
FET 1.. �.
�
o #
STR FT '.
- fo
_.-
wow i
_tl —
v!
1 .' -SUN*
N
Conceptual Landscaping
The proposed landscape package shares the following vision: "Creating diverse and engaging amenities help to create a truly livable community. Open spaces are lifelines for a community, both programed and natural, and makes a neighborhood that truly feels like home. Taking inspiration from the adjacent San Bernadino National Forest, water -wise and native plant material have been added to the community planting palette. " The design further programs for a healthy community with an emphasis on the outdoor space and interconnectivity of the site with multiple parks connected with a combination of sidewalk and landscaped decomposed granite (DG) trails. Special attention was paid to the edges of the development, which will include an enhanced landscape buffer at perimeter walls that will be managed by the HOA. This will help to soften the view of street adjacent rear yards and allow for a surrounding greenbelt along the public right of way.

Prior CIP Improvements:

This Project would not be feasible without the significant investment made by the City through past and on -going Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Projects. The site greatly benefits from drainage improvements made by the City, which ultimately removed portions of the site from the FEMA floodplain. The potential development capacity for this Project increased with those improvements, and the risk (and cost of flood insurance) was substantially reduced for most of properties in the area.

By leveraging the CIP improvements, the implementation of this Project allows for the City to recoup the significant infrastructure investments through the payment of Development Impact Fees, and also allows for development to directly leverage the investment with a higher per/acre taxable value to the City.

Development Impact Fees:

Based on a total number of 127 single family residences and a total of 299,960 square feet, the Project can be expected to generate $2,665,890 in Development Impact Fees after a $12,752 credit for the existing single-family residence, using the current 2022 fee schedule, as follows:

Drainage Facilities:
$47100
Traffic Facilities:
$11334438
Public Facilities:
$28305
Fire Facilities:
$167,177
Park Facilities:
$408,988
TOTAL:
$2,665.890
Fees collected by other agencies, such as Yucaipa Valley Water District and Yucaipa-Calimesa Joint Unified School District, are in addition to this total.

Consistency with the General Plan and Development Code:

As a part of the review of the Specific Plan, a consistency analysis was performed to compare the proposed Specific Plan and the goals and objectives of the General Plan. The Project supports a number of General Plan policies including:
• 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. • CDL-10.1 Development Review. Implement and adhere to development review procedures and design guidelines in the City of Yucaipa Municipal Code that advance the visual quality of the community.
• CDL-10.4: Design Variation. Encourage identifiable architectural designs, design variations, and well -planned projects that are visually interesting, neighborhood or district oriented, and well -integrated with the surroundings.
• HN-2.1 Balanced Housing Stock. Designate adequate land for a broad range of types of housing, including single-family attached and detached, multiple -family housing, and mixed use located in accordance with the land use and community design element.

• HN-2.5 Dunlap Acres and Central Core. Preserve residential fabric of Dunlap Acres and Central Core, while allowing for infill on vacant parcels, underutilized parcels where deemed appropriate, or parcels that have been removed from the floodplain. • CDL-10.5 Private Landscaping and Parks. Require developers to incorporate appropriately sized and drought -tolerant vegetation with sufficient maintenance to provide a mature -looking landscape in three -five years after installation. Require private recreational facilities in new multifamily housing projects.
• CDL-10.7: Basins. Design retention/detention basins to be visually attractive, with natural landscaping and a public use component such as trails, and well integrated with any associated project and with adjacent land uses.
• 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.
• 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. • 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. • HN-3.3: Housing Incentives. Facilitate development of market -rate and affordable housing through regulatory incentives (e.g., density bonus), permit processing (e.g., planned or small lot development) and other means where feasible and appropriate. • PR-3: Multipurpose Trails. Comprehensive trail system that allows residents to travel, explore, and enjoy Yucaipa on foot, bicycle, or horseback. • PR-3.9: Development Requirements. Condition approval of new projects near existing or proposed trails to ensure access to multipurpose trails and/or contribute improvements, dedications, or fees to extend trails.
• HN-3.1 Design Features. Require new and rehabilitated residential units to be well designed, with appropriate attention to site planning, materials and colors, building treatments, landscaping, open space, parking, and environmentally sustainable practices. • HN-3.2 Entitlement Process. Offer flexible and streamlined entitlement processes that facilitate innovative and imaginative housing solutions yet balance the developer's need for predictability in the approval process, governmental regulation, and oversight. • HN-3.3 Housing Incentives. Facilitate development of market -rate and affordable housing through regulatory incentives (e.g., density bonus), permit processing (e.g., planned or small lot development) and other means where feasible and appropriate. • S-6.1: Noise Assessment. Assess the compatibility of proposed land uses with the noise environment when preparing, revising, or reviewing applications for development projects or land use changes.
• S-6.2: Acoustical Studies. Require acoustical studies for proposed projects within areas that exceed 60 dBA; discourage siting of new noise -sensitive uses in areas exceeding 65 dBA without appropriate mitigation.
• S-6.5: Development Patterns. Locate new development in areas where noise levels are appropriate for use. Limit development of noise -producing uses adjacent to noise -sensitive receptors and require that noise producing land uses have adequate mitigation.

At a high level, the Project reflects many of the objectives and policies of the General Plan, with an emphasis on the design and review requirements for a project, as well as the housing stock created.

Processing and Procedural Actions:

As a part of the City's review process, notices of the Project were sent to all surrounding property owners within a 300-foot radius of the site in addition to three (3) newspaper notices, the first for the intent to adopt a MND, the second to advertise the Planning Commission meeting date and the third to advertise the City Council meeting. Four (4) unique comments were received in response to the Project Notice, with a few commenters providing comments multiple times. The comment letters are contained in the attachments and highlight concerns with the following topics: traffic, noise, congestion during peak hours at the school, the perceived rural nature of the surrounding area, the potential that the Project will be "Section 8" Housing.

In addition to the required noticing for the Project, the Applicant conducted a community meeting on May 2nd, 2024, which was attended by approximately ten (10) of the surrounding neighbors. The meeting lasted approximately one hour and included discussion on many of the comments that were received. The City also initiated consultation with Native American tribes pursuant to the provisions of SB-18 and AB-52, which resulted in extended Phase-1 archaeological testing and additional mitigative conditions being added.

At the June 5th, 2024 Planning Commission meeting there were four (4) public comments provided, with three (3) responses in opposition (of which two (2) of which had provided similar written comment), and one (1) person who spoke in support of the Project.

Environmental Review:

The Initial Study prepared for this proposal, was made available for comment for 20 days beginning on April 12, 2024, and ending on May 2, 2024. No comments were received on the Initial Study during the public review process by local, regional or state agencies, or by members of the public.

The Initial Study considers the potential environmental impacts that could occur and assigns mitigation as necessary if recommended in the Project's technical studies in order to reduce impacts to less than significant. Based upon the analysis conducted by staff in reviewing the Project site's environmental setting and provided technical studies, all available evidence indicates that any adverse impacts that could occur are at a less -than -significant level, and consequently, staff is recommending the adoption of a MND should City Council approve.

Mitigation Measures for the Initial Study were included to: 1) reflect comments received through Tribal consultation as part of Cultural and Tribal Resources pursuant to SB 18/AB52, 2) protect nesting bird habitat if grading were to occur during the nesting bird season through the preparation of preconstruction general nesting bird survey pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), 3) address grading protocol with preparation of a paleontological assessment and, 4) to incorporate the recommendations of the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation.

Conclusion:

The proposed Project includes a Specific Plan to memorialize the proposed development standards, the implementation of the Specific Plan requires a Land Use District of the parcels from RS-20M to PD through an amendment to the General Plan. The required findings for approval are attached should the City Council ultimately approve of the Specific Plan and associated minor General Plan Amendment. The proposed Tentative Tract Map has been designed to be consistent with the SHSP requirements and would meet the standards for access, lot size and dimension, setbacks, and site design as specified.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact as a result of this recommendation.

Attachments:
l . Specific Plan Amendment Findings

2. General Plan Amendment Findings

3. Tentative Map Findings

4. Land Use District & Location Map

5. Meeting Minutes of June 51h 2024

6. Conditions of Approval

7. Resolution No. 2024-34

8. Ordinance No. 449

9. Comment Letters Received

10. Environmental Initial Study (attachments provided online with PDF packet:
httl):Hyucaipa.org/govenu-nelit/n-ieeting-agendas�

11. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan

12. Project Plans

13. Specific Plan
The Specific Plan, Draft MND, and Project -related environmental documents are available for the public at City Hall or via the following link: https:Hyucaipa.gov/envirotimental-review/.

Approved by:

ATTACHMENT

Attachment 1
The following are draft Findings of Approval for the Specific Plan. The City Council shall review these findings and make any modifications deemed necessary. If the City Council does not recommend approval of the Specific Plan, guidance shall be provided that identifies where these Findings are not met, which will then be updated accordingly.

FINDINGS: SPECIFIC PLANNO. 22-129

1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for this Project adequately discusses the potential impacts of the proposed Specific Plan and disclosed to decision makers and the public that all impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant impact.

2. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan, because it implements the City's adopted goals and policies from the 2016 General Plan policies, as well as the 61h Cycle Housing Element as shown in the comprehensive consistency review contained in the Starling Heights Specific Plan. The highlight of the policies promotes "for a range of housing types, locations, and densities in a variety of neighborhood settings" (CDL-1.1). The SHSP provides for a greater range of housing opportunities that align with market demand and provides opportunities for nearby commercial and institutional uses to create a new employment base for the community. In addition, the Specific Plan meets several of the policies contained in CDL-10: Design Quality, which places an emphasis on well -designed projects that provide appropriate variation. The Project also helps meet the City's need for additional housing stock, as outlined in HN-2.1 Balanced Housing Stock. Providing for the full utilization of the site for development also helps to cover the infrastructure investments made by the City that has ultimately removed the impediments for development.

3. The proposed Specific Plan specifies through text and/or diagrams the distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan through a variety of diagrams and descriptive text.

4. The proposed Specific Plan specifies through text and/or diagrams the proposed distribution, location, extent, and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan.

5. The proposed Specific Plan specifies through text and/or diagrams the standards and criteria by which development will proceed and the standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable.

6. The proposed Specific Plan specifies a program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, and improvements required to carry out the project.

7. The Specific Plan includes a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, Development Code, and any applicable plan including a General Plan Consistency analysis.

8. The Specific Plan addresses any other subjects that are necessary for implementation of the General Plan, with sections outlining the implementation and management of the Project.

ATTACHMENT 2

Attachment 2
FINDINGS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO.22-129

1. The Initial Study prepared for this proposal adequately discusses the potential impacts of the Project and indicates that all potentially significant environmental impacts that could occur are at a level that is considered to be less -than -significant. The Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment.

2. The proposed General Plan Amendment has been referred to the public water purveyor, and pursuant to the Governmental Code Section 65958.1, an adequate water supply exists or is planned that will serve any future project that could be proposed.

3. The proposed Land Use District Change is in the public interest, there will be a community benefit, and other existing and permitted uses will not be compromised, because the change will result in an enhanced land use compatibility, and will provide additional housing opportunities within the City. The General Plan Amendment would provide the PD Land Use District to the subject site, and would permit a development as specified by the SHSP that provides housing intended to meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirements for the 6th Housing Cycle. The proposed Project would allow for 127 residential units in an area with proximity to commercial uses and institutional uses such as the nearby elementary school.

4. The proposed Land Use District Change is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, and it will provide for a reasonable and logical extension of the existing land use pattern in the surrounding area, because the Starling Heights Specific Plan includes the development of single family housing, consistent with the current designation of the site, and the change in the Land Use District and implementation of the Specific Plan simply allows for an increased density at the site and will help to meet many of the housing goals in the City. The Project would permit a single-family development that has immediate pedestrian accessibility to a variety of uses, including proximity to an elementary school and nearby commercial uses.

5. The proposed Land Use District Change does not conflict with provisions of this Code, or any applicable Specific Plan, because it provides tailored standards to the area which will provide compatibility with the surrounding land use designations, and all applicable residential development standards and would be implemented by future projects, including the proposed Tentative Tract Map.

6. The proposed Land Use District Change will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding property, because any future residential development will be designed and constructed to mitigate any adverse conditions, and appropriate public improvements will be required to provide sufficient capacity in the infrastructure required to support the development.

ATTACHMENT

Attachment 3
FINDINGS: TENTATIVE MAP NO. 20372
l . The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvements, is consistent with the General Plan, provided that the Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment is approved, because the proposed use and overall density of is consistent with the standards provided in the Starling Heights Specific Plan that includes standards that would apply specifically to the site, and the Conditions of Approval address the provision of public services and improvements.

2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development, because the Project site would be graded to create pad areas for future units, and has been designed to accommodate the proposed development, roadways, and associated infrastructure for the Project.

3. The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and substantially or avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, because the environmental review for the Project includes appropriate conditions or mitigation measures that demonstrate that the Project and its impacts can be mitigated to a less than significant level.

4. The design of the proposed subdivision and any related types or proposed improvements are not likely to cause serious public safety and health problems because conditions are included to assure compliance with all City health and safety standards.

5. The design of the proposed subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with public easements within or through the site because conditions have been included to ensure non-interference with any existing public easements.

6. The design of the subdivision provides for the extent feasible, passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities, because the Project proposes residential lots that would include the installation of solar panels, as required by the with the most current building code, without interference from surrounding properties, which provide opportunities for the use of solar energy.

7. The proposed subdivision, its design, density, and type of development and improvements conforms to the regulations of the Development Code with approval of the Starling Heights Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment, and the regulations of any public agency having jurisdiction by law should the Preliminary Development Plan be approved pursuant to the provisions listed in Article 2 of Chapter 3 of Division 3 of the Yucaipa Development Code, and all public agencies that may be affected by this development have had their concerns addressed by the Conditions of Approval.

The proposed subdivision is not deemed to be a land Project as defined by the Yucaipa Development Code, Section 812.12030.

ATTACHMENT 4

Attachment 4
LAND USE - EXISTING: SINGLE RESIDENTIAL (RS-20M)

LOCATION
%dog
C5
.-- vc'-*

ATTACHMENT 5

Agenda Item No.

City of Yucaipa

PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
Regular Meeting of June 5, 2024
01 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.
i
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

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 25447 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON 424.7 ACRES AND UP TO 415851>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 250543000 SQUARE FEET OF BUILDING SPACE, AS WELL AS TRUCK

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

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.

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 against 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 Hearing 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
b-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.

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

3. 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.

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 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code, or that would better meet the Goals, Policies, and/or Objectives of the General Plan.

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.

Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
6-5-24

DIS%CITSSION _-
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.

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.
'J r-1.
njamin Matlock 1 Allbower
Deputy Director/City Planner Chair of th,e4qanning Commission Planning Commission Minutes Page 9
6-5-24

ATTACHMENT

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 1
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

PROJECT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ON -GOING CONDITIONS/GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

1. The project consists of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change the Land Use Modification Overlay Districts of the General Plan to include the Starling Heights Specific Plan, and to change the General Plan Land Use Designation from RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) to PD (Planned Development) and adding the Specific Plan to the General Plan Land Use Modification Overlay. The Starling Heights Specific Plan (SHSP) is for the establishment of the development standards that would be applicable to the site and would permit the development of 127 lots, as well as the ancillary development of private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on -street guest parking. Any alteration or expansion of these facilities, or increase in the developed area of the site from that shown on the approved site plan, may require the submission of a new application or an additional application for Revisions for review and approval.

2. This Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 20372 is a one (1) lot subdivision for condominium purposes, to subdivide the 14.78-acre site, currently consisting of four (4) parcels, into 127 single family residential units.

3. This Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map shall become null and void if all conditions have not been complied with and the occupancy or use of the land has not taken place within three (3) years of the date of approval. Up to two extensions of time pursuant to the provisions of Section 83.040220(e) of the Yucaipa Development Code may be granted upon written request and submittal of the appropriate fee not less than 30 days prior to the date of expiration.

PLEASE NOTE: this will be the only notice given for the above specified expiration date. The applicant is responsible for the initiation of an extension request.

4. Water service shall be by the Western Heights Water Company. The Western Heights Water Company letter provided as part of the Project application materials is included as a Condition of Approval.

5. Sewage disposal shall be by the Yucaipa Valley Water District. The Yucaipa Valley Water District letter provided as part of the Project application materials is included as a Condition of Approval.

6. Mail delivery shall be by neighborhood boxes or other delivery as approved by the U.S. Postal Service.

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 2
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

7. All future development of this site shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Starling Heights Specific Plan development standards and requirements.

8. The applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding attacking or seeking to set aside, void or annul the approval of all or part of the matters applied for, or any other claim, action or proceeding relating to or arising out of such approval.

This obligation includes the obligation to reimburse the City, its agents, officers and employees for any court costs or attorney fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees are required by a court to pay as a result of such claim, action or proceeding. The City agrees to notify the applicant of any such claim, action or proceeding promptly after the City becomes aware of it. The City may participate in the defense of the claim, action or proceeding, but such participation will not relieve the applicant of applicant's defense and indemnification obligations, including City expenses.

9. The applicant/owner shall pay a fee of $2,916.75, pursuant to Senate Bill 1535.

This fee shall be submitted to the Planning Division within three (3) days after the effective date of conditional approval along with a $50.00 administrative handling fee required by the Clerk. Payments shall be made with a Check, Money Order or Cashier's Check for $2,956.75 made payable to the "Clerk of the Board". The Planning Division shall then file the Notice of Determination within three (3) days after the effective date of conditional approval. The applicant should be aware that Section 21089(b) of the Public Resources Code provides that any project approved under CEQA is not operative, vested or final until the required fee is paid. Proof of fee payment will be required prior to issuance of building permits.

10. All conditions of this Tentative Map are continuing conditions. Failure of the applicant and/or operator to comply with any or all of said conditions at any time may result in the revocation of the permit granted to use the property.

11. All conditions of this Conditional Use Permit are continuing conditions and shall be applicable to each construction phase. Failure of the applicant and/or operator to comply with any or all of said conditions at any time may result in the revocation of the permit granted to use the property.

12. All future development of this site shall be in accordance with the provisions of Division 9, Chapter 5, of the Development Code regarding Oak Tree Conservation development standards and requirements.

13. The applicant/owner shall maintain in good condition at all times all permanent plantings as identified on the approved landscape plan.

14. All new utility lines shall be placed underground. Existing overhead distribution lines shall be placed underground when four (4) or more utility poles on the same street are located on or adjacent to the project site.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

15. New projects with a landscape area of 500 square feet or more shall comply with Sections 492.6(a)(3)(b) (c), (d) and (g) of the MWELO including the use of renewable organic waste products such as compost and mulch where applicable.

16. Projects rehabilitating an existing landscape area of 2,500 square feet or more shall comply with Sections 492.6(a)(3)(b) (c), (d) and (g) of the MWELO including the use of renewable organic waste products such as compost and mulch where applicable.

17. Compost and mulch made by the City's franchised hauler, Yucaipa Disposal, Inc. (909) 797-9125, or other designee from recovered organic waste products pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18993.1 shall take precedence over inorganic or virgin forest products when available locally.

18. The applicant/property owner shall be required to apply an anti -graffiti coating, and/or provide a landscape design of a type and nature that is acceptable to the City Planner, to each of the publicly viewable surfaces deemed by the City Planner to be likely to attract graffiti.

19. The applicant/property owner, and any and all successors in interest, shall for ten (10) years after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, provide the City with sufficient matching paint and/or anti -graffiti coating on demand for use in the painting over or removal of graffiti from any designated graffiti attracting surfaces.

20. Developers of residential development projects greater than a single dwelling unit shall attempt to ensure that at least 25% of the total cost of the project will be spent with Yucaipa businesses and/or the hiring of Yucaipa residents.

21. All proposed road names shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner.

22. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 797-2489 EXT. 246

23. This project is protected by the Yucaipa Fire Department / CalFire. Prior to any construction occurring on any parcel, the applicant shall contact the Fire Marshall for verification of current fire protection development requirements. All new construction shall comply with the adopted California Fire Code and all applicable statutes, codes, ordinances, standards, and policies of the Yucaipa Fire Department / CalFire.

24. This project is in a Fire Safety Review Area 2. This is a high fire hazard area.

This project shall comply with the construction and development standards for a FR-2 Area. Consult the City of Yucaipa Development Code Section 85.0202201 — 85.02022230 and CBC Chapter 7A.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

25. Fire Department access roads and/or public/private streets shall meet the Fire Department minimum clear width standard of twenty-four (24) feet. Access roads shall be paved (asphalt/concrete) and in place prior to placement of combustible material on site. Fire Department minimum paving thickness shall be no less than four (4) inches. This standard shall not lessen other agency requirements.

26. Fire Department access roads and/or public/private streets and residential driveways shall have a minimum vertical clearance of thirteen (13) feet and six (6) inches.

27. Fire Department access roadways and/or public/private streets and driveways shall not exceed 12% grade (please note: Engineering Division requirements may be more restrictive).

28. Cul-de-sac shall not exceed six hundred (600) feet in total length, unless otherwise approved by the Fire Marshall.

29. Required fire flow for this project, as determined by Appendix "B" of the California Fire Code. A reduction in the required fire flow rate may be allowed per the exceptions specified in the California Fire Code. System shall be looped with minimum eight (8) inch mains; six (6) inch laterals; six (6) inch risers; six (6) inch diameter hydrants with one 2 1/2" outlet and one 4" outlet.

30. Approved fire hydrants capable of supplying required fire flow shall be provided to all premises upon which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are constructed or moved within the jurisdiction. When any portion of the facility or building protected is in excess of 400 feet from a fire hydrant on a public street, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, additional fire hydrants, meeting the required fire flow, shall be provided.

31. Fire hydrants shall be installed at locations to be determined by the California Fire Code (2022) Appendix "C". Required fire flow to be determined by the California Fire Code (2022) Appendix "B". Minimum fire flow shall not be less than 1500 gpm.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 254

32. Submit WQMP Plan for Approval.

33. The natural drainage courses traversing the site shall not be occupied or obstructed.

34. Applicant shall demonstrate that the site does not create concentrated discharges to adjacent properties and/or public right-of-way in excess of historical flows. If project does create concentrated or sheet flows off -site that are greater than historical, the applicant shall demonstrate that the downstream facilities can accommodate flows; otherwise, applicant shall provide on -site detention for excess flows in accordance with the approved WQMP.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

35. Adequate provisions shall be made to intercept and conduct the tributary drainage flows around or through the site in a manner which will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties at the time the site is developed.

36. Road sections within and/or bordering the project shall be designed and constructed with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks to City Road Standards, and in accordance with the General Plan Circulation Element.

37. Final improvement plans and profiles shall indicate the location of any existing utility facility which would affect construction. Existing utility poles shall be shown on the improvement plans and relocated as necessary without cost to the City.

38. A thirty-five (35) foot radius of return grant of easement is required for rounding the corner of intersecting roads when the half -width right-of-way of any intersecting road is forty (40) feet or greater. A twenty (20) foot radius of return grant of easement is required for rounding the corners of intersecting roads if the half -width right-of-way of all intersecting roads is less than forty (40) feet.

39. Continuous water spraying or other approved methods must be used during grading operations to control fugitive dust.

40. Applicant shall integrate any recommended roadway improvement measures from the Traffic Impact Analysis into the required street improvement plans.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO
RECORDATON OF THE FINAL MAP:

FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 797-2489 EXT. 246

41. Three sets of water delivery system plans, designed to meet the required fire flow for this project and/or development, shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval.

42. Applicant -developer shall provide the Fire Department with a letter from the water provider serving the project -development verifying that financial arrangements have been made and bonds posted for the required Fire Department approved water improvements.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 254

43. A preliminary soils report shall be filed with and approved by the City Engineer.

44. A geology report, prepared by a Licensed Engineering Geologist, shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

45. Adequate provisions shall be made to intercept and conduct the off -site tributary drainage flow around or through the site in a manner which will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties.

46. Detention basins shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the criteria set forth in the City Detention Basin Policy and the approved WQMP. All work shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

47. Detention basins for the purposes of water quality filtration shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the criteria set forth in the project WQMP, landscape plans and City Detention Basin Policy. All work shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.

48. Should the use of detention basins be determined not appropriate in this case, the applicant shall design an alternate method, approved by the City Engineer.

49. The WQMP shall be approved and the developer shall provide a financial mechanism for the maintenance of the detention basins which shall be set in place and approved by the City Engineer. The WQMP maintenance agreement shall be executed and recorded by the applicant.

50. In addition to the drainage, traffic related, or other requirements stated herein, other "on -site" or "off -site" improvements may be required which cannot be determined from tentative plans at this time and would have to be reviewed after more complete improvement plans and profiles have been submitted to the City Engineer.

51. A Registered Civil Engineer shall investigate and design adequate drainage facilities to intercept and conduct the drainage flows around or through the site in a manner which will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties.

52. A thorough evaluation of the structural road section, to include parkway improvements, from a qualified materials engineer, shall be submitted to the Engineering Division.

53. Existing City roads which will require reconstruction shall remain open for traffic at all times, with adequate detours, during actual construction. A cash deposit may be required to cover the cost of grading and paving prior to recordation of the map. Upon completion of the grading and paving to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division, the cash deposit will be refunded.

54. Trees, irrigation system, and landscaping required to be installed on public right- of-way within this project area shall be maintained by other than the City, with the exception of Landscape & Lighting Maintenance District areas, and shall be as specified in City standards for tree planting. Maintenance procedures acceptable to the Engineering Division shall be instituted.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

55. Road improvement plans for 12t" Street and Avenue E shall be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.

56. All required public road and drainage improvements shall be bonded in accordance with the Development Code and City Bonding Policy unless constructed and approved prior to recordation.

57. In the event applicant fails to acquire the required off -site property interests, the developer shall at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the applicant of all costs incurred by the City to acquire off -site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the applicant, at the applicant's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal.

58. The applicant shall submit road improvement plans to the Engineering Division and bond for those improvements with the City.

59. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and twenty-two (22) feet of paving shall be installed on 12t" Street and thirty-two (32) feet on Avenue E. Plans for all improvements must be approved by the Engineering Division, prior to installation of said improvements. A cash deposit or surety bond may be placed to fulfill this requirement.

60. The applicant shall provide proof of legal and physical access to the proposed subdivision. As proof of access, the applicant shall submit one of the following:
(a) existing dedication; (b) copy of the court decree establishing prescriptive rights that is acceptable to the City Engineer; (c) dedications by separate instrument from all property owners intervening between the proposed land division and the City Maintained Road System.

61. Right-of-way and improvements (including off -site) to transition traffic and drainage flows from proposed to existing shall be required as necessary.

62. Slope stability tests are required for road cuts or road fills in excess of a 2:1 slope

63. A Registered Civil Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor shall be retained to design the proposed road alignment to the approval of the City Engineer. A contour map at sufficient intervals to determine existing topography (not to exceed five feet) prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer or a Licensed Land Surveyor shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer delineating the alignment and grade of the proposed access roads designed to City standards.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24
am

64. Applicant shall present evidence to the City Engineer that he has obtained a non- interference letter from any utility company that may have rights of easement within the property boundaries.

65. Easements of record not shown on the tract/parcel map shall be relinquished or relocated. Lots affected by proposed easements or easements of record, which cannot be relinquished or relocated, shall be redesigned.

66. Any off -site grading easements shall be obtained and these areas shall be contour graded.

67. Applicant shall provide for street lighting within the tract as per adopted City standards and per Improvement Level requirements.

68. This project shall be required to create a Homeowners Association (HOA) for new development for the provision of maintenance services to public or common areas that may be a part of the development, and the applicant hereby agrees to waive the right to protest the formation of said HOA.

69. Project shall annex into the Public Safety Community Facilities District.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224

70. Applicant shall procure a verification letter from the sewering agency. This letter shall state the availability or denial of sewer connection and service by the agency to the proposed project.

71. Applicant shall procure a verification letter for water service from the entity whose geographical jurisdiction contains the proposed project. Certification that arrangements have been made to provide water service shall be submitted for sign -off.

72. A Composite Development Plan, complying with Development Code Section

83.040505, shall be filed by the applicant with the Planning Division for review and approval.

73. The Composite Development Plan shall include the following notes:

A. All parcels may be located within 1,320 feet of existing accessory animal raising uses which existed prior to the creation of this subdivision. Such uses will be protected from nuisance complaints pursuant to the City Development Code, Section 84.0560, entitled "Accessory Animal Raising' .

B. Prior to occupancy, a minimum number of one (1) inch caliper/15 gallon, multi -branched trees and an appropriate groundcover shall be planted in the parkway within street right-of-way as follows:

Small trees: 25 feet on center

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 9
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24
Large trees: 30 feet on center
These trees are to be of a type and are to be placed in such a manner as indicated in note above.

C. Street trees in the parkway between sidewalk and curb shall be provided with a linear root barrier.

D. Specify three approved street tree types (actual variety is to be approved by the Planning Division) and detail the planting specifications as outlined in the City's Standards and Specifications for Tree Planting.

E. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, slope planting shall be required for the surface of all cut slopes more than five (5) feet in height and fill slopes more than three (3) feet in height. Said slopes shall be protected against damage by erosion by planting with grass or ground cover plants.

Slopes exceeding eight (8) feet vertical height shall also be planted with shrubs, spaced at not to exceed ten (10) feet on centers; and trees, spaced at not to exceed thirty (30) feet on centers. The plants selected and planting methods used shall be suitable for the soil and climatic conditions of the site.

Trees 50% 15 gal.; 50% 5 gal.

Shrubs 50% 5 gal.; 50% 1 gal;
Groundcover 100% coverage.

F. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, slopes and parkways required to be planted shall be provided with an approved automatic system of irrigation, designed to cover all portions of the slope and parkway. A functional test of the system may be required. All irrigation systems, where required, shall be designed on an individual lot basis unless commonly maintained in an approved manner.

G. No grading or structures of any type shall be permitted in the open space easements, including walls or fencing. Fuel modification improvements, natural vegetation and/or re -vegetation in compliance with resource agency permits and regulations, drainage facilities, and trail improvements are permitted in the natural open space areas.

H. A six (6) foot decorative masonry wall shall be provided at the top of slope (if applicable) along the side and rear of lots adjacent to public roads and other walls as shown on the approved Tentative Map. All decorative walls shall be designed and constructed to incorporate design features such as tree planter wells, variable setback, split block face, columns, or other such features to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

Decorative block walls may incorporate see -through features to take advantage of views, such as wrought iron or tubular steel sections between decorative block pillars, but must include a minimum two (2) foot masonry base. Walls along street frontage shall be provided with a seal coat of graffiti resistant paint and/or dense landscaping in front of the wall.

No fence, wall, or retaining wall shall exceed six (6) feet in height (four (4) feet in front yard setback areas) unless a Variance is approved by the City.

74. This project shall annex into a Mello -Roos Community Facilities District if it is required by the City, and the applicant hereby agrees to waive the right to protest the formation of said district.

75. Proof of fee payment of Fish and Game fees pursuant to California State Assembly Bill 3158 shall be submitted.

76. The applicant/owner shall process a Condition Compliance Review through the City for verification of conditions prior to final map recordation.

77. The Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (CC&Rs), which covenant shall run with the land, in a form satisfactory to the City Planner, shall require that the owners of the lots shall immediately remove any graffiti placed on publicly viewable trees, rocks or structures thereon to the City's satisfaction. The CC&Rs shall also prohibit the future subdivision of the site.

78. Two copies of the CC&R's shall be submitted to the Planning Division and City Attorney's office for review and approval to ensure consistency with City policies and standards.

79. A Homeowners Association shall be established for the on -going maintenance and management of the common open space, recreation facilities, private streets and drainage facilities, and landscaped areas. The front and street side yard and parkway landscaping for each dwelling unit and all exterior fences, shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association and incorporated into a Landscape Maintenance Easement. The Homeowners Association's By -Laws and CC&R's shall include this requirement for common maintenance of front yard landscaping and exterior fences, they shall prohibit individual garages from being used for the storage of personal belongings to the extent that they shall prohibit the storage of recreational vehicles (boats, trailers, etc.) in the off-street parking spaces. Said By -Laws and CC&R's also shall state that they cannot be amended without the express written consent of the City Planning Commission.

80. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 11
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24
BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 263

81. Three (3) copies of a Landscaping and Irrigation Plan shall be submitted for Building and Safety Division review and approval for all proposed lots (including areas to be maintained by a Landscape Maintenance District, which shall have separate landscape plans). Said Landscape and Irrigation Plan shall include all of the requirements specified in the current City of Yucaipa Landscape Design and Installation Guidelines, and shall also include the following:

A. The required slope planting. Slope planting shall be required for the surface of all cut slopes more than five (5) feet in height and fill slopes more than three (3) feet in height. Said slopes shall be protected against damage from erosion by planting with grass or ground cover plants.

Slopes exceeding eight (8) feet in vertical height shall also be planted with shrubs, spaced at not to exceed ten (10) feet on centers; and trees, spaced at not to exceed thirty (30) feet on centers, per City Landscape Design and Installation Guidelines.

Trees 50% 15 gal.; 50% 5 gal.

Shrubs 50% 5 gal.; 50% 1 gal.

Groundcover 100% coverage
B. Parkway planting with trees and appropriate groundcover. Trees in the parkway between sidewalk and curb shall be provided with root barriers.

Tree spacing/location:

Small trees: 25 feet on center
Large trees: 30 feet on center
C. A six (6) foot decorative masonry wall shall be provided at the top of slope (if applicable) along the side and rear of lots adjacent to public roads and as shown on the approved Tentative Map. All decorative walls shall be designed and constructed to incorporate design features such as tree planter wells, variable setback, split block face, columns, or other such features to provide visual and physical relief along the wall face.

Decorative block walls may incorporate see -through features to take advantage of views, such as wrought iron or tubular steel sections between decorative block pillars, but must include a minimum two (2) foot masonry base. Walls along street frontage shall be provided with a seal coat of graffiti resistant paint and/or dense landscaping in front of the wall.

No fence, wall, or retaining wall shall exceed six (6) feet in height (four (4) feet in front yard setback areas) unless a Variance is approved by the City.

D. Neighborhood entry monuments, including elevations.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

E. All required and proposed multi -use trails, including specifications for construction.

F. For landscape installations, Compost at a rate of a minimum of 4 cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of permeable area shall be incorporated to a depth of six (6) inches into the soil. Soils with greater than six percent (6%) organic matter in the top six (6) inches of soil are exempt from adding Compost and tilling.

G. Apply a minimum three- (3-) inch layer of mulch on all exposed soil surfaces of planting areas except in turf areas, creeping or rooting groundcovers, or direct seeding applications where mulch is contraindicated. To provide habitat for beneficial insects and other wildlife, leave up to five percent (5%) of the landscape area without mulch.

Designated insect habitat must be included in the landscape design plan as such.

H. Compost and mulch made by the City's franchised hauler or other designee from recovered organic waste products pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18993.1 shall take precedence over inorganic or virgin forest products when available locally.

82. All irrigation systems, where required, shall be designed on an individual lot basis unless commonly maintained in an approved manner.

83. All landscaping and irrigation systems shown on the approved landscape and irrigation plans, all required walls, trails, and/or other improvements shall be completed or suitable bonds shall be posted for their completion. Separate bonds are required for individual lots and Landscape Maintenance District Areas.

THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 263

84. This project will require one or more building permits. Permits will require a complete permit application and complete building plans to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of work.

85. The site shall be developed in compliance with all current model codes. All plans shall be designed in compliance with the latest editions of the California Building Codes, California Energy Codes, California Accessibility Codes, and Yucaipa Municipal Codes as adopted by the City of Yucaipa.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

86. Site development shall be designed to comply with California Accessibility Codes. Provide access to all entrances and exterior ground floor exits and access to normal paths of travel, and where necessary to provide access. Paths of travel shall incorporate (but not limited to) exterior stairs, landings, walks and sidewalks, pedestrian ramps, curb ramps, warning curbs, detectable warnings, signage, gates, lifts and walking surface material. The accessible route(s) of travel shall be the most practical direct route between accessible building entrances, site facilities, accessible parking, public sidewalks, and the accessible entrance(s) to the site. California Building Code (CBC) 11A and11 B. a. City of Yucaipa enforces the State of California provisions of the California Building Code disabled access requirements. The Federal ADA standards differ in some cases from the California State requirements. It is the building owner's responsibility to be aware of those differences and comply accordingly.
b. Disabled access parking shall be located on the shortest accessible route.

Relocate parking spaces accordingly.

87. Structures on the site shall be accessible per California Building Code (CBC) 11A and 11 B.

88. Three copies of a Landscape Documentation Package shall be submitted for Building and Safety Division review and approval. Said Landscape Documentation Package shall be consistent with the requirements of Chapter 4, of Division 10, of the Development Code and include all of the following elements:

A. Project Information
(1) Date
(2) Project Applicant
(3) Project Address (if available, parcel and/or lot number(s)) (4) Total Landscape Area (square feet)
(5) Project Type (e.g., new, rehabilitated, public, private, cemetery, homeowner -installed)
(6) Water Supply Type (e.g., potable, recycled, well) and identify the local retail water purveyor if the applicant is not served by a private well
(7) Checklist of All Documents in Landscape Documentation Package

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

(8) Project Contacts (to include contact information for the project applicant and property owner)
(9) Applicant Signature and Date (with statement, "I agree to comply with the requirements of the water efficient landscape ordinance and submit a complete Landscape Documentation Package"). (B) Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet
(1) Hydrozone Information Table
(2) Water Budget Calculations
(1) Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA)
(II) Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU)
(C) Soil Management Report
(D) Landscape Design Plan
(E) Irrigation Design Plan
(F) Grading Design Plan
(G) Certification of Substantial Completion (to be submitted after installation of the project).

A copy of the approved Landscape Documentation Package shall be provided to the property owner or site manager along with the record drawings and any other information normally forwarded to the property owner or site manager. A copy of the Water Conservation Concept Statement and the Certificate of Substantial Completion shall be sent by the project manager to the local retail water p u rveyo r.

89. Three (3) copies of a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a Registered Landscape Architect for the planting (drought tolerant landscaping shall be utilized to minimize water consumption) and permanent irrigation system for the development, including setback areas and parkways, shall be submitted to the Building & Safety Division for review and approval. Said plans must be consistent with the City of Yucaipa Landscape Design and Installation Guidelines and include the following details:

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

A. Voltage boxes, mailboxes, trash enclosures, maintenance structures, backflow devices, automatic controls, air conditioning/heating units, etc., to be shown on the plan and screened with landscaping and/or decorative fencing/trim.

B. A permanent automatically -controlled irrigation system.

C. Landscaping shall consist of drought tolerant vegetation appropriate to the local climate. Trees, shrubs and ground covers in the following quantities shall be required as follows:

1. Compost
Compost at a rate of a minimum of 4 cubic yards per 1,000 square feet of permeable area shall be incorporated to a depth of six (6) inches into the soil. Soils with greater than six percent (6%) organic matter in the top six (6) inches of soil are exempt from adding Compost and tilling.

2. Tree planting (15 gallon size):
a. 1 for each 600 sq. ft. of total landscaped
area (one required, minimum);
b. 80% of total trees required to be 15 gallon;
C. 1 for every 12 parking stalls;

3. 24 to 96 inch box trees:
a. 20% of total trees required (one required, minimum).

4. Tree Spacing/location:
a. small trees: 20 feet O.C. max.;
b. large trees: 30 feet O.C. max.;
C. street trees: 15 gal. min./30 feet O.C. max.;
d. min. 6 feet from curbs, paving and sidewalks;
trees in parkway between sidewalk and curb
shall be provided with a linear root barrier.

5. 5 gallon shrubs:
a. 60% of total shrubs required to be 5 gallon;
b. 10 for each 300 sq. ft. of landscaped area.

6. 1 gallon shrubs:

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 16
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24
a. 40% of total shrubs required.

7. Ground Cover:
a. Drought tolerant adapted when mature, or native;
b. Maximum spacing: 12 inches O.C., or as suitable for planting material;
C. Hydroseeding (establish recommended mixture); specify weight or volume per unit area.

7. Mulch:
a. Apply a minimum three- (3-) inch layer of mulch on all exposed soil surfaces of planting areas except in turf areas, creeping or rooting groundcovers, or direct seeding
applications where mulch is contraindicated. To provide habitat for beneficial insects and other wildlife, leave up to five percent (5%) of the landscape area without mulch.

Designated insect habitat must be included in the landscape design plan as such
D. Parking/vehicular circulation areas screened with landscaped berms adjacent to streets.

E. Landscape detail of trash enclosures, to be located within 200 ft. of building pad.

F. All walls and fences shall be shown, at the top of slope (if applicable), with the style, design, materials, and colors indicated.

G. Design features to direct storm water run-off into landscaped pervious areas to achieve percolation into the ground before run-off flows reach the public rights -of -way.

H. Detector -check valve assembly screening and camouflage, which shall include landscaped berms and/or depressions, shrub screening, and the painting of the equipment to match the landscaping. The height of the equipment shall not exceed the minimum ground clearance established by the applicable code. It is not permitted to be located within the front yard building setback area, unless otherwise approved by City Inspector.

90. Per Yucaipa Valley Water District regulations, no waste line cleanouts or back water valves shall be installed inside a garage.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

91. Separate submittals and permits are required for all structures, accessory structures such as but not limited to, trash enclosures, patios, trellises, gazebos block walls, signage, and storage buildings.

92. Pursuant to California Business and Professions Code Section 6737, this project is required to be designed by a California licensed architect or engineer.

93. The perimeter of the jobsite shall have a properly installed, 6' high, construction fence with privacy cloth attached. The fencing and cloth shall be maintained and kept in good condition until such a time that the project has been completed, or a permanent perimeter wall is in place. All construction entrances/exits shall be approved in advance by city personnel.

94. Prior to Building and Safety approving building final and the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy all conditions shall be satisfied and final approval signatures from all required city departments, and/or other governing bodies having jurisdiction, shall be present on the Approved Permit Inspection Record or Job Card."

95. New projects with a landscape area of 500 square feet or more, or projects rehabilitating an existing landscape area of 2,500 square feet or more shall comply with Sections 492.6(a)(3)(b) (c), (d) and (g) of the MWELO including the use of renewable organic waste products such as compost and mulch where applicable.

96. Three (3) copies of the grading plan shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Division for review and approval. A copy of the grading plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division when graded slopes exceed five (5) feet in height. All on -site cut and fill slopes shall:

A. Be a part of the downhill lot when between individual lots, or as approved by the City Planner and City Engineer.

B. Incorporate recommendations of the approved geology and soils reports.

C. Be contour graded to blend with existing natural contours.

D. Be limited to a maximum slope ratio of two -to -one (2:1) and a maximum vertical height of thirty (30) feet. Setbacks from the top and bottoms of slopes shall be a minimum of one-half (1/2) the slope height or per CBC.

E. Preclude damage to the site and downstream properties during heavy storm run-off, especially during the construction stage by including a stringent slope, erosion, and sediment control program on the proposed grading plan. Any such damage allowed to occur will be the responsibility of the applicant.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

F. Provide letters of consent from adjacent property owners for proposed offsite grading.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 254

97. Applicant shall submit a Notice of Intent and comply with the requirements of the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board if the project site is 1 acre or greater. In addition, the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required to be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.

98. Groundwater pollution from urban run-off water generated by the project shall be mitigated using various structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs), per the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region and/or as indicated in the "New Development/Redevelopment Guidelines." All provisions of the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) consistent with the 2010 MS4 permit and most recent regulatory mandates shall be met, including but not limited to approval of a Preliminary WQMP.

99. The applicant shall provide documentation indicating that the WQMP, grading plan, erosion control plan and landscape plan are consistent with each other. The documentation shall indicate that each document has been reviewed by the applicant for consistency.
100. The applicant's plans indicate approximately 49% of the site to be improved with impervious surfaces. Design features shall be included to direct storm water run- off flows into landscaped pervious areas before any run-off flows into public rig hts-of-way.
101. In addition to the drainage, traffic related, or other requirements stated herein, other "on -site" or "off -site" improvements may be required which cannot be determined from tentative plans at this time and would have to be reviewed after more complete improvement plans and profiles have been submitted to the City Engineer.
102. A thorough evaluation of the structural road section, to include parkway improvements, from a qualified materials engineer, shall be submitted to the Engineering Division.
103. Existing City roads which will require reconstruction shall remain open for traffic at all times, with adequate detours, during actual construction. A cash deposit may be required to cover the cost of grading and paving. Upon completion of the grading and paving to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division, the cash deposit will be refunded.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

104. Prior to signing of the improvement plans, any proposed grading within the road right-of-way shall be done under the direction of a Soils Testing Engineer, hired by the applicant. Compaction tests of embankment construction, trench backfill, and all subgrades shall be performed at no cost to the City. Prior to placement of any base materials, and/or paving, a written report shall be submitted by the applicant's engineer to the City Engineer for review and approval. 105. A topographic map shall be provided to facilitate the design and review of necessary drainage facilities at the time the site is developed. 106. The proposed development indicates a vacation of public right-of-way. Applicant shall coordinate with City Engineering staff to for vacation process if agreed upon.
107. Future building pads shall be elevated adequately, a minimum of one foot above established Base Flood Elevation to reduce damage from flooding. 108. Avenue E and 12t" Street shall be designed as water -carrying streets and their water carrying capacity shall be maintained.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224
109. Grading permits shall not be issued for any areas to be graded and remain undeveloped until a revegetation plan is approved by the Planning Division, and until bonds are posted for revegetation.
110. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET:

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 263
111. This project will require one or more building permits. Permits will require a complete permit application and complete building plans to be submitted for approval prior to commencement of work.
112. The site shall be developed in compliance with all current model codes. All plans shall be designed in compliance with the latest editions of the California Building Codes as adopted by the City of Yucaipa.
113. The structures shall comply with all structural and non-structural provisions of the California Building Code.
114. Pursuant to California Business and Professions Code Section 6737, this project is required to be designed by a California licensed architect or engineer.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

115. The perimeter of the jobsite shall have a properly installed, 6' high, construction fence with privacy cloth attached. The fencing and cloth shall be maintained and kept in good condition until such a time that the project has been completed, or a permanent perimeter wall is in place. All construction entrances/exits shall be approved in advance by city personnel.
116. Separate submittals and permits are required for all accessory structures such as but not limited to, trash enclosures, patios, block walls and storage buildings. 117. For all required walls, the applicant shall submit plans to and obtain building permits from the Building and Safety Division.
118. New projects with a landscape area of 500 square feet or more shall comply with Sections 492.6(a)(3)(b) (c), (d) and (g) of the MWELO including the use of renewable organic waste products such as compost and mulch where applicable. 119. Compost and mulch made by the City's franchised hauler, Yucaipa Disposal, Inc. (909) 797-9125, or other designee from recovered organic waste products pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18993.1 shall take precedence over inorganic or virgin forest products when available locally.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224
120. The enrollment of the Yucaipa Joint Unified School District is severely impacted by new development. To mitigate the impact of this project, developer shall pay such taxes as are required by the Yucaipa Joint Unified School District Community Facilities District No. 1, and any other fees assessed by Government Code Section 53080, and 65995-65997.
121. The City of Yucaipa has implemented development impact fees for various infrastructure and capital facilities needs generated by new development. These fees will provide for various capital facilities including, but not limited to, roads, parks, flood control and drainage, public facilities, and fire fighting facilities. This project shall be subject to all such development impact fees which are in effect at the time building permits are issued.
122. Provide plans for conceptual landscaping, fencing, and detailed building elevations including materials, finishes and colors for all houses for Planning Commission review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 123. Project shall comply with the standards of the Starling Heights Specific Plan and any other applicable standards identified by the City -Wide Design Guidelines as adopted by the Development Code.
124. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

Starling Heights Specific Plan Page 21
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24
FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 797-2489 EXT. 246
125. A fuel break of one hundred (100) feet (brush and weed clearance) is required prior to construction. The clearance shall be maintained on a year-round basis. 126. An additional fuel modification zone of 100 feet shall be provided on all side(s) of the proposed structure(s). Fuels in this zone are to be thinned and/or removed or otherwise modified to provide a reasonable level of fire defense protection to the proposed structure(s).
127. Fire hydrants shall be installed and operational as per approved water system delivery plans prior to any framing, construction, or delivery of combustible materials to project site.
128. A water storage and delivery system for temporary use during construction and meeting Fire Department fire flow requirements shall be installed prior to framing, construction, or delivery of combustible materials to project site. 129. An alternative type of construction providing a higher level of fire resistance may be required. Consult the City of Yucaipa Development Code Section 85.0202201 — 85.02022230 and CBC Chapter 7A.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 254
130. Submit engineered road improvement plans to the City Engineer. 131. The WQMP shall be approved and the developer shall provide a financial mechanism for the maintenance of the detention basins which shall be set in place and approved by the City Engineer. The WQMP maintenance agreement shall be executed and recorded by the applicant.

SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE OCCUPIED AND/OR USED FOR

PURPOSES APPLIED FOR UNTIL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
HAVE BEEN MET:

FIRE DEPARTMENT (909) 797-2489 EXT. 246
132. Residential driveways shall be paved (asphalt/concrete) and shall have a minimum width of twelve (12) feet. Driveways of this standard shall serve no more than two single family dwellings and shall not exceed 12% in grade. 133. Fire Department access roadways and/or public/private streets exceeding one hundred fifty (150) feet in length shall have a Fire Department approved turn-

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

around at the terminus (cul-de-sac). Minimum radius shall be not less than 48 feet.
134. Driveways exceeding 150 feet shall have a Fire Department approved turn- around at the terminus (hammer -head tee).
135. Fire Department access roadways and/or public/private streets and driveways shall extend to within one hundred fifty (150) feet of and shall give reasonable access to all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. An access road, approved by the Fire Department, shall be provided to within fifty (50) feet of all structures when the natural grade between access road and structure is in excess of 30%. Where an approved access road cannot be provided, a fire protection system shall be required and approved by the Fire Department.
136. The Development and/or project, and each phase thereof, shall have a minimum of two (2) remote points of access, including a secondary access, for fire and other emergency equipment and for routes of escape which will safely handle evacuations.
137. The public and/or private roadways serving this project shall be named. 138. Street name signs shall be installed with approved names. 139. Manual operated gates across Fire Department access roadways, public and/or private streets and driveways, shall be equipped with approved emergency key - operated ("Knox" type) locks. For automatic gates, a "Knox" keyed emergency access switch shall be installed at location determined by Fire Prevention Department and shall over -ride all command functions and open gate automatically upon activation. All automatic gates shall have a manual over -ride for use during loss of electric power. "Knox box" ordering is available from www.knoxbox.com .
140. Address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing residential structures in such a manner as to be plainly visible and legible from the access roadway or street. Single-family dwellings shall have numbers of 4" height, 1 /2" stroke on contrasting background. Address numbers shall be low voltage, automatically electrically illuminated. Where structure setback exceeds one hundred (100) feet from the access roadway or street, additional non -illuminated numbers 4" in height, 1/2" stroke, on contrasting background shall be displayed at property access entrance.
141. Address numbers shall be placed on all new and existing commercial and multi- family residential structures in such a manner as to be plainly visible and legible from the access roadway or street. Structures shall have numbers of 8" height, 3/8" stroke on contrasting background. Address numbers shall be illuminated so as to be visible and legible from access roadway or street. Industrial

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

occupancies shall have address numbers of 12" height, 1" stroke and shall be illuminated so as to be visible and legible from access roadway or street. Where structure setback exceeds one hundred (100) feet from the access roadway or street, additional non -illuminated numbers 6" in height, 3/4" stroke, on contrasting background shall be displayed at property access entrance. 142. Prior to final inspection, there shall be posted at each entrance of the complex an illuminated diagrammatic representation of the complex showing the locations of the viewer, the unit designations within the complex, and the locations of fire hydrants. The developer shall submit a drawing detail to the Fire Department for approval.
143. "No Parking — Fire Lane" signs shall be posted at locations designated by Fire Department. Fire lane curbs shall be painted red with white letters stating, "No Parking — Fire Lane".
144. On -site fire hydrants capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be installed at locations identified by the Fire Marshall. System shall be looped with minimum eight (8) inch mains; six (6) inch laterals; six (6) inch risers; six (6) inch diameter hydrants with one 2 1/2" outlet and one 4" outlet.
145. Approved fire hydrant pavement markers shall be installed. 146. Residential automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed according to NFPA 13D, or Section R313 of the California Residential Code, and Fire Department requirements. Submit three (3) sets of shop plans with material cut sheets and hydraulic calculations for Fire Department review and approval prior to an installation. Submit copy of California C-16 license. Minimum water meter supplying a 13D system shall be 1" steel pipe, or 3/" if other than steel pipe.

Minimum pipe size for interior use shall be 1" steel pipe, or 3/4" if other than steel pipe (actual pipe size to be hydraulically calculated). Residential sprinkler heads of proper temperature rating shall be installed in attic and built-up storage spaces where mechanical equipment (fau, water heater, etc.) is installed. 147. Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed according to NFPA 13R and Fire Department requirements. Submit three (3) sets of shop plans with material cut sheets and hydraulic calculations, indicating the type of occupancy, type of materials to be stored (if any), for Fire Department review and approval prior to any installation. Submit copy of California C-16 license. 148. Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed according to NFPA 13 and Fire Department requirements. Submit three (3) sets of shop plans with material cut sheets and hydraulic calculations, indicating the type of occupancy, type of materials to be stored (if any), for Fire Department review and approval prior to any installation. Submit copy of California C-16 license.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

149. Automatic fire sprinkler control devices (P.I.V. & O.S.&Y.) shall be visible from Fire Department access roadway, and identify system being controlled and address of structure. Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall be located no closer than fifty (50) feet and not to exceed one hundred fifty (150) feet from structure. Required fire hydrant shall have a maximum distance from FDC of thirty (30) feet. FDC shall identify address and system of structure being protected.
150. A minimum of one 2A-10BC fire extinguisher shall be installed for each 3,000 sq. ft. of floor area. Travel distance to any one fire extinguisher shall not exceed 75 feet. Additional fire extinguishers, size and class to be determined by Fire Department, may be required. Fire extinguishers shall be serviced annually and shall have a current sfm service tag attached.
151. An automatic fire detection and alarm system meeting the requirements of CFC Article 10, CBC and NFPA 72 shall be installed. Three (3) sets of shop plans with material cut sheets and calculations shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 152. Smoke detectors, hard wired in series with battery back-up, shall be installed in all sleeping areas and in all hallways and areas/rooms leading to sleeping areas in a manner consistent with manufacturers instruction. Smoke detectors shall be installed at the top of all stairways. At least one smoke detector shall be installed on the first floor level.
153. Carbon Monoxide detectors shall be installed pursuant to manufacturer specifications.
154. For each chimney used in conjunction with any fireplace or heating appliance in which solid or liquid fuel is used, an approved spark arrester shall be installed and visible from the ground. Spark arrester shall be of stainless steel, copper or brass, woven galvanized wire mesh, twelve (12) gauge, and minimum of 3/8" to /2" maximum openings.
155. A class "A" roof covering structure with "bird stops" shall be installed. 156. High Fire Hazard Areas FR-1 & FR-2: one -hour fire resistive construction is required for exterior walls. Consult the City of Yucaipa Development Code Section 85.0202201 — 85.02022230 and CBC Chapter 7A.
157. The main electrical panel and all sub -panels shall be labeled on inside cover for all circuits.
158. Water heater (fuel fired) shall be property vented to exterior of structure. Water heater shall be seismic strapped to wall and be located 18" above a garage floor. 159. A solid core, self -closing door shall be installed between an attached garage and living space.

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

160. Commercial and industrial structures/occupancies and gated complexes shall have a "Knox box" system installed on the exterior of the buildings or complex.

Location of device to be determined by the Fire Department. The box shall contain keys necessary to gain access and may contain pre -plans and SDS information as required by the Fire Department.
161. Commercial exit requirements:

A. Required exit doors shall be maintained in an operable condition at all times.

B. Required exit doors shall swing outward and away in the direction of exit travel.

C. Obstructions shall not be placed in the required width of an exit. Exits shall not be blocked or locked shut or obstructed in any manner during business hours.

D. Exit paths shall be illuminated when structure is occupied.

E. Exit path illumination shall be supplied from two (2) sources of power when occupant load is one hundred (100) persons or more.

F. When exit way/exit pathway and/or exit doorway is not easily identified, additional exit signs shall be installed.

G. Exit signs shall be internally or externally illuminated by two lamps or shall be of the self -luminous type.
162. Submit to Fire Marshal's office building and/or structure plans for Fire Department Review.

ENGINEERING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 254
163. Construct curb and gutter (with match -up paving) thirty-two (32) feet from centerline along Avenue E and twenty-two (22) feet along 12t" Street. 164. Construct sidewalk adjacent to site with landscaped parkway. 165. Construct driveway approach/entrance. Commercial driveways require radius type approaches.
166. Any further development of this parcel will require construction of full road improvements.
167. Developer shall be required to place construction traffic control in public right-of- way during the construction of off -site improvements. Traffic control devices shall be maintained 24 hours a day 7 days a week as directed by the City Engineer.
168. The Applicant shall submit the signed original Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Certification form to verify consistency of the BPMs shown on the as-

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

built grading plans and landscape plans. In case of inconsistency, the Applicant shall revise the WQMP to match the as -built plans.

PLANNING DIVISION (909) 797-2489 EXT. 224
169. Parking and on -site circulation requirements shall be provided for as identified on the approved site plan.
170. All access drives and parking areas shall be surfaced with a minimum of 2 inches of asphalt concrete surfacing, City Road Specification No. 39, which shall be appropriately striped to accommodate safe vehicular circulation. 171. All access drives shall be a minimum of 24 feet wide to facilitate two-way traffic. 172. All parking stalls shall be clearly striped and permanently maintained with double or hairpin lines on the surface of the facility, with the two lines being located an equal nine (9) inches on either side of the stall sidelines; arrows shall be painted on the paving to indicate direction of traffic flow.
173. Any lights used to illuminate the site shall be hooded and designed so as to reflect away from adjoining properties and public thoroughfares. 174. Developers of residential development projects greater than a single dwelling unit, commercial properties and multi -family dwellings shall submit a report, including invoices or proof of recovered organic waste product procurement (either through purchase or acquisition) pursuant to 14 CCR Section 18993.1, and submit records to the City's designee. Records shall include the source of product, including name, physical location, and contact information for each entity, operation, or facility from whom the recovered organic waste products were procured, type of product, quantity of product in tons or yards, invoice or other record demonstrating procurement.
175. The amenities approved for each unit per Development Code Section 88.0210 (f) shall be installed.
176. The applicable planting, irrigation, walls, monuments, and other improvements shown on the approved landscaping and irrigation plan shall be installed. 177. Developers shall ensure that they recycle and/or salvage for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of the nonhazardous construction and demolition waste. 178. The applicable planting, irrigation, walls, monuments, and other improvements shown on the approved landscaping and irrigation plan shall be installed. 179. Developers of residential development projects greater than a single dwelling unit shall submit a report detailing the percentage of project costs spent in the City of Yucaipa. At a minimum, this report shall contain a list of local

Starling Heights Specific Plan
Case No. 22-129/SP/ARC/TTM 20372
DRAFT Conditions of Approval; 7-12-24

businesses/individuals that have been solicited for bids and/or received contracts for materials or services.
180. Residential projects shall comply with all objective design requirements as listed in the City's Development Code and Citywide Design Guidelines. 181. The project shall implement the mitigation measures listed in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

ATTACHMENT 7

RESOLUTION NO.2024-34

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA

ADOPTING STARLING HEIGHTS SPECIFIC PLAN AND THE

ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), CERTIFYING THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR CASE NO. 22-129/SP9

ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM FOR THE STARLING HEIGHTS SPECIFIC PLAN
PROJECT, AMENDING SPECIFIC PLAN FIGURE CDL-3 TO REFLECT

THE NEW SPECIFIC PLAN AND AMENDING GENERAL PLAN
FIGURE CDL-2, LAND USE DISTRICTS TO REFLECT THE UPDATED

LAND USE PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Yucaipa (the "City Council") has before it a request for approval of a Specific Plan and General Plan Amendment to change a Land Use District designation (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Initial Study which has been prepared for the Project evaluates and determines that any potentially significant environmental impacts that occur are at a level that are less -than -significant; and
WHEREAS, the Starling Heights Specific Plan and associated General Plan Land Use District Amendment is in the public interest, and there will be a community benefit, because the development would provide housing that is directly accessible to neighborhood serving uses; and WHEREAS, the Starling Heights Specific Plan and associated General Plan Land Use District Amendment is consistent with General Plan goals and policies regarding residential uses, and it will provide additional housing opportunities within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has before it a request for approval of the Starling Heights Specific Plan 22-129 (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.) ("CEQA"), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the Specific Plan will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding properties as any future project will require improvements and include development standards to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses.

WHEREAS, the City circulated the MND and the Appendices for the Project to the public and other interested parties for a 20-day comment period, in accordance with Guidelines Section 15105, from April 12, 2024, through May 2, 2024; and

WHEREAS, there were no responses to the MND during the 20-day comment period; and
WHEREAS, on May 24, 2024, a notice of a Planning Commission public hearing on the Specific Plan and its environmental review was published in the Yucaipa News Mirror and mailed to all property owners within and 300 feet around the plan area; and WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Yucaipa Municipal Code, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 5, 2024, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence regarding the General Plan Update, as set forth in the Planning Commission Agenda Report of that date; and WHEREAS, following consideration of the entire record before it at the public hearing and upon due consideration of the proposed General Plan Update, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt environmental findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.), certify the MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Planning Commission hearing and after due consideration of the entire record before the Planning Commission and the testimony provided during the hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve of the Specific Plan according to the Findings required pursuant to Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code; and
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2024, a notice of a City Council public hearing on the Specific Plan and its environmental review was published in the Yucaipa News Mirror and mailed to all property owners within and 300 feet around the plan area; and WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Yucaipa Municipal Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on June 24, 2024, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and WHEREAS, the update is included as part of the City's General Plan Amendment for the second quarter of 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information for Starling Heights Specific Plan.

Section 2. The City Council finds that the above recitals are true.

Section 3. The City Council approves and adopts the Starling Heights Specific Plan, and that it meets Findings required pursuant to Section 83.020310 of the Yucaipa Development Code.
-2-

Section 4. The City Council certifies the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The mitigation measures set forth in the MND and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are hereby incorporated into the Project and will be made conditions of the Project.

Section 5. The City Council approves the modification to General Plan Figure CDL-3, Land Use Modifications, to include the Starling Heights Specific Plan.

Section 6. The City Council approves the modification to General Plan Figure CDL-2, Land Use Plan, to include the Starling Heights Specific Plan boundary as Planned Development (PD).

Section 7. The City Clerk of the City of Yucaipa shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution be noted in the Minutes of this City Council meeting and a "Notice of Determination" be filed within five (5) days of this action by the City Clerk.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2024.

ATTEST:

Ana V. Sauseda, MMC
Director of General Services/City Clerk
Justin Beaver, Mayor
-3-

EXHIBIT A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Starling Heights MMRP (Under Separate Cover)
-1-

ATTACHMENT S

ORDINANCE NO. 449

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA,

CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL LAND USE PLAN AND

ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YUCAIPA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. A public hearing has been held before the City Council of the City of Yucaipa (the "City"), duly noticed and conducted pursuant to the Planning and Zoning Laws of the State of California and applicable provisions of Division 3 of the Development Code as adopted by Ordinance No. 124; and the Official Land Use Plan of the City, as adopted by Ordinance No. 343, is hereby amended as provided in Section 2 herein below.

Section 2. The proposed land use modification contained on the "Official Land Use Modifications Map" on file with the City, and bearing the file number Case No. 22-129/GPA/SPA, creates an overlay encompassing APNs 0318-021-18, -19, -44, and -5 8 titled "Starling Heights Specific Plan", modifying Figure CDL-3, Land Use Modifications.

Section 3. The proposed land use designation contained on the "Official Land Use Districts Map" on file with the City, and bearing the file number Case No. 22-129/GPA/SPA, changes the Land Use District designation of the area encompassed by the boundaries of the Starling Heights Specific Plan, as reflected in Figure CDL-3, Land Use Modifications to the City's Planned Development (PD) district, replacing the Single Residential (RS-20M) Land Use District.

Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to cause the following summary of this ordinance to be published by two (2) insertions in the Yucaipa News Mirror, a newspaper of general circulation that is printed, published, and circulated in the City of Yucaipa, and hereby designated for that purpose by said Council of the City of Yucaipa: "Ordinance No. 449 creates the Specific Plan Boundaries for the Starling Heights Specific Plan within the City's Land Use Modification Plan (CDL-3) within the changes the Land Use Designation reflected for the Starling Heights Specific Plan within the City's General Plan Figure CDL-2 to Planned Development (PD) as part of Case No 22-129/GPA/SPA."
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of , 2024.

ATTEST:

Justin Beaver, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM
Ana V. Sauseda, MMC Steven Graham, City Attorney
Director of General Services/City Clerk

ATTACHMENT 9

Christian Farmer
From: Benjamin Matlock
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2024 7:58 AM
To: Christian Farmer
Subject: FW: Starling Heights Yucaipa Village
For the file; thank you.

Benjamin Matlock
Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner City of Yucaipa
City Hall • 34272 Yucaipa Blvd • Yucaipa, CA 92399
Office 109 `9 .148 9 2
From: MICHAEL SIMPSON
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2024 11:48 AM
To: Benjamin Matlock
Subject: Starling Heights Yucaipa Village
Hello.

I am writing to oppose the rezoning and development of the field next to Dunlop Elementary. I live directly behind this field and have a clear view of it from my backyard. I have just redone my back lawn and spent lots of time and money making my yard nice. If you begin construction on this field, it will drive all the gophers out of the field and into my yard.

Also, this development will put 200+ cars next to an elementary school, putting children at risk on an already very busy street, Ave E.

The developer plans to put 127 homes on 5 acres. This hardly fits with the theme and aesthetic of the "Dunlap Acres" section of Yucaipa. This is a terrible option for our city and Neiborhood and I strongly hope you will listen to your constituents and not proceed with this development.

City council members that agree to this proposal wilt not have my vote in the future and I wilt encourage as many as possible to vote in a similar manner.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Michael Simpson

Christian Farmer
From:

MICHAEL SIMPSON
Sent:

Sunday, April 21, 2024 4:31 PM
To:

Christian Farmer
Subject:

Ave E and 12th Rezoning
Hetto.

I am writing to oppose the rezoning of the field next to Dunlop Elementary. I live directly behind this field and have a clear view of it from my backyard. I have just redone my back lawn and spent tots of time and money making my yard nice. If you begin construction on this field, it will drive all the gophers out of the field and into my yard.

This city has terrible roads and lots of money. How about we get those fixed before adding any more McMansions to the area?
If my yard is impacted by this construction, I will contact my lawyer and begin to seek damages.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Michael Simpson
1 Christian Farmer
From: Lillian Simpson
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2024 10:49 AM
To: Christian Farmer
Subject: Ave E and 12 rezoning proposal
Good afternoon,
This e-mail is to express my deep concern and upset to your proposal to rezone the lot off Ave E and 12th. In. Yucaipa.

By resining this area you are increasing traffic, thus increasing risk to the children who walk to the school on Ave E.

You are removing the entire reason why we moved to Yucaipa to have land, and not be completely shut in my cheap track housing. We selected this beautiful place to live on a promise that building could not occur behind our land. Your proposal takes away the country feel of our town, and would no longer be a town I would wish to live in.

You would be causing significant disruption and stress to the livestock that live in this area during the construction process, the increase of traffic, the increase of people.

This would cause an increase in disturbance to current Residents as well with the increase in traffic and population of people.

Please, I ask you reconsider your proposal to leave that lot as it is. Please continue to keep Yucaipa a place that we want to stay, and not remove our happiness in our beautiful town.

Thank you,
Lillian Simpson
Sent from my iPhone

Christian Farmer
To: Teresa Drummonds; William Inghram
Subject: RE: Homeowner Comments to Rockwell Land - Update -- Starling Heights From: Teresa Drummonds,
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 4:55 PM
To: William Inghram
Cc: Christian Farmer
Subject: Re: Homeowner Comments to Rockwell Land - Update -- Starling Heights I injured my ribs in a bad fall and will be unable to attend tonight. My neighbor next door, Sarah Perez, is stepping in.

While I appreciate the house and Landscape plans you provided, I have not changed my opposition to your development that wilt be traffic, noise, and eye pollution to the rural community that already has 2 or more new housing developments. They aren't completed or filled in Yucaipa on Avenue H and 5th Streets. Those tracts took the beautiful landscapes and serene lifestyles from co-Yucaipans, who likely fought this same urbanization by Orange County capitalists.

I'm sure you're a nice man, but this deviation from early morning cackle-doodle-doos and baahs is a nightmare to those if us who settled here for those very symbols of God and Country and His Star Spangled night skies.

Terri Drummonds

DRUMMONDS MED-LEGAL
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Teresa Drummonds
Date: Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: Homeowner Comments to Rockwell. Land - Update -- Starting Heights
To: Nate Lin
This wilt ruin our property values and mountain view if developed in any capacity. I looked for new property 2 years ago when I saw the soil samples being taken and suspected this. Nothing could replace the acreage and the wideopenedness of this land.

I notified many of my neighbors of the community meeting scheduled 2 months ago. They are also opposed to the impending decimation of Yucaipa's rural character in yet another attempt at its demise.

I Looked for the plans via h_tt_p_a,:iLarcg,,i - s/ - 1 - ruq,000 as indicated on the City's Project Notice and found only my neighbor's property at 33022 Ave E, stating it isn't for sale.

Please provide the plans personally to me.

Is this slated for Section 8 property or other housing for the homeless? There are so many other places for you to build.

To the west of me is such an area of blight that I won't even drive that way. Your development has the very real potentiality for that blight to grow and encroach Like cancer onto 12th and E home- and acreage -owners' properties.

If the apartments (128 units) are set back against the hills with the park set to its front, I may be, candidly, less Likely to create a huge frenzy to your proposed development.

I purchased this property for the quiet starry nights and awesome view.

Instead, the traffic has become unsustainable. You're asking us to accept at least 244 more vehicles and adults x 2.5 noisy kids and their dogs without a fight?
Terri Drummonds

DRUMMONDS MED-LEGAL

CITY OF YUCAIPA PLANNING DIVISION

PROJECT NOTICE
DATE: April 10, 2024
CASE NUMBER: PL20220000129
APPLICANT: Starling Heights
PROPOSAL: Case No. 22-129/CUP:A Minor General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of four (4) contiguous parcels from RS-20M (Single -Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) to RS (Single Residential) with an associated Specific Plan (Starling Heights Specific Plan) to provide the development standards for a 14.78-acre site to allow a 128-unit residential subdivision and the associated community features including a recreation center, active park, dog park, entry monuments, and detention basins located on the corner of Ave E & 12th St APNs: 0318-021-18,19, &58 LOCATION: 33022 AVE E ;;, APN 031802118;031802119;031802158; ATTENTION PROPERTY OWNERS AND REVIEWING AGENCIES: The development proposal � listed above has been filed with the City Planning Division and more information may be found at City at the following link: https:Harcg.is/1 rug000 or using the QR code to the right.

You are invited to comment because your property is near the proposed project. Your comments must be received by this office no later than April 24, 2024. Comments received after this date might not be considered in the decision. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Christian Farmer at (909) 797-2489, ext. 270. You may send your comments to the City of Yucaipa Planning Division, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, CA 92399, or via email to [email protected].

If you want to be notified of the project decision, print your name clearly and legibly on this form and mail it to the address above along with a self-addressed, stamped envelope. All decisions are subject to an appeal period of ten (10) calendar days after an action is taken.

COMMENTS (If you need additional space, please attach additional pages):

IM., w,'�e. (moy St-raoloy ds^irce wig, tl' e
C JAA JA / l In W' Gy W e-
'T im ,% trwce ( o '� (,,,.HJ ;S SN ✓'roft^410 J k>7 A SC r'I 00 1 (1,VeV+,,_k . 044MAINY Gl�►^�S
cAt l V�cAr A
C'"J proper4l^er
a.r'e.A 4,;il iAcvcAse --r� Ft�'c i Ylo,xe
SGttool. C:kn urc�-
Cl el i A'Ctl ' i
twig,
wti 1/' "'"'0 , to d- f,rov.

EA n
5Ltotd� be- re-)cc�e�
C"r Arc ^ S^ 42C
SIGNATURE_.. DATE 'i/t`I/I %GENCY Res; Ie
PRINT NAME M► ke S t MP 5 0 kl ADDRESS
GVli&V'Ir 01 nJ

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY DECISION REGARDING THE ABOVE PROPOSAL IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING

ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING

DIVISION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE TIME IT MAKES ITS DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL OR, IF A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON

THE PROPOSAL, YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE RAISED THOSE ISSUES AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE HEARING BODY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE HEARING.

DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WISHING TO GIVE ORAL TESTIMONY, TIME RESTRICTIONS MAY BE PLACED ON ORAL TESTIMONY AT ANY PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL. YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING TO ASSURE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS YOURSELF ADEQUATELY. cc: Surrounding Property Owners Yucaipa Valley Water District Fire Department Engineering Division
Building & Safety Division Yucaipa-Calimesa School District South Mesa Water Company

CITY OF YUCAIPA PLANNING DIVISION

PROJECT NOTICE
DATE: April 10, 2024
CASE NUMBER: PL20220000129
APPLICANT: Starling Heights
PROPOSAL: Case No. 22-129/CUP:A Minor General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of four (4) contiguous parcels from RS-20M (Single -Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) to RS (Single Residential) with an associated Specific Plan (Starling Heights Specific Plan) to provide the development standards for a 14.78-acre site to allow a 128-unit residential subdivision and the associated community features including a recreation center, active park, dog park, entry monuments, and detention basins located on the corner of Ave E & 12th St APNs: 0318-021-18,19, &58 LOCATION: 33022 AVE E ;;, APN 031802118;031802119;031802158; ATTENTION PROPERTY OWNERS AND REVIEWING AGENCIES: The development proposal 0 � listed above has been filed with the City Planning Division and more information may be found at City at the following link: https://arcg.is/trug000 or using the QR code to the right. �+ You are invited to comment because your property is near the proposed project. Your comments must be received by this office no later than April 24, 2024. Comments received after this date might not be considered in the decision. If you have no comment, no reply is necessary. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact Christian Farmer at (909) 797-2489, ext. 270. You may send your comments to the City of Yucaipa Planning Division, 34272 Yucaipa Boulevard, Yucaipa, CA 92399, or via email to [email protected].

If you want to be notified of the project decision, print your name clearly and legibly on this form and mail it to the address above along with a self-addressed, stamped envelope. All decisions are subject to an appeal period of ten (10) calendar days after an action is taken.

COMMENTS (If you need additional space, please attach additional pages Rom. r�.. - t2..w►----v C9 wti
SIGNATURE l DATE_ A r=FNr.Y _
PRINT NAME jU:5i`1G�-1 AJ C�_ ADDRE'

IF YOU CHALLENGE ANY DECISION REGARDING THE ABOVE PROPOSAL IN COURT, YOU MAY BE LIMITED TO RAISING

ONLY THOSE ISSUES YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE RAISED IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE PLANNING

DIVISION AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE TIME IT MAKES ITS DECISION ON THE PROPOSAL OR, IF A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON

THE PROPOSAL, YOU OR SOMEONE ELSE MUST HAVE RAISED THOSE ISSUES AT THE PUBLIC HEARING OR IN WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE DELIVERED TO THE HEARING BODY AT, OR PRIOR TO, THE HEARING.

DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS WISHING TO GIVE ORAL TESTIMONY, TIME RESTRICTIONS

MAY BE PLACED ON ORAL TESTIMONY AT ANY PUBLIC HEARING ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL YOU MAY WISH TO MAKE YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING TO ASSURE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO EXPRESS YOURSELF ADEQUATELY. cc: Surrounding Property Owners Yucaipa Valley Water District Fire Department Engineering Division
Building & Safety Division Yucaipa-Calimesa School District South Mesa Water Company

ATTACHMENT 10

Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Starling Heights Specific Plan
TTM 20372

CITY OF
Lead Agency:

City of Yucaipa
34272 Yucaipa Boulevard
Yucaipa, CA 92399
Prepared By:

CASC Engineering and Consulting, Inc.
1470 E. Cooley Dr.

Colton, CA 92324
(909) 783-0101 Ext. 5370
C
Engineering and Can 1ting
April 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE — INTRODUCTION............................................................................................6

1.1 Purpose and Authority.........................................................................................................6

1.2 Documents Incorporated by Reference..............................................................................6

1.3 Documents Prepared for the Project...................................................................................6 CHAPTER TWO — ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST..................................................................7

2.1 Project Summary..................................................................................................................7

1. Project Title..............................................................................................................................7

2. Lead Agency Name and Address............................................................................................7

3. Contact Person and Phone Number........................................................................................7

4. Project Location.......................................................................................................................7

5. Project Applicant's Name and Address...................................................................................7

6. General Plan/Zoning Designation............................................................................................7

7. Project Description..................................................................................................................7

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: ....................................................................................... 8 9. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: ............................................................. 9 10. California Native American Tribes: .......................................................................................... 9 2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected....................................................................15

2.3 Determination......................................................................................................................15

2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts...............................................................................16 CHAPTER THREE — ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DISCUSSION............................................18 I. Aesthetics.................................................................................................................................18 II. Agricultural Resources............................................................................................................21 III. Air Quality..............................................................................................................................23 IV. Biological Resources.............................................................................................................32 V. Cultural Resources.................................................................................................................37 VI. Energy...................................................................................................................................41 VII. Geology and Soils................................................................................................................45 VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions................................................................................................50 IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials........................................................................................54 X. Hydrology and Water Quality..................................................................................................58 XI. Land Use and Planning.........................................................................................................63 XII. Mineral Resources................................................................................................................65 City of Yucaipa
*- Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

XIII. Noise...................................................................................................................................67 XIV. Population and Housing......................................................................................................75 XV. Public Services.....................................................................................................................77 XVI. Recreation...........................................................................................................................80 XVII. Transportation/Traffic.........................................................................................................82 XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources..................................................................................................89 XIX. Utilities and Service Systems..............................................................................................92 XX. Wildfire.................................................................................................................................98 XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance..................................................................................101 CHAPTER FOUR — MITIGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP).103 CHAPTER FIVE— REFERENCES AND PREPARERS............................................................107

5.1 References Cited...............................................................................................................107

5.2 List of Preparers...............................................................................................................110 City of Yucaipa
*- Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

FIGURES
Figure2-1 Regional Vicinity........................................................................................................10 Figure2-2 Project Boundary.......................................................................................................11 Figure 2-3 Existing Land Use and Zoning...................................................................................12 Figure 2-4 Proposed Specific Plan Land Use.............................................................................13 Figure 2-5 TTM 20372................................................................................................................14 Figure 13-1 Noise Measurement Locations................................................................................69 Figure 13-2 Construction Noise Receptor Locations..................................................................70 Figure 13-3 Operation Analysis Receiver Locations...................................................................72 TABLES
Table 3-1 Maximum Daily Regional Emissions Thresholds........................................................24 Table 3-2 Maximum Daily Localized Emissions Thresholds.......................................................25 Table 3-3 Overall Regional Construction Emissions Summary..................................................28 Table 3-4 Project Localized Construction Impacts......................................................................28 Table 3-5 Total Project Regional Operational Emissions...........................................................29 Table 8-1 Total Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions..................................................................51 Table 13-1 24-Hour Ambient Air Noise Level Measurements.....................................................68 Table 13-2 Construction Reference Noise Levels......................................................................71 Table 13-3 Construction Equipment Noise Summary.................................................................71 Table 13-4 Operational Noise Level Compliance.......................................................................73 Table 17-1 VMT Analysis for Project Impacts.............................................................................86 Table 17-2 Summary of Transportation Deficiencies at Study Intersections..............................86 Table 19-1 Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand Comparison (acre-feet) .............................95 Table 19-1 Estimated Solid Waste Generation...........................................................................97 Table 22-1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program........................................................103 City of Yucaipa
*- Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

APPENDICIES
Appendix A-
Rockwell Technical Studies Air Quality Impact Analysis. Urban Crossroads, Inc. September 8, 2023.

Appendix B -
Starling Heights Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Tract Map 20372, Biological Resource Assessment Report. CASC Engineering and Consulting, July 2023.

Appendix C -
Cultural Resource Assessment for the Rockwell TTM 20372 Project, City of Yucaipa, County of San Bernardino, California (C-0478), Duke Cultural Resources Management, LLC (DUKE CRM), July 21,2023.

Appendix D -
Extended Phase I Survey Rockwell TTM 20372 Project, City of Yucaipa, County of San Bernardino, California, Duke Cultural Resources Management, LLC (DUKE CRM), February 2024.

Appendix E -
Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation Proposed Yucaipa Village Partners Assessor's Parcel Numbers 0318-021-18, -19 and -58. GeoTek, Inc. August 9, 2022
Appendix F -
Rockwell Technical Studies Greenhouse Gas Analysis. Urban Crossroads, Inc.

September 8, 2023.

Appendix G -
Preliminary Hydrology Study TR 20372 Residential Development Yucaipa, CA.

Blue Engineering and Consulting, Inc. November 2020.

Appendix H-
Water Quality Management Plan for Tract Map 20372, Blue Engineering and Consulting, Inc. August 2022.

Appendix I-
Rockwell Technical Studies Noise Impact Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc., July 17,2023.

Appendix J -
121" Street and Avenue E Residential Traffic Impact Analysis Yucaipa, California, TJW Engineering, Inc. February 9, 2023.

Appendix K -
12t" Street and Avenue E Residential Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis.

TJW Engineering, Inc. June 6, 2023.

Appendix L -
Preliminary Project Service Evaluation, Yucaipa Valley Water District.

February 6, 2024.

Appendix M -
Service Letter, Western Heights Water Company. March 26, 2024.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Authority
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ("IS/MND") has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq.) ("CEQA") to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Starling Heights Specific Plan TTM 20372 ("Project") located at the northeast corner of 12th Street and Avenue E in the City of Yucaipa, California. This document is prepared in conformance with CEQA and the CEQA guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, § 15000 et seq.). This IS/MND is intended to serve as an informational document for the public agency decision makers and the public regarding the Project.

1.2 Documents Incorporated by Reference
As permitted by Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, this IS/MND references several technical studies and analyses. Information from the documents incorporated by reference is briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s). The relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and the IS/MND has also been described. The documents and other sources used in the preparation of this IS/MND include, but are not limited to:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 2016)
• City of Yucaipa General Plan Environmental Impact Report (April 2016) • Initial Study City of Yucaipa General Plan Update, PlaceWorks, (October 2014) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
• San Bernardino County Countywide Plan (September 2022) • San Bernardino County Policy Maps (GIS-NET)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
• 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) (adopted December 2, 2022) 3 Documents Prepared for the Project
As part of the CEQA review process, the lead agency determined that the following stand-alone technical studies be prepared for the Project, and they are appended to the IS/MND as follows:
• Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A)
• Biological Resources Assessment (Appendix B)
• Cultural Resources Assessment (Appendix C)
• Extended Phase I Evaluation (Appendix D)
• Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation Report (Appendix E) • Greenhouse Gas Assessment (Appendix F)
• Preliminary Hydrology Study (Appendix G)
• Water Quality Management Plan (Appendix H)
• Noise Assessment (Appendix 1)
• Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix J)
• VMT Analysis (Appendix K)
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

CHAPTER TWO - ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

2.1 Project Summary

1. Project Title:

Starling Heights Specific Plan — TTM 20372

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Yucaipa, 34272 Yucaipa Blvd. Yucaipa, CA 92399

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Benjamin Matlock, Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner (909) 797-2489 ext. 261

4. Project Location:

North of Avenue E and east of 12th Street at the northeast corner of Avenue E and 12th Street. Specifically, within Section 3, township 2 South, Range 2 West, as depicted on the Yucaipa, California USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle.

5. Project Applicant's Name and Address:

Yucaipa Village Partners
4350 Von Karman Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92660

6. General Plan/Zoning Designation:

Existing: RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) Proposed: RS (Single Residential) — Specific Plan GP Land Use Modification Overlay

7. Project Description:

Rockwell Land Company ("Applicant") proposes a Tentative Tract Map (TTM No. 20372) to subdivide 14.78 acres into a 128-unit, single-family residential development in the City of Yucaipa ("City") (See Figure 2-1: Regional Vicinity). The Project site consists of four (4) existing parcels: Accessor's Parcel Numbers (APNs) 0318-021-18, -19, -58, and 0301- 113-44 (See Figure 2-2: Project Boundary). The Project site is vacant on two (2) parcels (APNs) 0318-021-18 and -19 and contains a single-family residence with horse corrals on two (2) parcels (APNs 0318-021-58 and 0301-113-44).

The General Plan land use designation for the Project site is RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) (See Figure 2-3: Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning). The Project site is located within the southwestern portion of the City and is surrounded by single-family residential uses and vacant land to the north, Dunlap City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Elementary School to the west, single-family residential uses to the south, and Oak Glen Creek to the east with single-family residential uses further east. The Project site is bounded by Avenue E to the south, 12th Street to the west, and Oak Glen Creek to the east.

The Project consists of the following applications:

General Plan Amendment (GPA) to change Figure CDL-3, Land Use Modification Overlay Districts of the General Plan to include Starling Heights Specific Plan, and to change the General Plan Land Use Designation from RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum) to RS (Single Residential) and adding the Specific Plan to the General Plan Land Use Modification Overlay (General Plan Figure CDL-3).

Figure 2-4: Proposed Land Use Plan depicts the proposed Land Use Designation for the Project site.

Specific Plan Amendment (SPA) to adopt the Starling Heights Specific Plan and associated standards and regulations for the planning area.

Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 20372 to subdivide the 14.78-acre site, currently consisting of four (4) parcels, into 128 single family residential units with community features and detention basins that will serve the Project. Figure 2-5: TTM 20372 depicts TTM No. 20372.

The Applicant proposes to construct 128 two-story single-family residences with attached 2-car garages, private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on - street guest parking. The Project consists of two (2) floor plans with four (4) bedrooms and one (1) floor plan with three (3) bedrooms. As part of the Project, all existing on -site structures are proposed to be demolished. Project construction is anticipated to commence in September 2024. Access to the Project site is provided via a 24-foot-wide driveway on Avenue E, and a 24-foot-wide driveway on 12th Street. Circulation throughout the residential development is provided via a two-lane, 24-foot-wide private road.

Elongated driveways, 24-foot-wide, extend from the private road to provide direct access to individual residences. The Project also includes a community recreation center located within the central portion of the development, an open space area to serve as a game park located in the northeast corner of the development, and an active -community park located in the southeast corner of the development.

8. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:

North: To the north of the Project Site are single-family residential uses designated as RS- 20M.

South: To the south of the Project Site are single-family residences designated RS-20M and southeast is vacant land designated as Park, planned for the future Dunlap Park.

East: To the east of the Project Site is Oak Glen Creek designated Floodway (FW) and further east are single-family residences designated as RS-10M.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

West: To the west of the Project Site is Dunlap Elementary School which is designated as Institutional and further west are single-family residences designated as RS-20M.

9. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required:

Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit; construction run-off permits, Storm Drain MS4 Permit)
Development Agreement with the Yucaipa Valley Water District

10. California Native American Tribes:

Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission's Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

The City, Lead Agency, commenced the AB 52 process by transmitting letters of notification to the California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Project area on February 8, 2023. The Lead Agency received one response from the Yuhaaviatam San Manuel Nation (YSMN) on March 6, 2023. During the consultation process, YSMN requested an Extended Phase 1 Survey (XPI) of the Project site be performed due to the Project site's proximity to a prehistoric archaeological site. Field excavations for the XPI occurred over a two-day period from January 10-11, 2024 with a YSMN representative present. No tribal cultural resources were identified during the XPI, and the site was determined to have a low sensitivity for buried prehistoric and historic era cultural resources. The results of the XPI are incorporated in Section V. Cultural Resources and Section XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). The City therefore complied with the requirements of AB

52. City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

oeirrtw
srs
e.rnr,i..

Yes �.*.�e■ oa...�
k
ling Hill$
,we Park
��flM�Fl2
F
r
1 UdR Fomg
h�lCu,918 r �iS
{
f
*tCNIL.
a
247
�s
Sm @errlard no
f onal F4
x t f Tl
OKPqW',d
Wrapa
Pass ,
PCrnS
Hanel: �FI i.3'"AliPrll
i4t.IFT1�
�1 �r^f'7GE' �r�rrjrn
Cl� hlral
r' Ir--,crr
Figure 2-1 Regional Vicinity
TTM No. 20372
a s ,a 2GStarling Heights Specific Plan
FSuNinruriaR � uJ {:ik� I I iak
Rues Yucaipa, CA
LMMifla ELri, +,sue phffS&. CAro7Q Sam ram, AMs: 0318-021-18, -19, & -58, 3301-11344 EM. YmTorrk, Q m. SMCmo, RW). HETVNASA, , 6_.eau or Lr d Mw6WwwfL BP*, WE, USPWS Sm @errlard no
f onal F4
x t f Tl
OKPqW',d
Wrapa
Pass ,
PCrnS
Hanel: �FI i.3'"AliPrll
i4t.IFT1�
�1 �r^f'7GE' �r�rrjrn
Cl� hlral
r' Ir--,crr
Figure 2-1 Regional Vicinity
TTM No. 20372
a s ,a 2GStarling Heights Specific Plan
FSuNinruriaR � uJ {:ik� I I iak
Rues Yucaipa, CA
LMMifla ELri, +,sue phffS&. CAro7Q Sam ram, AMs: 0318-021-18, -19, & -58, 3301-11344 EM. YmTorrk, Q m. SMCmo, RW). HETVNASA, , 6_.eau or Lr d Mw6WwwfL BP*, WE, USPWS

�
_.�
Wit.
rrl- - - I .- m r
1 f L
�.k _
tti
I� I
OL
bL
eN
1 * + rJti
+
F,r �•'�
.� . r
OL
I _
Sri_y,� � � •
' • L J _ _AILiPP
...
i y
A -A
OV #
_ y
r
it
-
Figure 2-2 Project Boundary
0 163 3za TTM No. 20372
61 II�IL.oridK �11� c:ll� LO US F&V Sta H i ng Heig hts .specific Dian Yucaipa, -CA
e.,-llkz cmw� !;rft 2wb� we oprcgrmmftR - _ I-M.- G-r-% f-2- y w,d.-km— k�; -Ery APNs: 0318-021-18, -19, & -58; 0301-113-44 ft-5A U5K ka ]I LwW Nw— EMMIS, les Lti-a iLrmmA LFW, usuT� Carq•d Sal Mwrad •- Ph=

Figure 2-3 Existing General Plan Lard Use & Zoning
h��`
TTM No, 20372
Eii4iiii vriii4 mild Can llinj N a 251 rDD 1,am
Starting Heights Specific Plan
us Feet Yucaipa, CA
p.` �u ^-- Vic,
� ,4PNs: 0318-021-18 1 & -58; 03D1-113- 4
Ramrdn}, [ali8•fma:k a Pwks. '� OpeAme � Flow 1, u5 �u^ �4 GEMirTW 7Tifr17�iA". Y4 / f f MCA, J53E, CI LVW F ffal. op, *S' L6 CM.M H r"L {EEMf4 LtEp Y CGIIM, or Sw awanj 1n;' HiSvf

Figure 2-4 Proposed Land
j��UiiP�ylan
ilwlN 0mo � Um TrM No. 20372
us Ftarfing HeihtSpecific plan
Yucaipa, CA
44 BKMd I!Wf ,Q�� oCPMtb% MaV, or M. E^ Tr. I)^' Q.Ks a fiTkdM kr, ,4PN5: �318�0 1-18, -1 , & -58; 0 [}i-113— R1CA, u90E, BuiwmdLwA IW eS SK IRS us C-- Ekff tmk UWM Cur or Sm fiwnm� Mmm

Figure 2-5: TTM 20372
�I■ �r 01Em a �
rrieni��r�in
AVENUE E.
(PUBLIC ROAD) P,
,.,.�City Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

OPEN SPACE
13,936 SF

2.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑
Aesthetics
❑
Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
ElAir
Quality
®
Biological Resources
®
Cultural Resources
❑
Energy
®
Geology/Soils
❑
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
❑
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
❑
Hydrology/Water Quality
❑
Land Use/Planning
❑
Mineral Resources
❑
Noise
❑
Population/Housing
❑
Public Services
❑
Recreation
❑
Transportation/Traffic
®
Tribal Cultural Resources
❑
Utilities/Service Systems
❑
Wildfire
®
Mandatory Findings of
Significance

2.3 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ® I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Benjamin Matlock Date
Deputy Director of Community Development
IT) OF
City of Yucaipa
e*Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
oo^ Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

2.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the Project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors, as well as general standards (e.g., the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant.

If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the Project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

CHAPTER THREE - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DISCUSSION
Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
I. Aesthetics — Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the pro'ect:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
❑
❑
®
❑
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
❑
❑
®
❑
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly
❑
❑
®
❑
accessible vantage point). If the project is in
an urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
❑
❑
®
❑
nighttime views in the area?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • City of Yucaipa General Plan Environmental Impact Report, PlaceWorks (April 2016) o Section 5.1 — Aesthetics
• Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
• California Department of Transportation. List of Eligible and Officially Designated State Scenic Highways, 2019
• Submitted Project Materials
Findings of Fact: The Project site is located in an urban, built-up environment within the southwest portion of the City, in the County of San Bernardino. The Project site has a land use designation and zoning designation of RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum). The Project proposes a general plan amendment to change the land use designation of the site to IRS (Single Residential) while adding the Specific Plan to the General Plan Land Use Modification Overlay, and a specific plan amendment to adopt the Starling Heights Specific Plan. The Project site is predominately undeveloped with one (1) single-family residence and associated horse corrals located at the southeast corner of the Project site. Uses surrounding the Project site include single-family residences to the north, south, and east, the Wilson Creek Floodway to the east, and Dunlap Elementary School west of 12th Street. The nearest State -designated scenic highway is a portion of State Route 38 (SR-38) located approximately 6.79 miles northeast of the Project site.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

The Applicant proposes to demolish the existing structures onsite and to construct 128 two-story residences. The proposed housing development will create new sources of lighting that will be consistent in scale and character with the surrounding uses and developments. Lighting will be constructed in a manner that prohibits excessive glare and light spill by utilizing shields or hoods that direct the light in a downward manner away from adjoining properties. These additional light sources are not anticipated to be substantial enough to adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area and would be consistent with the adjoining single family residential development surrounding the site. The Project will be conditioned during the entitlement process to ensure compliance with the City's standards related to lighting.

Discussion of Impacts
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant Impact: Scenic vistas within the City are provided by the Yucaipa Hills, the Crafton Hills, and Wildwood Canyon. The proposed Project site is not located in a scenic vista and is bounded by the Wilson Creek Floodway to the East and is surrounded by single-family residences and Dunlap Elementary School. The site is predominately undeveloped with one (1) single-family residence located in the southeastern portion of the site. The Applicant proposes to demolish the existing building and construct 128 two- story residences with attached 2-car garages, private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on -street guest parking. Upon approval of a general plan amendment and specific plan amendment the Project would be consistent with the proposed land use designation of Single Residential (RS) and the Starling Heights Specific Plan. Furthermore, the Project is consistent in scale and character with the surrounding residential uses. Therefore, the Project would not have substantial adverse effects on a scenic vista and impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Less than Significant Impact: The nearest State -designated scenic highway is a portion of SR-38 located approximately 6.79 miles northeast of the Project site. The City's General Plan identifies Oak Glen Road as a scenic corridor which is located 0.13 miles east of the Project site and as such will not be impacted by the proposed Project. Furthermore, views from Oak Glen Road towards the Project site are obstructed by existing single-family residences. The Project site is predominately undeveloped and consists of ruderal/disturbed vegetation. The proposed Project includes ornamental landscaping adjacent to the existing public streets and within the Project site. Due to the nature of the surrounding residential uses, the existing disturbed vegetation onsite, the proposed ornamental landscaping, and the distance between the Project site and a scenic highway, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on scenic resources. c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
OJIll
April 2024

Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Project is located within an urbanized area with single-family residences located to the north, south and east, and Dunlap Elementary School immediately to the west. Visual impacts during construction would be temporary and would cease upon Project completion. Development of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial difference in the character or visual quality of the surrounding area. Furthermore, the Project will be conditioned upon approval to be consistent with Division 7 General Design Standards of the City's Municipal Code, the Citywide Design Guidelines, and the development standards listed in the Specific Plan. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact: Excessive or inappropriately directed lighting can adversely impact night-time views by reducing the ability to see the night sky and stars.

Glare can be caused by unshielded or misdirected lighting sources, as well as reflective surfaces. Temporary lighting may be used during construction of the Project; however, impacts would be temporary and insignificant. The long-term operation of the Project would result in new sources of light at the Project site as a result of street lighting, exterior and interior lighting of residences, and security lighting. The Project is required to comply with the City's Development Code which contains general design standards that ensure new developments will not have an impact on surrounding land uses due to light and glare.

Therefore, lighting and glare impacts from the proposed Project would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
II. Agricultural Resources — In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State's inventory of forest land, including the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Would theproject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
❑
❑
®
❑
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
nonagricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
❑
❑
®
❑
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined by
Public Resource Code section 122220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resource
❑
❑
®
❑
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104 ?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
❑
❑
®
❑
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
❑
❑
®
❑
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
• California Department of Conservation (CDC), California Important Farmland Finder (CIFF), 2016
• Submitted Project Materials
CITY O- City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Findings of Fact: According to the City's General Plan Land Use Map, there are no land uses designated for agriculture, forest, or timberland within the vicinity of the Project site. The Project site is located within the southwest portion of the City which contains urbanized residential and commercial communities and is located north of Interstate 10 (1-10). The Project site has a land use designation of RS-20M (Single Residential, 20,000 square foot minimum), which permits residential development, and includes one (1) existing building and associated improvements. Finally, there is no active agriculture, forest, or timberland within the vicinity of the Project.

Discussion of Impacts
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency to non-agricultural use?
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined by Public Resource Code section 122220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resource Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104 (g))?
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
a-e) Less than Significant Impact: The following analysis addresses environmental checklist questions a) through e) for Agriculture and Forestry Resources. The California Department of Conservation manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), which identifies and maps significant farmland. Farmland is classified using a system of five categories including Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance or Potential, and Grazing Land. The classification of farmland is determined by a soil survey conducted by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) which analyzes the suitability of soils for agricultural production. Based on the Important Farmland Finder, an interactive GIS application, the Project site is identified as "Grazing Land" meaning the site has existing vegetation that is suitable for grazing. The Project site currently consists of ruderal/disturbed vegetation and is not designated for agriculture uses. The Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract, nor would the Project conflict with zoning for agriculture uses, forest land area, or timberland production as the site would remain designated for single family development. Finally, the Project site is fully disturbed and contains one (1) existing building and associated improvements in the southeast corner of the site. Based on the preceding, the Project would not result in the conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use and a less than significant impact to agricultural or forestry resources would occur.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

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

Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
❑
❑
®
❑
the applicable air quality plan?
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non -attainment under
❑
❑
®
❑
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
❑
❑
®
❑
pollutant concentrations?
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
❑
❑
®
❑
substantial number of people?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). adopted December 2, 2022.
• Rockwell Technical Studies Air Quality Impact Analysis. Urban Crossroads, Inc.

September 8, 2023. (Appendix A)
Regulatory Setting: The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) within the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis -Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality standards. The SCAB is a 6,745-square mile subregion of the SCAQMD, which includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County.

Criteria Pollutants
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants representing safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called "criteria" pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

criteria documents. The six criteria pollutants are ozone (03) (precursor emissions include NOX) and reactive organic gases (ROG), CO, particulate matter (PM), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead (Pb). Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas.

Regional Air Quality
The SCAQMD has developed regional significance thresholds for criteria pollutants, as summarized in Table 3-1. The SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds (March 2023) indicate that any projects in the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact.

Table 3-1 Maximum Daily Regional Emissions Thresholds
Pollutant
Construction
Operation
NOx
100 Ibs/day
55 Ibs/day
VOC
75 Ibs/day
55 Ibs/day
PMto
150 Ibs/day
150 Ibs/day
PM2.5
55 Ibs/day
55 Ibs/day
sox
150 Ibs/day
150 Ibs/day
CO
550 Ibs/day
550 Ibs/day
*Ibs/day — Pounds Per Day
Local Air Quality
Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced look -up tables for projects less than or equal to five acres in size. The SCAQMD's screening look -up tables are utilized in determining localized impacts. It should be noted that since the look -up tables identify thresholds at only one, two, and five acres, linear regression has been utilized to determine localized significance thresholds. Consistent with SCAQMD guidance, the thresholds presented in Table 3-2 were calculated by interpolating the threshold values for the Project's disturbed acreage.

The acres disturbed is based on the equipment list and days identified in the demolition phase, site preparation phase, and grading phase based on the anticipated maximum number of acres a given piece of equipment can pass over in an eight -hour workday. For analytical purposes, emissions associated with peak site preparation and grading activities are considered for purposes of Localized Significance Thresholds (LSTs) since this phase represents the maximum localized emissions that would occur. The Project's construction activities could disturb a maximum of approximately 1.0 acre per day during the demolition phase, 3.5 acres per day for the site preparation phase, and 4.0 acres per day for grading activities. Any other phases of development would result in lesser emissions and consequently lesser impacts than what is disclosed herein. According to SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project if the project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., transfer facilities and warehouse City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

buildings). The proposed Project does not include such uses, and thus, due to the lack of significant stationary source emissions, no long-term localized significance threshold analysis is needed. As such, Table 3-2 presents thresholds for localized construction emissions (Appendix A).

Table 3-2 Maximum Daily Localized Emissions Thresholds
Source
Activity
Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx
CO
PM10
PM10
Construction
Demolition
118
775
4 4
Site Preparation
220
1,625
11 7
Grading
237
1,775
12 8
Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC)
In 1984, because of public concern for exposure to airborne carcinogens, CARB adopted regulations to reduce the amount of TAC emissions resulting from mobile and area sources, such as cars, trucks, stationary products, and consumer products. The seven TACs studied include those that are derived from mobile sources: diesel particulate matter (DPM), benzene (C6H6), and 1,3-butadiene (C41­16); those that are derived from stationary sources: perch loroethylene (C2C14) and hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)); and those derived from photochemical reactions of emitted VOCs: formaldehyde (CH2O) and acetaldehyde (C2H4O).

Sensitive Receptors
Some people are especially sensitive to air pollution and are given special consideration when evaluating air quality impacts from projects. These groups include children, the elderly, and individuals with pre-existing respiratory or cardiovascular illnesses. Structures that house these persons or places where they gather are defined as "sensitive receptors" as those groups are more likely to remain within the sensitive receptor for an extended period of time given limited mobility. These structures typically include uses such as residences, hotels, and hospitals where an individual can remain for 24 hours. Consistent with the LST Methodology, the nearest land use where an individual could remain for 24 hours to the Project site has been used to determine construction and operational air quality impacts for emissions of PM10 and PM2.5, since PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds are based on a 24-hour averaging time.

Findings of Fact: Upon approval of a general plan amendment and specific plan amendment, the proposed Project will be consistent with the City's General Plan, which provides consistency with the SCAQMD AQMP. The SCAQMD determines future air quality forecasts for the AQMP based on growth projections provided to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) by cities located within the SCAQMD. City growth forecasts provided to the SCAG are based off of a localities adopted general plan build out.

An Air Quality Impact Analysis was prepared by Urban Crossroads on September 8, 2023 (Appendix A) to evaluate the Project. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) v2022.1.1.12 was used to calculate construction -source and operational -source criteria pollutants (VOCs, NOX, SOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5) from direct and indirect sources.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

Discussion of Impacts
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact: The Project site is located within the SCAB, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality. The SCAQMD is principally responsible for air pollution control and works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, local governments, as well as state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards. Currently, these state and federal air quality standards are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB. In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMPs to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy.

In December 2022, the SCAQMD released the Final 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that establishes thresholds for criteria pollutants; projects that exceed any of the indicated daily thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact and are not in compliance with the AQMP. The primary purpose of the air quality plan is to bring an area that does not attain federal and state air quality standards into compliance with those standards pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act. A proposed project should be considered consistent with the AQMP if it furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook identifies two key indicators of consistency:
1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. 2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP, or increments based on the years of project buildout phase.

Criterion 1 - Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations? The violations that Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to are the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

CAAQS and NAAQS violations would occur if regional or localized significance thresholds were exceeded. As evaluated in the Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), the Project's regional and localized construction and operational -source emissions would not exceed applicable regional significance thresholds. As such, a less than significant impact is expected.

Criterion 2 - Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

The 2022 AQMP demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the timeframes required under federal law. The SCAQMD determines future air quality forecasts for the AQMP based on growth projections provided to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) by cities located within the SCAQMD. City growth forecasts provided to the SCAG are based off a localities adopted general plan build out. Development consistent with the growth projections in the City of Yucaipa General Plan is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are largely independent of land use assignments, but rather are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance. Irrespective of the site's land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential would likely occur, with disturbance to the entire site occurring during construction activities. Given that no emissions thresholds will be exceeded, a less than significant impact would result.

The City's General Plan designates the Project site as RS-20M (Single Residential 20,000 square foot minimum). The Project proposes a general plan amendment, which would change the land use designation from RS-20M to RS (Single Residential) and a specific plan amendment to change the Land Use Modification Overlay of the General Plan to include the Starling Heights Specific Plan. The RS designation provides areas for single- family homes, as well as accessory uses that complement the neighborhoods. The Specific Plan would allow for a maximum density of 8.7 dwelling units per acre (du/ac).

Additionally, the Project proposes TTM No. 20372 to subdivide the 14.78-acre site, into 128 single family residential units with associated community features and detention basins that will serve the Project. The proposed residential units will have private yard space with community landscaping, and the Project would include additional onsite amenities for the new homes. The proposed Project is not consistent with the site's existing land use designation and therefore requires a general plan amendment to adopt the Starling Heights Specific Plan which would allow the proposed residential subdivision development and related features. Although this finding is inconsistent with the current designation, the Project on an individual basis does not have an impact and as such, the proposed Project would not conflict with the goals and objectives of the AQMP.

Furthermore, the Project, as evaluated herein would not exceed the regional or localized air quality significance thresholds. On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project is determined to be consistent with the second criterion and a less than significant impact would occur.
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less than Significant Impact: The CAAQS designate the Project site as nonattainment for 03, PM10, and PM2.5 while the NAAQS designate the Project site as nonattainment for 03 and PM2.5. The SCAQMD states that individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the SCAQMD's recommended daily thresholds for project -specific impacts would also not cause a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment, and therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality impact.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

Alternatively, individual project -related construction and operational emissions that exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project -specific impacts would be considered cumulatively considerable. The following analysis is based on the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (Appendix A).

Construction Related Impacts
The Project involves construction activities associated with demolition, site preparation, building construction, architectural coating, paving, and grading. Construction activities associated with the Project would result in emissions of VOCs, NOx, SOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.5. Construction is scheduled to occur from January 2024 to December 2025. The construction schedule analyzed in the Air Quality Assessment, dated September 8, 2023, represents a "worst -case" analysis scenario should construction occur any time after the respective dates since emission factors for construction decrease as time passes and the analysis year increases due to emission regulations becoming more stringent (Appendix A). Table 3-3 presents the results of the Project's regional construction impact assessment, and Table 3-4 presents the results of the Project's localized construction impact assessment.

Table 3-3 Overall Regional Construction Emissions Summary Source
Emissions (pounds/day)
VOC NOx I CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Summer
2024

3.66 36.80

33.22 0.07

4.94 2.54
2025

1.44 11.92

17.95 0.03

1.17 0.60
Winter
2024

3.73 36.92

34.05 0.07

7.49 4.21
2025

67.73 20.70

29.99 0.04

1.88 1.03
Maximum Daily
Emissions

64.73 36.92

34.05 0.07

7.49 4.21
SCAQMD Regional
Threshold
75 100
550
150
150
55 Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Table 3-4 Project Localized Construction Impacts
On -Site Emissions
Emissions (pounds/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Demolition
Maximum Daily Emissions

24.89 21.74

1.14 0.99
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
118
775
4 4
Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
Site Preparation
Maximum Daily Emissions

35.95 32.93

7.26 4.16
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
pjg
April 2024

SCAQMD Localized Threshold
220
1,625
11 7
Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
Grading
Maximum Daily Emissions

34.29 30.17

4.12 2.31
SCAQMD Localized Threshold
237
1,775
12 8
Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
The Project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in Tables 3-3 and 3-4 demonstrates that proposed Project construction -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional or local thresholds. Therefore, proposed Project construction -source emissions would be considered less than significant on a project - specific and cumulative basis.

Operation Related Impacts
Long-term air quality impacts generally involve mobile source emissions generated from project -related traffic and stationary source emissions. Operational emissions would be expected from the following primary sources -mobile source emissions, area source emissions, energy source emissions, and on -site equipment emissions. The estimated emissions generated by Project operations are shown in Table 3-5, which presents the results of the Project's regional operation impact assessment. The Project would not exceed the thresholds of significance established by the SCAQMD for emissions of any criteria pollutant. Therefore, operational emissions would be less than significant.

Table 3-5 Total Project Regional Operational Emissions
Source
Emissions (pounds/day)
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Summer
Mobile Source

4.88 4.39

41.32 0.10

3.34 0.65
Area Source

7.26 1.98

8.06 0.01

0.16 0.16
Energy Source

0.06 1.01

0.43 0.01

0.08 0.08
Total Max Daily Emissions

12.20 7.39

49.81 0.12

3.58 0.89
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
55 55
550
150
150
55 Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Winter
Mobile Source

4.52 4.72

34.71 0.09

3.34 0.65
Area Source

6.61 1.91

0.81 0.01

0.15 0.15
Energy Source

0.06 1.01

0.43 0.01

0.08 0.08
Total Max Daily Emissions

11.18 7.64

35.96 0.11

3.57 0.88
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
55 55
550
150
150
55 Threshold Exceeded?
No
No
No
No
No
No
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

The Project -specific evaluation of emissions presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that proposed Project operational -source air pollutant emissions would not result in exceedances of regional or local thresholds. The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the Project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard.

Therefore, the proposed Project operational -source emissions would be considered less than significant on a project -specific and cumulative basis. c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact: Sensitive receptors in the Project study area are listed below. All distances were measured from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., backyards) or at the building fagade, whichever is closer to the Project site. • An existing residence located at 12383 12th Street, located approximately 72 feet north of the Project site.
• An existing residence located at 12376 Cambria Drive, located approximately 206 feet east of the Project site.
• An existing residence located at 32939 Avenue E, located approximately 85 feet south of the Project site.
• Dunlap Elementary School located at 32870 Avenue E, located approximately 77 feet west of the Project site.

As explained in Section III (b) above, construction emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTs) for any criteria pollutant.

Sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project site would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations in violation of SCAQMD LSTs during construction or operation of the proposed Project. As the proposed Project will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard identified by SCAQMD at the nearest residence or sensitive receptor, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact: The Project will not involve land uses that are typically associated with odor complaints such as agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the Project's (long-term operational) uses.

Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction and is thus considered less than significant. It is expected that Project -generated refuse would be City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City's solid waste regulations. The Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance) to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the Project construction and operations would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
IV. Biological Resources: Would theproject:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
❑
❑
®
❑
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
❑
❑
®
❑
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
❑
❑
®
❑
coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
❑
®
❑
❑
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
❑
❑
❑
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
❑
❑
❑
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation Ian?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
OJIll
April 2024

• Starling Heights Specific Plan Amendment and Tentative Tract Map 20372 Biological Resource Assessment Report, Casc Engineering and Consulting, July 2023. (Appendix B)
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper.

Findings of Fact: The Project site consists of four (4) existing parcels: APN's (0318-021-18,19,58) and (0301-113-44). The Project site is currently vacant on two (2) parcels APN's (0318-021-18,19) and contains a single-family resident with horse corrals on the other two (2) parcels APN's (0318- 021-58) and (0301-113-44). The Project site is located on 14.78 acres in the City and is designated as RS-20M on the City's General Plan Land Use Map. The Project proposes a TTM No. 20372 to subdivide the 14.78-acre Project site into 128 two-story residences with attached 2- car garages, private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on -street guest parking. As part of the Project, all existing on -site structures are proposed to be demolished. The Project site is located within the southwestern portion of the City and is surrounded by single- family residential uses and vacant land to the north, Dunlap Elementary School to the west, single- family residential uses to the south, and Oak Glen Creek to the east with single-family residential uses further east. The Project site is bounded by Avenue E to the south, Avenue D to the north, 12t" Street to the west, and Oak Glen Creek to the east. CASC conducted a literature review and a field survey of the Project site plus a 500-foot buffer around the Project boundary (Survey Area) on April 4, 2023, to identify the potential for special status plant and wildlife species to occur within the Project site.

Vegetation
Based on the results of the literature review and the Biological Resource Assessment survey conducted on April 4, 2023, two (2) special -status vegetation types were identified as having potential to occur within the region of the Survey Area: Southern Riparian Forest and Southern Willow Scrub. Neither of these special -status vegetation associations were recorded on the Project Site at the time of the survey. Two (2) special -status plant species were identified as having potential to occur within the region of the Survey Area: Plummer's mariposa -lily (Calochortus plummerae) and slenderhorned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras). Neither of these special -status plant species were observed at the time of the field survey. However, based on the results of the field survey, the disturbed conditions of the Project Site, review of specific habitat preferences, soil composition, occurrence records, known distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that these species are not expected to occur within the Survey Area.

The vegetation community onsite is classified as Ruderal/Disturbed. Native plant species observed on the Project site during the general biological assessment survey include western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandifola), California scalebroom (Lepidospartum squamatum), and Menzies fiddleneck (Amsinckia menziesii). Non- native plant species observed on the Project site during the general biological assessment survey include London rocket (Sisymbrium irio), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), spotted rattlesnake spurge (Chamaesyce maculate), red -stemmed filaree (Erodium cicutarium), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora), foxtail (Hordeum murinum), and wild oat (Avena fatua).

Wildlife
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Eight (8) special -status wildlife species have the potential to occur within the region of the Survey Area. The following special -status wildlife species are not expected to occur within the Survey Area due to lack of suitable habitat and resources required to support each species: Southern California legless lizard (Anniella stebbinsi), Crotch bumblebee (Bombus crotchii) (Candidate Endangered), lesser long -nosed bat (Leptonycteris yerbabuenae) (locally significant within its elevational range), western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) (locally significant within its elevational range), northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax), Southern California rufous crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens) (CDFW Watch List), Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) (foraging only), and Orange throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra).

However, based on the results of the field survey, the disturbed conditions of the Project site, review of specific habitat preferences, soil composition, occurrence records, known distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that these species are not expected to occur within the Survey Area. Project development is not likely to adversely affect local or regional populations of these species.

Western burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is considered locally significant within the County of San Bernardino; however, this species did not appear on the literature search nor are there any known local observations of this species. During the site assessment CASC's biologist took this species into consideration and performed a search for potential burrows. There were no burrows of appropriate size or shape on the Project site that would support western burrowing owls. It was determined that this species is not expected to occur within the Survey Area due to lack of suitable nesting habitat.

Four (4) bird species were detected within the survey area: house finch (Haemorhous mexicanus), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), and Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna). One (1) mammal species was detected during the survey, Audubon's cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii), and one (1) reptile, the Western side -blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans). All wildlife species recorded are common to disturbed/ruderal areas and within the Project region. No active bird nests were observed within the survey area during the general biological resources assessment survey. Nesting opportunities for birds on the Project Site are limited due to the recent discing, and extremely sparse and low growing vegetation present with the exception of two large ornamental trees located near the single-family residence located in the southeast portion of the site. There is low likelihood for common ground nesting species to nest on site such as mourning dove, killdeer (Charadrius vociferus), and horned lark (Eremophila alpestris).

Discussion of Impacts
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Project site is designated as RS-20M with a vegetation community classified as ruderal/disturbed. No special -status plant or wildlife species were detected within the Survey Area during the Biological Assessment Survey, dated July 2023. Based on the results of the field survey, the disturbed conditions of the Project Site, review of specific habitat preferences, soil composition, occurrence records, known distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that no species identified as a City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are expected to occur on the Project site. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Less Than Significant Impact: The proposed Project is located in an area designated as RS-20M that is largely undeveloped with one (1) single-family residence with horse corrals located in the southeast portion of the site. Oak Glen Creek is located adjacent to the Project's eastern boundary. According to the USFWS NWI Wetlands Mapper GIS application, Oak Glen Creek is classified as an R4SBC riverine streambed. This classification is utilized to identify characteristics of the channel, such as the fact that the channel has flowing water only part of the year. When water is not flowing in the channel, it may remain in isolated pools or surface water may be altogether absent. When surface water is present it will typically be for brief periods during the growing season as the water table usually lies well below the ground surface for most of the season (USFWS). The nearest riparian habitat is located approximately 0.75 miles south of the Project site.

Sensitive natural communities are natural communities that are considered rare in the region by regulatory agencies, known to provide habitat for sensitive animal or plant species, or known to be important wildlife corridors. Based on the general biological assessment survey there are no sensitive natural communities that exist on the Project site. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Project will have an adverse effect on the water bodies in the vicinity and impacts are expected to be less than significant. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Less than Significant Impact: No wetlands exist on the Project site. Oak Glen Creek, an improved drainage channel, is the nearest wetland and is located adjacent to the Projects eastern boundary. Project implementation is not anticipated to cause a significant adverse effect to the channel. There will be no direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means of adverse effect as this wetland is located outside of the Project site. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: Wildlife corridors link together areas of suitable habitat that are otherwise separated by rugged terrain, changes in vegetation, or human disturbance. The fragmentation of open space areas by urbanization creates isolated "islands" of wildlife habitat. Corridors effectively act as links between different populations of a species. The proposed Project is located in an area designated as RS-20M and is not considered a wildlife corridor. Limited suitable ground nesting bird habitat is present throughout the Project site and there is potential for birds to City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

nest within the ornamental trees located in the southeast portion of the Project site. Pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S. Government Code [USC] 703) of 1918, as amended in 1972, federal law prohibits the taking of migratory birds or their nests or eggs (16 USC 703; 50 CFR 10, 21). Therefore, the Project will implement pre -construction nesting bird surveys through Mitigation Measure 113I0-1 (as set forth below) to reduce potential impacts to any nesting birds to a less than significant level. Implementation of the proposed Project with Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would not interfere with the movement of any migratory fish or wildlife species. Additionally, the Project site is not an established wildlife corridor or designated nursery site according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFW). A less than significant impact would occur with mitigation incorporated.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact:

The Project site does not feature any Coastal Live Oak Trees, which are protected by the City of Yucaipa pursuant to Chapter 5 of Division 9 of the Yucaipa Development Code.

Therefore, there would be no impacts to this resource.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact: The City is not a part of any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. Thus, the Project Site does not overlap with any Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved plan. The project would not impede any Habitat Conservation Plans and no impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
IV. Biological Resources
(d) BIO-1 Preconstruction Nesting Bird Survey
If construction occurs during the nesting bird season (February 1st through August 31st), a one -day Preconstruction Nesting Bird Survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the presence/absence of ground nesting birds. The location, and status of any active nests on or directly adjacent (within 100 feet) to the Project Site will be determined by this survey. If active nest(s) are located, the extent of the survey buffer area surrounding the nest should be established by the qualified biologist to ensure that direct and indirect effects to nesting birds are avoided. To avoid the destruction of active nests and to protect the reproductive success of birds protected by the MBTA and the CFGC, the nesting bird survey shall occur no earlier than seven (7) days prior to the commencement of construction. In the event active nests are discovered, a suitable buffer (distance to be determined by the biologist) shall be established around such active nests, and no construction within the buffer allowed, until the biologist has determined that the nest(s) is no longer active (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest).

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
V. Cultural Resources — Would theproject:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
❑
®
❑
❑
pursuant to 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
❑
®
❑
❑
resource pursuant to 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including
❑
®
❑
❑
those outside of formal cemeteries?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • City of Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434) • Cultural Resources Assessment for the Rockwell TTM 20372 Project, City of Yucaipa, County of San Bernardino, California (C-0478), Duke Cultural Resources Management, LLC (DUKE CRM), July 21, 2023. (Appendix C) • Extended Phase I Survey Rockwell TTM 20372 Project, City of Yucaipa, County of San Bernardino, California, Duke Cultural Resources Management, LLC (DUKE CRM), February 2024. (Appendix D).

Findings of Fact: The City has a rich array of cultural resources dating back to the area's first inhabitants more than 10,000 years ago. Cultural resources consist of places, sites, structures, artifacts, and landscapes that are considered important for scientific, traditional, religious, or other reasons. Resources may be historical, paleontological, archaeological, architectural, or archival in nature.

Paleontological resources are the fossilized remains of organisms from prehistoric environments.

There are two types of resources: vertebrate and invertebrate. These resources are found in geologic strata conducive to their preservation, typically sedimentary formations. Paleontological sites are areas that show evidence of prehuman activity. Often they are simply small outcroppings visible on the surface or sites encountered during grading. While the sites are important indications, the geologic formations are the most important since they may contain important fossils.

The Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC) system is a scale for determining the sensitivity of a particular rock formation for fossils. The PFYC system classifies rock units on a scale of 1 (extremely low) to 5 (very high likelihood of finding). The General Plan EIR shows Yucaipa's geologic units according to this scale. Based on this scale, Cultural and Paleontological Resources Sensitivity notes that areas within the community have moderate to patchy sensitivity for fossils. The Project Site is located in an area that is identified as a "Cultural Sensitivity Area".

Discussion of Impacts
CITY O- City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant in §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines defines historic resources as resources listed or determined to be eligible for listing by the State Historical Resources Commission, a local register of historical resources, or the lead agency. Generally, a resource is considered "historically significant" if it meets one of the following criteria:
i) Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. ii) Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. iii) Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.
iv) Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Although there are no sites in the City listed on the state or federal registers of historic places, the City has a number of structures that are of local significance. On March 13, 2023, DUKE CRM conducted a records search at the South -Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC).

The SCCIC is part of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) and is located at California State University, Fullerton. The records search included a review of all recorded cultural resources and reports within a'/z-mile radius of the Project site. No cultural resources have been recorded within the Project boundary and three (3) cultural resources have been recorded within a '/z-mile radius of the Project site. One (1) of these resources is the village of Yukaipa't, a prehistoric habitation site located approximately 0.1-miles east of the Project. The other two (2) resources recorded within % mile of the Project are historic in age. One historic era resource is a single-family residence in the Colonial revival style located approximately 0.45-mile northwest of the Project site. The other historic era resource is a refuse dump consisting of refuse dating to the mid-1950s as well as modern industrial refuse located approximately 0.45-mile east of the Project site.

According to the City's General Plan, the Project Site is located within a "Cultural Sensitivity" Overlay District. Due to the disturbed conditions of the site, there is a low likelihood that the area would yield any information important in prehistory or history. However, due to the presence of the village of Yukaipa't located 0.1-mile east from the Project site, there is a higher than usual potential for buried cultural resources to buried under the Project site.

An Extended Phase I (XPI) Survey was conducted by DUKE CRM to assess whether the village of Yukaipa't extends into the Project site or whether any other buried cultural resources were located within the Project area. The field work for the XPI occurred over a 2-day period (January 10-11, 2024) and consisted of digging nine (9) trenches located throughout the Project site. Six (6) of the nine (9) trenches were discovered as having a small amount of potentially historic -era cultural material including glass, ceramic, bone, and metal. DUKE found that one of these items was temporarily diagnostic and were determined to have been recovered from a disturbed context and therefore, the items do not constitute intact cultural deposits and are not considered historical resources according to CEQA. Furthermore, the XPI excavations revealed a high level of disturbance within the Project site to depths of up to City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

five (5) feet below the surface. Based on the Cultural Resources Analysis and XPI, the Project site does not contain a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. However, in the event that historical resources are inadvertently unearthed during the excavation/grading phase of the Project, Mitigation Measure CULA will be implemented as specified in the XPI under the "Findings and Recommendations" heading on page 29 (Appendix D). Therefore, the proposed Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and a less than significant impact would occur with the implementation of mitigation.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: Archaeological resources are prehistoric or historic evidence of past human activities, including structural ruins and buried resources. Project development would involve ground disturbance on the site. Although the Project area has been extensively disturbed by plowing, the depth of previous disturbance within the Project site is not known, and the Project proposes ground disturbance of at least five (5) feet. Based on the Cultural Resources Analysis and XPI, the Project site does not contain a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines. However, in the event that historical resources are inadvertently unearthed during the excavation/grading phase of the Project, Mitigation Measure CULA will be implemented. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur with mitigation incorporated.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: There are no known human remains on the Project Site. A review of historic aerial photos and maps at historicaerials.com was conducted and did not identify possible cemeteries in the area, and therefore a low likelihood exists that human remains could be uncovered during ground disturbing activities.

However, there is a possibility that unidentified human remains could be discovered during Project construction. Consistent with State law, if at any time during grading human remains are found, the Project is to be conditioned to halt work and make contact with the San Bernardino County Coroner's Office. Additionally, Mitigation Measure CULA is identified to require notification to NAHC if the remains are determined to be prehistoric and further reduce cultural impacts to the disturbance of human remains, specifically Native American remains.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
V. Cultural Resources
(a, b, c) CUL-1 Inadvertent Archaeological Finds
If intact and potentially significant subsurface deposits are encountered during ground disturbing activities, all activities in the immediate area of the finds shall be halted and an on -site inspection shall be performed by a qualified archaeologist, to assess the find, determine its significance under California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility, and make recommendations for appropriate mitigation measures. To reduce impacts to historical resources to a level of less than significant, data recovery or other treatments of eligible deposits may be required.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

If human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner shall notify the NAHC, which shall determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC. The MLD may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. In addition, according to the California Health and Safety Code, a cemetery is place where six or more human bodies are buried (Section 8100), and unauthorized disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052).

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
VI. Energy — Would theproject:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impacts due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
❑
❑
®
❑
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or Local
plan for renewable energy or energy
❑
❑
®
❑
efficiency?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
• California Energy Commission. Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act — SB 350.2022. • California Energy Commission. Joint Energy Report — SB 100. 2022. • California Department of General Services. California Building Standards Code (Title 24, 2022).
• California Air Resources Board. Guide to Off -Road Vehicle & Equipment Regulations Findings of Fact: The California Energy Conservation and Development Commission (California Energy Commission) adopted Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations; Energy Conservation Standards for new residential and nonresidential buildings in June 1977 and standards are updated every three years. Title 24 ensures building designs conserve energy. The requirements allow for the opportunities to incorporate updates of new energy efficiency technologies and methods into new developments.

Energy resources that would be potentially impacted by the Project include electricity, natural gas, and petroleum -based fuel supplies and distribution systems. This analysis includes a discussion of the potential energy impacts of the Project, with emphasis on avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. A general definition of each of these energy resources is provided below.

Electricity is a man-made, consumptive utility resource. The production of electricity requires the consumption or conversion of energy resources, including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal, and nuclear resources, into energy. The delivery of electricity involves several system components, including substations and transformers that lower transmission line power (voltage) to a level appropriate for on -site distribution and use. The electricity generated is distributed through a network of transmission and distribution lines commonly called a power grid.

Conveyance of electricity through transmission lines is typically responsive to market demands.

Natural gas is a combustible mixture of simple hydrocarbon compounds (primarily methane) that is used as a fuel source. Natural gas consumed in California is obtained from naturally occurring City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

reservoirs, mainly located outside the State, and delivered through high-pressure transmission pipelines. The natural gas transportation system is a nationwide network and, therefore, resource availability is typically not an issue. Natural gas satisfies almost one-third of the State's total energy requirements and is used in electricity generation, space heating, cooking, water heating, industrial processes, and as a transportation fuel. Petroleum -based fuels currently account for a majority of California's transportation energy sources and primarily consist of diesel and gasoline types of fuels. However, the state has been working on developing strategies to reduce petroleum use. Over the last decade California has implemented several policies, rules, and regulations to improve vehicle efficiency, increase the development and use of alternative fuels, reduce air pollutants and GHG emissions from the transportation sector, and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Accordingly, petroleum -based fuel consumption in California has declined.

Discussion of Impacts
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Project would impact energy resources during construction activities from the combustion of fossil fuels used for worker vehicles and construction equipment and temporary construction lighting. The Project would consume energy resources during construction in three (3) general forms:

1. Petroleum -based fuels used to power off -road construction vehicles and equipment on the Project Site, construction worker travel to and from the Project Site, as well as delivery and haul truck trips (e.g., hauling of demolition material to off -site reuse and disposal facilities);

2. Electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during Project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power; and,

3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as gravel, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber.

Construction Related Impacts
Construction of the Project would result in fuel consumption from construction tools and equipment, vendor and haul truck trips, and vehicle trips generated from construction workers traveling to and from the site. Construction activities and corresponding fuel energy consumption would be temporary and localized. The use of diesel fuel and heavy-duty equipment would not be a typical condition of the Project. Also, there are no unusual Project characteristics that would cause construction equipment that would be less energy efficient compared with other similar construction sites in other parts of the State.

Electricity and Natural Gas Usage
Southern California Edison (SCE) would provide temporary electric power for as necessary lighting and electronic equipment. The electricity used for such activities would be temporary City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

and would be substantially less than that required for Project operation and would have a negligible contribution to the Project's overall energy consumption. Natural gas is not anticipated to be required during construction of the Project. Fuels used for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which are discussed below under the "Petroleum Fuel Usage" subsection. Any minor amounts of natural gas that may be consumed as a result of Project construction would be substantially less than that required for Project operation and would have a negligible contribution to the Project's overall energy consumption.

Petroleum Fuel Usage
Off -road heavy-duty construction equipment associated with construction activities would rely on diesel fuel, as well as vendors and haul trucks that would be involved in delivering building materials and removing the demolition debris from the Project site. All construction equipment is subject to the CARB In -Use Off -Road Diesel -Fueled Fleets Regulation. This regulation, which applies to all off -road diesel vehicles 25 horsepower or greater, limits unnecessary idling to 5 minutes, requires all construction fleets to be labeled and reported to CARB, bans Tier 0 equipment, and phases out Tier 1 and 2 equipment (thereby replacing fleets with cleaner equipment), and requires that fleets comply with Best Available Control Technology requirements, which would increase construction equipment fuel efficiency. These limitations on idling vehicles and equipment, and the requirements that equipment must be properly maintained (CCR Title 13, Sections 2449(d)(3) and 2485), would result in fuel savings. Due to the temporary nature of construction, the Project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Related Impacts
Electricity and Natural Gas Usage
SCE and Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) would provide electricity and natural gas for the Project. The on -going operation of the proposed industrial facility would require the use of electricity for multiple purposes including, but not limited to, refrigeration, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Natural gas is often used for Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems and hot water heaters. Energy would also be consumed during operations related to water usage, solid waste disposal, landscape equipment and vehicle trips. Natural gas will be required for the operation of the Project.

The operation of the Project would involve the development of 128 two-story residences with attached 2-car garages, private backyards, community open space, an active community park and game park, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on - street guest parking. According to CEQA Guidelines Appendix F, the goal of conserving energy implies the wise and efficient use of energy, including decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, reducing reliance on natural gas and oil, and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources. The Project would comply with all energy efficiency requirements under Title 24 and all applicable City residential and energy ordinances. As a result, even with the increase in demand for electricity and natural gas, the operation of the Project would not result in inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary energy use compared with other similar residential projects in the region and would be less than older, similar types of housing units.

A less than significant impact would occur.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or Local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact: The applicable state plans that address renewable energy and energy efficiency are CALGreen, the California Energy Code, and the California Renewable Portfolios Standard (RPS). Under the California RPS, the State of California is transitioning to renewable energy through the California's Renewable Energy Program.

Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydropower, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. Electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral. Executive Order S-1408, signed in November 2008, expanded the state's RPS to 33 percent renewable power by 2020. This standard was adopted by the legislature in 2011 (SB X1-2). Senate Bill 350 (de Leon) was signed into law September 2015, and establishes tiered increases to the RPS-40 percent by 2024, 45 percent by 2027, and 50 percent by 2030.

Senate Bill 350 also set a new goal to double the energy -efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas through energy efficiency and conservation measures. On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown signed SB 100, which supersedes the SB 350 requirements. Under SB 100, the RPS for public owned facilities and retail sellers consist of 44 percent renewable energy by 2024, 52 percent by 2027, and 60 percent by 2030. Additionally, SB 100 also established a new RPS requirement of 50 percent by 2026. The bill further established a state policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end -use customers and 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by December 31, 2045. Under SB 100, the state cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon -free electricity target.

The statewide RPS goal is not directly applicable to individual development projects, but to utilities and energy providers such as Southern California Edison (SCE), which is the utility provider that would fulfill all electricity needs for the proposed Project. Compliance of SCE in meeting the RPS goals would ensure the State in meeting its objective in transitioning to renewable energy. Additionally, the proposed Project would comply with the Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CALGreen. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict or obstruct plans for renewable energy and energy efficiency and a less than significant impact would occur.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant with
Less Than
Significant
Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
VII. Geology and Soils— Would theproject:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
❑
❑
®
❑
based on other substantial evidence
of a known fault. Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure,
❑
❑
®
❑
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
❑
❑
®
❑
loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that
is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
❑
❑
❑
❑
potentially result in on- or off -site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined
in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building
❑
❑
®
❑
Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
❑
❑
❑
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
❑
®
❑
❑
geologic feature?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016) • Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation Proposed Yucaipa Village Partners, Assessor's Parcel Numbers 0318-021-18, -19 and -58, 121" Street and Avenue E, Yucaipa, San Bernardino County, California. GeoTek, Inc. August 9, 2022 (Appendix E) Discussion of Impacts
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

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

Less than Significant Impact: The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Act's main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, known as "Alquist-Priolo (AP) Earthquake Fault Zones," around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. If an active fault is found, a structure for human occupancy cannot be placed over the trace of the fault and must be set back from the fault (typically 50 feet).

The proposed site is situated in a seismically active region. As is the case for most areas of Southern California, ground shaking resulting from earthquakes associated with nearby and more distant faults may occur at the project site. During the life of the project, seismic activity associated with active faults can be expected to generate moderate to strong ground shaking at the site. The Project Site is not located within a currently designated State of California or San Bernardino County Earthquake Fault Zone (Appendix E). The nearest zoned faults are the Crafton Hills fault zone (Chicken Hill fault) located approximately 0.2 miles southeast of the Project site. The potential for surface rupture resulting from the movement of nearby major faults is not known with certainty but is considered low. Although there are no known active faults through the Project site, the site is still subject to ground shaking and potential damage as a result of seismic activity, which is characteristic of Southern California.

Accordingly, proposed construction will be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable portions of Section 1808.6.2 of the 2022 California Building Code ("CBC") to ensure that potential impacts are less than significant.

Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact: As described above, the Project Site is located in a seismically active area of southern California and is expected to experience moderate to severe ground shaking during the lifetime of the proposed Project. The Project consists of the development of 128 two-story residences and associated site improvements such as parking, pedestrian paths, a community park, recreation center and biofiltration basins. Accordingly, proposed construction would be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable portions of Section 1808.6 of the 2022 CBC to ensure that potential impacts are less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact: Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated cohesionless soils are subject to temporary loss. Soil liquefaction is a geologic hazard that occurs during strong seismic ground shaking, most commonly in saturated unconsolidated poorly graded low -cohesion soils. During a strong seismic event, these soils experience a temporary loss of strength causing settlement of the ground surface. Soil liquefaction generally occurs in submerged granular soils and non -plastic silts during or after strong ground shaking. There are several general requirements for liquefaction to occur and they are as follows:
• Soils must be submerged.
• Soils must be loose to medium -dense.
• Ground motion must be intense.
• Duration of shaking must be sufficient for the soils to lose shear resistance.

Based on review of hazard maps, the project site is not located within a designated zone of liquefaction susceptibility (Appendix E). The site has negligible potential for liquefaction -induced settlement under current groundwater conditions with historic high groundwater depths greater than 75 feet below the existing grade. Based on the results of the field exploration conducted by GeoTek, Inc., review of site area geomorphology and geology, groundwater is not anticipated to adversely affect the proposed site improvements (Appendix E). Therefore, the potential for liquefaction to occur at the Project site is considered very low. Impacts are considered less than significant.
iv. Landslides?
No Impact: Seismically induced landslides and slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after large earthquakes. According to Figure S-1, Geologic Hazard Overlay District, in the City's General Plan, the Project Site is not located in an area that is susceptible to landslides. Furthermore, no evidence of ancient landslides or slope instability was observed at the site (Appendix E). Finally, the site is relatively flat and not considered a risk for landslides. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects related to landslides. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact: Construction activities associated with the Project would involve earth movement and the exposure of soil, which would temporarily increase erosion susceptibility. In the long-term, development of the Project would reduce the potential for erosion and loss of topsoil that currently occurs every storm season. Developments within the City are required to prepare an erosion control plan to minimize erosion during grading and construction, and such plan is required to be prepared in compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) standards. In addition, the Project's excavation and grading activities will be required to be carried out pursuant to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit that requires adoption of an appropriate Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implementation of Best Management Practices City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
OJIll
April 2024

(BMPs) to reduce erosion from storm water runoff. Based on the preceding, impacts to substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil will be less than significant. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: A Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation was prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated August 9, 2023 (Appendix E).

The upper soils that underlie the site were found to contain varying thickness of undocumented fills, were relatively non -uniform, or low relative density, and anticipated to be subject to settlement upon wetting with or without additional loading. Thus, existing soils onsite are unsuitable for foundation support for the proposed Project. Therefore, the recommendations provided in the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation will be implemented as Mitigation Measure GEO-1 into the design and construction phase of the Project. The Project site is not located within an area mapped by the State of California or County of San Bernardino for liquefaction potential. Based on the current mapping and the depth to groundwater, GeoTek, Inc. had determined that the liquefaction potential at the site is very low. Due to the general flat terrain, the potential for seismic induced landslides or lateral spreading is considered minimal.

Furthermore, the Project would be required to comply with the requirements of a final City - approved geotechnical report, and applicable provisions of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) and California Building Code (CBC) that would act to minimize any unstable soils or unstable geologic units that may be encountered. On this basis, the potential for the Project to be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the Project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse is less than significant with mitigation incorporated. d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact: Expansive soils contain significant amounts of clay particles that swell considerably when wetted and shrink when dried. Foundations constructed on these soils are subject to uplifting forces caused by the swelling. Without proper mitigation measures, heaving and cracking of both building foundations and slabs -on -grade could result. Based on the exploratory borings and laboratory test results, the subsurface soil at the Project Site consisted undocumented soils from 1 to 5 feet of thickness. Alluvium was encountered at all of the borings to the maximum depth explored of 51.5 feet. The alluvium encountered consisted of silty sands, relatively clean sands, and sandy silts. Based on the laboratory tests performed, near surface soils at the site have a very low expansion index.

Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

No Impact: The Project does not involve land uses requiring septic services. The proposed Project is conditioned to connect to sewer service provided by the YVWD and would therefore not require the use of septic tanks. No impact would occur. f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in Section V., Cultural Resources, of this Initial Study, the Project site has no recorded cultural and/or paleontological resources. Furthermore, according to the City's General Plan Figure PR-6 Cultural and Paleontological Resources Sensitivity Overlay Districts, the Project site is not located in a paleontological resource sensitivity area. In the event paleontological resources are unearthed during ground disturbing activities, Mitigation Measure GEO-2 will be implemented to reduce impacts to inadvertent finds of paleontological resources to a less than significant level. With the incorporation of mitigation, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
VII. Geology and Soils
(c) GEO-1: Grading and Construction
The Project shall incorporate applicable recommendations provided in the Geotechnical and Infiltration Evaluation prepared by GeoTek, Inc. dated August 9, 2022 (Appendix E).

The recommendations are presented in Section 5.0 Conclusions and Recommendations of the report under the following subheadings: general, earthwork considerations, design recommendations, retaining and garden wall design and construction, preliminary pavement design recommendations, concrete construction, and plan review and construction observations (pages 9-23).
(f) GEO-2: Inadvertent Paleontological Discovery
In the event that paleontological resources are inadvertently discovered during ground disturbing activities, a qualified paleontologist shall document the discovery as appropriate, evaluate the potential resource, and assess the significance of the find under the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
OJIll
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
Vill. Greenhouse Gas Emissions — Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
❑
❑
®
❑
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
❑
❑
®
❑
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:

City of Yucaipa General Plan (adopted April 11, 2016)
Yucaipa Municipal Code (current through Ord. 434)
Rockwell Technical Studies Greenhouse Gas Analysis. Urban Crossroads, Inc.

September 8, 2023. (Appendix F)
Findings of Fact: The evaluation of an impact under CEQA requires measuring data from a project against both existing conditions and a "threshold of significance." For establishing significance thresholds, the Office of Planning and Research's amendments to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(c) state "[w]hen adopting thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies, or recommended by experts, provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence."
The City's Climate Action Plan (CAP) utilizes a two-step approach in quantifying GHG emissions.

First, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is used to determine if additional analysis is required. Projects that exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year are required to either achieve a minimum of 100 points per the Screening Tables or a 31 % reduction over 2007 emissions levels.

Consistent with CEQA guidelines, such projects would be determined to have a less than significant individual and cumulative impact for GHG emissions.

To evaluate consistency with the CAP, the City has implemented CAP Update Screening Tables (Screening Tables) to aid in measuring the reduction of GHG emissions attributable to certain design and construction measures incorporated in development projects. To this end, the Screening Tables establish categories of GHG Implementation Measures. Under each Implementation Measure category, mitigation or project design features (collectively "features") are assigned point values that correspond to the minimum GHG emissions reduction that would result from each feature. Projects that yield at least 100 points are considered to be consistent with the GHG emissions reduction quantities anticipated in the City's GHG Technical Report and support the GHG emissions reduction targets established under the CAP Update. The potential for such projects to generate direct or indirect GHG emissions that would result in a significant City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

impact on the environment; or conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases would be considered less -than - significant.

Discussion of Impacts
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact: Urban Crossroads conducted a Greenhous Gas Analysis for the proposed Project, dated September 8, 2023. The analysis provides the estimated GHG emissions that will result from Project construction and operation. Construction related GHG emissions are quantified and amortized over the life of the Project, which is identified as a 30-year period, in accordance with SCAQMD recommendation. Project operational emissions would consist of mobile source, area source, energy source, water supply and treatment, waste, refrigerants, and on -site equipment. As shown in Table 8-1, the Project would generate 2,082.78 MTCO2e per year and does not exceed the City's screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. According to the threshold of significance, a cumulative global climate change impact would occur if the GHG emissions created from construction and on -going operations of the proposed Project would exceed the City's threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, since the Project will not exceed the threshold of significance, the Project does not have the potential to result in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to GHG emissions. Furthermore, since the Project does not exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold, the Project is not required to demonstrate compliance with the City's CAP Screening Tables and achieve a minimum 100 points as identified in the CAP. A less than significant impact will occur.

Table 8-1 Total Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source
Emissions (MT/year)
CO2
CH4
N2O
R
Total CO2E
Annual construction -related
emissions amortized over 30
years

33.27 1.56E-03

9.43E-04

1.21E-02

33.60 Mobile Source
1,542.35

0.08 0.08

2.61 1,570.17
Area Source

29.71 0.00

0.00 0.00

29.74 Energy Source
370.94

0.03 0.00

0.00 372.45
Water Usage

32.13 0.18

0.00 0.00

37.88 Waste

11.05 1.10

0.00 0.00

38.65 Refrigerants

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.30

0.30 Total CO2e (All Sources)
2,082.78
City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact: The Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.

Applicable plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions include the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Scoping Plan, SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and the City's CAP. A consistency analysis with these plans is presented below.

CARB Scoping Plan
The Project would not impede the State's progress towards carbon neutrality by 2045 under the 2022 Scoping Plan. The Project would be required to comply with applicable current and future regulatory requirements promulgated through the 2022 Scoping Plan. The Project includes design features related to water and solid conservation that will further reduce Project GHG emissions. As such, the Project would not be inconsistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan. Lastly, the Project would be required to comply with applicable elements outlined in the City's CAP. As such, the Project would be consistent with the 2022 Scoping Plan.

SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy SCAG's 2016-2040 RTP/SCS was adopted April 7, 2016. The RTP/SCS identifies multimodal transportation investments, including bus rapid transit, light rail transit, heavy rail transit, commuter rail, high-speed rail, active transportation strategies (e.g., bike ways and sidewalks), transportation demand management strategies, transportation systems management, highway improvements (interchange improvements, high -occupancy vehicle lanes, high -occupancy toll lanes), arterial improvements, goods movement strategies, aviation and airport ground access improvements, and operations and maintenance to the existing multimodal transportation system.

The RTP/SCS identifies that land use strategies that focus on new housing and job growth in areas served by high quality transit and other opportunity areas would be consistent with a land use development pattern that supports and complements the proposed transportation network. The overarching strategy in the 2016-2040 RTP/SCS is to provide for a plan that allows the southern California region to grow in more compact communities in existing urban areas, provide neighborhoods with efficient and plentiful public transit, abundant and safe opportunities to walk, bike and pursue other forms of active transportation, and preserve more of the region's remaining natural lands (SCAG 2016). The 2016-2040 RTP/SCS contains transportation projects to help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, as well as forecasted development that is generally consistent with regional -level general plan data. The projected regional development, when integrated with the proposed regional transportation network identified in the RTP/SCS, would reduce per capita vehicular travel related GHG emissions and achieve the GHG reduction per capita targets for the SCAG region. The RTP/SCS does not require that local general plans, specific plans, or zoning be consistent with the SCS, but provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers. Upon approval by the City, the Project will be consistent with the general plan City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

land use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the Project area in SCAG's Sustainable Community Strategy/ Regional Transportation Plan.

City of Yucaipa Climate Action Plan (CAP)
As previously stated, the proposed Project will result in approximately 2,082.78 MTCO2e/yr; the proposed Project would not exceed the City's screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr. Thus, project -related emissions would not have a significant direct or Indirect impact on GHG and climate change and would not require additional analysis.

Overall, the proposed Project would not conflict with the City's CAP and impacts would be less than significant.

City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
OJIll
April 2024

Potentially
Less Than
Significant
Less Than
Significant
With Mitigation
Significant
No Impact
Impact
p
Incorporated
Impact
p
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials — Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
❑
❑
®
❑
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
❑
❑
®
❑
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
❑
❑
®
❑
substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
❑
❑
❑
11 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
❑
❑
❑
project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
❑
❑
®
❑
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
❑
❑
®
❑
injury or death involving wildland fires?
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Sources:
• City of Yucaipa General Plan, adopted April 11, 2016. o Chapter 7 — Public Safety
■ Figure S-5, Evacuation Routes
• City of Yucaipa General Plan Environmental Impact Report, PlaceWorks (April 2016) City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
April 2024

o Section 5.8 — Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• http://documents.yvwd.dst.ca.us/emergency/hmp/200831yvwd-hmp.pdf • City of Yucaipa Emergency Operations Plan. November 2012. Accessed online at http://yucaipa.org/wp-content/uploads/disaster_prep/EOP.pdf • Yucaipa Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. March 2023. Accessed online at https://yucaipa.gov/wp-
content/uploads/disaster prep/YucaipaLHMP FinalAdopted03012023.pdf? t=16885844 51 • Envirostor, Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2019. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
• Heliports in California, United States of America. Accessed online on August 31, 2023 at https://www.airnay.com/airports/us/CA?type=H&use=R
• FHSZ Viewer, The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), accessed August 31, 2023. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
Discussion of Impacts
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact: Surrounding uses of the Project site include single-family residences to the north, south, and east and Dunlap Elementary School to the west. The Project contains vacant land and a single-family residence with associated improvements in the southeast corner. Construction of the proposed Project would require the use and transport of materials such as soils, concrete, lumber and drywall. However, equipment used at the site during construction activities could use substances considered by regulatory bodies as hazardous, such as diesel fuel and gasoline from typical construction equipment and would therefore have the potential to discharge hazardous materials during construction. These types of materials are not acutely hazardous, and all storage, handling, use, and disposal of these materials are regulated by federal and state requirements, which the Project construction activities are required to strictly adhere to.

The use, transport, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials must comply with existing regulations established by several agencies, including the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the EPA, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT), the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA), the California Code of Regulations (CalOSHA), and the state Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program. This amount of hazardous material discharge during construction is expected to be less than significant, and the Project would be required to comply with applicable laws, ordinances, and procedures. Additionally, through the implementation of a SWPPP and WQMP, off -site discharge of pollutants during construction and operation of the Project would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact: As mentioned in Section IX(a), any handling activities City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
PJg
April 2024

associated with hazardous or potentially hazardous materials would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local agencies and regulations. Both short-term construction and long-term operation of the proposed Project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local agencies and regulations with the policies and programs established by agencies such as the EPA, Department of Transportation, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Cal/OSHA, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and the state Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program. Adherence to the applicable policies and programs of these agencies would ensure that any transport or interaction with hazardous materials would occur in the safest possible manner, reducing the opportunity for the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment. Any handling of hazardous materials would be limited in both quantities and concentrations. Based on the preceding, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact: The proposed Project includes the development of 128 two-story residences with attached 2-car garages, private backyards, community open space, a community park, a recreation center, two (2) detention basins for stormwater runoff, paved private roads, and on -street guest parking. Dunlap Elementary School is located adjacent to the Project site, west of 12t" Street. As previously mentioned, handling activities associated with hazardous or potentially hazardous materials would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local agencies and regulations. During construction, the Project is anticipated to handle and use diesel fuel and gasoline. Any handling of hazardous materials during construction would be limited in both quantities and concentration and would be temporary as it would cease upon Project completion. Given the proposed Project is a residential housing community, it is not anticipated that the Project would emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or hazardous waste, and instead would be consistent with the adjoining residential uses to Dunlap Elementary School. Therefore, the Project would not expose schools within one quarter of a mile of the site to hazardous materials. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact: Government Code Section 65962.5 describes that before an application for a development project is completed, the Applicant and/or Lead Agency shall indicate whether the site is included on any of the lists compiled pursuant to that section and identify which list(s). According to the Cortese List (DTSC, EnviroStor 2019), the Project Site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites., nor are there any hazardous materials sites listed in the vicinity of the Project Site. Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard and no impact would occur. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? City of Yucaipa
Starling Heights SP TTM 20372
IVInitial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
fjg
April 2024