HomeMy WebLinkAboutSouth Highland Sewer - Final Initial Study And Negative Decl 11
1
1
FINAL INITIAL STUDY and
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
for the proposed
I SOUTH HIGHLAND AVENUE and JUNIPER AVENUE
SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
1 .
' Prepared for:
The City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Prepared by:
' David Evans and Associates, Inc.
800 North Haven Avenue, Suite 300
Ontario, CA 91764
I
1
April 11, 2002
•
:yy P .
l'S�v'
•
1
I
FINAL INITIAL STUDY and
NEGATIVE I ECLA ., TION
for the proposed
I SOUT d 1 IGHLAN I1} AVENUE and JUNIPER AVENUE
I SE }'i IMP!' (0 VEMLNT PROJECT
C
I
Prepared for:
The City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Prepared by:
' David Evans and Associates, Inc.
800 North Haven Avenue, Suite 300
Ontario, CA 91764
I
April 11, 2002
1
•
I • TABLE OF CONTENTS .
1 Section Page
1 INTRODUCTION 1-1
1.1 Introduction . 1-1
1.2 Purpose of the MND and Initial Study 1-1
1 1.3 Summary of Findings 1-2
2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION • 2-1
I2.1 Project Location and Environmental Setting • 2-1
2.2 Description of the Proposed Project a 2-5
I 2.3 Objectives of the Project 2-18
2.4 Discretionary Actions 2-18 •
I3 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 3-1
3.1 Aesthetics ' 3-2
I • 3.2 Agriculture Resources 3-3
3.3 Air Quality • 3-4
3.4 Biological Resources 3-8
3.5 Cultural Resources 3-11
I3.6 Geology and Soils 3-12
3.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials . 3-15
3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 3-17
I 3.9 Land Use and Planning 3-20
3.10 Mineral Resources 3-22
3.11 Noise 3-23
I 3.12 Population and Housing 3-25
3.13 Public Services 3-26
3.14 Recreation -3-28
I
Transportation and Traffic 3-29
, 3.16 Utilities and Service Systems 3-32
•
I4 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 4-1
4.1 Findings 4-1
I5 LIST OF PREPARERS/REFERENCES 5-1
5.1 Preparers of the MND/Initial Study 5-1
I 5.2 References 5-1
5.3 Persons Contacted 5-2
I
APPENDIX A-ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
I South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project
Pagei
•
I
•
•
1
Table of Contents(continued)
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1 Air Quality Monitoring Data 3-5
LIST OF FIGURES •
Figure Page
1 Regional Location 2-2
2 Vicinity Map 2-3
3a Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line A 2-6
3b Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line A 2-7
4a Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line B 2-8
4b Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line B 2-9 ,
5a Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line C 2-10
5b Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line C 2-11
6 Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line D 2-13
7a Traffic Control Plan 2-14
7b Traffic Control Plan 2-15
7c Traffic Control Plan 2-16
7d Traffic Control Plan • 2-17
1 _ .
•
1
I
..
i
I
I
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project
Page ii
•
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
This Initial Studyevaluates and identifies thepotential environmental impacts which mayresult from the
P
proposed development of approximately 5,100 feet of sewer main along South Highland Avenue between
1 Sierra Avenue and Juniper Avenue, south on Juniper Avenue from Highland Avenue to Walnut Street,
west on Walnut Street from Juniper Avenue to Cypress Avenue, and south along Sierra Avenue from the
South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection. South Highland is a two-lane street and is bounded
by vacant land.Juniper Avenue is a two-lane street bounded by scattered single-family residential units, as well
as vacant land to the east and vacant land to the west, and Walnut Street is also a two-lane road and is bounded
by vacant land, as well as a paved pathway located to.the north. Miller High School is located at the
northwestern corner of Cypress Avenue and Walnut Street.
The City of Fontana is serving as the Lead Agency for the proposed South Highland Avenue and Juniper
Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project. Section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) defines a Lead Agency as the public agency which.has the principal responsibility for carrying out or
approving a project which may have a significant effect on the environment. The City of Fontana would be
responsible for approving the proposed project, as well as for.the implementation of the proposed sewer
improvements. Thus,the City will serve as the Lead Agency,and has the authority to oversee and complete the
environmental review process for the project.
1.2 PURPOSE OF THE MND AND INITIAL STUDY
As part of the environmental review process for the proposed South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue
Sewer System Improvement project, the City-of Fontana has authorized the preparation of this Initial Study.
The Initial Study provides a basis for understanding whether there are environmental impacts associated with
the proposed project and, if environmental impacts are likely to.occur, whether such impacts could be
significant. The purposes of this Initial Study, as stated in Section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines, are as
follows: -
I . To provide the City of Fontana with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to
prepare an Environmental Impact Report(ER)or Negative Declaration(ND) for the proposed
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement project;
■ To enable the City of Fontana to modify the project, by reducing or eliminating any adverse
impacts before an DR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a negative
declaration;
■ - To assist in the preparation of an ER, if one is required, by focusing the ER on the effects
determined to be significant; identifying effects determined not to be significant; and
explaining reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant;
■ To identify whether a program ER, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for the
analysis of the project's environmental effects;
■ To facilitate the environmental review of the project early in its design;
t
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April II,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 1-1
•
•
•
' Introduction(continued)
•
•
• To provide documentation for findings in a negative declaration that the project would not
have a significant effect on the environment;
• To eliminate unnecessary environmental impact reports; and
■ To determine whether a previously prepared ER can be used for the project.
Based on the Initial Study, the City of Fontana could then determine the subsequent environmental review
' needed for the project,which may take the form of a(Mitigated)Negative Declaration(MND/ND)or an EIR.
1.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
. Based on the findings of the environmental analysis in Section 3 of this Initial Study, the proposed South
Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue.Sewer System Improvement project does not have the potential for
creating significant adverse impacts, and no mitigation measures are required with the implementation of
the project. In accordance with these findings,the City of Fontana will adopt a Negative Declaration for the
proposed South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement project. This would
complete the environmental review process for the project.
!
I .
•
•
I
1
Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration Draft:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 1-2
•
SECTION 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Project Background
The City of Fontana has experienced significant growth in the last forty years when population levels
increased by 900 percent. This population growth has shifted development and land use patterns from
farming and steel manufacturing to residential, commercial and industrial uses. Infrastructure
improvements, including sewer improvements, to support such growth in the City have not been
implemented.
Major sewer system improvements are necessary to ensure the health and safety of persons and property in
I the City of Fontana. Additionally, completion'of the State Route 210 Foothill Freeway, will result in an
even greater demand for local infrastructure, including sewer. New development surrounding the Freeway
is proposed and/or near construction phases, which need adequate sewer services. The improvements to the
I sewer system in the vicinity of the Freeway, as well as other areas in the City have become critical for the
expansion of development.
Regional Setting •
The City of Fontana occupies approximately 36 square miles in the southwestern section of San Bernardino
' County, at the southern base of the San Gabriel Mountains and north of Jurupa Hills. Lytle Creek Wash is
found north of the City but then heads southeast along the eastern edge of the City of Rialto (See Figure 1,
Regional Map).
The City of Fontana is located in the southwestern portion of the County of San Bernardino, within the Inland
Empire of Southern California. The County of San Bernardino, covering approximately 22,000 square miles,
is the largest county in the United States and consists of 31 incorporated cities. The county is home to
approximately 1.7 million residents,making it the fifth most populated county in California. Population growth
of approximately 19 percent is estimated to have occurred between the 1990 population of 1,418,380 persons
and the 2000 population of 1,689,281 persons.
The City is bounded to the west by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Ontario,and unincorporated
• county land,to the north by the San Bernardino National Forest and unincorporated county land,to the east by •
the City of Rialto and unincorporated county land, and to the south by the San Bernardino—Riverside County
line and unincorporated county land within Riverside County (see Figure 2, Vicinity Map). The San
Bernardino Freeway (I-10) runs through the southern portion of the City, and the Ontario Freeway (I-15)
' runs along the northwestern boundary of the City. Other major roadways in Fontana include Foothill
Boulevard,Arrow Highway,Valley Boulevard,-Baseline Avenue, South Highland Avenue and the proposed
Foothill Freeway (210 Freeway/State Route 30), Jurupa Avenue, Sierra Avenue, Citrus Avenue and Cherry
' Avenue.
The City of Fontana has developed in a mix of land uses, with the majority of the City developed as
' residential land uses. Older residential areas are found within the City core at the southeastern section of
the City north of the I-10 Freeway; and the newly developed residential areas are found at the northern
section, north of Foothill Boulevard and at the southern section near Jurupa Hills. Commercial
developments are found along major highways and roadways throughout the City and south of the I-10
' Freeway and east of Sierra Avenue. Industrial land uses are primarily located at the southwestern section of
the City, along the I-10 Freeway and parallel the Union Pacific Railroad.
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-1
i .. ... ... _Noi_._ma m r■r milt mill-. gill mil Illslimit —
(-I_I AA1O1t v1 -',ii Dq. ore
t"✓1LC� PP.E
j .k CL�P'AP lNi it: ?
f 1 -;. :c t
, ti�+T r A rnf�� • Verdemont,\
18
San Antonio; • PROJECT LOCATION Musco � ��� s_o
Heights.", 1 Oe Y% [
3 1 f el @asa... West
r.
im
RI 03 /t'— I ' }ct _ f,i91 1 ` ' ti r # �j hlands 4.
_` `I.t vandd �—! - - �'�a , r Path p~� � Hotghlankt
r a r�tirn.� ,I t
• f III 1 ' I -_ , IttLo, z1 t, A Base L1a
:t!~ CI
i Gol e e { 'V. c T R cho Ct carnonga & 8MI
Hel.hts�jt c 'i ❑ t.l tern_, i Mart is
` f: tlayt_ ' lad v f, _ r—toii rt�ort r. ,-.
' i �,�Aj p z Forttana ; t iii (3r�
; C�71€ T. _ ; atIIQV;31'nt Biocm#nEon, rs Golton J,, fo £ raven Jewel !I
t�
dC
'i$ `' „ Ct #' ' add
t7r1 i t£"Tdliun i ' -
a ,� ; south 1 v ' Trrt ' pno��'�1U "t- ,.v� _ y,�s:.--> .,_.�.._ ._ -- ..: ; :� rlr
�q �xatstrrV �n� -w�t ana _ �t c BrY TVlfivrr
{ � n i.ter:
1 fand4
r��: _�'`_ ,4 . a P.,,�e •ide ,r^T ;Rive sic.Or '/s 1 t,._ L"i P 'ii i A ` / ;
f , `_ tirtnys m H( hgrave
`-kit,:Chino -3 ' " ' ti: e ' <# : �,l
' ochar#ir;Ave Mira onta o en v n uL t Qdrrtlad t
',z..,..,...A.A....,1 .....c...---------,. .
Rubicioux j` o Belvedere 1
•
Ale iIF:A �9 + Heights
�--� ill A ''' c' I'',".lte: Ve Pe llBy ; abet*• `�::0 —'
�' Airport / ti?f'�.F41 l`SIt�E�
Las Serranos i`. Okla ✓ `n • q 6J`,IT t Atlu i-;..iE . ,, F
�% ��`�`Ni is v �' L ` . REGtC171; �:r�F�g r -.
Sleepy Hollow `:tl. E ?I - E f. Sterra fi
_.�.r�5.. Box Springs
S� J`` _ He hts 1 °rent)
1421 ',, ,,w� o; 1 ,�. �ALlanza` • ��, [ 4,. Al e
1�l `,, IY� 6t� St \ �,� d` r`tgemanf._tiJ� __. .�.._
. ! ,,,,..0 ' �r„r 1'` d� SUnnymead� W
La Sierra
��1. • 30 1 Norco `tiArkng n ,-"'Blanca 17 cArntSl H ghfs
('otQs?a 1 Q�f' a I 1
'rl=� Atura �1 i, r Prenda '",C 4 •
i31'vd Wrpo t1 �f. r' :\jf f
Yvit�a LirBlvd Ave_�
Sri irtda e `er i 1Y '( n. _. 1r
1 i e
Woodcr st. ix
1` ;- '-, - a �, Home Gardens ; 7
w Prado D aroltia �� t i; ��rrfi
a Pa�mb rT • `231 El obren :3 Glen Valley, I f'AYs.. .
`.• r`'rt � f 1!I '' ��, s Markham rhhem tit ��
Source: Microsoft Streets and Trips 2000
FIGURE 1 —REGIONAL MAP N
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project
IIIIII MIN IMO MINI Ell ale MIN OM MINI NMI MIMI IIIIIII IIIII MIN MO ale NIS IIIIII INN
Li
11 1,1
Highland Ave - -- -,
Ri/111--- --G- 1-41rnele"-fa-,We-16:7-
1 i I?
14,6) ' ''
roffIin
1.- I-1,F-'7
(1G-a--La4 , ell
rg
['9,Ein-1 rw St,
CI i I
rir
I . innt,a_iilir-
utstri___17 jai •
° 4r 1 1(
I ,4 w in-L
0 A I,_ '
•-.Frrii _Ill .,_
-_.=-
,1 1: rlijlicalle , =i
ciVlif6:
m
m,
i k
i I____I
13
,a)
611 l'n
-T_I—fd)wm117 ve- _ _iliiiii [ Fo 1 it a na ll- aip_sl i ase tit j
1 -I
Li iLi---ri .1-J [-- °}-----) v
1 - s .-3R4F -- LIR 1
---1 (J1 =
1__IL11_
-Ti
I _Sit* I 11 0 i Ft! 0 __1(
fl-AI ' ,
0 - -1 -L-toiher -T1
n 1 cr- 1T] °AU r---1 Li . __ I ---1 I r
1 , , .,.. _ 9 [I it
, TI\ Lid
I-11 ' 11-1 rimia-ga- iii ,---Ir J 1 it,r -111
Source: Microsoft Streets and Trips 2000
A
N , , , Project Site
FIGURE 2-VICINITY MAP
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project
I
Project Description(continued)
Growth and development in the City of Fontana has outpaced that of the County of San Bernardino for the
last two decades. While annexations have contributed to the population increase, infill construction of new
housing units has also added housing stock and residents to the City. During the 1980's, the City of
Fontana was among the fastest growing cities in San Bernardino County. The City's 1980 population of
37,100 persons increased to 87,535 persons in 1990, representing a 135 percent increase over the decade.
The majority of the growth was the result of new residential development in the City and land annexations.
During this same period, the number of dwelling units rose from 14,860 units in 1980 to 29,383 units in
1990.
According to the Department of Finance, the City's 2000 population is estimated at 128,929 persons, and its
housing stock consists of 36,504 units. The vacancy rate is 10.2 percent and the average household size is
3.566 persons per household. While the City's growth has slowed since 1990 to 47.3 percent (from 1990 to
2000), growth rates within the City of Fontana continue to exceed those of San Bernardino County,as a whole.
Project Area
•
The project area is located within the northeastern portion of the City. The proposed sewer improvements
would be developed from Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue east to Juniper Avenue, north from the
intersection of Juniper Avenue and Walnut Street to South Highland Avenue, east from the intersection of
Juniper Avenue to South Highland Avenue to Sierra Avenue, and south approximately 105 feet from the
intersection of South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue.
South Highland Avenue runs west to east through the City and in the project vicinity is a two-lane street
bounded by vacant land to the south and north. Commercial development is planned for the southeastern
corner of South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue. Juniper Avenue runs in a north to south fashion
through the City. It is a two-lane road in the project area. Four single-family homes are located along the
east side of Juniper Avenue, and mature trees and vacant lands are located on the west side of Juniper
Avenue within the project area. An elementary school is planned west of Juniper Avenue. Walnut Street
traverses the City in a west to east direction and includes a walking path along its northern border within the
project site.Walnut is a two-lane road in the project area and is surrounded by vacant land.The A. B. Miller
High School is located at the northwestern corner of Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue.
An existing eight-inch water line is located along Walnut Street south of where the proposed sewer line
would be installed. Additionally, overhead electricity lines are also located south of the proposed sewer
line, along Walnut Street. An existing underground telephone line-is located along Walnut Street, north of
the proposed sewer line. A gas line is located along Cypress Avenue. The proposed sewer line would
traverse the existing gas line.
Overhead electricity lines are located along Juniper Avenue and west of the proposed sewer line.
, Underground electricity lines are located at the northern portion of the portion of Juniper Avenue where the
project sewer would be installed.Additionally, a six and 5/8 inch to 17 3/8-inch water line is located west of
the proposed sewer line under Juniper Avenue. An underground telephone line is located within Juniper
Avenue, east of the proposed sewer line.
An underground electricity line is located along South Highland Avenue south of the proposed sewer line.
A fiber optic line encased in concrete, as well as a 25 3/8-inch water line is located just north of the
proposed sewer line under South Highland Avenue.
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-4
1
Project Description(continued)
An existing twelve-inch water line and an existing underground telephone line are located along the eastern
1 side of Sierra Avenue, approximately twelve feet west of the proposed.sewer line. Additionally, an existing
six-inch water line and an underground electric line are located along the western side of Sierra Avenue,
approximately 35 feet from of the proposed sewer line. Near the eastern portion of the Sierra Avenue and
South Highland Avenue intersection, an underground electric line traverses the proposed sewer line
location. Also in that portion of the intersection, a reinforced concrete pipe exists along of the proposed
sewer line and extends northward along Sierra Avenue.
2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Physical Characteristics
The proposed project would include the construction of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line. The
sewer improvements are divided into three sewer lines: Line A, located along Walnut Street; Line B,
' located along Juniper Avenue; Line C, located along South Highland Avenue; and Line D, located along
Sierra Avenue.These four proposed sewer lines are described below.
Line A
Line A would be approximately 1,312 linear feet and would be located approximately ten feet below the
existing grade of Walnut Street, as shown in Figures 3a and 3b, Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line A.
Walnut Street is a 24 foot-wide paved road with 18 feet wide dirt shoulders. A future median is planned for
Walnut Street. Line A would be located just north of the future median and would tie into an existing 10 inch
vitrified clay sewer pipe (VCP) and existing manhole at Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue. The proposed
sewer pipe would also be 10 inch VCP.Four new manholes would be constructed along Line A, one of which
would be located at the intersection of Walnut Street and Juniper Avenue where Line B would start. At two
' locations along Line A,the project proposes to replace damaged pavement with four inches of asphalt concrete.
At the eastern end of Line A,pipe support would be constructed, as well as a 10-inch extra strength sewer with
plug at the point were Line A and Line B would meet. •
' Line B
Line B would be approximately 1,793 linear feet long and would be located approximately ten feet below
' existing grade of Juniper Avenue, as shown in Figures 4a and 4b, Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line
B. Juniper Avenue is a 24-foot wide paved road with 18 feet wide dirt shoulders. Line B would tie into Line
A at a proposed manhole to be located at the intersection of Walnut Street and Juniper Avenue. Line B
' would be composed of ten-inch VCP. Five manholes are proposed along Line B, one of which would be
located at the intersection of Juniper Avenue and South Highland Avenue were Line C would start. The
central portion of Line B would include sewer laterals, extending from the proposed sewer line to the east,
' to service the existing single family residents located on the eastern side of Juniper Avenue. At the northern
portion of Line B, the project proposes to replace damaged pavement with four inches of asphalt concrete
pavement.
' Line C
Line C would be approximately 1,593 linear feet long and would be located approximately ten feet below
' existing grade of South Highland Road, as shown in Figures 5a and 5b,Proposed Improvements for Sewer
Line C. A proposed median is planned for South Highland Avenue.Line C would he constructed north of
the paved area of South Highland Avenue.Line C would be composed of ten inch VCP and would include
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April II,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-5
' Project Description(continued)
the development of five manholes.At the eastern portion of Line C,the sewer line would be deflected every
six feet, and a 10-inch extra strength VCP sewer with plug would be constructed.The project also proposes
to replace damaged pavement with four inches asphalt concrete surfacing at the eastern portion of Line C.
The portion of Line C that would traverse the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue
maybe constructed using a method called jack and bore.The jack and bore process would include digging a
bore pit at the western end of the intersection and a jacking pit at the eastern end of the intersection. Once
' the pits are dug,the boring machinery is installed in the boring pit. A sleeve for the new sewer line segment
is jacked through from one pit to the other. A new segment of sewer line is then installed within the sleeve.
The new pipe is slurried into place,and the boring and jacking machinery is pulled out. At this point,the
' new sewer line is completely tied in at both ends to the proposed sewer line. A 20-inch steel casing would
be placed around the sewer line.
' Line D
As shown in Figure 6, Proposed Improvements for Sewer Line D, the proposed Line D would be
approximately 105 feet long and would be located approximately ten feet beneath the existing grade,
' adjacent to Sierra Avenue. Line D would tie into Line C at a proposed manhole, which would to be located
at the eastern portion of the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue. Line D would be
six-inch, eight-inch, and ten-inch VCP. In addition to the manhole located at the intersection of South
Highland and Sierra Avenue, an additional manhole is proposed to be located ten feet from the southern end
of Line D. Additionally, a service lateral would extend east to serve the lot located southeast of the South
Highland and Sierra Avenue intersection. This lateral would serve a planned commercial development.
All proposed project manhole frames and covers would be constructed six inches below finished surface
grade and, upon completion of finished paving, the contractor would raise the manhole to finish grade. The
project would include protection of existing curbs, gutters, and sidewalks to the extent possible. Any
excavated ground would be filled with compacted backfill and a two-inch minimum temporary asphalt
concrete pavement would be placed in areas where existing pavement was removed and at driveways.
These areas would be compacted,rolled smooth and flush with adjacent pavement.
Traffic Control Plan
' The proposed sewer improvements are expected to take approximately three months. Construction is
anticipated to begin in Spring 2002 and to end in Summer 2002. A traffic control plan would be
implemented during the construction of the project(See Figures, 7a, 67b, and 7c Traffic Control Plan). The
following is a summary of the traffic control plan for each affected road (Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue,
South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue).
' Walnut Ayenue
Walnut Avenue would not be closed during construction of the sewer improvements. One-lane of traffic
would be open at all times during construction. Traffic would not be able to make left turns onto Juniper
Avenue and/or Cypress Avenue from Walnut Street during construction. Appropriate signage would be
posted at locations along Walnut Street to inform vehicles of lane closures, lane narrowing, merging, and
' shoulder work ahead, as well as other necessary directions. Additionally, a sign would be placed at either
end of project area on Walnut Street informing vehicles that construction has ended or is starting.
1
Draft Initial Study/Negative Declaration Draft:March 21,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-12
1
Project Description(continued)
1 Barricades would be placed west of Cypress Avenue along Walnut Street.K-rails would also be placed
along either side of the sewer improvement area.These barricades would be removed once the sewer
improvements are finished. Steel plates would be placed at the intersection of Cypress Avenue and Walnut
Street to cover up the necessary trench during construction.
1 Juniper Avenue
Juniper Avenue would be intermittently closed during the sewer construction. Juniper Avenue would be
closed to traffic from Walnut Street to approximately 300 feet north,with local residents exiting the area by
traveling north on the open portion of Juniper Avenue to South Highland Avenue. When sewer
construction is taking place in front of the residences along Juniper Avenue, access to northbound Juniper
Avenue would be coordinated with the contractor and facilitated with steel plates or the use of temporary
pavement. Once the construction passes, Juniper Avenue would be closed from the residences north to .
South Highland Avenue. No left turns onto Juniper Avenue or South Highland Avenue would be allowed
during construction. Signs indicating that road work is taking place ahead would be located at the on
Juniper Avenue right before Sierra Avenue. Additionally, signs would be posted along the project site
portion of Juniper Avenue directing vehicles of up coming road conditions, as well as open trenches.
j Additionally, steelplates would beplaced alongJuniper Avenue. These barricades would be removed once
P
the sewer improvements are finished. •
rSouth Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue
The proposed sewer line would be constructed just north of South Highland Avenue. Both lanes on South
Highland Avenue would be open during construction. Signs indicating shoulder work would be placed
along the northern shoulder of the road. Signs instructing vehicles of construction activities, as well as
' instructions for vehicles, would be placed along South Highland Avenue and at the intersection of Sierra
Avenue and South Highland Avenue. Additionally, K-rail barricades would be placed on the south side of
the sewer improvements. The K-rails would be removed once construction was completed. Left turns onto
Sierra Avenue, as well as South Highland Avenue, would be prohibited during construction. Additionally,
all lanes on Sierra Avenue are proposed to be open during the sewer construction. Traffic controls would
be implemented along the portion of Sierra Avenue where the sewer line would be constructed to reduce
traffic hazards.
2.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE PROJECT
The City of Fontana seeks to accomplish the following objectives with the proposed South Highland
Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project:
IN To implement sewer services in concert with planned developments;
■ To develop the sewer improvements prior to the opening of the proposed commercial
development located at the northeast corner of South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue;
I . To provide adequate sewer line capacity and service to the surrounding area; and
• To provide an adequate sewer system for the health and welfare of citizens of the City.
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April II,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-18
' Project Description(continued)
2.4 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
A discretionarydecision is an action taken byagovernment agency(for this project,thegovernment agency is
g Y g Y
the City of Fontana) that calls for the exercise of judgement in deciding whether to approve a project. The
proposed South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement project would require
the following specific discretionary approvals by the City of Fontana:
• Approval of Sewer Plans—The City of Fontana will need to approve final sewer improvement
plans for the project.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 2-19
I
SECTION 3: ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
I - This section of the Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed South
Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement project and provides explanations of the
responses to the Environmental Checklist found in Appendix A of this document.
The Environmental Checklist is based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines provides a list of checklist questions that correspond directly to the legal standards for preparing
Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs), Negative Declarations, and Mitigated Negative Declarations
(MNDs). The environmental issues evaluated in this Initial Study include the following:
I . Aesthetics ■ Land Use and Planning
■ . Agriculture Resources • Mineral Resources
• Air Quality • Noise
I . Biological Resources ■ Population and Housing
■ Cultural Resources ••
Public Services
• Geology and Soils • Recreation
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Transportation/Traffic
• Hydrology and Water Quality • Utilities and Service Systems
The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the questions in the Environmental Checklist.
Under each issue area, a general discussion of the existing conditions is provided. The Environmental
Checklist questions are then stated and an answer is provided according to the environmental analysis of the
project's impacts. To each question,there are four possible responses:
• No Impact. The proposed South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System
Improvement project will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment.
• Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will have the potential for impacting the
environment,although this impact will be below thresholds that may be considered significant.
I . Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project will have potentially
significant adverse impacts which may exceed established thresholds, although mitigation
measures or changes to the project's physical or operational characteristics will reduce these
impacts to levels that are less than significant. Measures that may reduce this impact are
identified.
I . Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will have impacts that are considered
significant and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce
these impacts to insignificant levels. When an impact is determined to be potentially
significant in the preliminary analysis, the environmental issue will be subject to detailed
analysis in an environmental impact report(EIR).
The references and sources used for the analysis are also identified after each response.
t
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-1
t
Environmental Analysis(continued)
3.1 AESTBETICS
The proposed feet of sewer improvements would be located alongaportion of Walnut Street, Juniper
p p 5,100p p
`Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue within the City of Fontana. Walnut Street is two-lane paved
road without curb cuts or sidewalks. Overhead utility lines are located on the southern side of Walnut
Street, and a paved walking path is located on the south side. A high school is located at the northwest
corner of Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue. The adjacent surrounding area to Walnut Street is vacant.
Juniper Avenue is a two-lane paved roadway without curb cuts or driveways. Overhead utility lines are
located on the east and west sides of Juniper Avenue. Four single-family homes are located on the east side
of Juniper Avenue, and mature trees are located on the west side. Vacant lands make up the rest of the
surrounding areas along Juniper Avenue.Highland Avenue is a two lane paved road with a curb cut located
at the southern side of the roadway. Additionally, overhead utility lines are located along the southern side
of the roadway. A traffic signal is located at the intersection of Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue.
Surrounding lands are vacant. Sierra Avenue is a two-lane roadway. Surrounding land uses around, the
portion of Sierra Avenue were the sewer line would be constructed are vacant. A commercial development
is planned at the southeastern corner of Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue.
(Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plans, and Site Photographs)
A. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
No Impact. There are no designated scenic vistas identified in the Fontana General Plan. Walnut Street,
Juniper Avenue and/or Highland Avenue are not a designated scenic highway in California's Scenic Routes.
' The nearest scenic route is Foothill Boulevard, located approximately 1.4 miles to the south from the project
site. The proposed project involves sewer improvements along within portions of Walnut Street, Juniper
Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue. The proposed project would not affect a scenic vista,
because the sewer improvements would be underground and would not block views of the surrounding area
from adjacent properties. The proposed construction and the improved roadway would not affect views of or
from Foothill Boulevard. Therefore,no impact on any scenic vista would occur from the proposed project.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Improvement Plans, California's Scenic Routes,and Site Survey)
B. . Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. There are no scenic resources on or near the project site, although views of the San Bernardino
Mountains to the north are visible from the project area. The project involves sewer improvements and
construction of 15 manholes within portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Sierra
Avenue. No rock outcroppings or historic buildings are found along or near the project site. Additionally,the
mature trees located along the west side of Juniper Avenue would not be disturbed by the proposed sewer
improvements. The proposed widening would not affect a scenic vista, because the improvements would be
underground and would not impact the view of the nearby mountains from adjacent properties. There are no
designated scenic vistas identified in the Fontana General Plan. Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland
Avenue,and Sierra Avenue are also not designated scenic highways. Therefore,no impact on scenic resources
or scenic highways is expected.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Site Survey,Improvement Plan, and California's Scenic Routes)
r
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-2
Environmental Analysis(continued)
•
C. Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings?
I Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project area consists of vacant lands, a high school, single
family residential units, and mature trees. The proposed project would include the construction of sewer
lines and 15 manholes under and along Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Sierra
Avenue. The visual quality of the site would not change with the proposed project because the sewer lines
and manholes would be located underground or at the same elevation as the existing roads.
On a short-term basis, during the three-month construction period, Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland
Avenue, and Sierra Avenue would be subject to excavation and construction activities which would provide
views of a highly disturbed area with construction materials and equipment, excavation ditch, fill soils,
form works, uneven roadway pavements, metal sheets, and unfinished and ongoing construction and
' paving. Barrier walls would be provided along the roadways,which would conceal views of the excavation
ditches.This impact would be temporary and is not considered significant. After construction,the area over
the sewer improvements would be cleaned and returned to its original condition.The proposed project is not
expected to result in negative aesthetic impacts.
(Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plans, and Site Photographs)
' D. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
No Impact. Existing sources of light and glare along the project site include headlights from vehicles traveling
along Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue at nighttime. The streets do not
have streetlights within the project area. The proposed project includes sewer improvements and would not
include development of any new sources of light or glare.Thus,no impact is anticipated.
(Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plans, and Site Photographs)
3.2 AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
•
Although the Fontana area was historically used for agriculture, agriculture throughout the City has decreased
significantly through the years,with less than 1,000 acres currently remaining in agricultural use. These areas
include small,scattered parcels throughout the City and vineyards in the northwestern portion of the City. Land
I along the project site contains vacant land and residential use, none of which are used for agriculture. The
project area is located within the urbanized area of the City of Fontana and is not designated as farmland under
the California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Land along the project site are designated as
Community Mixed Use(CMU)and Residential Planned Community(RPC).
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, San Bernardino County Important Farmlands, and Site Survey)
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?
No Impact. The project proposes sewer improvements within Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, Highland
Avenue, and Sierra Avenue, which are existing roadways, and no agricultural lands are located along or near
I .
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-3
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
the roadway. The adjacent areas are not designated as Farmland under the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency or in the Fontana General Plan. Thus,no impact on important
farmlands would occur with the proposed roadway improvement project.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, and Site Survey)
B. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
Icontract?
No Impact.The project would be developed along existing roadways, and vacant land along the project site
I is not used for agriculture. Adjacent areas designated for community mix use and residential development in
the City's Land Use Policy Map. Vacant lands near the site are not designated for agricultural use. In addition,
there is no agricultural zone in the City's Zoning Map. There are no lands under a Williamson Act contract
near the site. The proposed sewer improvement project would not affect agricultural uses in the City. No
impact on agricultural zones, resources, or operations in the City would result from the proposed roadway
improvement project.
(Sources:Land Use Policy Map of the Fontana General Plan, California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program, Fontana General Plan,Fontana Zoning and Development Code, and Site Survey)
C. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use?
I No Impact. There are no agricultural uses along or near the project site, which may be affected by the
proposed sewer improvements. The proposed sewer line and manhole construction would not convert
agricultural land to non-agricultural uses. The area along the project site consists of developed residential areas,
planned commercial land uses, a high school, as well as with vacant land. This area is urbanizing, and no
agricultural land uses are found nearby. Thus,the project would not induce any farmland conversion.
' (Sources:Land Use Policy Map of the Fontana General Plan and Site Survey)
3.3 AIR QUALITY
The project site is located at the north central section of the City of Fontana. The climate in Fontana is
characterized by very warm summers, mild winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime on-shore breezes,
I and comfortable humidities. Average temperatures are 80°F, with a high of 96°F, in summer and 53°F, with a
low of 45°F, in the winter. Rainfall averages 16.02 inches per year. Winds across the project area consist of
onshore flow from the southwest-west that is strongest in summer,with a weaker offshore return flow from the
northeast that is strongest on winter nights. The onshore winds during the day average 8 to 12 miles per hour
(mph), while the offshore flow is calm or drifts slowly westward at 1 to 3 mph. This wind pattern is broken by
winter storms and Santa Ana winds. The Santa Ana winds are strong northerly or northeasterly winds that
originate from the desert and go through the Newhall and Cajon Passes and into the valley. They occur most
often from September through March. Usually warm, always very dry, and often full of dust,these winds are
particularly strong in passes and at the mouths of canyons. On the average, Santa Ana winds occur five to ten
times a year,each lasting up to a few days.
The City of Fontana is located at the western section of the South Coast Air Basin. Existing levels of ambient
air quality and historical trends and projections in the project area are best documented from measurements
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-4
I
Environmental Analysis(continued)
I
made near the project site. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) operates air
1 monitoring stations in the Central San Bernardino Valley (Station No. 34 in the cities of Fontana and San
Bernardino)that monitor carbon monoxide,ozone,PM10,nitrogen dioxide,and other air pollutant levels. Table
1, Air Quality Monitoring Data, summarizes the last three years of published monitoring data from the
ISCAQMD monitoring stations near the site.
TABLE 1
AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA
Pollutant/Standard Days Standards Were Exceeded and Maximum Observed Levels
1997 1998 1999
Carbon Monoxide*
I 1-Hour>20 ppm 0 0 0
. 8-Hour> 9 ppm 0 0 0
Max.1-Hour Conc.(ppm) 8.0 6.0 5.0
Max.8-Hour Conc.(ppm) • 6.0 4.6 • 4.0
I Ozone
1-Hour>0.09 ppm 65 60 26
1-Hour>0.12 ppm 10 32 4
8-Hour>0.08 ppm 33 43 16
Max. 1-Hour Conc.(ppm) 0.17 0.20 0.14
Nitrogen Dioxide
1-Hour>0.25 ppm 0 0 0
Max.1-Hour Conc.(ppm) 0.14 0.15 0.15
Sulfur Dioxide
Max.1-Hour Conc.(ppm) 0.01 0.02 0.01
Suspended Particulates(PM1o)
I 24-Hour> 50 µg/m3 29 28 36
24-Hour>150 µg/m3 0 0 0
Max.24-Hour(µg/m3) 122 101 116
I Suspended Particulates(PM2.5) -
24-Hour> 65 µg/m3 3
Max.24-Hour(µg/m3) 98.1)
Particulates(TSP)
I Max 24-Hour(µg/m3) 212 175 232
Particulate Lead*
1-Month>1.5 µg/m3 0 0 0
• Max.1-Month (µg/m3) 0.04 0.05 0.07
Particulate Sulfate
24-Hour>25 µg/m3 0 0 0
Max.24-Hour(µg/m3) 10.2 10.1 12.4
I Data from Central SBV 1 Station in Fontana,except for Carbon Monoxide and Particulate Lead(pollutants with"),which utilize
data from Central SBV 2 Station in San Bernardino
-no data available
Source: SCAQMD ,I
The data shows that carbon monoxide,nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and particulate lead and sulfate levels do
not exceed state and federal clean air standards, although ozone and particulate levels occasionally exceed the
I standards. However, a trend towards better air quality can be seen, since the frequency of smog alerts due to
high ozone levels, especially those considered unhealthy for all people, has dropped considerably in the last
decade.
IThe Federal Clean Air Act(1977 Amendments)required that designated agencies in any area of the nation not
meeting national clean air standards must prepare a plan demonstrating the steps that would bring the area into
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
ISouth Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-5
•
Environmental Analysis(continued)
•
compliance with all national standards by December 31, 1987. The air quality in the South Coast Air Basin
(SCAB) did not meet clean air standards at that time, and the SCAQMD and the Southern California
Association of Governments(SCAG)adopted an Air Quality Management Plan(AQMP)in 1979. The AQMP
was subsequently revised several times,when earlier attainment forecasts were shown to be overly optimistic.
' In 1988,the California Legislature enacted the California Clean Air Act(CCAA), which requires that regional
emissions be reduced by 5 percent per year, averaged over 3-year periods, until attainment can be
demonstrated. Each area that did not meet a national or state ambient air quality standard was required to
prepare a plan which demonstrates how the 5 percent reductions would be achieved. In July 1991, the
SCAQMD adopted a revised AQMP,which was designed to meet the CCAA,requirements. The 1991 AQMP
deferred the attainment date to 2010,consistent with the 1990 Federal Clean Air Act.
The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA)required that all states with airsheds with "serious" or
' worse ozone problems submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The 1991 AQMP was
modified/adapted and submitted as the SCAB portion of the SIP. The 1991 SIP submittal estimated that an
85% basin-wide reduction in volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions and a 59% reduction in oxides of
nitrogen (NOx) between 1990 to 2010 was needed to meet federal clean air standards. About 40% of these
reductions were to come from existing pollution control programs. The remaining reduction would be from
new rules,technologies,or other reduction programs.
In 1996,EPA approved the 1994 submittal of the SCAB portion of the SIP. An updated 1997 AQMP was
locally adopted in compliance with the CAAA and CCAA. The California Air Resources Board(ARB)
forwarded this plan to EPA for its consideration and recommended approval. A 1999 Amendment to the
proposed SIP Revisions was developed that accelerates the schedule for a number of new SCAQMD rules
and regulations,to meet the court-ordered acceleration of the rate of progress. The 1999 Amendments were
approved by the California ARB on January 27, 2000.Additionally,the 1999 Amendments received EPA
approval as the adopted regional air quality plan in 2000.
(Sources: Western Regional Climate Center, SCAQMD Air Quality Monitoring Data, SCAQMD CEQA
Handbook, Annual Average Daily Traffic, and Site Survey)
A. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
111 No Impact. The planning process for the AQMP was heavily focused on stationary and area source controls,
and also incorporates anticipated changes in the vehicle fleet mix. Planned emissions reductions are offset by
projected growth in population,housing,employment,and land use. A sewer improvement project, such as the
proposed project would not generate air pollutants.
Conformity with adopted plans, forecasts, and programs relative to population, housing, employment and
' land use is the primary yardstick by which impact significance of planned growth is determined. If a given
project incorporates applicable direct source and transportation control measures, and if the scope and
phasing of a project are consistent with adopted forecasts as shown in the Regional Comprehensive Plan
(RCP), then the regional air quality impact of project development would not be significant. The proposed
sewer improvements do not involve an increase in population, housing, or employment. The proposed
project is not subject to specific SCAQMD regulations, although regulations for fugitive dust emissions,
construction equipment, and asphalt paving would need to be complied with during the construction phase
for the project.
The project would not conflict and is not inconsistent with the AQMP of the SCAQMD. The project would
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-6
Environmental Analysis(continued)
incorporate measures to reduce short-term construction emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD
I regulations and thus,the project would have no significant adverse impacts on regional air quality. The
roadway improvements would not conflict or obstruct implementation of the AQMP.
' (Sources:SCAQMD AQMP, SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, Fontana General Plan, and Improvement Plan)
B. Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing
' or projected air quality violation?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would lead to construction emissions that
may affect regional air quality. The proposed improvements would involve grading and excavation activities
during an estimated three-month construction period.During construction,construction equipment and vehicles
may drop or carry out dirt or silt that is washed into public streets. Passing non-project vehicles then pulverize
' the dirt to create off-site dust impacts. Construction activities also generate evaporative emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) from paints, solvents, asphalt, and other coatings. The use of construction
equipment would lead to emissions, which would add to local air pollution levels. The project would include
measures in accordance with SCAQMD to reduce short-term vehicle emissions.Additionally,the project would
include dust control measures, such as adequate watering of the site to prevent/reduce the amount particulates
from entering the air.The following are recommendations for the project to further reduce air pollution:
■ Apply non-toxic soil stabilizers according to manufacturers' specification to all inactive construction areas
(previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more).
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as quickly as possible.
• All trucks hauling dirt, sand, or other loose materials are to be covered or should maintain at least two feet
freeboard(i.e.,minimum vertical distance between top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance
with requirements of CVC Section 23114.
• Soil disturbance should be terminated when high winds (>25 mph) make dust control extremely
difficult.
■ Minimization of construction interference with regional non-project traffic movement. Scheduling
receipt of construction materials to non-peak travel periods.
• Reducing "spill-over" effects by preventing soil erosion, washing vehicles entering public roadways
' from dirt off-road project areas, and washing/sweeping project access to public roadways on an
adequate schedule.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, and Improvement Plans)
C. Would the project 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 (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project is not expected to generate air
pollutants. However, construction emissions would be produced during the three-month construction
period. This impact would be temporary, and it is not expected that vacant parcels located along the project
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-7
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
•
site would be under development/construction at the same time due to the access constraints that would be
posed by the project construction. The project's contribution to cumulative impacts would be temporary
and considered less than significant. The project's construction impacts would also be reduced by
implementation of dust control measures, as well as other measures as required by SCAQMD. Over the long
' term, the proposed project would not generate air pollutants. Thus, any cumulative increase in air pollutants
or ozone levels in the project area would be less than significant.
' (Sources:SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, Fontana General Plan, and AQMP)
D. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. The construction emissions have the potential to affect sensitive receptors
located along the affected roadway segment. Impacts on adjacent residents and/or students and teachers at
the existing high school would include fugitive dust during grading and excavation and emissions from on-
site construction equipment. Predominant wind patterns come from the south and southwest, and emissions
from the site would not be windblown to the land uses and residences located south of the roadway. The
four single-family residential units along Juniper Avenue, as well as the Walnut Village specific planning
area(located southeast of the project site) would.not be affected by fugitive dust. However,these land uses
located to the south may be affected by fugitive dust during Santa Ana wind episodes. The area to the north
of the project site includes vacant lands and scattered single family residential units. Additionally, an
' existing high school is located northwest of the intersection of Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue were the
project would start. This area may be affected by fugitive dust during construction. However, dust control
measures, such as daily watering, have been incorporated into the project to reduce fugitive dust. A less
then significant impact is expected with the dust control measures. Once construction is done,the sewer line
and manholes would not create air pollution;no impact is expected.
' (Sources:SCAQMD CEQA Handbook, Fontana General Plan, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, and Site Survey)
E. Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
tLess than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project would not be involved in the
handling of large quantities of solid waste materials, chemicals, food products, or other odorous materials
and has no potential to create objectionable odors. If a sewer line break occurs in the future after the pipe in
constructed, objectionable odors may occur. These odors would be temporary and would stop once the
sewer leak is fixed. During construction, there may be localized instances when. the characteristic diesel
exhaust odor is noticeable from construction equipment and asphalt paving. Such transitory exposures (during
construction or/and if a sewer line break occurs) are brief nuisances and would not threaten regional air quality
standards. Thus, adverse impact in terms of objectionable odors during construction would be less than
significant.
' (Sources: SCAQMD CEQA Handbook and Improvement Plans)
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Biological resources in the City of Fontana consist of a variety of plant and animal habitats found on
' undeveloped areas, as well as open areas within urban developments. Natural habitats remain in the
undeveloped areas along the foothills, with urbanized areas supporting introduced species and landscaping
materials. According to the Fontana General Plan,no endangered or sensitive plant or animal species are found
' adjacent to the project site (portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-8
Environmental Analysis(continued)
Avenue). The Fontana General Plan shows that native plant communities along a portion of the project site
(north of South Highland Avenue) consist of Creosote Brush Scrub. Creosote Brush Scrub is generally found
on well-drained soils on the slopes, fans and valleys. Dominant plant species include creosote brush, indigo
bush,and California sunflower. The vacant area along the western side of Juniper Avenue supports five mature
' trees, one of which appears to be dead. These trees may provide food and nesting areas for local and migratory
birds.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan,Aerial Photographs, and Site Survey)
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?
No Impact.The proposed project includes the development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line
and 15 manholes. The sewer improvements would be made along existing roadways: Walnut Street from
Cypress Avenue to Juniper Avenue; Juniper Avenue from Walnut Street to Highland Avenue; Highland
' Avenue from Juniper Avenue to Sierra Avenue, and approximately 100 feet south on Sierra Avenue from
the intersection of Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue. The adjacent areas to the project site are
disturbed and do not support rare, endangered, or threatened species of plants or animals. According to the
' Fontana General Plan, the project area is not located in an area with sensitive biological resources. The
mature trees along Juniper Avenue would not be disturbed. Therefore, no impact to nesting birds within
these trees is expected to occur.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan, Recovery Plan for Delhi Sand Flower Loving Fly, City Code, and Site
Survey)
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, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The project site is located within portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland
Avenue;and Sierra Avenue. Surrounding use include residential units and vacant lands. Grass, weeds, and
five mature trees are found along the proposed site. There are no riparian habitats in the project vicinity.
Consequently, the project would not affect riparian habitats or natural communities identified in local or
regional plans or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, and Site Survey)
C. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.)through direct removal,filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. The project site does not contain any wetland habitat or any designated blue line streams,
according to the USGS Fontana Quadrangle.The proposed 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15 manholes
is not expected to generate runoff or drainage that would impact wetlands. Therefore, no impacts to
wetlands are expected to occur as a result of the project.
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April I1,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System improvement Project Page 3-9
1.111.11111100"—
Environmental Analysis(continued)
(Sources: USFWS National Wetlands Inventory, Fontana General Plan, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino
and Riverside Counties, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, and Site Survey)
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?
No Impact.The segments of South Highland Avenue, Juniper Avenue, Walnut Avenue, and Sierra Avenue
where the proposed sewer main would be located do not serve as wildlife dispersal corridors.While the area
surrounding the affected segment includes vacant lands, scattered urban developments are found along
' these roadways. With the SR-210 Freeway to the north of South Highland Avenue and the presence of
residential tracts to the east, south and southwest of the affected segment, the adjacent vacant lots do not
form a connected corridor for wildlife dispersal. There are no wildlife corridors or open areas nearby which
serve as animal migration routes through the affected segment. The proposed project is not expected to
affect wildlife migration.No impact to wildlife dispersal or migration would occur with the project.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Site Survey, and Aerial Photograph)
E. u d thelo
cal 1 project conflict with any to al policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources,such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. According to the Fontana General Plan, there are no significant biological resources on the
project site. Sensitive habitat is located north of South Highland Avenue but the project would not impact
this area. No impacts to biological resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed sewer
improvements.
Although mature trees are located on the west side of Juniper Avenue, the project would not destroy or
remove these trees. Thus, no conflict with the City's tree preservation ordinance and policies would occur
with the project. The project is not expected to conflict with local policies protecting biological resources;
' thus,no impact is anticipated.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, City Code, and Site Survey)
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 project site is not identified as critical or sensitive habitat in the Fontana General Plan and
there is no adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan for the area. Thus, the
proposed sewer project would have no impact on local or regional habitat conservation plans.
Habitat loss associated with new development within the City is being addressed through participation of
the Valley Wide Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) as outlined in the 1995
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Service, CDFG, and 15 additional local jurisdictions,
including the City of Fontana. In addition, all major municipal jurisdictions are currently negotiating with
the Service to develop a mutually acceptable process for implementation of the MSHCP. It is the intent of
these jurisdictions to continue to address and accommodate habitat loss in their long-range development
plans.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan and Site Survey)
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-10
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
The City of Fontana has a long history of human occupation and archaeological resources have been found
in and adjacent to the Jurupa Hills and the San Gabriel Mountains. These resources regionally suggest a
rich cultural prehistory, dating back four to six thousand years ago. Local inhabitants during that time are
' believed to be Indians of the Shoshonean linguistic family. No archaeological resources have been found
within the valley floor of the City.
' Development within the City of Fontana was originally centered around the agricultural production of
citrus, poultry and other agricultural.crops. The construction of the Kaiser Steel Plant in 1942 shifted the
economy of the area to industrial development, and the associated demand for residential and commercial
' developments. Historical structures in the City are concentrated along Sierra Avenue, and within the area
bounded by Arrow Route, Mango Avenue,Foothill Boulevard, and Juniper Avenue.
' There is one site within the City currently listed on the Federal Register of Historic Places. Seven sites are
listed on the California Historical Points of Interest and one site is designated as a California Historical
Landmark. None of the sites are located along the project site. The list of Historical Resources in the Code
of the City of Fontana does not include structures or sites along the project site. The Fontana Historical
Society has identified 51 sites or areas of local historical interest within the City and its Sphere of Influence.
None of these sites or areas is located along the proposed sewer improvement project area.
(Sources:Site Survey, City Code, and Fontana General Plan)
A. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined in§15064.5?
No Impact. The proposed project includes construction of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line
under Walnut Street between Cypress Avenue and Juniper Avenue, under Juniper Avenue between Walnut
Street and South Highland Avenue, adjacent to South Highland Avenue between Juniper Avenue and Sierra
Avenue, and adjacent to Sierra Avenue south of the Sierra Avenue and South Highland Avenue
intersection. There are no known historical structures or sites on or near the sewer improvement area.
' According to the Conservation Element of the Fontana General Plan, the proposed project site is not on or
adjacent to a historical resource. Because the proposed project would not occur on or immediately adjacent
to historical resources,the project is not expected to cause an adverse change in a historical resource.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan and Site Survey)
B. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
' No Impact. According to the Conservation Element within the Fontana General Plan, no archaeological
resources have been found within the valley area of the City of Fontana. It is anticipated that the likelihood for
an archaeological find within the project site would be low because of prior disturbance to soils within the
' right-of-way from previous grading activities for the existing roadway construction.Thus,.there is low potential
for archaeological resources to be present within the project site. While additional excavation and grading
would be necessary for the sewer improvements and manhole construction, no impact on archaeological
resources is expected.
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-11
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
' (Sources:Site Survey and Fontana General Plan)
C. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
No Impact. According to the Fontana General Plan,there are no known paleontological resources in the City
of Fontana. In addition, the project site(under Walnut Street between Cypress Avenue and Juniper Avenue,
under Juniper Avenue between Walnut Street and South Highland Avenue, adjacent to South Highland
Avenue between Juniper Avenue and Sierra Avenue, and adjacent to Sierra Avenue south of South
' Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection)is highly disturbed due to existing roadway construction,as
well as utility line installations. Thus, the potential for finding in-situ paleontological resources within the
proposed project area is considered low. The existing roads are relatively flat and there are no unique geologic
1 features on or near the site. Consequently, no impact to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic
features is expected to occur with the proposed sewer improvement project.
(Sources: Site Survey, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, and Fontana General Plan)
' D. Would the project disturb anyhuman remains, includingthose interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
1 No Impact. The project site is highly disturbed due to existing roadway construction and utility line
installations. There is no known evidence of human remains or a previous cemetery along the Walnut Street,
' Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue corridors. Therefore, no impact on human
remains is expected to occur with the proposed sewer improvement project.
1 (Sources: Site Survey and Fontana General Plan)
3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The City of Fontana has a varied topography, with the San Gabriel Mountains to the north, the Jurupa Hills to
the south and the valley area in between. Soils in the area primarily consist of alluvium from the San Gabriel
Mountains,including course textured sands and gravels. •
The City of Fontana is located in a seismically active region, and has experienced several earthquakes with a
magnitude of 6.0 or greater within the last 100 years. These events have been attributed to the San Andreas
Fault (located 10 miles north of the City and capable of producing an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 on the
Richter Scale), San Jacinto, Cucamonga, and Lytle Creek Faults (at the northern boundary of the City and
capable of a 6.5 to 7.0 magnitude earthquake), and Red Hill Fault(crossing the City in a northeast to southwest
' direction). These faults are not located on or near the affected segment of the project site.
The Fontana General Plan also identifies areas susceptible to slope instability/failure and wildfires. No areas
susceptible to slope failure or wildfires are located in close proximity to the project site.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Fontana General Plan, Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los
Angeles Region, and Site Survey)
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-12
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
A. Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effect,
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?
Less than Significant Impact. While the City of Fontana is located in a seismically active region. The
Rialto-Colton fault is located adjacent to the project site(under Walnut Street between Cypress Avenue and •
Juniper Avenue, under Juniper Avenue between Walnut Street and South Highland Avenue, adjacent to
' South Highland Avenue between Juniper Avenue and Sierra Avenue, and adjacent to Sierra Avenue south
of South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection). The sewer lines would be constructed to
withstand seismic forces, in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction
' (Greenbook). Construction workers may be exposed to hazards associated with an earthquake event.
However, these hazards would be limited to pavement cracks and utility line damage that would not lead to
significant hazards. Thus,the impact of strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Improvement Plan,Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles
Region, and Fontana General Plan Safety Element)
B. Would the project be subject to strong seismic groundshaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project would be exposed to
' groundshaking hazards associated with earthquake events in the region. These hazards are no different than
those at other areas of the City. The project site may be subject to groundshaking, but is not expected to
expose persons to undue hazards. Some pavement cracking and possible sewer line damage may occur,but
these are not expected to create major threats to life and property since the sewer improvement site is at
' . grade and would be constructed to withstand seismic forces, in accordance with the Standard Specifications
for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Construction workers may be exposed to hazards associated
' with groundshaking during an earthquake event. However, these hazards would be limited to pavement
cracks and utility line damage that would not lead to significant hazards. Thus,the impact of strong seismic
ground shaking would be less than significant.
' (Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Greenbook, and Fontana General Plan Safety Element)
C. Would the project be subject to seismic-related ground failure,including liquefaction?
SNo Impact. The site is not located in areas with liquefaction susceptibility, as identified in the Safety
Element of the Fontana General Plan. The site is also located outside areas with perched water conditions,
' which may support liquefaction hazards. Groundwater levels along the affected project site are estimated at
790 to 800 feet below mean sea level or approximately 530 to 610 feet below the ground surface. Thus, no
hazards associated with liquefaction are anticipated.
' (Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Improvement Plan, Fall 1997 Water Levels, and Fontana General
Plan Safety Element)
D. Would the project be subject to landslides?
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-13
Environmental Analysis(continued)
No Impact. The project-site is relatively flat and is located on the valley portion of the City. The Fontana
General Plan identifies areas with slope instability in the City, and does not include the area on or near the
project area. Consequently, no impact associated with landslides would occur with the proposed sewer
improvement project.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Site Survey, Improvement Plan, and Fontana General Plan Safety
Element)
1 E. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant Impact. Grading and excavation for the project would lead to excavation and
grading activities for the sewer improvements and construction of manholes. The project site would remain
relatively flat after the completion of construction. Construction of the sewer lines may lead to erosion of
the side slopes prior to completion of the project. This erosion would be temporary, would be confined to
I the excavation areas for the sewer lines; arid would cease once the excavation area is backfllled and the
roadway pavement is constructed. The City would implement standard erosion control measures as
required by the City Code. Thus, soil erosion during construction would be less than significant.
(Sources:Improvement Plans and Fontana General Plan)
F. 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?
No Impact. There are no known geologic hazards along the project site (under Walnut Street between
Cypress Avenue and Juniper Avenue, under Juniper Avenue between Walnut Street and South Highland
1 Avenue, adjacent to South Highland Avenue between Juniper Avenue and Sierra Avenue, and adjacent to
Sierra Avenue south of South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection). Subsidence has not
occurred along the project site and there are no water wells or oil wells near the proposed sewer line
development area. Perched water conditions (which may lead to liquefaction hazards) are also not present
within the project site. The portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, as well as
Sierra Avenue where the sewer improvements would occur are relatively flat topographically and are not
located on unstable soils. The on-site soils do not present any geologic hazards to sewer construction.
There is no known incidence of landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse on-site or
near the site. Thus,the proposed project is not expected to be exposed to or create off-site landslide,lateral
spreading, subsidence,liquefaction, or collapse.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Site Survey, and Fontana General Plan)
G. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
' No Impact. On-site soils consist primarily of sands and gravels typically found on the Lytle Creek alluvial
fan. The project site is not located within an area known to have soil expansion hazards or clay soils (which
have high shrink-swell potential) as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code. Thus, no soil
expansion hazard is expected on-site.
(Sources:Site Survey and Fontana General Plan)
T .
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-14
•
•
Environmental Analysis(continued)
H. 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?
No Impact. The proposed project includes construction of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15
manholes. The project does not propose development of septic tanks and/or alternative wastewater disposal
systems. Thus,no impacts to soils which are unsuitable for on-site sewage disposal systems would occur as a
Iresult of the project.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Site Survey, and Improvement Plan)
1 3.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
A hazardous material is defined as any substance that may be hazardous to humans,animals,or plants,and may
include pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and chemicals, volatile chemicals, explosives, and even nuclear
fuels or low-level radioactive wastes. The City of Fontana has a wide variety of industries and land uses,which
generate,use,or handle hazardous materials. Most of these sites are associated with industrial and commercial
uses located throughout the City. According to the EPA's Envirofacts data base closest hazardous waste
handlers and/or generators to the project site include Mid Valley Landfill located on Sierra Avenue; San
Bernardino County Solid Waste Management located at 6087 Sierra Avenue;Alman's Truck Repair located at
6183 Sierra Avenue; Circle K located at 50898 Grapefruit Street; and ETI of California, Inc. located at 2900
Tamarino Avenue.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Designated Truck Routes, Envirofacts Database, and Site Survey)
A. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public, or the environment through the
' routine transport,use,or disposal of hazardous materials?
No Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would not utilize or generate hazardous materials or
wastes. The proposed sewer improvement project would not transport hazardous materials. Therefore, the
project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
(Source: Site Survey and Improvement Plans)
B. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
' Less than Significant Impact. Activities associated with the sewer and manhole construction may involve
some hazardous materials use, such as paints, thinners, cleaning solvents, oil, grease, etc. However,
hazardous materials use, storage, and disposal would be made in accordance with existing federal, state and
local regulations. No truck oil change, equipment maintenance or other activities that may release
hazardous materials on or near the project site are proposed within the construction area. Trucks carrying
hazardous materials would be utilizing surrounding roads. Traffic safety signs and controls would be
provided to create safe driving conditions and prevent vehicle accidents. Thus, hazardous material
accidents are expected to be less than significant.
(Source:Site Survey and Improvement Plans)
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-15
Environmental Analysis(continued)
•
C. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials,substances,or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. The nearest school to the project site is A. B. Miller High School, located at the corner of
Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue, adjacent to the project site. The Wayne Ruble Elementary School is
proposed along Juniper Avenue, adjacent to the project site. The proposed sewer line would not emit
' hazardous materials. Activities associated with the sewer and manhole construction may involve some
hazardous materials use, such as paints, thinners, cleaning solvents, oil, grease, etc. Hazardous materials
use, storage, and disposal would be made in accordance with existing federal, state and local regulations
and would not be emitted onto the existing or proposed school grounds. Therefore, the project would not
result in a risk of hazardous emissions or the improper handling of acutely hazardous materials, substances,
or waste which may affect nearby schools.
' (Sources: Fontana Unified School District, Site Survey, and Improvement Plans)
D. Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment?
' No Impact. A field survey of the affected segment and review of the Envirofacts Database of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency show that the project site is not a hazardous material site. Also, the
Fontana Engineering Department has indicated that the project site is not identified on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the sewer
improvements and manholes would not result in a risk to the public or the environment. The nearest listed
hazardous material users/generators are the Mid Valley Landfill, San Bernardino County Waste
' Management, Elman's Truck Repair, Circle K, and ETI of California, Inc. The project would not be
developed within these hazardous waste handlers/generators sites. Thus, no hazards to the public or the
environment would occur with the proposed roadway improvement project.
(Sources:Envirofacts Database, Fontana Engineering Department, and Site Survey)
E. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
1 adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport,would the project result in
a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is not located near a public airport. The nearest airports are the Rialto
Municipal Airport in the City of Rialto located approximately one and a half miles to the east of the project
site and the Ontario International Airport in the City of Ontario located approximately twelve miles to the
southwest of the project site. The proposed project would not be exposed to airport hazards; would not
affect aircraft operations; and would not create an airport safety hazard for people utilizing the roadway or
residing and working in the project area.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, and
Fontana General Plan)
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-16
I
•
Environmental Analysis(continued)
F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. There are no private airstrips located immediately adjacent to or near the project site.
' Therefore, the proposed sewer improvements would not expose construction workers to air traffic hazards,
during construction. The project would not expose people to air traffic hazards once construction was done;
therefore no impacts are anticipated
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties)
I
G. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would be located under Walnut Street between
Cypress Avenue and Juniper Avenue, under Juniper Avenue between Walnut Street and South Highland
I Avenue, adjacent to South Highland Avenue between Juniper Avenue and Sierra Avenue, and adjacent to
Sierra Avenue south of the South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection. During construction
when the roadways would remain open,no obstruction to emergency response to or emergency evacuation
I from adjacent properties is expected. Construction at intersections would also be made under metal sheets
and scheduled to minimize interference with vehicle traffic. However, the congestion that may occur at
these intersections during construction could impede emergency vehicles that pass along the affected
segment during heavy traffic. With the availability of two-way traffic flow and emergency sirens, it is
expected that impacts to emergency response would be less than significant. Access to individual lots would
be maintained throughout the construction period, and no adverse impacts to emergency evacuation are
expected.
(Sources:Fontana General Plan, Traffic Control Plan,Improvement Plans, and Site Survey)
H. Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires,including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Less than Significant Impact.The project site is located in a generally urbanized area. Although vacant areas
g p
are located adjacent to the project,the site is not located in the area identified in the Fontana General Plan as a
"fire prone area". The proposed project does not involve the construction of structures that may be exposed to
fire hazards. Therefore,no risk of loss,injury, or death involving wildland fires is expected from the proposed
roadway improvement project.
(Sources:Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, and Improvement Plans)
3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The City of Fontana is underlain by the Chino groundwater basin, which is an adjudicated basin by the Chino
Watermaster. Groundwater levels near the project site were estimated at approximately 790 to 800 feet above
mean sea level or 530 to 610 feet below the ground surface.
I .
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-17
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
The Etiwanda Creek and San Sevaine Channel are the major surface water resources in the project area. These
channels join approximately 3.75 miles west of the project site and serve as the regional storm drain facilities
for the surrounding area. The San Bernardino County Flood Control District's planning area is responsible for
regional storm drainage facilities and the City of Fontana is responsible for local storm drainage. The storm
drainage within the northern section of the City of Fontana (north of Foothill Boulevard) is provided by
scattered detention basins, which serve the newer development projects. Runoff from older developments is
• conveyed as sheet flow through curbs and gutters toward the drainage system on Foothill Boulevard and the •
West Fontana Channel.
The 100-year and 500-year plains are generally located at the northern,western and southern portion of the City
of Fontana.Major flood hazards associated with storm flows from the San Gabriel Mountains and Lytle Creek
have been controlled by the Army Core of Engineer facilities built in the 1940s and 1050s and by.Hawker-
Crawford and San Sevaine channels. These facilities have controlled major streambed overflow problems
although localized flooding does occur in certain portions of the City.
Surface flows in the City generally travel east and south to the Rialto Channel in areas east of Sierra Avenue
and west and south to San Sevaine Channel for areas west of Sierra Avenue.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan, Fall 1997 Water Levels, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside
Counties, and USGS Fontana Quadrangle)
A. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes construction of approximately 5,100 linear
feet of sewer line and 15 manholes. The project would not generate any stormwater or wastewater. During
construction, the City would implement best management practices for stormwater pollution control, in
accordance with the NPDES. The project site would be subject to street sweeping during construction and
after construction to collect debris on the roadway pavement. The sewer improvements are not expected to
generate pollutants that would violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.
' (Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plan, and Fontana Engineering Department)
B. Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering
of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
No Impact. The proposed project includes development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line
P p p
and 15 manholes. No water wells are proposed as part of the project and no long-term water demand would
1 be created by the project. The proposed sewer line would be placed approximately 10 feet under the
existing grade. Groundwater is located approximately 530 to 610 feet below the ground surface. The
construction of the proposed improvements would not interfere with groundwater recharge, since the
affected area does not serve as a recharge basin. Therefore,the project would not reduce the net level of the
underground aquifer or lower the groundwater table thereby reducing groundwater supplies.
(Sources:Improvement Plan, Site Survey, and Fontana General Plan)
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-18
1
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
IC. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
' Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the construction of sewer improvements.
The project would not alter existing drainage patterns and would not alter the course of a stream or river.
Additionally, the project would not result in erosion or siltation.on- or off-site. Erosion control measures
would be implemented during construction; therefore, no substantial erosion "would result during
construction of the sewer line improvements.
(Sources: USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, and Improvement Plan)
D. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site, or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no identified flood hazards on the project site. The 100-year and
500-year flood plains are not located near or on the project site. The project would not lead to a decrease in
ground absorption or an increase in runoff. The project would not increase impervious surfaces. After the
' sewer construction was completed, Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra
Avenue would be put back to their existing conditions. The proposed improvements would not alter
drainage patterns or result in flooding on-or off-site.
(Sources: Site Survey,USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Fontana General Plan, and Improvement Plan)
111 E. Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes construction of approximately 5,100 linear
feet of sewer line and.15 manholes. The project would not increase in impervious surfaces and/or increase
stormwater runoff volumes. During construction, the City would implement best management practices for
stormwater pollution control,in accordance with the NPDES.The project would not generate pollutants that
may enter the storm drain system. The proposed improvements would not exceed the capacity of the
downstream stormwater drainage systems or provide additional sources of polluted runoff.
(Sources: Site Survey and Improvement Plans)
F. Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
No Impact. The proposed project would have no long-term demand for water and would not lead to
activities or pollutants that could degrade groundwater quality. No water wells are proposed as part of the
project, and the demand for water during construction would be limited. Thus,the project does not have the
potential to degrade water quality.
(Sources: Site Survey and Improvement Plan)
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April II,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-19
Environmental Analysis(continued)
G. Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary of a Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
No Impact. No housing units are proposed as part of the project, and the project site is not located within a
flood hazard area. The project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary of a Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map.
(Sources: Site Survey, FEMA FIRM, Fontana General Plan Safety Element, and Improvement Plans)
H. Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures,which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The affected segment is not located within a flood hazard area, and no structures are proposed
as part of the sewer improvement project. Consequently, the project would not place structures in a manner
that would impede or redirect flows within a 100-year flood hazard area.
(Sources: Site Survey, Fontana General Plan Safety Element, FEMA FIRM, and Improvement Plan)
Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death
involving flooding,including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact. The project site is not located downstream of a dam or levee, which may lead to inundation of
the project area. Also, no above ground structures would be constructed as part of the sewer improvement
project. Therefore,there would be no risk of significant loss, injury, or death involving flooding, as a result
of the failure of a levee or dam or as a result of the proposed project.
(Sources: Site Survey, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, USGS Fontana
Quadrangle, Fontana General Plan Safety Element, and Improvement Plan)
' J. Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,injury or death
involving inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow?
No Impact. The proposed project site is located inland and would not be subject to tsunami hazards. The
project site has a relatively flat topography; and there are no hillside areas near it, which may create
mudflow hazards. In addition, there are no large open bodies of water near the site, which may lead to
seiche hazards. Therefore, there would be no risk of significant loss, injury, or death involving inundation
by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow as'a result of the proposed sewer improvement project.
(Sources: Site Survey, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, USGS Fontana
Quadrangle, and Improvement Plans)
3.9 LAND USE AND PLANNING
IThe project site is located approximately 10 feet under the existing grade of Walnut Street, from Cypress
Avenue to Juniper Avenue; Juniper Avenue, from Walnut Street to South Highland Avenue; adjacent to
Highland Avenue, from Juniper Avenue to Sierra Avenue; and adjacent to Sierra Avenue, the from South
Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue intersection for approximately 100 feet. Highland Avenue is designated as
a Primary Highway in the Fontana General Plan. Walnut Street is designated as a Secondary Highway, and
Juniper Avenue is designated as a Collector Road in the General Plan. The project site is designated at
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-20
I
Environmental Analysis(continued)
111
Residential-Planned Community (R-PC) along Walnut Street and the majority of Juniper Avenue. Along the
South Highland Avenue and the northern portion of Juniper Avenue, the project site is designated as
Community Mixed Use(CMU).
The R-PC designation is a special classification, which provides for master planned development to promote
managed growth within north Fontana. Development is restricted to single-family detached residential units
with controlled local commercial uses.Minimum lot sizes under the R-PC designation range from 3,500 square
I feet to 30,000 square feet.The CMU designation applies to the north Fontana area and is intended to allow for
support commercial uses for residential development within R-PC areas.
The Walnut Village specific planning area is located to the east of the project site and is primarily single-family
residential development. The planning area is approximately 2,560 acres and land uses include residential,
commercial,public/quasi-public,parks and open space.
The project site is zoned General Commercial (C-3)along South Highland Avenue and the northern portion of
Juniper Avenue and Single Family Residential (R-1-1000) along the southern portion of Juniper Avenue and
Walnut Street.
' (Sources:Fontana General Plan, Land Use ZoningMap,Land Use PolicyMapand Site Survey)
1 A. Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact.The project site is located within and along existing two-lane roadways in the northern portion of
the City. In the project area, four single-family homes are located along Juniper Avenue. The proposed sewer
improvement project would not divide the residential homes from other parts of the community. Therefore,the
project would not physically divide the City or the residential areas located on Juniper Avenue.
(Sources:Fontana Circulation Master Plan,Improvement Plan, and Site Survey)
B. Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project (including,but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program,or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
No Impact. The sewer improvement project would not affect land use designations or zoning districts.
Therefore,no conflict with applicable land use plans,policies, or regulations would occur with the project.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan,Fontana.Zoning and Development Code)
1 C. Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
No Impact.The project site is located within or adjacent to existing roadways and adjacent land uses include
residential and vacant land. The project area has been designated for urban development in the City's General
Plan. There are no natural or native habitats on the project site. Mature trees are located along the portion of
Juniper Avenue where sewer improvements would be made.However,the project would not impact the trees.
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-21
Environmental Analysis(continued)
The City has not adopted any comprehensive conservation plan. The Valley Wide Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (MSHCP) as outlined in the 1995 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the
Service, CDFG, and 15 additional local jurisdictions, including the City of Fontana; is in the planning
stages at this time. The proposed sewer improvement project is not expected to conflict with this future
plan due to the presence of the existing roadways and the highly disturbed condition of the project area.
There are no adopted habitat conservation plans that are applicable to the site or the surrounding area.
Consequently, the proposed sewer improvement project would not conflict with any habitat or natural
community conservation plan.
(Sources: Site Survey and Fontana General Plan)
3.10 MINERAL RESOURCES
The Lytle Creek alluvial fan contains extensive aggregate resources and sand and gravel resources represent the
most significant mineral resources in the northern section of Fontana. According to the Fontana General Plan,
the project site has been identified by the Division of Mines and Geology as a regionally significant
construction aggregate resource area. This area has been identified because its potential to provide needed
mineral resources for future regional use. The Fontana General Plan states that it is expected that development
proposals will be adopted by the City, which would preclude the use of the aggregate resources in this area.
There are two mineral extraction sites within the City of Fontana. Neither of the two mineral extraction sites lie
within or adjacent to the project site.
There are no known oil or geothermal resources in the City of Fontana. No oil fields or oil wells are present on
or near the project site. The adjacent areas are not subject to oil,gas,or mining operations.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Site Survey, and California Oil, Gas and
Geothermal Resources)
A. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
' of value to the region and the residents of the state?
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within an area identified as an aggregate resource
areas.However,the proposed sewer improvements would be.developed under or adjacent to existing roadways
' where mining activities are prohibited under the City's Code. Moreover,the extent of aggregate resource loss
that would occur as a result of the sewer improvements would not be of significant value to the region or the
residents of the state.Less than a significant impact is anticipated.
' (Sources:Fontana General Plan, City Code, and USGS Fontana Quadrangle)
' B. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan,specific plan or other land use plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located within an area identified as an aggregate resource
areas.However,the proposed sewer improvements would be developed under or adjacent to existing roadways
where mining activities are prohibited under the City's Code.The sand,gravel, and other construction materials
that would be needed for the proposed sewer improvement project are not expected to represent a significant
amount of local resources, when compared to available resources and the cumulative demand for these
resources by construction activities in the region. Thus, the demand for sand and gravel resources, as needed
for construction,would be considered less than significant.
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-22
I
Environmental Analysis(continued)
(Sources:Improvement Plan, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, City Code, Site Survey, and Fontana General Plan)
3.11 NOISE
' The noise environment in the project area is defined by vehicle noise along Walnut-Street, Juniper Avenue,
South Highland,Avenue, and Sierra Avenue. Adjacent residential uses and the high school occasionally
' generate stationary noises. There are no hospitals,churches or dependent care facilities along the project site.
The Noise Element of the Fontana General Plan states that noise sensitive land uses should be located in areas
with an ambient noise level of 60 CNEL or less and residential uses in areas with 65 CNEL or less. Otherwise,
noise control measures need to be incorporated into the design and construction of these uses. The Noise
Element sets the interior noise standard at 45 CNEL and the exterior noise standard at 65 CNEL.
The Noise Ordinance of the City of Fontana identifies specific noises which are prohibited in the City. These
include construction noise outside the hours of 7 AM to 6 PM and excessive noise near schools, courts,
churches and hospitals. Regulations for the use of sound trucks and commercial advertising by aircraft are also
' outlined in the ordinance.
(Sources: Site Survey,FHWA, Fontana City Code-Article II, and Fontana General Plan)
A. Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The proposed project would involve construction of
approximately 5,100 feet of sewer line and 15 manholes. Construction activities associated with the
proposed sewer improvements would result in noise impacts associated with the use of-construction
equipment and construction vehicle trips. On-site construction activities would create noise from
construction equipment and vibration from excavation and grading activities. Temporary construction noise
' impacts would vary in noise level according to the type of construction equipment and its activity level. Short-
term construction noise impacts tend to occur in separate phases, with large, earth-moving equipment
generating 85 dBA at 50 feet from the source and finish construction activities and equipment generating less
1 noise. Construction noise impacts would be incremental throughout the three-month construction period.
Schools and residential uses are identified in the Fontana General Plan as noise sensitive uses. Residents of
the adjacent dwelling units, as well as faculty and students at the high school would be subject to
construction noise on a short-term and temporary basis, when the project is under construction (for
approximately three-months). Construction activities would be confined to the daytime hours between 7
AM and 6 PM on weekdays, and would comply with the noise regulations of the City of Fontana. Thus,
noise from the construction activities on the site would be confined to the daytime hours, when noise
sensitivity is less for the residents located along Juniper Avenue. The students and employees of the high
' school would be exposed to noise during school operation; however the exposure would be temporary. The
following additional measures are recommended to further decrease construction noise:
• The high school should be notified of construction and of the construction schedule.
• Construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers.
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-23
Environmental Analysis(continued)
• Idling of construction equipment shall be limited to the extent feasible. Instead, equipment shall be
1 turned off when not in use.
Once construction is completed,the project would not generate noise and no noise impacts would be expected.
(Sources: Fontana General Plan, Site Survey, FHWA, Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations,
Building Equipment and Home Appliances, Fontana City Code—Article II, and Roadway Improvement Plan)
' B. Would the project result in the exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
iLess than Significant Impact. On-site construction activities would create noises from construction
equipment and vibration from excavation and grading activities. Temporary construction noise impacts would
vary in noise level according to the type of construction equipment and its activity level. Short-term
construction noise impacts tend to occur in separate phases,with large, earth-moving equipment generating
greater noise and finish construction activities and equipment generating less noise. Noise levels from
construction equipment range from 65 to 105 dBA at 50 feet from the noise source. These impacts may affect
adjacent residents along Juniper Avenue,as well as students,faculty and staff at the high school to the west.
Construction activities would have to comply with the construction time limits (7 AM to 6 PM on
weekdays). Loading/unloading of boxes; transport of metal rails, pillars and columns; and the use of pile
drivers, steam shovels, pneumatic hammers and other noisy construction equipment are limited to 7 AM to
10 PM, as set by the Fontana Noise Ordinance. Thus,noise impacts on adjacent residents would be limited
to the daytime hours on weekdays when residents are away.,Noise impacts to the adjacent school may occur
during the construction of the portion of the sewer improvements along Walnut Street. Because impacts
would be short term in duration noise impacts to the school would not be regarded as significant.
' Implementation of additional measures as presented in Section 3.11A, above, would further reduce impacts
to the adjacent high school.
(Sources.•Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, Roadway Improvement Plan, Fontana City Code—Article II, and
Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment and Home Appliances)
' C. Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
No Impact. The proposed project includes development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line
and 15 manholes. The project would not generate a permanent increase in ambient noise levels. No impact
is anticipated.
(Sources:Site Survey, Roadway Improvement Plan, and FHWA Noise Prediction Model)
D. Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed roadway improvement project would involve construction
' activities, which may lead to periodic increases in ambient noise levels during the three-month construction
period. Schools and residential uses are identified in the Fontana General Plan as noise sensitive uses. The
adjacent high school and residents along Juniper Avenue would be exposed to construction noise and may
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
111 South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-24
Environmental Analysis(continued)
be impacted.'Compliance with existing noise regulations of the City of Fontana would ensure that construction
noise impacts do not significantly affect adjacent residents and high school.
(Sources:Roadway Improvement Plan,Fontana City Code-Article II, and Site Survey)
' 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 expose
' people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. There are no airports located along the project site. The nearest airports are the Rialto
Municipal Airport in the City of Rialto (approximately one and a half miles to the east) and the Ontario
International Airport in the City of Ontario (approximately twelve miles to the southwest). The noise
contours of the Ontario and Rialto Airports do not extend into project site. Also, the proposed roadway
improvements would not lead to or increase the exposure of people in the area to noise levels associated
with aircraft and airport operations.
' Sources: Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, and Thomas Guide for San Bernardino County)
F. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. There are no private airstrips located near the project site,which may expose persons to excessive
aircraft noise levels. The proposed sewer improvement project would not increase on-site exposure to aircraft
noise.
(Sources: Site Survey and Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties)
3.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING
During the 1980's, the City of Fontana was among the fastest growing cities in San Bernardino County.
The City's 1980 population of 37,100 persons increased to 87,535 persons in 1990, representing a 135
percent increase over the decade. The majority of the growth was the result of new residential development
in the City and annexations. During this same period, the number of dwelling units rose from 14,860 units
in 1980 to 29,383 units in 1990.
According to the Department of Finance,the City's 2000 population is estimated at 128,929 persons and its
' housing stock consists of 36,504 units. The vacancy rate is 10.2 percent and the average household size is
3.566 persons per household. While the City's growth has slowed since 1990 to 47.3 percent(from 1990 to
2000), growth rates within the City of Fontana continue to exceed those of San Bernardino County, as a
1 whole.
(Sources: California Department of Finance Estimates and Fontana General Plan Housing Element)
A. Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would not induce substantial population
growth as no homes or businesses are proposed as part of the project. The presence of construction workers
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-25
1
• Environmental Analysis(continued)
at the site would be temporary and short-term(three months) and would not lead to a demand for permanent
' housing, goods, or services in the area. The project would increase sewer capacity in the project area,which
could accommodate future growth in the area,but is not expected to directly induce new growth in the City.
(Sources:Improvement Plans and Site Survey)
B. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The project includes development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15
manholes. The project would not include demolition or acquisition of homes in the area. Thus, no impacts
are expected.
(Sources: Improvement Plan, Fontana Engineering Department, and Site Survey)
C. Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
' replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The project includes development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15
manholes. The project would not include demolition or acquisition of homes in the area that would
' necessitate the construction of replacement housing.Thus,no impacts are expected.
(Sources:Improvement Plans, and Site Survey)
3.13 PUBLIC SERVICES
Law enforcement services for the City of Fontana are provided by the Fontana Police Depai tiiient. The Police
Department station is located at 17005 Upland Avenue,approximately 1.7 miles southeast of the project site.
The City of Fontana is served almost exclusively by the Central Valley Fire District, which is part of the San
Bernardino County Fire Agency. The exception is a small parcel of land north of the I-15 Freeway, which is
served by the California Division of Forestry. The nearest fire station to the project site is Station#78,located
at 7710 Citrus Avenue and approximately 1/4 mile westof the project site.
Properties alongtheproject site are served by the Fontana Unified School District. The nearest school to the
p
project site is A. B. Miller High School, located at the corner of Cypress Avenue and Walnut Street. The
Wayne Ruble Elementary School is planned to be developed along the western portion of Juniper Avenue that
is within the project site.
There are five major health care facilities within 12 miles of the City of Fontana, which provide health care
services to residents of the City. Library service is provided by the Fontana Branch of the San Bernardino
County Library system. The Fontana Branch Library is located at 8334 Emerald Avenue, approximately 1.7
' miles southeast of the affected roadway.
(Sources: Fontana Unified School District, Site Survey, Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside
Counties, and Fontana General Plan).
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-26
i
Environmental Analysis(continued)
A. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives in terms of fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project would not create a demand for fire
' protection service. During construction, traffic flows on Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland
Avenue, and Sierra Avenue may experience a temporary congestion, which may affect emergency response.
None of these streets would be closed during construction. Access to all parcels located along the project site
would be available at all times, so as not to preclude fire protection and emergency services. Also, the Fire
District and other service agencies would be informed of the roadway construction schedule. This would allow
emergency vehicles to use alternate routes as necessary. Impacts on fire protection services would be less than
significant.
(Sources:Fontana Engineering Department and Improvement Plan)
B. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives in terms of police protection?
Less than Significant Impact.The proposed sewer improvement project would not create a demand for police
protection or law enforcement service. During construction, traffic flows on Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue,
South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue may experience a temporary congestion, which may affect
emergency response. None of these roads would be closed during construction. Access to all parcels located
along the roadways would be available at all times, so as not to preclude police protection services. The Police
Department and other service agencies would also be informed of the roadway construction schedule. This
would allow emergency vehicles to use alternate routes as necessary. Impacts on police protection services
would be less than significant.
(Sources:Fontana Engineering Department and Improvement Plan)
C. Would the project result in substantial adversephysical impacts associated with the provision
p
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
' governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives in terms of school services?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would not generate a demand for school
services. The proposed project development of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15
manholes. No land uses are proposed which may require school services. A. B. High School is located
adjacent to the project site. Temporary noise impacts may occur during construction of the sewer
improvements. Adherence to the City's noise standard relative to construction would ensure that temporary
noise impacts are not significant. Additionally, a traffic control plan would be implemented as part of the
project to facilitate the flow of traffic in the project area. The school district would be notified of the
project. Compliance with existing noise regulations of the City of Fontana would ensure that construction noise
impacts do not significantly affect the adjacent high school. Additional measures presented under 3.11A,
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-27
• Environmental Analysis(continued)
above, would further reduce noise impacts. The proposed project, therefore, would not result less than
' significant impacts to school services.
(Sources: Fontana Engineering Department, Site Survey, Traffic Control Plan, and Improvement Plans)
D. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives in terms of parks?
No Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project would not generate a demand for parks and
recreational services. No land uses are proposed which may generate a demand for parks and recreational
services. There are no parks or recreational facilities along the affected segment, which may be impacted
by the proposed project. The proposed project,therefore,would not result in impacts to parks.
(Sources: Fontana Engineering Department, Site Survey, and Improvement Plan)
' E. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision
P Y P
of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives in terms of other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed sewer improvement project would not generate a demand for
library services or medical services and facilities. The new sewer and manholes would create a demand for
maintenance services from the City of Fontana. The increase in sewer maintenance is not expected to be
significant when compared to the total length of sewer lines that are maintained by the City. Thus, this
increase in public facility maintenance is not considered significant.
(Sources:Fontana Engineering Department, Site Survey, and Improvement Plan)
3.14 RECREATION
The City of Fontana provides recreational services through city parks, recreational programs, and organized
activities. The City's Land Use Policy Map designates 692 acres of parks and recreational facilities within the
City, of which the City's 28 public parks occupy approximately 260 acres. In addition, 1,602 acres are
designated as open space,which includes the Tudor-Jurupa Hills Regional Park. There are no parks along the
project site. The nearest park facilities to the project site is the Charles Koehler Park, located at the
' northeast intersection of Walnut Street and Beech Avenue, approximately 1.25 miles west of the project
site, and Cypress Park at the northwest intersection of Juniper Avenue and Reed Street, approximately 1.25
miles to the south of the project site.
(Sources: Site Survey, Fontana Recreation, Parks, Trails and Recreation Master Plan, and Fontana General
Plan)
1
i
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-28
Environmental Analysis(continued)
A. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
No Impact. The proposed project would involve construction of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line
and 15 manholes under or adjacent to portions of Walnut Street,Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue,and
Sierra Avenue.This project would not lead to or encourage residents,construction workers,or roadway users to
use nearby recreational facilities. No increase in use of nearby recreational facilities would occur with the
proposed project..Also,there are no parks or recreational facilities located along the project site,which may be
impacted by the proposed roadway improvement project. Thus,no impact is expected.
(Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plan and Fontana General Plan)
' B. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact.The project site is located under or adjacent to existing roadways,which are currently not used for
!, recreation.There are no park facilities located along the project site. The proposed sewer improvements would
not provide on-site recreational facilities. No adverse impacts to parks in the project area are expected from the
construction of the project or on nearby recreational facilities.
(Sources:Site Survey and Improvement Plan)
3.15 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
The proposed project would include construction of approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line,
approximately 10 feet under existing grade along Walnut Street from Cypress Avenue to Juniper Avenue;
along Juniper Avenue from Walnut Street to South Highland Avenue; adjacent to.South Highland Avenue
from Juniper Avenue to Sierra Avenue; and adjacent to Sierra Avenue from South Highland Avenue and
Sierra Avenue intersection, south for approximately 100 feet. The project also includes construction of 15
manholes along the proposed sewer line to allow for maintenance of the sewer line.
Walnut Street is a two-lane road that traverses the City of Fontana in a west to east fashion. Walnut Street is
designated as a Secondary Highway in the City's General Plan.Juniper Avenue is also a two-lane roadway that
crosses the City in a north to south fashion. It is designated as a Collector Road in the General Plan. South
Highland Avenue is designated as a Primary Highway in the Fontana General Plan a. It is a two-land road and
' traverses the City in a west to east fashion.
Omnitrans provides public transit services in San Bernardino County. The nearest Omnitrans Routes are 26
' and 66. Route 29 runs along Baseline Avenue to Walnut Street and Route 66 runs along Citrus Avenue to
Walnut Street and then along Walnut Street.
' (Sources: Site Survey, Fontana General Plan,Annual Average Daily Traffic, and Omnitrans Busbook)
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April l I,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-29
1 .
Environmental Analysis(continued)
A. Would the project cause an increase in traffic.which is substantial in relation to the existing
' traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the
number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads,or congestion at intersections)?
Less than Significant Impact. During construction,Walnut Street,Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue,
and Sierra Avenue would remain open to one-way traffic, and Juniper Avenue would have limited traffic
restricted only to residents living along Juniper Avenue. When the roadway remains open, unsignalized
intersections may become congested as turning vehicles could temporarily block through traffic. Excavation
and construction at intersections may also block traffic flows. In accordance with City regulations and Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook), barriers, guards, lights, signs, temporary bridges,
flag persons and watch persons shall be provided during construction to promote traffic safety and convenience.
The project would also implement a traffic control plan, which would facilitate the flow of traffic along the
project site.
Once construction is completed, the sewer line and manholes would not increase traffic. Occasional
maintenance of the sewer line may cause slowing in traffic along the portion of the line that is being worked on.
However,this temporary slowing of traffic would be considered less than significant.
(Sources: Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, Traffic Control Plan, Greenbook, and Improvement Plan)
' B. Would the project exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
' No Impact. During construction, South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue would remain a two-lane
roadways and would be open,while Walnut Street would be restricted to one lane. Access to all parcels located
along the affected segment would be available at all times. The proposed sewer line and manholes would not
lead to an increase in Levels of Service (LOS) along Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland
Avenue, and/or Sierra Avenue. Therefore,no impact is expected.
(Sources: Site Survey and Fontana Engineering Department)
C. Would the project result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in
•
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. There are no airports near the project site or air traffic patterns above the roadways. The
improvement project involves the construction of a sewer line'and manholes. The proposed project would
not involve air transportation nor affect air traffic at the Ontario International Airport or Rialto Municipal
Airport. Thus,no impact on air traffic patterns would occur with the project.
(Sources: Site Survey and Thomas Guide to San Bernardino and Riverside Counties)
D. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature(e.g., sharp curves or
' dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed improvements would involve the construction of a sewer line
' and manholes along portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue
and would not introduce design hazards or incompatible uses.No roadway hazards are anticipated.
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-30
•
Environmental Analysis(continued)
•
During construction, two lanes on South Highland Avenue and Sierra Avenue, and one lane on Walnut
1 Avenue would continue to be available to' accommodate existing vehicles using these roadways. A
temporary elimination of turning lanes may occur at intersections, which could temporarily block through
traffic. In addition, excavation at intersections would also affect traffic flows. However, construction
' activities shall be conducted in accordance with Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction
(Greenbook) and City regulations. Additionally, a traffic control plan would be implemented. Construction
signs, warning lights (flares, lanterns, electric markers, or flashers), barriers, temporary bridges, flag
persons, and watch persons shall be provided along the portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South
Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue were the sewer improvements would be made to facilitate traffic flow
and access. Also, construction equipment would not be stored on public streets,but within the construction
' easements for the project. Thus,impacts are expected to be less than significant.
(Sources: Site Survey, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, Greenbook, Traffic Control Plan and Fontana
1 Engineering Department)
E. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
•
Less than Significant Impact. During construction, South Highland and Sierra Avenue would continue to be
open for two-way traffic, and Walnut Avenue for one-way traffic. Access to all parcels located along the
' affected segments of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue would be
available at all times, so as not to preclude emergency response and evacuation. Some excavation work at
intersections could hamper or obstruct passthrough traffic when turning vehicles are present. In accordance
with City regulations, safe crossing for vehicles shall be maintained at all times at intersections, alleys, and
private driveways and for pedestrians at 500-foot intervals,with one safe crossing maintained at all times. Free
access to fire hydrants and all water gates and gas valves shall also be maintained at all times. Thus,emergency
vehicle access would be maintained. Notification of the Police and Fire Depaituuents of the sewer construction
' schedule would also allow emergency vehicles to use alternate routes for emergency response.
(Sources:Site Survey, City Code Section 25-186, Greenbook, and Fontana Engineering Department)
F. Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would not change the parking along Walnut Street, Juniper
Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and/or Sierra Avenue. Thus, no change in the parking capacity of the area
would occur with the proposed project.
(Sources:Site Survey,Improvement Plan, and Fontana Engineering Department)
G. Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?
Less than Significant Impact. The Omnitrans Bus Route 29 and 66 run along Walnut Street through the
project site. Construction at the intersections along the bus route may cause traffic delays, which would cause
delays in bus service in the area. However, this impact is considered less than significant. In the Fontana
General Plan, there are no designated bike routes/bike paths planned along the project site. Therefore,
implementation of the sewer improvement project would not conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation.
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-31
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
(Sources: Site Survey, Fontana General Plan, Omnitrans, Fontana General Plan, and Fontana Engineering
Department)
3.16 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
1 Water services to the project area are provided by the Fontana Water Company and the Cucamonga County
• Water District. An eight and 5/8 water line and an eight inch water line is located within Walnut Street; a six
' and 5/8 inch water line and 17 and 3/8 inch water line is located within Juniper Avenue; and a 25 and 3/8 inch
water line is located within South Highland. An existing twelve-inch water line is located along the eastern
side of Sierra Avenue and an existing six-inch water line is located along the western side of Sierra Avenue.
The water lines are owned by The Fontana Water Company.
Sewage from the City of Fontana is collected and conveyed the City's local sewer lines and the regional
sewer trunks of the Inland Empire Utilities Agency(IEUA) for treatment,reclamation, and disposal.
Storm drainage within the project area is currently handled by scattered detention basins provided by
individual development projects. Runoff from areas without a storm drain system flows south from the
State Route 30 alignment toward the drainage channel on Foothill Boulevard and the West Fontana
Channel.
Solid waste collection services are provided by Fontana Rubbish Collectors and brought to the West Valley
Materials Recovery Facility (run by Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc) located at 13373 Napa Street in the City
of Fontana. Final solid waste disposal is provided by the Mid-Valley Landfill (managed by Norcal
Industries)located at 6087 Sierra Avenue in the City of Fontana.
The City.of Fontana is served by Southern California Gas Company for natural gas services and by the
Southern California Edison Company for electrical power services. Overhead and underground power lines are
found along Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue,and Sierra Avenue. Telephone services
are provided by Pacific Bell Telephone Company. Telephone lines are located along Walnut Street as well as
portions of Juniper Avenue and Sierra Avenue.Fiber optic lines are located underground along South Highland
Avenue.
(Sources: Fontana Rubbish Collectors, Southern California Gas Company, Adelphia Communications,
Fontana Water Company, Cucamonga County Water District, Southern California Edison Company, and Site
Survey)
• A. Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
No Impact. The proposed project involves construction of a sewer line and manholes within and adjacent
to portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue. No residential,
commercial, industrial, or other sewage-generating uses are proposed as part of the project. Therefore, no
demand for wastewater disposal and treatment would be created by the proposed sewer improvement project.
The construction of the sewer lines would not interruption of sewer service. The project would increase sewer
capacity in the project area, benefiting sewer services in the City. This would prevent adverse impacts on
1 existing sewer services.
(Sources:Improvement Plan)
I
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-32
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
B. Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment
' facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
No Impact. No residential, commercial, industrial, or other land uses which may generate a demand for
water or sewage disposal services are proposed by the project. The project would include construction
approximately 5,100 linear feet of sewer line and 15 manholes. The project itself would not increase sewage
but would increase sewer capacity in the project area. The project is not expected to require or result in the
construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities.
' (Sources:Improvement Plan, Site Survey, and Fontana Engineering Department)
C. Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities
or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. The project includes development of sewer lines and manholes within and
adjacent to portions of Walnut Street, Juniper Avenue, South Highland Avenue, and Sierra Avenue. Storm
drainage in the surrounding area is provided by swales, open channels, and detention basins. The proposed
sewer improvement project would not generate stormwater runoff in amounts that would require the
' construction of storm drain facilities by itself.
During construction, runoff flows may be diverted or blocked by excavations, stockpiles, walls, and other
construction site conditions. However, proper drainage shall be provided so as not to impede existing
runoff flows to Foothill Boulevard, as required by City Code.
(Sources:Improvement Plan, City Code, USGS Fontana Quadrangle, and Site Survey)
D. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available from existing entitlements and
resources,or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not result in any permanent water use. During
construction, water may be used to mix and set concrete and for equipment cleaning. However, these uses
would be temporary in duration and are not expected to be large enough to require new water entitlements.
Therefore,less than significant impacts to water supplies are anticipated to occur from the project.
' (Sources: Site Survey,Improvement Plan, and Fontana General Plan)
E. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which
1 serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
' No Impact. The proposed sewer improvements would not result in any generation of domestic sewage.
During construction,portable toilets would be used by construction workers. These toilets are considered to be
an insignificant source of wastewater. The project would not interrupt existing sewer services. Therefore, no
impact to wastewater treatment facilities is anticipated to occur from the project.
(Sources: Improvement Plan, Fontana General Plan, and Fontana Engineering Department)
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April I I,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-33
1
Environmental Analysis(continued)
F. Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate
the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the proposed improvements would generate construction
debris (roadway pavement and excavated soil materials) that would need to be disposed at the Mid-Valley
Landfill. No long-term need for solid waste collection and disposal is anticipated after the proposed
construction activities.No significant impact on solid waste disposal needs is expected. The long-term use
of the sewer line would not generate solid wastes.
(Sources: Improvement Plan, Fontana General Plan, Fontana Rubbish Collectors, and Norcal Industries)
G. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. Refuse collection within the City of Fontana is provided by Fontana
Rubbish Collectors, Inc., with recycling services at West Valley Recycling Facility and landfill disposal at
Mid-Valley Landfill. Solid wastes generated by construction of the proposed improvement project would
be disposed at Mid-Valley Landfill. Construction of the proposed sewer improvements would be
administered to comply with federal, state, and local solid waste regulations. The sewer line and manholes
would not generate solid wastes.
(Sources: Improvement Plan, Fontana General Plan, Fontana Rubbish Collectors, and Norcal Industries)
I
1
1
I
I
1
Final Initial Study/Negative Declaration Final:April II,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 3-34
1
SECTION 4: MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
4.1 FINDINGS
The environmental analysis in Section 3 of this document indicates that the proposed South Highland Avenue
and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project would not have the potential for significant adverse
environmental impacts with implementation of standard city conditions. The following findings can be made
regarding the mandatory fmdings of significance set forth in Section 15065 of the CEQA Guidelines, as
based on the results of this environmental assessment:
I . The proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment.
There are no sensitive plant or animal species along the project site and the proposed sewer
improvement project will not reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
• plant or animal.Mature trees located along Juniper Avenue would not be impacted by the
project. No historic structures or sites, archaeological resources or paleontological
resources are present on the site, which may be affected by the proposed project. The
proposed project will not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
■ The proposed project would not have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long term environmental goals. The proposed sewer improvement would
1 increase the sewer capacity in the project area and would not significantly impact
environmental resources.
I . The proposed project would not have environmental impacts,which are individually limited
but cumulatively considerable, when considering planned or proposed development in the
immediate vicinity of the site. The proposed roadway improvement would be a growth-
!' accommodating project, and would not directly lead to development in the project area.
Rather,the sewer improvements would increase sewer capacity to serve existing and future
developments in the City. The improvement project would not cumulatively lead to
significant adverse impacts,when added to proposed,planned or anticipated development in
the area.
• • The proposed sewer improvement project would not have environmental impacts, which
may have adverse effects on humans, either directly or indirectly. The project may create
short-term noise impacts. However, with incorporation of city standards for construction
projects, significant impacts are not expected and would reduce these impacts to
' insignificant levels.
The City of Fontana has determined that a Negative Declaration shall be prepared for the proposed South
Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project.
•
I
Final Initial StudylNegative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 4-1
SECTION 5: LIST OF PREPARERS/REFERENCES
5.1 PREPARERS OF THE MND/INITIAL STUDY
David Evans and Associates,Inc.
800 North Haven Avenue, Suite 300
Ontario,California 91764
(909)481-5750
Karen Ruggels,Project Manager
Rebecca Harrington,Environmental Planner
Josephine Alido, Senior Environmental Planner
Amy Slater,Environmental Analyst
Alicia Cox,Environmental Analyst
5.2 REFERENCES
The following references were used in the preparation of this Initial Study and are available for review by V
I the public at the offices of the City of Fontana at 8353 Sierra Avenue in Fontana,California 92335 or at the
offices of David Evans and Associates at 800 North Haven Avenue, Suite 300, Ontario, California 91764
during normal business hours.
BNI Building News,Greenbook—Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction,2000.
California Department of Conservation,. Division of Oil and Gas, California Oil, Gas and Geothermal
Resources,Publication No TR03, 1988.
California Department of Finance,E-5 Report,Population and Housing Estimates for California Cities,January
1999 and January 2000.
California Department of Health, Office of Noise Control, Guidelines of the Preparation and Content of Noise
Elements of General Plans,February 1976.
California Department of Justice,California and FBI Crime Index,San Bernardino County, 1997-1999.
California Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, San Bernardino County Important Farmland, 1992.
California Office of Planning and Research, California Environmental Quality Act and the CEQA Guidelines,
2000.
California Trade and Commerce Industry,Inland Empire,California's Scenic Routes, 1994.
Chino Basin Watermaster,Fall 1997 Water Levels, 1999.
City of Fontana,Annual Average Daily Traffic, 1998/1999.
City of Fontana, Seven-year Capital Improvement Program,2000-2006, 1999.
City of Fontana,Circulation Master Plan, 1990.
Final Initial StudylNegative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 5-1
I
IPreparers/References(continued)
11 City of Fontana,Code of the City of Fontana, California,2000.
City of Fontana,Zoning and Development Code,2000.
ICity of Fontana,Fontana Recreation,January 2001.
ICity of Fontana,General Plan, 1990. .
City of Fontana, Ordinance No. 1273,Local Truck Routes, 1999. _
IFederal Emergency Management Agency,Flood Insurance Rate Maps, 1996.
Fontana Chamber of Commerce,Map of Fontana,California,2000.
Inland Empire Utilities Agency,Fact Sheet, 1999.
ILegislative Counsel of California,California Law, 1999.
Omnitrans,Onmitrans Busbook,2000.
ISan Bernardino Association of Governments(SANBAG),Congestion Management Program(CMP), 1999.
ISCAQMD,CEQA Air Quality Handbook,May 1993,as amended.
SCAQMD, 1997-1999 Air Quality Readings, 1998-2000.
ITakata Associates,Parks,Trails and Recreation Master Plan, 1999.
Thomas Brothers Maps;The Thomas Guide for San Bernardino and Riverside Counties;2000.
IU.S.Bureau of Census, 1990 U.S.Census, 1993.
IU.S.Environmental Protection Agency;Envirofacts Database; January 2001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Noise from Construction Equipment and Operations, Building
IEquipment and Home Appliances, 1971.
U. S.Fish and Wildlife Service,National Wetlands Inventory,January 2001.
1 U. S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sand Flower Loving Fly, 1997.
IU.S.Geological Survey,7 'Y2 Minute Quadrangle for Fontana, 1980.
U.S.Geological Survey,Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region,Prof.Paper 1360, 1985.
I Wildermuth Environmental,Inc.,Chino Basin Man Optimum Basin Management Plan,Draft Initial State of the
Basin Report,January 17,2002.
I
Final Initial Study!Negative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 5-2
•
Preparers/References(continued)
5.3 PERSONS CONTACTED
Ben Minarnoide,City of Fontana
George Harvilla,City of Fontana •
Elias A.Busuego,Jr,Associated Engineers
I Rosa Andrade,Fontana Water Company
Taghi Monzavi,Inland Empire Utilities Agency
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
Final Initial StudylNegative Declaration Final:April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project Page 5-3
1
1
1
I
1
•
•
Appendix A - Environmental Checklist Form
•
r
1
1
l
1
Final Initial Study'Negative Declaration Final.•April 11,2002
South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer System Improvement Project
i -
I
I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: South Highland Avenue and Juniper Avenue Sewer Improvement
I2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Fontana
Engineering Department
I 8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
•
I3. Contact Person and Phone Number: George Harvilla(909) 350-6519
I 4. Project Location: Along South Highland Avenue between Sierra Avenue and
Juniper Avenue, south on Juniper Avenue from Highland
Avenue to.Walnut Street,west on Walnut Street from Juniper
I Avenue to Cypress Avenue,and south on Sierra Avenue from
South Highland Avenue.
5. Project Sponsor's Name&Address: City of Fontana Engineering Department
I 8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
I6. General Plan Designation: Residential-Planned Community(R-PC)and Community Mixed Use(CMU)
7. Zoning: General Commercial(C-3)and Single Family Residential(R-1-1000)
I8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases
of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation.
IAttach additional sheet(s)if necessary.)
The development of approximately 5,100 feet of new sewer main along South Highland Avenue
between Sierra Avenue and Juniper Avenue, south on Juniper Avenue from Highland Avenue to
Walnut Street, west on Walnut Street from Juniper Avenue to Cypress Avenue, and south on a
portion of Sierra Avenue from South Highland Avenue. The new sewer main would provide sewer
service to adjacent approved and planned developments, as well as areas generally east of Sierra.
I Avenue along South Highland Avenue and west of Juniper Avenue along South Highland Avenue.
The sewer line would be 10 inches in diameter. Additionally, the project would include construction
of 13 manholes.
I9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surroundings.)
I Properties along the project area are currently undeveloped but several projects are underway.
Scattered single-family residential units are developed east of Juniper Avenue. A. B. Miller High
School is located at the northwest corner of Walnut Street and Cypress Avenue, in the project
Ivicinity.Trees are found along Juniper Avenue.The rest of the surrounding areas are vacant.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation
I agreement):
N/A
l
FORM"J"
Page 1 of 12
I
1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: •
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
111 one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics 0 Agriculture Resources 0 Air Quality
0 Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources 0 Geology/Soils
0 Hazards&Hazardous
Materials ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality 0 Land Use/Planning
I
❑ Noise 0 Population/Housing
ID Mineral Resources
❑ Recreation 0 Transportation/Traffic
❑ Public Services
❑ Mandatory Findings of
I ❑ Utilities/Service Systems Significance
DETERMINATION(To be completed by the Lead Agency):
1 On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I I . I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
ID 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 will be prepared.
I0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
1 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a"potentially significant 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 •
I 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.
ID I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because
all potentially significant effects (a)have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b)have been avoided or mitigated pursuant
Ito that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project,nothing further is required. •
I
Signature Date
IGeorge Harvilla,Project Manager City of Fontana
Printed Name For
I
FORM"J"
IPage 2 of 12
1
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 will 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 is 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 Section XVII, "Earlier
Analyses,"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). hi this
case,a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analyses 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 encouraged are agencies d to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
g g 1P
potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside
' document should, where appropriate, include a reference 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
i should normally address the questions form 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 significance.
FORM"J"
Page 3 of 12
I
IENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
I Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
I
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
1 a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 ■
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,including,but 0 0 0 •
I not limited to,tress,rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
I c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 ■ 0
quality of the site and its surroundings?
l
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,which 0 0 0 ■
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects,lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
I Assessment Model (1997)prepared by the California
Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in
assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the
Iproject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland,Unique Farmland, or 0 0 0 ■
I Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources .
IAgency,to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,or a 0 0 0 e
I - Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 0 0 0 ■
I which, due to their location or nature,could result in
conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available,the significance
I criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations. Would the
Iproject:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 0 ■
Iapplicable air quality plan?
I FORM"J"
Page 4 of 12
I . Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: . . Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact-
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 ■ ❑
I
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
•
Ic) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 0 0 ■ 0
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air
I
quality standard(including releasing emissions,which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 ■ 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 ■ 0
number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Ia) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 0 0 0 ■
through habitat modifications,on any species identified as
I .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
I
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian 0 0 0 ■
I habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans,policies,regulations or by the
California Depattuient of Fish and Game or U.S.Fish and
•
IWildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 0 U
I
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act(including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal
pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling,
I
hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 0 0 ■
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
I
with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors,or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
Ie) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 ■
protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation
I
policy or ordinance?
I FORM"3"
Page 5of12
I
I
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
I
Impact Incorporated Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 0 ■
I
Conservation Plan,Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
IV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance 0 0 0 ■
I
of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance 0 0 0 ■
Iof an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological 0 0 0 ■
I
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains,including those interred 0 0 0 ■
I
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS --Would the project:
Ia) Expose people or structures to potential substantial 0 0 ■ 0
adverse effects,including the risk of loss, injury or death
Iinvolving: •
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on 0 0 ■ 0
the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
IMap 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. •
I.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 0 ■
I
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,including 0 0 0 ■
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 ■
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 0 ■ 0
Ic) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or 0 0 0 ■
that would become unstable as a result of the project,and
I 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- 0 0 0 ■
I
B of the Uniform Building Code(1994),creating
FORM"J"
I
Page 6 of 12
I
I Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
IImpact Incorporated Impact
substantial risks to life or property?
Ie) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use 0 0 0 ■
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems
I where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater?
I VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
I a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 E
environment through the routine transport,use,or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Ib) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 i
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
I accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 0 0 0 ■
I acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
I d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 0 0 ■
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result,would
I it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
I e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 ■
where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles
of a public airport or public use airport,would the project
I result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 ■
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Ig) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with 0 0 ■ 0
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
I h) people Expose or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 ■ 0
P
loss,injury or death involving wildland fires,including
Iwhere wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where
FORM"J"
I
Page 7of12
I .
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
IImpact Incorporated Impact
residences are intermixed with wildlands?
IVIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would
the project:
Ia) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 0 0 ■ 0
requirements?
Ib) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 0 0 0 ■
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there
I would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level(e.g.,the production rate
of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which
Iwould not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
I c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 ■ 0
site or area,including through the alteration of the course
of a stream or river,in a manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site?
Id) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 ■ 0
site or area,including through the alteration of the course
I of a stream or river,or substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on-or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed 0 0 ■ 0
the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage .
I systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 0 ■
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as 0 0 0 ■
I mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
Ih) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures 0 0 0 ■
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Ii) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, 0 0 ❑ ■
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
1
I FORM"J"
Page 8 of 12
I
I Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation. Significant No Impact
II
Impact Incorporated Impact
Inundation by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow? 0 0 0 ■
Ii)
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 ■
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan,policy, or 0 ❑ 0 ■
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
I (including,but not limited to the general plan, specific
plan,local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
I
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan 0 0 0 ■
I
or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
Ia) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 0 ■
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
Ib) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important 0 0 ■
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
Igeneral plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
Ia) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ❑ 0 ■ 0
excess of standards established in the local general plan or
I noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
I b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 El • ■ 0
groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels?
' c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 0 0 0 i
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
•
1 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 0 0 ■
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
Ie) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 ■
where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles
Iof a public airport or public use airport,would the project
FORM"J"
I
Page 9 of 12
•
I Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation
I
Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
expose people residing or working in the project area to
I excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 ■
would the project expose people residing or working in
I
the project area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
I
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either 0 0 ■ 0
I directly(for example,by proposing new homes and
businesses)or indirectly(for example,through extension
of road or other infrastructure)?
Ib) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 0 ❑ ❑ ■
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
I
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,necessitating 0 0 0 ■
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
IXIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
I a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered
I governmental facilities,the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other .
Iperformance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? 0 0 ■ 0
IPolice protection? 0 0 ■ ❑
ISchools? 0 0 • 0
Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ •
IOther public facilities? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
IXIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional . 0 0 0 ■
I parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
I
FORM"J"
Page 10 of 12
I
I Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
IImpact . Incorporated Impact
accelerated?
I b) Does the project include recreational facilities or 0 0 0 ■
p J
require the construction or expansion of recreational
I facilities which have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
I XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the
project:
I a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in 0 0 ■ 0
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system(i.e.,result in a substantial increase in either
the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio
I on roads,or congestion at intersections)?
I b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of 0 0 0 ■
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways?
Ic) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including 0 0 0 ■
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location
that results in substantial safety risks?
Id) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature 0 0 ■ 0
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
Iincompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 •■ ❑
If) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 0 ■
I g) Conflict with adopted policies,plans, or programs 0 0 ■ 0
supporting alternative transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
IXVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the project:
Ia) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 0 ■
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 ■
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
Ifacilities,the construction of which could cause
FORM"J"
111 Page 11 of 12
I
I Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
IImpact Incorporated Impact
significant environmental effects?
Ic) Require or result in the construction of new storm 0 0 ■ 0
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
I the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
I d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the 0 El ■ 0
project from existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
Ie) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 0 ■
provider which serves or may serve the project that it has
I adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand
in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 0 0 ■ 0
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 0 ■ 0
regulations related to solid waste?
IXVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 0 0 0 ■
Iquality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat or a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
. population to drop below self-sustaining levels,threaten
I to eliminate a plant or animal community,reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
Iperiods of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually 0 ❑ 0 ■
I
limited,but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable"means that the incremental effectsof a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects,the effects of other current
Iproject, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ 0 0 ■
Ic)
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
I •
FORM"J"
Page 12of12