HomeMy WebLinkAboutCategorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project
CARLSBAD
CLOVIS
IRVINE
LOS ANGELES
PALM SPRINGS
POINT RICHMOND
RIVERSIDE
ROSEVILLE
SAN LUIS OBISPO
1500 Iowa Avenue, Suite 200, Riverside, California 92507 951.781.9310 www.lsa.net
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 20, 2022
TO: Alejandro Rico
Associate Planner, City of Fontana
FROM: Dionisios Glentis
Senior Environmental Planner, LSA Associates, Inc.
SUBJECT: Class 32 Categorical Exemption for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project (MCN22-
014, TPM22-007, & DRP22-0008); LSA Project No. FTR2202)
Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State of California Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), the City of Fontana (City) is the Lead Agency under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for consideration of the First Tamarind II Logistics
Project (Project or proposed Project).
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(a-e) (Class 32: In-Fill Development Projects), the City
finds the proposed Project categorically exempt from CEQA. The Project includes development of a
site less than five acres in size in accordance with the City’s General Plan land use and zoning
designations; is substantially surrounded by urban uses; is not on a site containing habitat for
endangered, rare, or threatened species; would not result in significant effects to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality; and would be adequately served by all required utilities and public
services.
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, the proposed Project does not trigger any exceptions
to the Class 32 (Sec. 15332) Categorical Exemption. The Project is not located along a State scenic
highway or on a hazardous waste site as defined in Section 65962.5 of the Government Code; would
not result in any significant effect to the environment as a result of unusual circumstances or
cumulatively considerable effects; and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND EXISTING SETTING
The Project includes development of a light industrial warehouse building totaling 60,900 square
feet with a clear height of 40 feet on approximately 4.16 acres. The Project site is zoned Light
Industrial (M-1) in the southeastern portion of the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County. The
Project site is located along the west side of Tamarind Avenue between Slover Avenue to the north
and Santa Ana Avenue to the south and is comprised of two parcels (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
[APNs] 0256-011-03 and -04) bounded by warehouse uses to the north, Tamarind Avenue and single
family residential uses to the east, warehouse uses to the south, and a private drive aisle and
warehouse uses to the west. Figure 1: Regional and Project Location and Figure 2: Existing Setting
depict the location of the Project site on a regional and local scale.
304.80
SOURCE: USGS 7.5' Quad - Fontana (1980), CA
I:\FRT2202\GIS\MXD\ProjectLoc_USGS.mxd (6/20/2022)
FIGURE 1
First Tamarind II Logistics
Regional and Project Location
0 1000 2000
FEET
LEGEND
Project Location
Project
Location
SanBernardinoCounty
RiversideCounty
ÃÃ330
ÃÃ38
ÃÃ71
ÃÃ173
ÃÃ18
ÃÃ210
ÃÃ60
ÃÃ91
Project Location
§¨¦15
§¨¦215
§¨¦10
Project Vicinity
!!!!!!Private Drive AisleTamarind AveTamarind Ct
1 23
4
5
6
SOURCE: Nearmap (1/26/2022)
I:\FRT2202\GIS\MXD\Cat_Exemption\ExistingSetting.mxd (6/20/2022)
FIGURE 2
First Tamarind II Logistics
Existing Setting
LEGEND
Project Site
!Photograph Locations
0 90 180
FEET
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 4
Project entitlements (Master Case Number 22-14) include a Tentative Parcel Map (TPM No. 22-007)
and Design Review (DRP No. 22-08) for site and architectural review for the operation of a 60,900
square-foot concrete tilt-up warehouse. The proposed warehouse is generally rectangular shaped
with approximately 3,000 square feet of office space and 3,000 square feet of mezzanine in the
eastern portion of the building, employee parking proposed along the eastern portions of the site
fronting Tamarind Avenue, and freight truck dock doors located at the southern portion of the
building, facing south toward existing off-site industrial uses (refer to Figure 3 Conceptual Site Plan).
A 40-foot-wide driveway would be constructed off Tamarind Avenue on the east side of the site and
another 40-foot-wide driveway would be constructed off a private drive aisle on the west side of the
site. These driveways would be connected with an internal drive aisle that would serve as a fire lane
while interconnecting the employee parking lot with the docking area respectively along the east
and south sides of the building. The Project also includes construction of multiple screen walls,
measuring 13 feet tall facing Tamarind Avenue to the east and 8 feet tall facing adjacent properties
to the south and west, in order to screen loading/unloading activities at the docking area from
adjacent properties and the public right-of-way in accordance with Section No. 30-525(5) (Physical
Barriers) and Article V of Chapter 9 (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards) of the
City’s Zoning and Development Code. An existing cinder block wall along the northern site boundary
will remain in place.
Construction of the project would include the use of large and small bulldozers, heavy-duty trucks,
and graders. The nearest sensitive receptors in proximity to the project site are single-family
residential units approximately 55 feet to the east (measured property line to property line) and 80
feet to the east (measured project property line to residential building) across Tamarind Avenue.1
Properties respectively to the north, south, and west are industrial warehouse uses.
The Project site was used for agriculture since at least 1938, and residential buildings are noted in
aerial photos from 1948.2 Agricultural activities on the site ceased by the 1970s, and the majority of
the site was cleared of vegetation by 2013 for staging of truck trailers as development of the
surrounding properties ensued.3 Currently, two residential buildings, respectively constructed in
1948 (10642 Tamarind Avenue) and 1964 (10622 Tamarind Avenue), are located on the site, with
only the southwest portion of the site containing ruderal vegetation.4 Figure 4 includes photographs
of the project site and surrounding land uses.
1 The residential uses east of Tamarind Avenue are located in unincorporated San Bernardino County and do not share a physical
property line with the project site.
2 Weis Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue, Fontana, California 92316. Page 15. October 4, 2021. (Appendix A). 3 Ibid.
4 Ruderal vegetation consists of species (often invasive) that are first to colonize disturbed lands.
SOURCE: Herdman Architecture + Design; (4/12/22)FEET100050FIGURE 3Conceptual Site PlanFirst Tamarind II LogisƟcs Project
*$7(
'5,9(
352326('%8,/',1* 6)35,9$7('5,9(7$0$5,1''5,9( '2&.+,'22566)2)),&(6)0(==
0,1
0,1
0,1
$B$B$B$B$B $B$B 127$3$573527(&7,13/$&((;,67,1*6&5((1:$//3527(&7,13/$&((;,67,1*6&5((1:$//
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
$%29(+,*+(67$'-$&(17),1,6+('*5$'(3$,17%27+6,'(6$1'7232):$//6((3/$16)25&2/256&+('8/( 78%(67((/)(1&(0,1+(,*+7
$%29(+,*+(67$'-$&(17),1,6+('*5$'( 75$6+(1&/2685(Z522)&29(5,1* 3$,17('67((/52//,1**$7( 6 0,1+(,*+7
$%29(+,*+(67$'-$&(17),1,6+('*5$'(3529,'(.12;%2;$65(48,5('%<),5($87+25,7< 3$,17('67((/6:,1*,1*3('(675,$1*$7(:+(12&&856,178%(67((/)(1&($/,*1723Z)(1&(+(,*+7:+(12&&856,1&21&5(7(6&5((1:$//821$/,*1723Z6&5((1:$//+(,*+73529,'(.12;%2;$65(48,5('%<),5($87+25,7< 326,7,21%,.(5$&. &21&5(7(758&.5$03Z+,*+&21&5(7(7,/783*8$5'2123(16,'( 6 3$,17$//6,'(62)*8$5':$//6$1'+$1'5$,/66(($5&+,7(&785$/'5$:,1*6)25&2/256&+('8/( 81'(5*5281'67250:$7(55(7(17,216<67(0 )8785((9&6&+$5*,1*(48,30(17I:\FRT2202\G\Concept_Site_Plan.ai (6/21/2022)
I:\FRT2202\G\ 9 13Photos_CatEx.cdr ( / /2021)
Representative Site Photos
First Tamarind II Logistics Project
FIGURE 4
Photo1:Siteoverview,facingeast.
Photo2:Easternsiteboundary,facingnorth.
Page of13
I:\FRT2202\G\ 9 13Photos_CatEx.cdr ( / /2021)
Representative Site Photos
First Tamarind II Logistics Project
FIGURE 4
Photo3:Southernsiteboundary,facingsoutheast.
Photo4:Northernsiteboundary,facingnorth.
Page of23
I:\FRT2202\G\ 9 13Photos_CatEx.cdr ( / /2021)
Representative Site Photos
First Tamarind II Logistics Project
FIGURE 4
Photo5:Southernsiteboundary,facingeast.
Photo6:Westernsiteboundary,facingsouth.
Page of33
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 9
All existing vegetation will be removed from the Project site and replaced in accordance with City
Municipal Code Section No. 30-551(E)(4) (Landscaping) and Chapter 28, Article III, Section 28-65 of
the City’s tree preservation ordinance (refer to Figure 5 Conceptual Landscape Plan). A site-specific
Arborist Report indicates 32 trees are proposed for removal, 30 of which would require
replacement.5 The project includes installation of 69 trees to be incorporated through a
combination of accent plantings/groundcovers, hedges, and trees along the site perimeter and
throughout the parking areas and along the internal drive aisle. Enhanced landscaping would be
installed throughout the project site via a three-tiered planting system compatible with the scale of
adjacent structures, streets, and public spaces. Proposed landscaping would be drought-tolerant
and complement existing natural and manmade features, including the dominant landscaping of
surrounding areas.
The Project site consists of a single Drainage Area (DA 1) subdivided into four Drainage Management
Areas (DMA A, DMA B, and DMA C) to manage storm water runoff from the 4.16-acre site. DMA A
would encompass the largest portion of the site and consist of all paved ground surfaces, including
the parking lot, drive aisles, and loading areas. DMA B would include all permeable surfaces such as
landscaped areas and would outlet to DMA A. DMA C would include the warehouse rooftop. DMAs
A through C would direct flows into a proposed subterranean infiltration chamber system (BMP)
south of the proposed warehouse building and freight truck loading docks prior to discharge into an
existing storm drain along the private drive aisle and the City’s municipal storm drain system west of
the site6 pursuant to the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4
Permit.7
The project will install asphalt concrete, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, and streetlights and
trees along its frontage on Tamarind Avenue to the east (refer to Figure 3). Overhead electrical
facilities along the project site frontage would be relocated underground where feasible. The Project
also includes interconnection to utilities such as sewer, water, electrical, gas, and
telecommunications within the Tamarind Avenue right-of-way or along the private drive aisle
adjacent to the west of the site for service to the project site. The project also includes
approximately 12 feet of right of way dedication along Tamarind Avenue in order to widen the
roadway to achieve 34 feet of ultimate half-width pursuant to the City’s General Plan Circulation
Element standard for a Collector Street. Implementation of the Project would result in 22 feet of
roadway from centerline to curb face and 12 feet of parkway from curb face to project property line.
5 LSA Associates, Inc. Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana, California. Table A. April 22, 2022.
(Appendix B3) 6 Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Water Quality Management Plan for 10622 Tamarind Avenue Industrial. Form 3-1, Form 4.3-3, and Appendix A (Site Plan and Drainage Plan). January 7, 2022. (Appendix C)
7 Pursuant to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order Number R8-2010-0033, National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS618033, as amended by Order No. R8-2013-0024, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, the hydrologic performance standard for the proposed bioretention basin is a flow duration curve of the post-development DMA not to exceed that of the pre-development, naturally occurring, DMA by more than five percent
of the 2-year peak flow.
SOURCE: Herdman Architecture + Design, ScoƩ Peterson Landscape Design, Inc.FEET100050FIGURE 5Conceptual Landscape PlanFirst Tamarind II LogisƟcs Project TREES SYMBOLTREE NAMEQTY.WUCOLSPROPOSED STREET TREEPLATANUS RACEMOSA, WESTERN SYCAMORE24" BOX SIZE5MLARGE SPECIMEN SIZE TREEQUERCUS AGRIFOLIA, COAST LIVE OAK36" BOX SIZE3LEVERGREEN SCREEN TREE-PINUS ELDARICA, AFGHAN PINE-JUNIPER HOLLYWOOD, TWISTING JUNIPER24" BOX, STANDARD TRUNK, DOUBLE STAKE19 LGEIJERA PARVIFOLIA, AUSTRALIAN WILLOW24" BOX, STANDARD TRUNK, DOUBLE STAKE13LPARKING LOT SHADE TREEQUERCUS ILEX, HOLLY OAK24" BOX, STANDARD TRUNK, DOUBLE STAKE8LNARROW UPRIGHT GROWING TREETRISTANIA CONFERTA, BRISBANE BOX15 GAL., STANDARD TRUNK, DOUBLE STAKE17MFLOWERING TREE ACCENT TREECERCIDIUM F. 'DESRT MUSEUM', BLUE PALO VERDE36" BOX SIZE4LDESIGN KEY NOTES:1. FLOWERING ACCENT TREE PER LEGEND.2. EVERGREEN SCREEN SHRUBS.3. EVERGREEN SCREEN TREES.4. ALLOW FOR 24" PLANTING PLANTING GAP BETWEEN BACK OFCURB AND SHRUB HEAD.GROUND COVER AND SHRUB MASSES - GROUND COVER & SHRUB MASSES SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING: SYMBOLGROUND COVER/SHRUB MASS NAMEWUCOLSACHILLEA MILLIFOLIUM, YARROW1 GAL. SIZELAGAVE 'BLUE FLAME', BLUE FLAME AGAVE5 GAL. SIZELAGAVE 'MEDIOPICTA ALBA', DWARF WHITE STRIPED AGAVE5 GAL. SIZELAGAVE WEBERI, WEBER'S AGAVE15 GAL. SIZELALOE 'BLUE ELF',1 GAL. SIZELBACCHARIS P. 'PIGEON POINT', DWARF COYOTE BRUSH1 GAL. SIZELCALLISTEMON 'LITTLE JOHN', DWARF BOTTLE BRUSH5 GAL. SIZELENCELIA CALIFORNICA, CALIFORNIA BRITTLE BRUSH1 GAL. & 5 GAL. SIZELHESPERALOE PARVIFLORA, RED YUCCA5 GAL. SIZELLEYMUS C. 'CANYON PRINCE', CANYON PRINCE WILD RYE1 GAL. SIZELSALVIA CLEVELANDII, CLEVELAND SAGE5 GAL. SIZELMUHLENBERGIA C. 'REGAL MIST', PINK MUHLY1 GAL. SIZEMROSEMARINUS O. 'PROSTRATUS', PROSTRATE ROSEMARY1 GAL. SIZELVERBENA 'DE LA MINA', PURPLE VERBINA1 GAL. SIZELWESTRINGIA F. 'GREY BOX', GREY BOX COAST ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZELSCREEN SHRUBS: SYMBOLGROUND COVER/SHRUB MASS NAMEQTYWUCOLSHETEROMELES ARBUTIFOLIA, TOYON5 GAL. SIZELLIGUSTRUM TEXANUM, TEXAS PRIVET5 GAL. SIZEMMALOSMA LAURINUS, LAUREL SUMAC5 GAL. SIZELLEUCOPHYLLUM FRUITESCENS, TEXAS RANGER5 GAL. SIZELMYRICA CALIFORNICA, PACIFIC WAX MYRTLE5 GAL. SIZELRHUS INTEGRIFOLIA, LEMONADE BERRY5 GAL. SIZELWESTOINGRIA F. 'WYNABIE GEM', COAST ROSEMARY5 GAL. SIZELREFERENCE KEY NOTES:A. CONCRETE CURB PER CIVIL PLANS.B. CONCRETE SIDEWALK PER CIVIL PLANS.C. TRASH ENCLOSURE PER ARCH. PLANS.PLANTING PALETTEA'ATAMARIND DRIVEPROPOSED BUILDING60,900 S.F.PRIVATE DRIVE19 DOCK-HI DOORS3,000 SFOFFICE3,000 SFMEZZ.58141481213133413PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEROWAAAAPRIVATE DRIVE222324CBB1. NEW 6" CONC. STREET CURBPER CIVIL DWGS.2. FOUNDATION SCREEN SHRUBPLANTING PALETTE.3. ASSORTED ACCENT PLANTINGALONG STREET FRONTAGE.4. SCREEN TREES.SECTION A-A' KEY NOTES:BLDG.PRIVATE RDR.O.W.13241. NEW 6" CONC. STREET CURBPER CIVIL DWGS.2. PROPOSED SIDEWALK PER CIVILDWGS.3. PROPOSED NEW STREET TREEPER LEGEND.4. ASSORTED ACCENT PLANTINGALONG STREET FRONTAGE.5. EVERGREEN SCREEN SHRUBS.SECTION B-B' KEY NOTES:TAMARIND DRR.O.W.12354WUCOLS PLANT FACTORTHIS PROJECT IS LOCATED IN 'WUCOLS'REGION '4-SOUTH INLAND VALLEY'.H = HIGH WATER NEEDSM = MODERATE WATER NEEDSL = LOW WATER NEEDSVL= VERY LOW WATER NEEDSxROCK RIP-RAP MATERIAL SHALL BE INSTALLEDWHERE DRAIN LINES CONNECT TO INFILTRATIONAREAS.xALL UTILITY EQUIPMENT SUCH AS BACKFLOW UNITS,FIRE DETECTOR CHECKS, FIRE CHECK VALVE, ANDAIRCONDITIONING UNITS WILL BE SCREENED WITHEVERGREEN PLANT MATERIAL ONCE FINALLOCATIONS HAVE BEEN DETERMINED.xALL TREES PLANTED 5' OR LESS TO HARDSCAPECURB, WALKWAY OR WALL SHALL BE INSTALLEDWITH DEEP ROOT BARRIER PANELS. 18" MIN. DEPTHX 10' LONG. BARRIERS SHALL NOT WRAP AROUNDROOTBALL.GENERAL NOTES:THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPEPLAN. IT IS BASED ON PRELIMINARYINFORMATION WHICH IS NOT FULLYVERIFIED AND MAY BE INCOMPLETE. ITIS MEANT AS A COMPARATIVE AID INEXAMINING ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENTSTRATEGIES AND ANY QUANTITIESINDICATED ARE SUBJECT TO REVISIONAS MORE RELIABLE INFORMATIONBECOMES AVAILABLE.IRRIGATION NOTE:THE PROJECT WILL BE EQUIPPED WITH A LOWFLOW IRRIGATION SYSTEM CONSISTING OF ETWEATHER BASED SMART CONTROLLER, LOWFLOW ROTORS, BUBBLER AND/ OR DRIPSYSTEMS USED THROUGHOUT. THE IRRIGATIONWATER EFFICIENCY WILL COMPLY WITH THECOUNTY'S WATER CONSERVATION INLANDSCAPING ORDINANCE AND THE WATEREFFICIENT LANDSCAPE DESIGN MANUAL.CONCEPTUAL PLAN NOTE:NOTE: ALL SHRUB PLANTING AREAS TO RECEIVE A 3" LAYER OFSHREDDED FINE MULCH.SECTION A-ASCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"SECTION B-BSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"I:\FRT2202\G\Concept_Landscape_Plan.ai (6/21/2022)
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 11
2.0 EVALUATION OF CLASS 32 (IN-FILL) EXEMPTION CRITERIA
Class 32 (Section 15332 of the CEQA Guidelines) consists of projects characterized as in-fill
development meeting the conditions described in this section:
(a) The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general
plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.
The City’s General Plan Land Use Map8 indicates the Project site is designated as a Light Industrial
(I-L) land use, which includes business parks, research and development, technology centers,
corporate and support office uses, clean industry, supporting retail uses, truck and equipment sales
and related services, and also warehouses designed in ways that limit off-site impacts.9 The City’s
Zoning District Map10 indicates the site is zoned Light Industrial (M-1), which accommodates high
cube/warehousing and does not permit heavy manufacturing, processing of raw materials, or
business logistics that generate high volumes of truck traffic.11
On April 12, 2022, the Fontana City Council approved and adopted Ordinance No. 1879 to add
Article V to Chapter 9 (Environmental Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal
Code. Chapter 9, Article V, also known as the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards.
This is designed to exceed existing regional and State air quality standards to further air quality
improvement measures and standardize requirements for all warehouse developments in the City.
Table A lists the routine conditions prescribed to all warehouse projects in the City pursuant to the
Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards and summarizes the proposed project’s
consistency with the standards.
Since the project consists of a tilt-up warehousing facility,12 the project would be consistent with the
Light Industrial land use and zoning designations and would be conditioned to ensure compliance
with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards (Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana
Municipal Code). Because the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan land use designation
and zoning designation, it is therefore consistent with Section 15332(a) of the CEQA Guidelines.
8 City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Land Use Map. March 2, 2021.
9 City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Update 2015-2035. Chapter 15: Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design
Element. Page 15.26. Adopted November 13, 2018.
10 City of Fontana, State of California. Zoning District Map. Accessed May 27, 2022.
11 City of Fontana. Fontana Municipal Code. Article VII. – Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 30-522(1) – Light Industrial
(M-1). https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/zoning_and_development_code?nodeId=CH30ZODECO_ARTVIIINZODI.
Accessed May 27, 2022.
12 “Warehousing Facility” means the use of a building primarily for the storage of goods of any type by one or two
businesses and used for the sale or distribution of those goods to their direct customers (excluding bulk storage of
materials which are flammable or explosive or which create hazardous or commonly recognized offensive
conditions). Typically, 200,000 square feet or less in size with a land coverage ratio of approximately 45 to 55
percent with dock high and/or ground level loading doors on one side of the building only (Section 30-12 (List of
Definitions) of the City Zoning and Development Code).
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 12
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
Section 9-71. – Buffering and Screening / Adjacent Uses
(1) For any Warehouse building larger than 50,000 square
feet in size, a ten-foot-wide landscaping perimeter buffer
shall be required when adjacent to any sensitive receptors.
For any Warehouse building larger than 400,000 square feet
in size, a twenty-foot wide landscaping buffer shall be
required, measured from the property line of all adjacent
sensitive receptors. The buffer area(s) shall include, at a
minimum, a solid decorative wall(s) of at least ten feet in
height, natural ground landscaping, and solid screen
buffering trees, as described below, unless there is an
existing solid block wall. For any Warehouse building equal
to or less than 50,000 square feet in size, a solid decorative
wall(s) of at least ten feet in height shall be required when
adjacent to any sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptor shall
be defined as any residence including private homes,
condominiums, apartments, and living quarters, schools,
preschools, daycare centers, in-home daycares, health
facilities such as hospitals, long term care facilities,
retirement and nursing homes, community centers, places of
worship, parks (excluding trails), prisons, and dormitories.
Consistent: Sensitive receptors in the form of residential
uses are located across Tamarind Avenue to the east, but
they do not share a property line with the project site;
therefore, screening is not required. Nevertheless, as
shown in Figure 3, the project includes a minimum 20-
foot-wide on-site landscaped buffer at the eastern site
boundary along Tamarind Avenue, across which the only
sensitive receptors near the site are located. The project
also includes approximately 12 feet of right of way
dedication along Tamarind Avenue that would result in an
additional 12 feet of parkway from curb face to project
property line. The Project also includes construction of
multiple screen walls measuring 13 feet tall facing
Tamarind Avenue to the east in order to screen
loading/unloading activities at the docking area from
adjacent residential properties and the public right-of-
way.
(2) Trees shall be used as part of the solid screen buffering treatment. Trees used for this purpose shall be evergreen, drought tolerant, minimum 36-inch box, and shall be spaced at no greater than 40-feet on center. The property owner and any successors in interest shall maintain these trees for the duration of ownership, ensuring any unhealthy or dead trees are replaced timely as needed.
Consistent: As shown on Figure 5 (Landscape Plan), the project includes 10 trees within the landscaped buffer along the 245-foot project frontage with Tamarind Avenue, with an average spacing of 24.5 feet.
(3) All landscaping shall be drought tolerant, and to the
extent feasible, species with low biogenic emissions. Palm
trees shall not be utilized.
Consistent: As shown on Figure 5 (Landscape Plan),
landscaping shall be incorporated through a combination
of accent plantings/groundcovers, hedges, and trees along
the site perimeter and throughout the parking areas and
along the internal drive aisle. Enhanced landscaping would
be installed throughout the project site via a three-tiered
planting system compatible with the scale of adjacent
structures, streets, and public spaces. Proposed
landscaping would be drought-tolerant and complement existing natural and manmade features, including the
dominant landscaping of surrounding areas
(4) All landscaping areas shall be properly irrigated for the
life of the facility to allow for plants and trees to maintain
growth.
Consistent: Inherent with maintaining a high-quality
warehousing facility and attracting reliable and reputable
tenants, all landscaping areas would be properly irrigated
for the life of the facility to allow for plants and trees to
maintain growth.
(5) Trees shall be installed in automobile parking areas to
provide at least 35% shade cover of parking areas within
fifteen years. Trees shall be planted that are capable of
meeting this requirement.
Consistent: As shown on Figure 5 (Landscape Plan),
parking lot trees are selected for their shading properties.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 13
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(6) Unless physically impossible, loading docks and truck entries shall be oriented away from abutting sensitive receptors. To the greatest extent feasible, loading docks, truck entries, and truck drive aisles shall be located away from nearby sensitive receptors. In making feasibility decisions, the City must comply with existing laws and regulations and balance public safety and the site development’s potential impacts to nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore loading docks, truck entries, and drive aisles may be located nearby sensitive receptors at the discretion of the Planning Director, but any such site design
shall include measures designed to minimize overall impacts
to nearby sensitive receptors.
Consistent: Sensitive receptors in the form of residential uses are located across Tamarind Avenue to the east, but they do not share a property line with the project site; therefore, screening is not required. Nevertheless, the loading docks are proposed at the western portion of the site and face south, away from sensitive receptors located east of the site. Additionally, the trucks would enter and exit the property from the 40-foot-wide driveway on the west side of the site that facilitates direct access to the loading docks and truck court that would be screened from the sensitive receptors to the east via solid walls
measuring 13 feet tall facing Tamarind Avenue in order to
screen loading/unloading activities at the docking area
from adjacent residential properties and the public right-
of-way.
To account for potential unanticipated truck ingress and
egress along the eastern driveway off Tamarind Avenue,
and to analyze the maximum possible exposure of criteria
pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and mobile noise to
nearby residents, the air quality analysis (Appendix F1),
health risk assessment (Appendix F2), and noise analysis
(Appendix E) provided later in this document evaluate a
scenario which assumes 100 percent of the project truck
traffic would enter and exit Tamarind Avenue. As detailed
throughout this analysis, the proposed project would not
exceed any criteria pollutant, toxic air contaminant, or
operational noise standard on sensitive receptors in
proximity to the project site.
(7) For any Warehouse building larger than 400,000 square feet in size, the building’s loading docks shall be located a minimum of 300 feet away, measured from the property line of the sensitive receptor to the nearest dock door which does not exclusively serve electric trucks using a direct straight-line method.
Not Applicable: The proposed project includes a warehousing facility 60,900 square feet in size.
Section 9-72. – Signage and Traffic Patterns
(1) Entry gates into the loading dock/truck court area shall be positioned after a minimum of 140 feet of total available
stacking depth inside the property line. The stacking distance
shall be increased by 70 feet for every 20 loading docks beyond 50 docks. Queuing, or circling of vehicles, on public streets immediately pre- or post-entry to an industrial commerce facility is strictly prohibited unless queuing occurs in a deceleration lane or right turn lane exclusively serving the facility.
Consistent: As shown on Figure 3 (Site Plan), the entry gates into the loading dock/truck court are positioned
approximately 173 feet inside the property line. The
proposed warehousing facility includes 19 dock-high doors. The project is required to comply with all City ordinances to avoid queuing and circling of vehicles on public streets, including Tamarind Avenue.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 14
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(2) Applicants shall submit to the Engineering Department, and obtain approval of, all turning templates to verify truck turning movements at entrance and exit driveways and street intersections adjacent to industrial buildings prior to entitlement approval. Unless not physically possible, truck entries shall be located on Collector Streets (or streets of a higher commercial classification), and vehicle entries shall be designed to prevent truck access on streets that are not Collector Streets (or streets of a higher commercial classification), including, but not limited to, by limiting the
width of vehicle entries.
Consistent: All driveways facilitating access to and from the project site shall be 40 feet wide. The project will be conditioned to ensure adequate truck turning radii at entrance and exit driveways and applicable street intersections as part of the Fontana Development Advisory Board review of the project. The project includes approximately 12 feet of right of way dedication along Tamarind Avenue in order to widen the roadway to achieve 34 feet of ultimate half-width pursuant to the City’s General Plan Circulation Element standard for a Collector Street. Implementation of the Project would
result in 22 feet of roadway from centerline to curb face
and 12 feet of parkway from curb face to project property
line.
(3) Anti-idling signs indicating a 3-minute diesel truck engine
idling restriction shall be posted at industrial commerce
facilities along entrances to the site and in the dock areas
and shall be strictly enforced by the facility operator. Consistent: The project includes signage along entrances
to the site and in the dock areas indicating a 3-minute
diesel truck engine idling restriction.
(4) Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy facility
operators shall establish and submit for approval to the
Planning Director a Truck Routing Plan to and from the State
Highway System based on the City’s latest Truck Route Map.
The plan shall describe the operational characteristics of the
use of the facility operator, including, but not limited to,
hours of operations, types of items to be stored within the
building, and proposed truck routing to and from the facility
to designated truck routes that avoids passing sensitive
receptors, to the greatest extent possible. The plan shall
include measures, such as signage and pavement markings,
queuing analysis and enforcement, for preventing truck
queuing, circling, stopping, and parking on public streets.
Facility operator shall be responsible for enforcement of the
plan. A revised plan shall be submitted to by the Planning
Director prior to a business license being issued by the City
for any new tenant of the property. The Planning Director
shall have discretion to determine if changes to the plan are
necessary including any additional measures to alleviate
truck routing and parking issues that may arise during the
life of the facility.
Consistent: The facility operator will establish and submit
for approval to the Planning Director a Truck Routing Plan
to and from the State Highway System based on the City’s
latest Truck Route Map. Trucks would enter and exit the
property from the 40-foot-wide driveway on the west side
of the site that facilitates direct access to the loading
docks and truck court that would be screened from the
sensitive receptors to the east via solid walls measuring 13
feet tall facing Tamarind Avenue in order to screen
loading/unloading activities at the docking area from
adjacent residential properties and the public right-of-
way.
To account for potential unanticipated truck ingress and
egress along the eastern driveway off Tamarind Avenue,
and to analyze the maximum possible exposure of criteria
pollutants, toxic air contaminants, and mobile noise to
nearby residents, the air quality analysis (Appendix F1),
health risk assessment (Appendix F2), and noise analysis
(Appendix E) provided later in this document evaluate a
scenario which assumes 100 percent of the project truck
traffic would enter and exit Tamarind Avenue. As detailed
throughout this analysis, the proposed project would not
exceed any criteria pollutant, toxic air contaminant, or
operational noise standard on sensitive receptors in
proximity to the project site.
(5) Signs and drive aisle pavement markings shall clearly
identify the on-site circulation pattern to minimize
unnecessary on-site vehicular travel.
Consistent: The project will include signs and drive aisle
pavement markings to identify the on-site circulation
pattern to minimize unnecessary on-site vehicular travel.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 15
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(6) Facility operators shall post signs in prominent locations inside and outside of the building indicating that off-site parking for any employee, truck, or other operation related vehicle is strictly prohibited. City may require facility operator to post signs on surface or residential streets indicating that off-site truck parking is prohibited by City ordinance and/or the Truck Routing Plan.
Consistent: The project will include signs in prominent locations inside and outside of the building indicating that off-site parking for any employee, truck, or other operation related vehicle is strictly prohibited. If so requested by City staff, the warehousing facility operator will post signs on surface or residential streets indicating that off-site truck parking is prohibited by City ordinance and/or the Truck Routing Plan.
(7) Signs shall be installed at all truck exit driveways directing
truck drivers to the truck route as indicated in the Truck
Routing Plan and State Highway System.
Consistent: The project will include signs at all truck exit
driveways directing truck drivers to the truck route as
indicated in the Truck Routing Plan and State Highway
System.
(8) Signs shall be installed in public view with contact
information for a local designated representative who works
for the facility operator and who is designated to receive
complaints about excessive dust, fumes, or odors, and truck
and parking complaints for the site, as well as contact
information for the SCAQMD’s on-line complaint system and
its complaint call-line: 1-800-288-7664. Any complaints made
to the facility operator’s designee shall be answered within
72 hours of receipt.
Consistent: The project will include signs in public view
indicating the facility operator representative and contact
for SCAQMD’s compliant call-line, and the operator shall
respond to complaints about excessive dust, fumes, or
odors, and truck and parking complaints within 72 hours
of receipt.
(9) All signs under this Section shall be legible, durable, and weather-proof. Consistent: All signs under this Section will be legible, durable, and weather-proof.
(10) Prior to issuance of a business license, City shall ensure
for any facility with a building or buildings larger than
400,000 total square feet, that the facility shall include a
truck operator lounge equipped with clean and accessible
amenities such as restrooms, vending machines, television,
and air conditioning.
Not Applicable: The proposed project includes a
warehousing facility 60,900 square feet in size.
Section 9-73. – Alternative Energy
(1) On-site motorized operational equipment shall be ZE
(zero emission).
Consistent: Warehouse equipment such as forklifts will be
electric. No internal combustion engine/diesel generators
are proposed, except in events of emergency.
(2) All building roofs shall be solar-ready, which includes
designing and constructing buildings in a manner that
facilitates and optimizes the installation of a rooftop solar
photovoltaic (PV) system at some point after the building has
been constructed.
Consistent: The proposed warehousing facility will be
constructed with a flat, solar-ready roof, and bicycle racks
will have power to charge electric bicycles.
(3) The office portion of a building’s rooftop that is not covered with solar panels or other utilities shall be constructed with light colored roofing material with a solar reflective index (“SRI”) of not less than 78. This material shall be the minimum solar reflective rating of the roof material for the life of the building.
Consistent: Portions of the roof not potentially covered by solar panels or other utilities will be constructed with light colored roofing material with minimum SRI of 78. The proposed project will achieve a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) “Silver” rating based on site location, design, construction, and operation.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 16
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(4) On buildings over 400,000 square feet, prior to issuance of a business license, the City shall ensure rooftop solar panels are installed and operated in such a manner that they will supply 100% of the power needed to operate all non-refrigerated portions of the facility including the parking areas.
Not Applicable: The proposed project includes a warehousing facility 60,900 square feet in size.
(5) At least 10% of all passenger vehicle parking spaces shall
be electric vehicle (EV) ready, with all necessary conduit and
related appurtenances installed. At least 5% of all passenger
vehicle parking spaces shall be equipped with working Level
2 Quickcharge EV charging stations installed and operational,
prior to building occupancy. Signage shall be installed
indicating EV charging stations and specifying that spaces are
reserved for clean air/EV vehicles. Unless superior
technology is developed that would replace the EV charging
units, facility operator and any successors in interest shall be
responsible for maintaining the EV charging stations in
working order for the life of the facility.
Consistent: As shown on Figure 3 (Site Plan), at least 10
percent of all passenger vehicle parking spaces will be
electric vehicle (EV) ready, with all necessary conduit and
related appurtenances installed. At least 5 percent of all
passenger vehicle parking spaces will be equipped with
working Level 2 Quickcharge EV charging stations installed
and operational prior to building occupancy. Signage will
be installed indicating EV charging stations and specifying
that spaces are reserved for clean air/EV vehicles. EV
charging stations will be maintained in working order for
the life of the facility.
(6) Unless the owner of the facility records a covenant on the
title of the underlying property ensuring that the property
cannot be used to provide chilled, cooled, or freezer
warehouse space, a conduit shall be installed during
construction of the building shell from the electrical room to
100% of the loading dock doors that have potential to serve
the refrigerated space. When tenant improvement building
permits are issued for any refrigerated warehouse space,
electric plug-in units shall be installed at every dock door
servicing the refrigerated space to allow transport
refrigeration units (TRUs) to plug in. Truck operators with
TRUs shall be required to utilize electric plug-in units when
at loading docks.
Consistent: The project does not include a refrigeration
component to the proposed warehousing facility.
Accordingly, the owner will record a covenant on the title
of the underlying property ensuring that the property
cannot be used to provide chilled, cooled, or freezer
warehouse space.
(7) Bicycle racks are required per Section 30-714 and in the
amount required for warehouse uses by Table 30-714 of the
Zoning and Development Code. The racks shall include locks
as well as electric plugs to charge electric bikes. The racks
shall be located as close as possible to employee entrance(s).
Nothing in this section shall preclude the warehouse
operator from satisfying this requirement by utilizing bicycle
parking amenities considered to be superior such as locating
bicycle parking facilities indoors or providing bicycle lockers.
Consistent: The proposed project will include bicycle racks
equipped with locks and wired for power to charge
electric bicycles.
Section 9-74. – Operation and Construction
(1) Cool surface treatments shall be added to all drive aisles
and parking areas or such areas shall be constructed with a
solar-reflective cool pavement such as concrete.
Consistent: The parking lots, truck court, and drive aisles
will be constructed with a solar-reflective cool pavement.
The proposed project will achieve a LEED “Silver” rating
based on site location, design, construction, and
operation.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 17
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(2) To ensure that warehouse electrical rooms are sufficiently sized to accommodate the potential need for additional electrical panels, either a secondary electrical room shall be provided in the building, or the primary electrical room shall be sized 25% larger than is required to satisfy the service requirements of the building or the electrical gear shall be installed with the initial construction with 25% excess demand capacity.
Consistent: The proposed warehousing facility will include either a secondary electrical room in the building, or the primary electrical room will be sized 25% larger than is required to satisfy the service requirements of the building, or the electrical gear will be installed with the initial construction with 25% excess demand capacity.
(3) Use of super-compliant VOC architectural and industrial
maintenance coatings (e.g., paints) shall be required.
Consistent: The proposed warehousing facility will be
painted with super-compliant VOC architectural and
industrial maintenance coatings. The proposed project will
achieve a LEED “Silver” rating based on site location,
design, construction, and operation.
(4) The facility operator shall incorporate a recycling
program.
Consistent: Operation of the proposed warehousing
facility will include a recycling program. The proposed
project will achieve a LEED “Silver” rating based on site
location, design, construction, and operation.
(5) The following environmentally responsible practices shall be required during construction:
a. The applicant shall use reasonable best efforts to deploy the highest rated CARB Tier technology that is available at the time of construction. Prior to permit issuance, the construction contractor shall submit an equipment list
confirming equipment used is compliant with the
highest CARB Tier at the time of construction.
Equipment proposed for use that does not meet the
highest CARB Tier in effect at the time of construction,
shall only be approved for use at the discretion of the
Planning Director and shall require proof from the
construction contractor that, despite reasonable best
efforts to obtain the highest CARB Tier equipment, such
equipment was unavailable.
b. Use of electric-powered hand tools, forklifts, and
pressure washers.
c. Designation of an area in any construction site where
electric-powered construction vehicles and equipment
can charge.
d. Identification in site plans of a location for future
electric truck charging stations and installation of a
conduit to that location.
e. Diesel-powered generators shall be prohibited except in
case of emergency or to establish temporary power
during construction.
Consistent: The Applicant will pursue Tier 4-level construction equipment and implement such equipment where feasible. A construction equipment list will be submitted to City staff prior to demolition activities and construction on the site confirming equipment used is compliant with the highest CARB Tier at the time of construction or that, despite reasonable best efforts to
obtain the highest CARB Tier equipment, such equipment
was unavailable. In such a case, alternative equipment will be used upon approval of the Planning Director.
Construction equipment will include the use of electric-
powered hand tools, forklifts, and pressure washers, and
the construction contractor will designate a location on
the site for charging of electric-powered construction
vehicles and equipment.
Site plans will identify a location for future electric truck
charging stations and installation of a conduit to that
location.
Diesel-powered generators will not be used during
construction or operation, except in case of emergency or
to establish temporary power during construction.
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 18
Table A: Project Consistency with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards
(Article V of Chapter 9 of the Fontana Municipal Code)
Section Consistency Analysis
(6) A Property Maintenance Program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director or his/her designee prior to the issuance of building permits. The program shall provide for the regular maintenance of building structures, landscaping, and paved surfaces in good physically condition, and appearance. The methods and maximum intervals for maintenance of each component shall be specified in the program.
Consistent: Inherent with maintaining a high-quality warehousing facility and attracting reliable and reputable tenants, the Applicant will submit a Property Maintenance Program to the Planning Director or his/her designee for approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The program will provide for the regular maintenance of building structures, landscaping, and paved surfaces in good physical condition, and appearance. The methods and maximum intervals for maintenance of each component will be specified in the program.
(7) Property owner shall provide facility operator with
information on incentive programs such as the Carl Moyer
Program and Voucher Incentive Program and shall require all
facility operators to enroll in the United States
Environmental Protection Agency’s SmartWay Program.
Consistent: The property owner will provide the facility
operator with information on incentive programs such as
the Carl Moyer Program and Voucher Incentive Program
and will require the facility operator to enroll in the United
States Environmental Protection Agency’s SmartWay
Program.
Source: City of Fontana. Fontana Municipal Code. Ordinance No. 1879 (Article V of Chapter 9 (Environmental Protection and Resource
Extraction)), also known as the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards. Adopted April 12, 2022. In effect May 12,
2022.
(b) The proposed development occurs within City limits on a project site of no more than five acres
substantially surrounded by urban uses.
The Project is proposed on a site of approximately 4.16 acres (APN 0256-011-03) bounded by a
warehouse (CEVA Logistics) to the north, Tamarind Avenue and residential uses to the east, a
warehouse (Forward Air Ontario Station) to the south, and a private road and warehouses uses to
the west. As shown in Figure 2: Existing Setting, the 4.16-acre Project site is substantially surrounded
by urban uses and is therefore consistent with Section 15332(b) of the CEQA Guidelines.
(c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species.
The project site consists of primarily an aggregate gravel surface with the southern portion of the
site featuring earthen surfaces covered with ruderal vegetation. Two residential buildings with
ancillary structures are located on the property, and 32 trees were observed throughout the project
site.13 Since the project site is an infill site substantially surrounded by urban development, the site
exhibits no connectivity to substantial open space or habitat suitable to support endangered, rare,
or threatened species.
The Biological Assessment (Appendix B1) prepared for the project site included a literature review
and field survey to determine the existence or potential occurrence of endangered, rare, or
threatened plant and animal species and critical habitats on or in the vicinity of the site and was
13 LSA Associates, Inc. Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana, California. Table A. April 11, 2022.
(Appendix B3).
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx) 19
peer reviewed for CEQA adequacy by LSA Associates, Inc. (Appendix B2). The literature search
included the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which indicated critical habitat does not
occur on or near the project site, but special status and endangered, rare, or threatened14 plant and
animal species have been previously reported in the project vicinity as detailed in Table B.15
To determine the potential for these species to occur on the project site, field surveys were
conducted by a qualified biologist on September 10, 2021 (refer to Appendix B1). The results of the
field surveys indicate that none of these species are expected to occur on site due to lack of suitable
habitat. No plant or wildlife species listed as special status, endangered, rare, or threatened was
observed on the project site or within a 100-foot survey buffer, and none are expected to occur due
to the site’s previous disturbances, relatively small size, and isolation from open space with suitable
habitat to support these species.
Regionally, the project site is located within the Jurupa Recovery Unit of the federally endangered
Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, and Delhi Sand Soils historically have been mapped within the
southwestern portion of the site.16 However, the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas
terminatus abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation prepared by the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFW), Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, indicates the Jurupa Hills Population
of this species within the Jurupa Recovery Unit is approximately 3.21 miles southwest of the project
site among the undeveloped Jurupa Hills.17
The Recovery Strategy outlined in the Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly
prepared by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region, includes three primary
actions: (1) working with the appropriate landowners and local governments to preserve and
enhance the presently occupied habitat; (2) implementing a program to restore lands with the
highest potential; and (3) initiating a captive breeding and release program.18 Restorable habitat
consists of areas that contain Delhi series soil and are not currently occupied by the animal, but
could be managed for the species.19 Nevertheless, the highest priority of the Recovery Strategy is to
protect existing populations and existing suitable habitat by, in part, protecting dispersal corridors
critical for movement of the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly.20
14 Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15380.
15 BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment Project, City of Fontana. Page 8
through Page 10 and Attachment C. June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1). 16 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region. Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly. Figure 5: Jurupa Recovery Unit. 1997.
17 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly
(Rhaphiomidas terminates abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Page 29. March 2008. 18 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region. Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly. Page 14. 1997. 19 Ibid. Page 15.
20 Ibid.
20
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table B: Special-Status and Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species Summary
Onsite
Status Common Name (Scientific Name) Federal Listing State Listing State Rank CNPS1 List c
A Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis) Endangered None S1 --
A Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) None None S3 --
A Mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneatavar puberula) None None S1 1B.1
A Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii) None None S1S2 --
A California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis) None None S2 --
A Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) None None S3S4 --
A Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax) None None S3S4 --
A San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii) None None S3S4 --
A Southern California legless lizard (Anniella stebbinsi) None None S3 --
A Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus) None None S3 --
A Marsh sandwort (Arenaria paludicola) Endangered Endangered S1 1B.1
A Salt marsh bird's-beak (Chloropyron maritimumssp. maritimum) Endangered Endangered S1 1B.2
A Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Threatened None S2 --
A Parry's spineflower (Chorizanthe parryivar parryi) None None S2 1B.1
A Chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis) None None S2 2B.2
A San Bernardino kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) Endangered None S1 --
A Robinson's pepper-grass (Lepidium virginicumvar.robinsonii) None None S3 4.3
A Parish's bush-mallow (Malacothamnus parishii) None None SX 1A
A Pringle's monardella (Monardella pringlei) None None SX 1A
A Pocketed free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus) None None S3 --
A Los Angeles pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris brevinasus) None None S1S2 --
A Santa Ana River woollystar (Eriastrum densifoliumssp sanctorum) Endangered Endangered S1 1B.1
A San Bernardino aster (Symphyotrichum defoliatum) None None S2 1B.2
A Coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri) None None S3 --
A Santa Ana sucker (Catostomus santaanae) Threatened None S1 --
A Plummer's mariposa-lily (Calochortus plummerae) None None S4 4.2
A Parish's desert-thorn (Lycium parishii) None None S1 2B.3
A Least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) Endangered Endangered S2 --
21
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table B: Special-Status and Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species Summary
Onsite
Status Common Name (Scientific Name) Federal Listing State Listing State Rank CNPS1 List c
A Western yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus occidentalis) Threatened Endangered S1 --
A Arroyo chub (Gila orcuttii) None None S2 --
A Steelhead-southern California DPS (Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop.10) Endangered None S1 --
A Prairie wedge grass (Sphenopholis obtusata) None None S2 2B.2
A Western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis californicus) None None S3S4 --
A Orange-throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra) None None S2S3 --
A Greenest tiger beetle (Cicindela tranquebarica viridissima) None None S1 --
A San Diego banded gecko (Coleonyx variegatus abbotti) None None S1S2 --
A Southern rubber boa (Charina umbratica) None Threatened S2S3 --
A Bell's sage sparrow (Artemisiospiza belli belli) None None S3 --
A Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor) None Threatened S1S2 --
A Bristly sedge (Carex comosa) None None S2 2B.1
A Slender-horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras) Endangered Endangered S1 1B.1
A Los Angeles sunflower (Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii) None None SH 1A
A Desert cuckoo wasp (Ceratochrysis longimala) None None S1 --
A Red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber) None None S3 --
A California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus) None Threatened S1 --
A Southern California Arroyo Chub/Santa Ana Sucker Stream None None SNR --
A Brand's star phacelia (Phacelia stellaris) None None S1 1B.1
A Singlewhorl burrobrush (Ambrosia monogyra) None None S2 2B.2
A Smooth tarplant (Centromadia pungens ssp. laevis) None None S2 1B.1
A Gambel's water cress (Nasturtium gambelii) Endangered Threatened S1 1B.1
A San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia) None None S3S4 --
A Peruvian dodder (Cuscuta obtusifloravar glandulosa) None None SH 2B.2
A Yellow-breasted chat (lcteria virens) None None S3 --
A Yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia) None None S3S4 --
A Horn's milk-vetch (Astragalus horniivar hornii) None None S1 1B.1
A White rabbit-tobacco (Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum) None None S2 2B.2
22
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table B: Special-Status and Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species Summary
Onsite
Status Common Name (Scientific Name) Federal Listing State Listing State Rank CNPS1 List c
A Salt Spring checkerbloom (Sidalcea neomexicana) None None S2 2B.2
A Quino checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha quino) Endangered None S1S2 --
A Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii) None None S4 --
A Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni) None Threatened S3 --
A American badger (Taxidea taxus) None None S3 --
A Alvin Meadow bedstraw (Galium californicum ssp. primum) None None S2 1B.2
A Busck's gallmoth (Carolella busckana) None None SH --
A Lawrence's goldfinch (Spinus lawrencei) None None S3S4 --
A Southern grasshopper mouse (Onychomys torridus ramona) None None S3 --
A Merlin (Falco columbarius) None None S3S4 --
A Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficepscanescens) None None S3 --
A Santa Ana speckled dace (Rhinichthys osculus ssp. 3) None None S1 --
A San Diego ambrosia (Ambrosia pumila) Endangered None S1 1B.1
A Nevin's barberry (Berberis nevinii) Endangered Endangered S1 1B.1
A Stephens' kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi) Endangered Threatened S2 --
A Palmer's mariposa-lily (Calochortus palmerivar palmeri) None None S2 1B.2
A Parish's gooseberry (Ribes divaricatumvar parishii) None None SX 1A
A California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia) None None S4 --
A Pallid San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax pallidus) None None S3S4 --
A Western spadefoot (Spea hammondii) None None S3 --
A Many-stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) None None S2 1B.2
A Lemon lily (Lilium parryi) None None S3 1B.2
A Southern mountain yellow-legged frog (Rana muscosa) Endangered Endangered S1 --
Source: BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment Project, City of Fontana. Attachment C. June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1).
1 CNPS: California Native Plant Society (see Legend on the following page)
23
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table B: Special-Status and Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species Summary
Onsite
Status Common Name (Scientific Name) Federal Listing State Listing State Rank CNPS1 List c
LEGEND
-- No applicable classification
S1.1 Very threatened
S1.2 Threatened
S1.3 No current threats known
S2 6-20 EOs or 1,000-3,000 individuals or 2,000-10,000 acres
S2.1 Very threatened
S2.2 Threatened
S2.3 No current threats known
List 1A Plants presumed extinct in California
List 1B.1 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; seriously threatened in California
List 1B.2 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; fairly threatened in California
List 1B.3 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California and elsewhere; not very threatened in California
List 2.1 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere; seriously threatened in California
List 2.2 Plants rare, threatened, or endangered in California, but more common elsewhere; fairly threatened in California
List 3 More information about the plant’s distribution and rarity needed
List 4 Plants of limited distribution
Absent [A] Species distribution is restricted by substantive habitat requirements, which do not occur within the project site, and no further survey or study is obligatory to
determine likely presence or absence of this species.
Low [L] Species distribution is restricted by substantive habitat requirements, which are negligible within the project site, and no further survey or study is obligatory to determine likely presence or absence of this species.
Habitat Present [HP] Species distribution is restricted by substantive habitat requirements, which occur within the project site, and further survey or study may be necessary to
determine likely presence or absence of this species.
Present [P] Species or species sign were observed within the project site, or historically have been documented within project limits.
Critical Habitat [CH] The project site is located within a United States Fish and Wildlife-designated critical habitat unit.
24
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
The site-specific pedestrian survey did not result in the identification of any Delhi Sands flower-
loving fly specimen and revealed the project site lacks suitable open soils required to support this
species because any Delhi Sands that potentially occur on the site have been compacted and
covered in gravel base.21 Furthermore, previous disturbances on the site and vicinity from grading
and development of residential and industrial uses have removed any historical sand dune
formations that may have once occupied the site and/or vicinity.22
The project site consists of 4.16 acres of unsuitable habitat completely surrounded by industrial and
residential development and public and private roadways. Even if the project site were to be
designated as restorable habitat, its small size and infill nature isolating it from dispersion corridors
and larger habitat patches renders the site with very limited potential to sustain Delhi Sands flower-
loving fly populations through time.23 Therefore, the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly is considered
absent from the project site, and the site has no potential to support this species due to existing
residential and industrial development, absence of exposed native soils (unmaintained and
ungraded) and absence of sand dune formations.
The Project site does not provide suitable habitat for burrowing owl due to the site’s previous
disturbances, relatively small size, and isolation from open space with suitable habitat to support
this species. The trees around the site also could harbor other raptors that prey on burrowing owl
and make the site undesirable for this species.24
As detailed in Table B, the site’s location in an urbanized area, relatively small size, and lack of
suitable habitat renders the site unlikely to support any endangered, rare, or threatened plant and
animal species with potential to occur in the project vicinity. Ongoing disturbances from residential
occupation of the site, parking of passenger vehicles and freight trucks on the site, and routine weed
abatement and the resulting competitive exclusion by invasive non-native plants limit the potential
for native flora to occur or to host special-status, endangered, rare, or threatened animal species on
the site. Therefore, the Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened
species pursuant to Section 15332(c) of the CEQA Guidelines.
(d) Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air
quality, or water quality.
Traffic: A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is typically prepared to assess the impacts of traffic generated
by a development project on the surrounding transportation network. TIAs serve as tools for the
City to evaluate the effects specific development projects would have on the City’s transportation
infrastructure and address Section XVII (Transportation) of Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority’s (SBCTA) Congestion Management Plan (CMP)
TIA Guidelines (dated June 2016) indicate any project that generates 250 or more two-way peak
21 BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment Project, City of Fontana. Page 9. June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1).
22 Ibid.
23 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminates abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Page 14 and Page 15. March 2008. 24 BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment Project, City of Fontana. Page 9.
June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1).
25
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
hour trips of which at least 50 two-way peak hour trips would occur on a State highway facility is
required to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) report for City and Caltrans’ review. The City of
Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service
Assessment require TIAs to determine if project-generated vehicle trips would adversely affect the
surrounding transportation network when a project generates 50 or more trips during the a.m. or
p.m. peak hour.25 For projects anticipated to generate fewer than 50 peak hour trips, a trip
generation memorandum generally is considered sufficient unless the City has specific concerns
related to project access and interaction with adjacent intersections.
The building construction phase would generate the most trips of all the construction phases, at 222
trips per day based on the CalEEMod (Appendix F1). Roadways that would be used to access the
project site during construction are the private drive aisle, Tamarind Avenue, Slover Avenue, and
Santa Ana Avenue. The private drive aisle, Tamarind Avenue, Slover Avenue, and Santa Ana Avenue
have estimated existing daily traffic volumes of 435, 1,632, 15,463, and 7,315, respectively, near the
project site.26 Accordingly, the number of daily construction-related vehicle trips generated by the
project is small compared to existing daily traffic volume on the private drive aisle (435 trips),
Tamarind Avenue (1,632 trips), Santa Ana Avenue (15,463 trips), and Slover Avenue (7,315 trips).
A Trip Generation Memorandum was prepared for the project through consultation with the City’s
Traffic Engineering Division (Appendix D), which revealed the project is anticipated to add
approximately 11 passenger vehicle and freight truck trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12
passenger vehicle and freight truck trips during the p.m. peak hour. When freight truck trips are
converted to passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips, the project is anticipated to add approximately 18
PCE trips during the a.m. peak hour and 19 PCE trips during the p.m. peak hour.27 Since the number
of trips the project would generate is well below the City’s threshold to prepare a TIA, the addition
of the proposed project traffic would not create any significant adverse impacts to nearby
intersections.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) establishes “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) criteria
in lieu of “level of service” (LOS) for analyzing transportation impacts and was signed into law as
Senate Bill (SB) 743 in 2013. As detailed below, the project would facilitate access to alternative,
shared, and community transportation opportunities that satisfy key policies of the City’s General
Plan that reduce VMT without generating a substantial unanticipated increase in population or
vehicle trips to the circulation network. The City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines
for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment established project-screening
thresholds.28 For example, projects that generate fewer than 500 average daily trips (ADT) are
determined not to cause a substantial increase in the total Citywide or regional VMT and therefore
are presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.29 The project is anticipated to generate
25 City of Fontana. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. Page 4. October 21, 2020. 26 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Page 14.
May 2022. (Appendix E).
27 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D) 28 City of Fontana. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. Pages 13 and 14. October 21, 2020.
29 Ibid.
26
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
only 158 average daily PCE trips.30 Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial increase in
the total Citywide or regional VMT and can be screened out from further VMT analysis.31
To help reduce VMT in the Project vicinity, public transit is provided via Omnitrans Route 82 with
multiple bus stops along Sierra Avenue between Slover Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue 0.75 mile
west of the site. Omnitrans Route 82 traverses the entire City in a north-south direction,
interconnecting the Project site with the Fontana Downtown area and major transit facilities such as
the South Fontana Transfer Center and Fontana Metrolink Station, as well as neighboring Ontario
and Rancho Cucamonga.32 The project site is also served by OmniRide Bloomington, which operates
as an on-demand, reservation-based microtransit service serving portions of Bloomington, Colton,
Rialto, and south Fontana and connects to other Omnitrans fixed bus routes such as Route 82.33
Development of the project site would not conflict with any program, plan, ordinance, or policy
designed to promote or enhance the City’s transit facilities. Rather, development of a modern
warehouse as proposed would promote the continued use of Omnitrans Route 82 and OmniRide
Bloomington by introducing employment opportunities onto an underutilized property in proximity
to Omnitrans bus stops consistent with the Goals and Policies of the City’s General Community
Mobility and Circulation Element.34 Additionally, the Project would construct new curb and sidewalk
along the entire roadway frontage of the project site to help fill in gaps in the City’s sidewalk
network pursuant to General Plan Community Mobility and Circulation Element Goals 1 and 2.
Finally, the project site would include bicycle parking with electric bicycle charging stations, and
alternative access to the project site would be available via proposed Class 2 and 3 bicycle lanes to
be implemented by the City at a future date along nearby major corridors such as Slover Avenue
0.15 mile to the north and Santa Ana Avenue 0.35 mile to the south. These project design features
would be installed in accordance with City Municipal Code Section No. 30-554 (Trip Reduction
Measures) and Article V of Chapter 9 (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards) of the
City’s Zoning and Development Code.
The proposed project addresses several key issues and implements policies of the General Plan that
reduce vehicle miles traveled without generating a substantial increase in vehicle trips in accordance
with the City’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of
Service Assessment. Therefore, the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to
traffic pursuant to Section 15332(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Noise: The project is located in the City of Fontana; however, the nearest sensitive receptors are
single-family residences east of Tamarind Avenue in unincorporated San Bernardino County.
Accordingly, project-generated noise levels have been evaluated pursuant to the Fontana Noise
Control Ordinance for receptors in Fontana and pursuant to the San Bernardino County Noise
Control Ordinance for receptors in unincorporated San Bernardino County.
30 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D). 31 Ibid. Page 2.
32 City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Update 2015-2035. Chapter 9: Community Mobility and Circulation. Exhibit 9.3:
Mobility. Adopted November 13, 2018. 33 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Page 3. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D). 34 City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Update 2015-2035. Chapter 9: Community Mobility and Circulation. Pages 9.5 and
9.6. Adopted November 13, 2018.
27
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Fontana Noise Control Ordinance: Section 18-63(b)(7) of the City’s Municipal Code establishes
exemption criteria for construction activities, specifically exempting noise generated from
construction between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Section 30-543(a) of the City’s Municipal Code establishes
daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) exterior noise standards
of 70 and 65 a-weighted decibels (dBA), respectively for residential-zoned property adjacent to
industrial-zoned uses. Noise-sensitive land uses are uses where people reside or where the presence
of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land.35 Mobile sources of noise, such as
truck deliveries, are exempt from the local ordinance but are still subject to CEQA and would be
significant if the Project generates a volume of traffic which would result in a substantial increase,
defined by the City as an increase of 3 dBA or more, in mobile source-generated noise to sensitive
land uses in incompatible noise areas.36 For mobile sources of noise, only an audible change in noise
level, which is a change of 3 dBA or more, is considered potentially significant.37
San Bernardino County Noise Control Ordinance: Section 83.01.080(c) of the County of San
Bernardino (County) Development Code establishes the noise standards for stationary noise sources
that affect adjacent properties. Table C provides the County’s noise standards based on the affected
land use and the time period. The noise metric used for stationary sources is defined as noise levels
that cannot be exceeded for certain percentages of time, or Ln. In addition, Section 83.01.080(d) of
the County Development Code establishes interior and exterior noise standards for mobile noise
sources for various land use categories. Table C also provides the County’s interior and exterior
noise standards for mobile noise sources for each land use category.
Section 83.01.080(g)(3) of the County Code limits temporary construction, maintenance, repair, or
demolition activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., except on Sundays and
federal holidays.
Section 83.01.090 of the County Code prohibits ground vibration that can be felt without the aid of
instruments at or beyond the lot line or which produces a particle velocity greater than or equal to
two-tenths (0.2) in/sec measured at or beyond the lot line. In addition, vibration generated from
temporary construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition activities between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m. is exempt, except on Sundays and federal holidays.
35 Occupants of residences, hospitals, schools, guest lodging, libraries, churches, nursing homes, auditoriums, concert halls,
amphitheaters, playgrounds, and parks are considered noise-sensitive receptors. 36 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 5.10-4. June 8, 2018.
37 Ibid.
28
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table C: County of San Bernardino Stationary and Mobile Noise Standards
Stationary Noise Standards
Affected Land Use
(Receiving Noise) Time Period L50
(30 min)
L25
(15 min)
L8
(5 min)
L2
(1 min)
Lmax
(Anytime)
Residential 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 55 60 65 70 75
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 45 50 55 60 65
Professional Services Anytime 55 60 65 70 75
Other Commercial Anytime 60 65 70 75 80
Industrial Anytime 70 75 80 85 90
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California.
Table E. May 2022. (Appendix E). Note: If the measured ambient level exceeds any of the first four noise limit categories above, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be increased to reflect the ambient noise level. If the ambient noise level exceeds the fifth noise limit category above, the
maximum allowable noise level under this category shall be increased to reflect the maximum ambient noise level.
dBA = A-weighted decibel L2 = The noise standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour. L8 = The noise standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour.
L25 = The noise standard plus 5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour.
L50 = The noise standard plus up to 5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour. Lmax = The noise standard plus 20 dBA or the maximum measured ambient noise level for any period of time. min = minutes
Mobile Noise Standards
Land Use dBA Ldn or CNEL
Categories Uses Interior Exterior
Residential Single and multi-family, duplex, mobile homes 45 60
Commercial
Hotel, motel, transient housing 45
Commercial retail, bank, restaurant 50 N/A
Office building, research and development, professional offices 45 65
Amphitheater, concert hall, auditorium, movie theater 45 N/A
Institution/Public Hospital, nursing home, school classroom, religious institution, library 45 65
Open Space Park N/A 65
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table F. May 2022. (Appendix E). 1 The indoor environment shall exclude bathrooms, kitchens, toilets, closets, and corridors.
2 The outdoor environment shall be limited to: hospital/office building patios, hotel and motel recreation areas, mobile home
parks, multi-family private patios or balconies, park picnic areas, private yard of single-family dwellings, and school playgrounds. 3 An exterior noise level of up to 65 dBA (Ldn or CNEL) shall be allowed provided exterior noise levels have been substantially mitigated through a reasonable application of the best available noise reduction technology, and interior noise exposure does
not exceed 45 dBA (Ldn or CNEL) with windows and doors closed. Requiring that windows and doors remain closed to achieve an
acceptable interior noise level shall necessitate the use of air conditioning or mechanical ventilation. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level dBA = A-weighted decibel
Ambient Noise in the Project Vicinity: The project was subject to a Noise and Vibration Impact
Analysis (Appendix E). Three short-term (20-minute) and one long-term (24-hour) ambient noise
level measurements were conducted between April 12 and April 13, 2022, as detailed in Table D and
Table E, to establish baseline conditions.
29
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table D: Short-Term Ambient Noise Level Measurements
Monitor
No. Location1 Date
Start
Time
Noise Level (dBA)
Noise Source(s) Leq Lmax Lmin
ST-1 1751 Tamarind Court. In the front yard. Approximately 38 feet from the Tamarind Avenue centerline.
4/12/22 11:38 a.m. 59.9 76.0 46.0 Traffic on Tamarind Avenue.
ST-2 At the western end of the
vacant lot north of the project
site. Approximately 9 feet
from the wall to the north
and west.
4/12/22 12:14
p.m.
53.2 72.2 45.3 Faint traffic noise from
Tamarind Avenue and
faint warehouse noise.
ST-3 10545 Production Avenue.
Located at the southeast
corner of warehouse in the
parking lot.
4/12/22 12:38
p.m.
57.1 68.5 53.9 Freight trucks traveling
along the private drive
aisle. One or two
trailers parked along
the private drive aisle
with refrigeration units
in operation.
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table G. May 2022. (Appendix E).
1 Monitoring locations are depicted in Figure 3 of Appendix E.
dBA = A-weighted decibel
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum measured sound level
Lmin = minimum measured sound level
Table E: Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results
Monitor No. Location1
Noise Level (dBA)
Noise Sources Daytime Nighttime CNEL Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
LT-1 Northeastern corner of the project
site. Approximately 38 feet from the Tamarind Avenue centerline.
On a utility/light pole.
59.0–
66.3 (63.1)2
77.9–
90.0 53.2–
61.8 (58.2)3
71.7–
80.3 66 Traffic on Tamarind
Avenue. Industrial activity.
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table I. May 2022. (Appendix E). Note: Long-term (24-hour) noise level measurements were conducted from April 12, 2022, to April 13, 2022.
1 Monitoring locations are depicted in Figure 3 of Appendix E.
2 Average daytime noise level.
3 Average nighttime noise level. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level
Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level
Temporary (Construction) Noise: Two types of short-term construction noise would occur during
project construction. The first type would be from construction crew commutes and the transport of
construction equipment and materials to the project site, which would incrementally raise noise
levels on roadways leading to the site. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise
exposure potential causing intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 feet would generate up
to a maximum of 84 dBA) during equipment and material delivery to and from the site for
construction preparation, these intermittent high single-event noise exposure would not be
significant because trucks already use the roadways leading to the site without the project. In
addition, the effect on longer-term ambient noise levels would be insignificant because the daily
30
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
construction-related vehicle trips are few when compared to existing daily traffic volume on the
private drive aisle to the west, Tamarind Avenue, Santa Ana Avenue, and Slover Avenue. The
building construction phase would generate the most trips out of all of the construction phases, at
222 trips per day based on the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2020.4.0
(Appendix F1). The private drive aisle to the west, Tamarind Avenue, Slover Avenue, and Santa Ana
Avenue have estimated existing daily vehicle trips of 435, 1,632, 15,463, and 7,315, respectively,
near the project site. Construction-related traffic could increase ambient noise by up to 1.8 dBA
along these roadways,38 which is not an audible increase in ambient noise levels in an outdoor
environment.39 Therefore, no short-term, construction-related impacts associated with worker
commute and transport of construction equipment and material to and from the project site would
occur.
The second type of short-term construction noise is related noise generated from heavy equipment
used during construction activities. The Project includes demolition, site preparation, grading,
building construction, architectural coating, and paving phases of construction. These various
sequential phases change the character of the noise generated on a project site. Typical noise levels
range up to 88 dBA maximum instantaneous noise level (Lmax) at 50 feet during the noisiest
construction phases.40 The demolition, site preparation, and grading phases are expected to
generate the highest noise levels because the noisiest construction equipment is earthmoving
equipment. Noise associated with the use of earthmoving equipment is estimated to be between 55
dBA Lmax and 85 dBA Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area, and the
maximum noise level generated by each grader and bulldozer is assumed to be approximately 85
dBA Lmax at 50 feet.41 The maximum noise level generated by water trucks/pickup trucks is
approximately 55 dBA Lmax at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with
equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA.42 Each of the pieces of construction equipment
would operate together on the project site during the noisiest phase of construction. Although each
piece of construction equipment would operate in proximity to the other equipment, they would
not operate adjacent to each other due to space needed for maneuverability on the relatively small
project site. The worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 88 dBA
Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area. Based on a usage factor of 40 percent,
the worst-case combined noise level during this phase of construction would be 84 dBA43 equivalent
continuous sound level (Leq)44 at a distance of 50 feet from the active construction area.45
38 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Page 15. May 2022. (Appendix E).
39 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page
5.10-4. June 8, 2018.
40 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Page 15. May 2022. (Appendix E).
41 Ibid.
42 Federal Highway Administration. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance. Noise Fundamentals. Updated
August 24, 2017. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm (Accessed June 6, 2022). 43 The usage factor of 40 percent is approximately 4 dBA less than the maximum noise level (88 dBA maximum noise level - 4 dBA
usage factor = 84 dBA).
44 The Leq noise level is provided to describe construction noise levels for a longer period of time (compared to the maximum instantaneous noise level, Lmax) and compare it to ambient noise levels anticipated to be generated by the project. 45 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Page 15.
May 2022. (Appendix E).
31
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
The receptors sensitive to noise that are closest to the project construction boundary are residences
whose property lines are located 55 feet to the east across Tamarind Avenue in San Bernardino
County (refer to Figure 2). These residents may be subject to short-term construction noise reaching
87 dBA Lmax (83 dBA Leq) or higher as measured from the receptor property line.46 These noise levels
represent a worst-case scenario that is typically associated with grading activity, which only
represents a limited duration in time during the overall construction period. Existing ambient noise
levels at the closest residential properties range between 53.2 and 66.3 dBA Leq and 68.5 and 90.0
dBA Lmax based on short-term and long-term ambient noise measurements taken at the project site
(refer to Table D and Table E above). Although noise generated by project construction activities
would be higher than the ambient noise levels and may result in a temporary increase in the
ambient noise levels, construction noise is temporary and would stop once project construction is
completed.
Construction is estimated to occur for 12 months to complete the required demolition, site
preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Throughout this
process, the proposed project is required to comply with the construction hours specified in Section
18-63(b)(7) of the City Municipal Code and Section 83.01.080(g)(3) of the County Code. These
policies would restrict construction activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and prohibit construction
on Sundays and federal holidays unless it is approved by the building inspector for cases that are
considered urgently necessary as defined in Section 18-63(7) of the Municipal Code.47 Furthermore,
the City prescribes standard conditions to all development projects in its jurisdiction that include the
following:
• For all noise-producing equipment, use types and models that have the lowest horsepower and
the lowest noise generating potential practical for their intended use.
• The construction contractor will ensure that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, is
properly operating (tuned-up) and lubricated, and that mufflers are working adequately.
• Have only necessary equipment onsite.
• Use manually-adjustable or ambient-sensitive backup alarms. When working adjacent to
residential use(s), the construction contractor will also use the following path controls, except
where not physically feasible, when necessary:
○ Install portable noise barriers, including solid structures and noise blankets, between the
active noise sources and the nearest noise receivers.
○ Temporarily enclose localized and stationary noise sources.
46 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Page 15.
May 2022. (Appendix E).
47 San Bernardino County Development Code Section 83.01.080 limits temporary construction, maintenance, repair, or demolition activities to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., except on Sundays and federal holidays, and exempts construction noise from the County’s noise level standards; however, the Fontana Noise Ordinance shall prevail since project construction activity
would occur within Fontana City Limits.
32
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
○ Store and maintain equipment, building materials, and waste materials as far as practical
from as many sensitive receivers as practical.
Since the City’s Municipal Code Section 18-63(b)(7) allows construction noise in excess of normally
defined thresholds between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, compliance with this policy in conjunction with the
prescribed conditions listed above, which are required for construction of all development projects
in the City, would ensure the project would not generate a substantial temporary increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance.
Permanent (Operational) Noise: Long-term noise would be generated from vehicle traffic entering
and exiting the site and from on-site stationary sources, such as truck delivery and
loading/unloading activities, parking lot activity, and heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC)
operation. These mobile and stationary operational noise sources are analyzed separately in relation
to the ambient noise environment because the City’s applicable noise standards are different for
mobile versus stationary noise sources. Whereas mobile noise sources such as vehicle traffic are
measured as community noise equivalent level (CNEL), stationary noise sources such as truck
loading/unloading, parking lot activities, and HVAC are measured as Lmax and Leq. Additionally,
anticipating the timing of noise events (continuous versus intermittent) would be speculative, as
they differ for the various stationary noise sources. However, reasonable assumptions are made, as
specified for each noise source described below, in order to combine the stationary noise levels
anticipated to be generated by the proposed project and compare them to the ambient noise
environment in terms of Leq.48
Mobile Noise: Noise levels from vehicle traffic (including employee passenger vehicles and freight
trucks) entering and exiting the site are analyzed along roadway segments in the project vicinity
using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (1977;
FHWA RD-77-108). The existing (year 2022) average daily trip (ADT) volumes were obtained from
the project-specific Trip Generation Memorandum49 and traffic counts taken on behalf of LSA by
Counts Unlimited in March 2022.50 The standard vehicle mix for southern California roadways was
used for traffic on these roadway segments under the without Project scenario. Under the “with
Project” scenario, the vehicle mix was adjusted based on the Project’s vehicle mix through
consultation with the City.
Two traffic alternatives were evaluated for project-related traffic accessing the project site to ensure
the analysis captures a worst case scenario for mobile noise. Alternative 1 assumes 100 percent of
truck traffic would take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be constructed off the private drive
48 The Leq noise level is provided to describe operatonal noise levels for a longer period of time (compared to the maximum
instantaneous noise level, Lmax) and compare them to ambient noise levels anticipated to be generated by the project. 49 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix E). 50 LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table N and
Table O. May 2022. (Appendix E).
33
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
aisle on the west side of the site, and Alternative 2 assumes 100 percent of the truck traffic would
take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be constructed off Tamarind Avenue.51
Table F and Table G respectively summarize the Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 scenarios, each
detailing the existing (year 2022) traffic noise levels without and with the project along roadways in
the project vicinity. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no
shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn.
As detailed in Table F and Table G, respectively, project-related traffic would increase roadway noise
by up to 1.8 dBA along the private drive aisle (Alternative 1) and by up to 0.5 dBA along Tamarind
Avenue (Alternative 2). Noise level increases less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human
ear in an outdoor environment.52 Therefore, project-related traffic noise effects on off-site sensitive
receptors would not be significant.
Truck Delivery and Loading/Unloading Activities: Truck delivery and truck loading/unloading
activities during operation of the project would be located on the south end of the proposed
warehouse building, as shown in Figure 3. These activities are assumed to occur during both daytime
and nighttime hours. Noise levels generated from these activities would result in a maximum noise
level of 75 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.53 Although a typical truck-loading/unloading process takes an average
of 15–20 minutes, the maximum noise level occurs in a much shorter period of time (cumulative
period of 5 minutes).54 Based on the project-specific Trip Generation Memorandum (Appendix D),
up to four delivery trucks are expected to arrive and depart the site during the a.m. peak hour (7:00
a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and also during the p.m. peak hour (4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.). As a worst-case
scenario, this analysis assumes up to four trucks would arrive and depart the site within one hour of
time, and each truck is assumed to generate the maximum noise level for a cumulative period of five
minutes, which would result in a cumulative period of 20 minutes in any hour.55 Based on the
assumptions above, truck delivery and truck loading and unloading activities would generate a noise
level of 70.2 dBA Leq at 50 feet.56
51 Pursuant to Section 9-72(4) (Signage and Traffic Patterns) of Article V, Chapter 9 (Environmental Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal Code, the project Applicant shall submit a Truck Routing Plan to the City for approval prior to occupancy. Nevertheless, by evaluating a traffic alternative that concentrates 100 percent of the truck traffic in proximity to the nearest
sensitive receptors, the analysis demonstrates that the project would not result in any significant effects relating to mobile noise
under a worst case scenario.
52 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 5.10-4. June 8, 2018. 53 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).
54 The noisiest loading/unloading activities include back-up alarms from freight trucks backing into loading docks and forklifts
maneuvering backwards, forklifts lifting and/or lowering pallets, and metal-on-metal or metal-on-concrete contact from forklift booms. These events are expected to compose up to 25 percent (5 out of 20 minutes) of the overall loading/unloading activities. 55 Four trucks generating the maximum noise level for 5 minutes each per hour = cumulative period of 20 minutes per hour.
56 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Page 20. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).
34
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table F: Existing (Year 2022) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project (Alternative 1 – Private Drive Aisle Access)
Roadway Segment
Without Project Traffic Conditions With Project Traffic Conditions
ADT Centerline to 70 dBA CNEL (ft) Centerline to 65 dBA CNEL (ft) Centerline to 60 dBA CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 feet from Centerline of Outermost Lane ADT Centerline to 70 dBA CNEL (ft) Centerline to 65 dBA CNEL (ft) Centerline to 60 dBA CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 feet from Centerline of Outermost Lane
Increase from Baseline Conditions
Slover Avenue west of
Private Driveway
16,250 82 171 365 70.7 16,326 83 173 369 70.8 0.1
Slover Avenue between
Private Driveway and
Tamarind Avenue
15,932 81 168 360 70.7 15,971 81 169 362 70.7 0
Slover Avenue east of
Tamarind Avenue
15,463 80 165 353 70.5 15,470 80 165 353 70.5 0
Santa Ana Avenue west of
Private Driveway
5,987 < 50 79 164 65.5 6,001 < 50 80 165 65.5 0
Santa Ana Avenue between Private Driveway and Tamarind Avenue
5,844 < 50 78 161 65.4 5,851 < 50 78 161 65.4 0
Santa Ana Avenue east of
Tamarind Avenue
7,315 < 50 86 185 67.8 7,322 < 50 86 185 67.8 0
Private Driveway between
Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway
510 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.2 549 < 50 < 50 < 50 57 1.8
Private Driveway between Project Driveway and Santa Ana Avenue
435 < 50 < 50 < 50 54.5 442 < 50 < 50 < 50 54.6 0.1
Tamarind Avenue between
Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway
1,969 < 50 < 50 66 61.1 2,015 < 50 < 50 68 61.3 0.2
Tamarind Avenue between
Project Driveway and Santa
Ana Avenue
1,632 < 50 < 50 58 60.3 1,646 < 50 < 50 62 60.6 0.3
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table N. May 2022. (Appendix E).
ADT = average daily traffic
CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level
dBA = A-weighted decibels
ft = foot/feet
35
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table G: Existing (Year 2022) Traffic Noise Levels Without and With Project (Alternative 2 – Tamarind Avenue Access)
Roadway Segment
Without Project Traffic Conditions With Project Traffic Conditions
ADT
Centerline to 70 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline to 65 dBA
CNEL (ft)
Centerline to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 feet from
Centerline of Outermost
Lane ADT
Centerline to 70
dBA CNEL (ft)
Centerline to 65
dBA CNEL (ft)
Centerline to 60 dBA
CNEL (ft)
CNEL (dBA) 50 feet
from Centerline of
Outermost Lane
Increase from
Baseline
Conditions
Slover Avenue west of Private Driveway 16,250 82 171 365 70.7 16,326 83 172 368 70.8 0.1
Slover Avenue between
Private Driveway and
Tamarind Avenue
15,932 81 168 360 70.7 15,986 82 171 365 70.7 0.0
Slover Avenue east of
Tamarind Avenue
15,463 80 165 353 70.5 15,470 80 165 353 70.5 0.0
Santa Ana Avenue west of Private Driveway 5,987 < 50 79 164 65.5 6,001 < 50 80 166 65.6 0.1
Santa Ana Avenue between
Private Driveway and
Tamarind Avenue
5,844 < 50 78 161 65.4 5,851 < 50 79 164 65.5 0.1
Santa Ana Avenue east of
Tamarind Avenue
7,315 < 50 86 185 67.8 7,322 < 50 86 185 67.8 0.0
Private Driveway between
Slover Avenue and Project Driveway
510 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.2 532 < 50 < 50 < 50 55.4 0.2
Private Driveway between
Project Driveway and Santa
Ana Avenue
435 < 50 < 50 < 50 54.5 442 < 50 < 50 < 50 54.6 0.1
Tamarind Avenue between
Slover Avenue and Project
Driveway
1,969 < 50 < 50 66 61.1 2,030 < 50 < 50 71 61.6 0.5
Tamarind Avenue between
Project Driveway and Santa
Ana Avenue
1,632 < 50 < 50 58 60.3 1,646 < 50 < 50 59 60.3 0.0
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table O. May 2022. (Appendix E).
ADT = average daily traffic CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level dBA = A-weighted decibels ft = foot/feet
36
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
The closest residential property lines to the project’s truck delivery and truck loading/unloading
activities are located approximately 365 feet to the east. The 8-foot-tall concrete tilt-up wall
proposed along the project site’s southern property line and 13-foot-tall concrete tilt-up wall that
would face Tamarind Avenue to the east would provide a minimum noise reduction of 5 dBA for the
residents to the east of the Project site.57 Therefore, noise generated from on-site truck delivery and
truck loading/unloading activities at the closest residential properties would reach up to 47.9 dBA
Leq (refer to Table H below).
Parking Lot Activity: The project includes surface parking for passenger vehicles on the east side of
the proposed warehouse building and truck parking on the south side of the proposed warehouse
building. Noise generated from parking lot activities would result from vehicles traveling at slow
speeds, engine start-up noise, car door slams, car horns, car alarms, and tire squeals. Representative
parking activities would generate noise levels of approximately 60 to 70 dBA Lmax at 50 feet.58
Parking activities from employees and delivery trucks are assumed to generate the maximum noise
level for a cumulative period of 5 minutes in any hour, which would result in a noise level of 59.2
dBA Leq at 50 feet.59
For passenger vehicle parking activities, the closest residential property line is approximately 75 feet
to the east. For truck parking activities, the closest residential property line is approximately 235
feet to the east. The proposed 8-foot-tall and 13-foot-tall screen walls along the eastern perimeter
of the truck docking area would provide a minimum noise reduction of 5 dBA for the residences east
of the project site.60 Therefore, noise generated from on-site parking lot activities at the closest
residential properties would reach up to 55.7 dBA Leq from passenger vehicle parking activities
(assumes no shielding) and 40.8 dBA Leq from truck parking activities (assumes concrete screen wall
shielding)61 (refer to Table H below).
Heating-Ventilation-Air Conditioning (HVAC) Activity: The project includes up to two rooftop HVAC
units shielded from public view by parapets. The HVAC equipment could operate 24 hours per day.
Each rooftop HVAC unit would generate a noise level of 66.6 dBA Leq at a distance of 5 feet.62
57 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Page 20. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).. Noise attenuation
levels are calculated based on the noise source to barrier distance, sensitive receptor to barrier distance, barrier height, height of the noise source, and the sensitive receptor height. Noise attenuation levels are minimum levels expected in order to disclose a worst case scenario. In general, the noise barrier is more effective when the noise source is closer to the barrier, as in the case for
loading/unloading activities at the project site. Refer to Figure 2 of Appendix E for the proposed screen wall plan.
58 Ibid. Page 23.
59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. Noise attenuation levels are calculated based on the noise source to barrier distance, sensitive receptor to barrier distance, barrier height, height of the noise source, and the sensitive receptor height. Noise attenuation levels are minimum levels expected in
order to disclose a worst-case scenario. In general, the noise barrier is more effective when the noise source is closer to the barrier,
as in the case for loading/unloading activities at the project site. Refer to Figure 2 of Appendix E for the proposed screen wall plan. 61 The inclusion of screen walls is in accordance with Section No. 30-525(5) (Physical Barriers) and Article V of Chapter 9 (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards) of the City’s Zoning and Development Code.
62 Ibid.
37
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table H: Stationary Noise Levels
Land Use Direction Noise Source
Reference Noise
Level at 50 ft
(dBA)
Distance
from
Source to
Receptor
(ft)
Distance
Attenuation
(dBA)
Shielding
(dBA)
Noise Level (dBA)
Combined
Noise
Level
(dBA Leq) Leq Lmax Leq Lmax
Residential East
Truck Delivery and Truck Loading and Unloading Activities 70.2 75 365 17.3 51 49.7 52.7
56.5 Passenger Vehicle Parking Activities 59.2 70 75 3.5 0 55.7 66.5
Truck Parking Activities 59.2 70 235 13.4 5 40.8 51.6
HVAC 49.6 -- 365 18.8 82 24.3 --
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table P. May 2022. (Appendix E).
1 The proposed 8 ft and 13 ft high screen walls along the eastern perimeter of the truck docking area would provide a minimum noise reduction of 5 dBA.
2 The parapet and roofline would provide a minimum noise reduction of 8 dBA. dBA = A-weighted decibels ft = foot/feet
HVAC = heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Leq = equivalent continuous sound level Lmax = maximum instantaneous sound level
38
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Two HVAC units operating simultaneously would generate a noise level of 69.6 dBA Leq at a distance
of 5 feet. The closest residential property lines to the Project’s HVAC equipment are approximately
365 feet to the east. As stated above, the HVAC units would be shielded by parapets, which would
provide a minimum noise reduction of 8 dBA.63 Therefore, noise generated from HVAC equipment at
the closest residential properties would reach up to 24.3 dBA Leq (refer to Table H).
Table H details both the individual and combined stationary noise levels from truck delivery and
truck loading and unloading activities, parking activities from employees and truck delivery, and
rooftop HVAC equipment at the closest residential properties. The measurements account for the
various shielding features (i.e., screen walls and rooftop parapets) and distance attenuation of 6 dBA
for every doubling of distance from the noise source.64
As shown in Table H, noise levels generated from project operations would reach a maximum noise
level of 66.5 dBA and a combined stationary noise level of 56.5 dBA Leq at the closest residential
property line in San Bernardino County east of the project site. The maximum noise level of 66.5
dBA would not exceed the County’s daytime noise standard of 75 dBA Lmax. Although the County’s
nighttime anytime noise standard of 65 dBA Lmax could be exceeded should the noisiest project
activities occur at night, the measured maximum instantaneous noise level of 80.3 dBA Lmax under
existing (without project) conditions is higher than what the project would generate.65 Furthermore,
although the combined stationary noise level of 56.5 dBA Leq would exceed the County’s respective
daytime and nighttime 30-minute (L50) noise standards of 55 dBA and 45 dBA, the measured average
daytime and nighttime ambient noise levels at the closest residence under existing (without project)
conditions are higher than the County’s noise standards based on LT-1,66 with an average daytime
and nighttime ambient noise level of 63.1 dBA Leq and 58.2 dBA Leq, respectively. Accordingly, the
existing (without project) measured average daytime and nighttime ambient noise level becomes
the existing baseline, which would not be exceeded during project operations. Furthermore, the
increase in ambient noise levels would reach up to 0.9 dBA during daytime hours and 2.2 dBA during
nighttime hours, which would be less than 3 dBA and therefore not perceptible to the human ear in
an outdoor environment.67
The combined stationary noise level at sensitive receptor locations in Fontana would be lower than
56.5 dBA Leq because these receptors are farther away and/or would be shielded by existing
intervening buildings compared to the nearest sensitive receptors in San Bernardino County across
Tamarind Avenue to the east. Therefore, noise levels generated from project operations would not
exceed the City’s exterior daytime noise standard of 70 dBA and nighttime noise standard of 65 dBA.
No noise impacts from project operations would occur and no noise reduction measures are
required.
63 The inclusion of screen walls is in accordance with Section No. 30-525(5) (Physical Barriers) and Article V of Chapter 9 (Industrial
Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards) of the City’s Zoning and Development Code. 64 According to the Inverse Square Law, sound levels decrease approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from the source. California Department of Transportation. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. Pages 8-17 and 8-18.
September 2013.
65 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Page 23. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D). 66 Ibid. Page 23 and Figure 3. Noise levels at LT-1 are representative of the noise levels at the closest residence east of the project site based on distance from the Tamarind Avenue centerline.
67 Ibid. Page 25.
39
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Vibration: The greatest levels of vibration are anticipated to occur during the demolition, site
preparation, and grading phases, during which a large bulldozer, loaded trucks, and jackhammers
would generate groundborne vibration of up to 87 VdB (0.089 PPV [in/sec]), 86 VdB (0.076 PPV
[in/sec], and 79 VdB (0.003 PPV [in/sec]), respectively, when measured at 25 feet.68 All other
construction phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels.
Table I summarizes the reference vibration levels at a distance of 25 feet for each type of standard
construction equipment according to the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.69
Table I: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment
Equipment
Reference PPV/LV at 25 ft
PPV (in/sec) LV (VdB)1
Pile Driver (Impact), Typical 0.644 104
Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0.170 93
Vibratory Roller 0.210 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large Bulldozer2 0.089 87
Caisson Drilling 0.089 87
Loaded Trucks2,3 0.076 86
Jackhammer2 0.035 79
Small Bulldozer2,3 0.003 58
Source: Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Table 7-4. September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2022).
1 RMS vibration velocity in decibels (VdB) is 1 µin/sec.
2 Equipment shown in bold is expected to be used on site during demolition, site preparation, and grading phases. 3 Rubber tire equipment.
µin/sec = micro-inches per second
ft = foot/feet
FTA = Federal Transit Administration
in/sec = inches per second
LV = velocity in decibels
PPV = peak particle velocity
RMS = root-mean-square
VdB = vibration velocity decibels
The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest
off-site buildings and the project construction limits because vibration impacts normally occur to
and/or within buildings. The nearest off-site residential and industrial buildings are located
respectively 80 feet east and 55 feet south of the project construction boundary.
Based on these conditions, Table J lists the projected vibration levels at the nearest buildings from
various construction equipment expected to be used on the project site.
68 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Page 23. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D). Page 17. 69 Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Table 7-4. September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-
assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2022).
40
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table J: Summary of Construction Vibration Levels
Land Use Direction
Equipment/
Activity
Reference Vibration Level at 25 ft
Distance to
Structure (ft)
Maximum Vibration Level
VdB
PPV
(in/sec) VdB
PPV
(in/sec)
Industrial North
Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 90 70 0.013
Loaded Truck 86 0.076 90 69 0.011
Jackhammer 79 0.035 90 62 0.005
Residence East
Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 80 72 0.016
Loaded Truck 86 0.076 80 71 0.013
Jackhammer 79 0.035 80 64 0.006
Industrial South
Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 55 77 0.027
Loaded Truck 86 0.076 55 76 0.023
Jackhammer 79 0.035 55 69 0.011
Residence South
Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 370 52 0.002
Loaded Truck 86 0.076 370 51 0.001
Jackhammer 79 0.035 370 44 0.001
Industrial West
Large Bulldozer 87 0.089 130 66 0.008
Loaded Truck 86 0.076 130 65 0.006
Jackhammer 79 0.035 130 58 0.003
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table M. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).
Note: The FTA-recommended building damage threshold is 94 VdB (0.2 PPV [in/sec]) at the receiving residential and church building structure. The FTA-recommended building damage threshold is 102 VdB (0.5 PPV [in/sec]) at the receiving industrial building structure. 1 Based on the information provided by the project applicant and construction contractor, loaded trucks would be limited to certain
areas on the project site and would not operate within 15 ft from the project construction boundary.
ft = foot/feet FTA = Federal Transit Administration in/sec = inches per second
PPV = peak particle velocity VdB = vibration velocity decibels
As shown in Table J, the closest residential and industrial buildings located respectively 80 feet east
and 55 feet south of the project construction boundary would experience vibration levels of up to
72 VdB (0.016 PPV [in/sec]) and 77 VdB (0.027 PPV [in/sec]), respectively. These vibration levels
would not exceed the FTA’s community annoyance threshold of 78 VdB for residences or 84 VdB for
industrial buildings. Furthermore, these vibration levels would not result in damage to the nearest
residential or industrial buildings because they would not exceed the FTA’s respective vibration
damage thresholds of 94 VdB (0.2 PPV [in/sec]) for non-engineered timber and masonry buildings or
98 VdB (0.3 PPV [in/sec]) for engineered concrete and masonry buildings.
Other nearby building structures surrounding the project site would not result in annoyance or
building damage because they are farther away and would experience lower vibration levels. The
City's ordinance to restrict construction activities between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays is within
timeframes during which the City considers vibration “an acceptable intrusion of the ambient noise
within that project area.”70 Similarly, vibration generated from temporary construction activities at
buildings located within San Bernardino County during the allowable hours is exempt. Compliance
with the applicable noise control ordinance, which is required for construction of all development
70 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page
5.10-7. June 8, 2018.
41
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
projects in the City, would ensure community annoyance from vibration levels exceeding the FTA’s
community annoyance threshold of 78 VdB for residences would not be significant.
Operation of the proposed warehouse would not generate substantial vibration. In addition,
vibration generated from project-related traffic on the adjacent roadways (Tamarind Avenue and
the private drive aisle) is not expected to be substantial for on-road vehicles because the rubber
tires and suspension systems of on-road vehicles provide vibration isolation.71 Therefore, Project-
related vibration effects on off-site sensitive receptors would not be significant.
The analysis above is based on a project-specific Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis prepared for
the First Tamarind II Logistics Project (Appendix E). The analysis included short-term and long-term
ambient noise measurements taken at the project site and examined how short-term construction
and long-term operational noise and vibration generated by the proposed project would affect the
surrounding land uses based on existing baseline conditions. As detailed above, the project would
not result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise or
vibration levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance. Therefore, the Project would not result in any significant effects related to
noise pursuant to Section 15332(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Air Quality: The following analysis is based on the project-specific Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana,
California (Appendix F1) and Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana,
California (Appendix F2).
The project site is in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). Air quality in the Basin is under the
jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). CalEEMod Version
2020.4.0 was used to calculate emissions from construction and operation of the proposed project.
Construction Emissions: Project construction activities would include grading, site preparation,
building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. During construction, short-term
degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate matter emissions (i.e., fugitive
dust) generated by grading, building construction, paving, and other activities. Emissions from
construction equipment are also anticipated and would include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOC), particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5) and
particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10), and toxic air contaminants such as diesel exhaust
particulate matter.
Table K identifies the maximum daily emissions associated with construction activities and indicates
no criteria pollutant emission thresholds would be exceeded from construction of the proposed
project.
71 Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 0123. Page 116. September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-
assessment-manual-fta-report-no-0123_0.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2022).
42
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table K: Short-Term Regional Construction Emissions
Construction Phase
Total Regional Pollutant Emissions, lbs/day
VOC NOx CO SOx Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5
Demolition 3 26 21 <1 <1 1 <1 1
Site Preparation 3 33 20 <1 9 2 5 1
Grading 2 21 16 <1 3 <1 2 <1
Building Construction 2 17 20 <1 1 <1 <1 <1
Paving 1 9 13 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Architectural Coating 17 1 2 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Peak Daily 17 33 21 <1 11 6
SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Emissions Exceed
Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in
Fontana, California. Table I. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
Note: These estimates reflect control of fugitive dust required by SCAQMD Rule 403. The values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from the California Emissions Estimator Model.
CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOx = nitrogen oxides PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District
SOx = sulfur oxides VOC = volatile organic compounds
The construction emissions calculations prepared for the project assume that dust control measures
would be employed, as a matter of law, to reduce emissions of fugitive dust during site grading.
Adherence to Rule 403, including the implementation of Best Available Control Measures (BACMs),
is a standard requirement for any construction activity occurring within the Basin. Among the
requirements under this rule, fugitive dust must be controlled so that the presence of such dust
does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. These
measures may include, but are not limited to:
• Water active sites at least two times daily (locations where grading is to occur would be
thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving).
• Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet (0.6
meter) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer) in
accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114.
• Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour or less.
SCAQMD published its Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology in June 2003 and updated
it in July 2008.72 In their methodology, the SCAQMD recommends that all air quality analyses include
an assessment of both construction and operational impacts on air quality in proximity to nearby
72 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. June 2003, Revised July 2008.
43
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
sensitive receptors.73 Localized significance thresholds (LSTs) represent the maximum emissions
from a project site of up to 5 acres that are not expected to result in an exceedance of the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for CO,
NO2, PM10 and PM2.5. LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the
project Source Receptor Area (SRA) and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. For this
project, the appropriate SRA is the Central San Bernardino Valley area (SRA 34). Sensitive receptors
include any residence including private homes, condominiums, apartments, and living quarters,
schools, preschools, daycare centers, in-home daycares, health facilities such as hospitals, long term
care facilities, retirement and nursing homes, community centers, places of worship, parks
(excluding trails), prisons, and dormitories. The nearest sensitive receptors in proximity to the
project site are single-family homes located approximately 80 feet to the east of the project site
boundary.74 The SCAQMD LST methodology specifies that, when the receptor distance is less than
25 meters (82 feet) that thresholds for 25 meters should be used.75
The LST screening table lookup methodology was created for projects up to 5 acres in size. There
would not be any large-scale grading or other mass ground-disturbing activities. The Project site is
approximately 4.16 acres; therefore, the 5-acre LSTs are applied for construction emissions.
Table L indicates the on-site construction emissions would not exceed the LSTs for the nearby residences.
Therefore, construction of the project would not result in a locally significant air quality impact.
Table L: Construction Localized Impact Analysis
On-site Emissions Sources
Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Construction Equipment 33 21 10 6
LST Threshold 248 1,578 12 7
Emissions Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table J. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
Note: Source Receptor Area: Central San Bernardino Valley (SRA 34), 5 acres, 25 meters (82 feet) distance
CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LST = local significance threshold
NOx = nitrogen oxides PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
As detailed in Table K and Table L, emissions generated during project construction would not
exceed SCAQMD thresholds for regional construction emissions or LSTs for the nearest sensitive
receptors across Tamarind Avenue to the east.
73 Pursuant to Article V of Chapter 9 (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards) of the Fontana Municipal Code, sensitive
receptors shall be defined as any residence including private homes, condominiums, apartments, and living quarters, schools, preschools, daycare centers, in-home daycares, health facilities such as hospitals, long term care facilities, retirement and nursing homes, community centers, places of worship, parks (excluding trails), prisons, and dormitories.
74 The distance to sensitive receptors is measured from the emissions source location to the residential building. The analysis assumes
construction emissions could occur at the site boundary. For warehouse operations, the analysis assumes that the truck exhaust emissions would come from trucks idling at the loading docks and driving from the docks to the driveway(s). 75 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology. Page 3-3. June 2003, Revised July
2008.
44
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Operational Emissions: The proposed project would result in an incremental increase in the
generation of regional air pollutant emissions during the operation of the proposed warehouse
use. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with area sources, stationary
sources, and mobile sources involving any project-related changes. Area sources include
architectural coatings, consumer products, hearths, and landscaping. Stationary sources include
natural gas and electricity consumption for heating and lighting. Mobile sources consist of vehicle
trips associated with a project.
The proposed project would result in net increases in area-, stationary-, and mobile-source
emissions. The area- and stationary-source emissions would come from many sources, including the
use of consumer products, landscape equipment, general energy, and solid waste. Calculation of
emissions from these sources is based on CalEEMod defaults and assumes compliance, as a matter
of law, with Title 24 and the 2019 California Building Code (CBC). Mobile source emissions assume a
40-mile truck trip length and a fleet mix of 69 percent passenger cars and 31 percent trucks assigned
as 6.8 percent for 2-axles, 5.5 percent 3-axles, and 18.7 percent for 4+ axles in accordance with
SCAQMD guidelines and input from the City Traffic Engineering Department. Long-term operational
emissions associated with the project were calculated using the CalEEMod (Version 2020.4.0) and
are summarized in Table M.
Table M: Long Term Regional Operational Emissions
Source
Pollutant Emissions, lbs/day
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Area 1 <1 <1 0 <1 <1
Energy <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Mobile <1 4 5 <1 2 <1
Warehouse Equipment <1 5 6 <1 <1 <1
Total Project Emissions 2 9 11 <1 2 <1
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Emissions Exceed Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in
Fontana, California. Table K. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
CO = carbon monoxide
lbs/day = pounds per day
NOx = nitrogen oxides PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size
PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District
SOx = sulfur oxides ROG = Reactive organic gases
As shown in Table M, operation of the proposed warehouse would not exceed the SCAQMD daily
emission thresholds for any criteria pollutant.
By design, the localized impacts analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CalEEMod
outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. Table N indicates the
localized operational emissions would not exceed the LSTs for the on-site and nearby residences.
Therefore, the proposed operational activity would not result in a locally significant air quality
impact.
45
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table N: Long-Term Operational Localized Impacts Analysis
Emissions Sources
Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Operational On-Site Emissions 5 6 <1 <1
LST Threshold 248 1,578 4 2
Emissions Exceed Threshold? No No No No
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. Table L. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
Note: Source Receptor Area: Central San Bernardino Valley (SRA 34), 5 acres, 25 meters (82 feet) distance.
CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day = pounds per day LST = localized significance threshold
NOX = nitrogen oxides PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size
Long Term Microscale (CO Hot Spot) Analysis): Vehicular trips associated with the proposed project
would contribute to congestion at intersections and along roadway segments in the project vicinity.
Localized air quality impacts could occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase as a result of
a proposed project. The primary mobile-source pollutant of local concern is carbon monoxide (CO),
a direct function of vehicle idling time and, thus, of traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely
limited; under normal meteorological conditions, it disperses rapidly with distance from the source.
However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested
roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels, affecting local sensitive receptors (e.g.,
residents, schoolchildren, the elderly, and hospital patients). Typically, high CO concentrations are
associated with roadways or intersections operating with extremely high traffic volumes at
unacceptable levels of service.
The highest CO concentrations would normally occur during peak traffic hours; hence, CO impacts
calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis. Reduced speeds and
vehicular congestion at intersections result in increased CO emissions. However, pursuant to the
City’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service
Assessment, a Trip Generation Memorandum was prepared for the project through consultation
with the City’s Traffic Engineering Division (Appendix D) and revealed the project is anticipated to
add approximately 11 trips (18 PCE trips) during the a.m. peak hour and 12 trips (19 PCE trips)
during the p.m. peak hour.76 Since the proposed project does not meet the criteria for an evaluation
of study area intersection or roadway segment level of service, 77 the addition of the proposed
project traffic would not create any significant adverse impacts to nearby intersections, and project-
related vehicles are not expected to contribute significantly to CO concentrations exceeding the
State or federal CO standards. Therefore, the intersections in the project area would not experience
CO “hot spots.”
Health Risk Assessment: According to the California Air Resources Board, air pollution studies have
shown that diesel exhaust and other cancer-causing chemicals emitted from cars and trucks are
responsible for much of the overall cancer risk from airborne toxics in California and also have
shown an association between both respiratory and other non-cancerous health effects and
76 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).
77 The City’s Threshold to prepare a TIA is 50 or more trips during the a.m. or p.m. peak hour.
46
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
proximity to high-traffic roadways. Accordingly, the project is subject to a site-specific Health Risk
Assessment (HRA) (Appendix F2) to estimate the increased health risk levels for people living and/or
working near the site from generation of toxic air contaminants (TACs). The majority of the
estimated health risks from TACs are attributed to relatively few compounds, the most important
being particulate matter from diesel-fueled engines (diesel particulate matter [DPM]).
In accordance with SCAQMD guidance, health risk is considered significant under the following
conditions:
• Cancer risk at a nearby receptor location (i.e., area where persons reside, work, or attend
school—not including streets or sidewalks) is greater than 10 cases per one million persons over
a period of 30 years for adults and 9 years for children (residential uses) and 25 years for
workers.
• The cumulative increase in total chronic Hazard Index78 or total acute Hazard Index79 for any
target organ system would exceed 1.0 at any receptor location.
As stated previously, two traffic alternatives were evaluated for project-related traffic accessing the
project site to ensure the analysis captures a worst case scenario for air quality. Alternative 2
assumes 100 percent of the truck traffic would take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be
constructed off Tamarind Avenue, across which the nearest sensitive receptors (residential uses) are
located. Although it is probable that normal operations at the proposed warehouse will have trucks
exiting onto the private drive aisle to the west of the project site (refer to Alternative 1), the HRA
focuses on two sub-scenarios under Alternative 2 in order to analyze the maximum possible
exposure for nearby residents.80
• Alternative 2a assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn north on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Slover Avenue, then north
on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
• Alternative 2b assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn south on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Santa Ana Avenue, then
north on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
Pursuant to Section 9-72(4) (Signage and Traffic Patterns) of Article V, Chapter 9 (Environmental
Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal Code, the project Applicant shall submit a
Truck Routing Plan to the City for approval prior to occupancy. Nevertheless, by evaluating a traffic
alternative that concentrates 100 percent of the truck traffic in proximity to the nearest sensitive
receptors along Tamarind Avenue, the analysis demonstrates that the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to TACs under a worst case scenario.
78 Chronic Hazard Index is the ratio of the estimated long-term level of exposure to a TAC for a potential maximum exposed individual
to its chronic reference exposure level. The chronic Hazard Index calculations include multipathway consideration, when applicable.
79 Acute Hazard Index is the ratio of the estimated maximum 1-hour concentration of a TAC for a potential maximum exposed individual to its acute reference exposure level. 80 LSA Associates, Inc. Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana, California. Page 13. June 2022. (Appendix
F2).
47
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Table O details the carcinogenic and chronic health risks from operation of the proposed project
under Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. The residential risk incorporates both the risk for a child
living in a nearby residence for 9 years (the standard period of time for child risk) and an adult living
in a nearby residence for 30 years (considered a conservative period of time for an individual to live
in any one residence).
Table O: Health Risk Levels for Existing Residents and Workers under Alternative 2a and
Alternative 2b
Location Maximum Cancer Risk Maximum Non-cancer Chronic Risk (Hazard Index) Maximum Non-cancer Acute Risk (Hazard Index)
Alternative 2a (trucks north on Tamarind Ave., west on Slover Ave., north on Sierra Ave., to I-10)
Residential Risks 0.16 in 1 million 0.00004 0.00003
Worker Risks 0.01 in 1 million 0.00004 0.00005
Alternative 2b (trucks south on Tamarind Ave., west on Santa Ana Ave., north on Sierra Ave., to I-10)
Residential Risks 0.11 in 1 million 0.00003 0.00002
Worker Risks 0.01 in 1 million 0.00006 0.00005
SCAQMD Significance Threshold 10 in 1 million 1.0 1.0
Significant? No No No
Source: LSA Associates, Inc. Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana, California. Table B. June 2022. (Appendix F2).
SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District
As indicated in Table O, the maximum cancer risk for the residential maximum exposed individual
(MEI) would be 0.16 in 1 million, less than the threshold of 10 in 1 million, under Alternative 2a and
0.11 in 1 million, less than the threshold of 10 in 1 million, under Alternative 2b. The maximum
cancer risk for the worker MEI would be 0.01 in 1 million, also less than the threshold of 10 in 1
million under both Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. The chronic and acute health risks also are
shown in Table O under each of the alternative scenarios and indicate the hazard index for each of
these risks is below the threshold of 1.0. All health risk levels to nearby residents and workers from
emissions of TAC from the proposed project under worst case scenarios that assume truck trips are
concentrated in proximity to the nearest sensitive receptors would be below SCAQMD’s HRA
thresholds.
Without any exceedance in air quality emissions thresholds, the Project would not result in any
significant effects related to air quality pursuant to Section 15332(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Water Quality: The City is a co-permittee under the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) Order number R8-2010-0036, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Permit No. CAS618036, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System or MS4 permit.
The San Bernardino County Water Quality Management Plan was developed to implement
compliance with the MS4 permit.81 Since the proposed project involves over one acre of ground
81 State of California. California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Santa Ana Region. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge requirements for the San Bernardino County Flood Control. 2010. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/board_decisions/adopted_orders/orders/2010/10_036_sbc_ms4_permit_01_29_10.pdf (Accessed April 28,
2022).
48
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
disturbance, it is subject to NPDES requirements. Coverage under an NPDES permit includes the
submittal of a Notice of Intent (NOI) application to the State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB), the receipt of a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDIN) from SWRCB, and the
preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for construction discharges.
During the demolition and construction phases, as a matter of law, the Project must incorporate a
series of best management practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and sedimentation. These measures
may include the use of gravel bags, silt fences, hay bales, check dams, hydroseed, and soil binders.
The demolition and construction contractor(s) would be required to operate and maintain these
controls throughout the duration of construction activities. In addition, the construction
contractor(s) would be required to maintain an inspection log and have the log on site to be
reviewed by the City and representatives of the SWRCB.
Under existing conditions, the majority of the Project site comprises pervious surface area. Storm
water generally sheet flows from north to south and drains onto Tamarind Avenue to the east and
the private drive aisle to the west before entering the municipal storm drain system. Development
of the project site is expected to substantially increase the amount of impervious surface area due
to the proposed warehouse building, surface parking lot, and drive aisles.
The Project site consists of a single Drainage Area (DA 1) subdivided into three Drainage
Management Areas (DMA A, DMA B, and DMA C) to manage storm water runoff from the 4.16-acre
site. DMA A would encompass the largest portion of the site and consist of all paved ground
surfaces, including the parking lot, drive aisles, and loading areas. DMA B would include all
permeable surfaces such as landscaped areas and would outlet to DMA A. DMA C would include the
warehouse rooftop. DMAs A through C would direct flows into a proposed subterranean infiltration
chamber system (BMP) south of the proposed warehouse building and freight truck loading docks
prior to discharge into an existing storm drain along the private drive aisle and the City’s municipal
storm drain system west of the site.82
According to the project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (Appendix C), the
proposed infiltration chamber BMP must be sized with a design capture volume (DCV) of at least
16,027 cubic feet of runoff in order to manage the 4.16 acres of DA 1 pursuant to the City’s NPDES
MS4 Permit.83 In order to treat identified pollutants of concern,84 the proposed infiltration chamber
BMP would be designed and constructed to capture approximately 16,332 cubic feet of runoff and
include a hydrodynamic separator to remove silt, clay, and other deleterious material prior to
entering the infiltration chamber system in order to maintain effective infiltration rates. With
adequate design capture volume and pretreatment, the infiltration chamber BMP would treat “first-
82 Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Water Quality Management Plan for 10622 Tamarind Avenue Industrial. Form 3-1, Form 4.3-3, and Appendix A
(Site Plan and Drainage Plan). January 7, 2022. (Appendix C) 83 Pursuant to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order Number R8-2010-0033, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS618033, as amended by Order No. R8-2013-0024, also known as the Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit, the hydrologic performance standard for the proposed bioretention basin is a flow duration
curve of the post-development DMA not to exceed that of the pre-development, naturally occurring, DMA by more than five percent of the 2-year peak flow. 84 The project-specific priority pollutants of concern are copper, lead, and pathogens pursuant to Section 3.3(d) of the Clean Water Act
and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Refer to Form 3-3 of Appendix C for additional information.
49
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
flush” runoff85 from the project site and ensure post-development storm water runoff volume or
time of concentration would not exceed pre-development conditions by more than five percent of
the 2-year peak flow pursuant to the NPDES MS4 Permit.
Stormwater runoff from the project site would drain to the Declez Channel, which drains to San
Sevaine Channel, then to Santa Ana River Reach 3 before entering the Prado Dam. From Prado Dam,
flows enter Santa Ana River Reach 2, then Santa Ana River Reach 1 before finally entering the Pacific
Ocean. To address potential water contaminants, the Project is required to comply with applicable
federal, State, and local water quality regulations.
Pursuant to the MS4 permit, all development projects that would disturb more than one acre of land
in the City are required to prepare a WQMP to reduce water pollution impacts from construction and
operation of the developments. The Project is exempt from hydrologic conditions of concern
because all downstream conveyance drain to an adequate sump (Prado Dam), and the runoff flow
rate, volume, and velocity for the post-development condition of the Project would not exceed the
pre-development (i.e., naturally occurring condition) for the 2-year, 24-hour rainfall event utilizing
latest San Bernardino County Hydrology Manual.86
Pursuant to the City’s NPDES MS4 Permit, the project Applicant must prepare a Final WQMP that
includes BMPs designed and implemented to address 303(d) listed pollutants and retain the project
site’s minimum DCV and, if applicable, hydromodification volume to ensure post-development
storm water runoff volume or time of concentration does not exceed pre-development storm water
runoff by more than five percent of the two-year peak flow in accordance with the Technical
Guidance Document for Water Quality Management Plans prepared for the County of San
Bernardino Areawide Stormwater Program, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit
Number CAS618036, Order Number R8-2010-0036. The proposed BMPs specified in the Final WQMP
must be incorporated into the grading and development plans submitted to the City for review and
approval, and periodic maintenance of any required BMPs and landscaped areas during project
occupancy and operation must be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the Final WQMP.
Proper engineering design and construction in conformance with the requirements of the City, the
intent of the NPDES Permit for San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino
County within the Santa Ana Region (MS4 permit), and project-specific recommendations outlined
in an SWPPP and Final WQMP is mandatory policy applicable for all development projects greater
than one acre in size and would ensure construction and operation of the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to water quality pursuant to Section 15332(d) of the CEQA Guidelines.
(e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
Utilities: The project will install asphalt concrete, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaping, and
streetlights and trees along its frontage with Tamarind Avenue (refer to Figure 3). Overhead
85 “First-flush” runoff is the initial surface runoff of storm water along impervious surfaces, such as parking lots, and is typically more
concentrated with pollutants compared to the remainder of a storm event. 86 San Bernardino County Department of Public Works. San Bernardino County Water Quality Management Plan. Appendix F, Figure F-1. http://cms.sbcounty.gov/Portals/50/Land/AppendixF-HCOCExemptionCriteriaandMap.pdf?ver=2013-02-28-193056-000.
(Accessed June 6, 2022).
50
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
electrical facilities along the project site frontage would be relocated underground where feasible.
The project also includes interconnection to utilities such as sewer, water, electrical, gas, and
telecommunications within the Tamarind Avenue right-of-way or along the private drive aisle
adjacent to the west of the site for service to the project site. The project also includes
approximately 12 feet of right of way dedication along Tamarind Avenue in order to widen the
roadway to achieve 34 feet of ultimate half-width pursuant to the City’s General Plan Circulation
Element standard for a Collector Street. Implementation of the Project would result in 22 feet of
roadway from centerline to curb face and 12 feet of parkway from curb face to project property line.
Drainage: The approval of drainage features and other utility improvements occurs through the
building plan check process. As part of this process, all project-related drainage features and utility
infrastructure would be required to comply with City Municipal Code Chapter 21, Section 21-85(c)
(Additional Public Improvements), Chapter 27 (Utilities), and Chapter 30, Section 30-550 (Site Plan
Design), as well as Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) standards. On-site
project-related drainage features would be designed, installed, and maintained per City MS4
standards and the requirements identified in the Final WQMP.
Energy: Electricity would be the main form of energy consumed on the Project site. Electricity would
be used for building heating, cooling and lighting. As detailed in Appendix F1, the proposed uses on
the site would demand a total of 177,878 kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity and 122,409 British
thermal units (Btu) of natural gas on an annual basis.87
Electricity is provided in the State through a complex grid of power plants and transmission lines. In
2020, California’s in-state electric generation totaled 190,913 gigawatt-hours (GWh), and the State’s
total system electric generation, which includes imported electricity, totaled 272,576 GWh.88
Population growth is the primary source of increased energy consumption in the State. Meanwhile,
California’s electricity resource mix has diversified over the last decade to secure supply and grid
reliability, with a gradual shift from reliance on fossil natural gas and coal toward renewable
resources such as photovoltaic (solar), wind, and hydroelectric generation.89 The project’s net
electricity usage would total approximately 0.0000943 percent90 of electricity generated in the State
in 2020, which would not represent a substantial demand on available electricity resources.
California’s receipt capacity of natural gas per day totals approximately 9.8 billion cubic feet (Bcf),
and the State’s average consumption is approximately 5.8 Bcf per day.91 With a surplus receipt
capacity92 of approximately 4 Bcf of natural gas per day, the proposed project would demand
87 LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in
Fontana, California. Table O. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
88 California Energy Commission. 2020 Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-
almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation. (Accessed April 9, 2022) 89 California Energy Commission. Final 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report including errata adopted at the February 20, 2020 Business Meeting. Page 9 and 10. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2019-integrated-energy-
policy-report (Accessed April 8, 2022, 2022).
90 0.18 GWh (proposed Project) ÷ 190,913 GWh (generated in State in 2020) = 0.0000943 percent. 91 California Energy Commission. Final 2017 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Page 228. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2017-integrated-energy-policy-report (Accessed April 8, 2022).
92 Receipt capacity is the amount of pipeline capacity that can take natural gas supplies from interstate pipelines.
51
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
approximately 0.00000305 percent of the State’s natural gas surplus receipt capacity,93 which would
not represent a substantial demand on available natural gas resources.
The State of California provides a minimum standard for building design and construction standards
through Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), known as the CBC. The CBC is updated
every three years, and the current 2019 CBC went into effect in January 2020. Compliance with Title
24 is mandatory at the time new building permits are issued by local governments. The California
Building Standards Commission (CBSC) adopted Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency
Standards (also referred to as the California Green Building Standards Code, or CALGreen) in 2010 as
part of the State’s efforts to reduce GHG emissions and energy consumption from residential and
nonresidential buildings. CALGreen covers the following five categories: (1) planning and design,
(2) energy efficiency, (3) water efficiency and conservation, (4) material conservation and resource
efficiency, and (5) indoor environmental quality.94 The City has adopted both the CBC and CALGreen
Code as part of Article XVIII (California Green Building Standards Code) of the City Municipal Code
pertaining to energy conservation standards in effect at the time of construction. The project would
comply with the current 2019 CALGreen Code requirements and Title 24 efficiency standards, which
would further improve energy efficiency during operation.
Increasingly stringent electricity and natural gas efficiency standards combined with compliance
with the CBC and CALGreen Code as part of Article XVIII (California Green Building Standards Code)
of the City Municipal Code would ensure operation of the project would demand only the energy
required.
Water: The project site is located within the service territory of the West Valley Water District
(WVWD)95 and subject to the WVWD Integrated Regional Water Urban Water Management Plan (IR-
UWMP). The State has adopted SBX7-7, also known as the Water Conservation Act of 2009, to
provide baseline and targets for water usage and ultimately reduce the State’s urban water demand
by 20 percent.96 The WVWD established a year 2020 water use target of 232 gallons per capita per
day (GPCD) and currently reports an actual year 2020 demand of 201 GPCD, thus meeting its
confirmed water use target pursuant to SBX7-7 through implementation of its active water
conservation program.97
On March 28, 2022, the California Governor issued Executive Order N-7-22, which encourages all
Californians and water agencies to restrict water usage, recommends urban water suppliers such as
the WVWD to implement stage 2 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan, restricts new and
expansion of existing groundwater wells, and promotes projects that facilitate groundwater
recharge.98 WVWD customers currently are not subject to these restrictions, but the WVWD has
93 122,409 Btu = 0.000000122 Bcf ÷ 4 Bcf = 0.00000305 percent of surplus receipt capacity.
94 California Energy Commission. Building Energy Efficiency Standards – Title 24. https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/
programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards (Accessed April 8, 2022).
95 West Valley Water District. West Valley Water District Boundary Map. https://www.yourrialto.com/DocumentCenter/View/1207/Map-of-West-Valley-Water-District-Boundaries. (Accessed April 8, 2022). 96 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs.
Page 10-13. https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.81/n1s.6f9.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Part-2-Local-
Agency-Information.pdf. (Accessed April 8, 2022). 97 Ibid. Page 10-13 and Table 10-7. 98 State of California, Executive Department. Executive Order N-7-22. March 28, 2022. https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2022/03/March-2022-Drought-EO.pdf. (Accessed June 6, 2022).
52
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
voluntarily adopted stage 2 of its Water Shortage Contingency Plan as a preventative measure to
combat drought issues.99 Stage 2 of the WVWD Water Shortage Contingency Plan requires the
following:
• All ratepayers limit any landscape irrigation to four days per week and no more than 10 minutes
per station per day (water-efficient devices are exempt).
• All ratepayers repair all leaks within 72 hours of notification by WVWD unless other
arrangements are made with the general manager.
• If a hotel or motel, provide guests with the option not to have towels and linens washed daily
through signage in each guest room.
• If a restaurant, bar, or any other place where food and drink are served and/or purchased, water
cannot be served to customers unless requested.
• All ratepayers secure a permit for using water for compaction, dust control or other types of
construction as determined by the general manager or his/her designee.
• All ratepayers not irrigate any landscaping during or within 48 hours following any measurable
precipitation.
The WVWD relies on groundwater wells for the majority of its water supply. Bunker Hill and Lytle
Creek (both part of the San Bernardino Basin or SBB), Rialto-Colton, Riverside North, and Chino
Basins are among the five regional groundwater basins from which WVWD can draw groundwater.
Each of the five basins has been adjudicated and is being managed for long-term sustainability.100
The WVWD has a total water right allocation in the Rialto Basin of 6,104 acre-feet per year (AFY),
including 510 AFY that are fixed rights and 5,594 AFY that are adjustable and subject to a percent
reduction each year based on groundwater levels in the index wells. The percent reduction has
ranged from 7 percent in 2010 to 29 percent in 2020.101
To further diversify its water supply, the WVWD also utilizes local surface water from the eastern
San Gabriel Mountains as well as imported water from the State Water Project (SWP). On March 18,
2022, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) announced it would restrict its typical
allocation of SWP water to 5 percent of requested supply.102 As of 2020, the WVWD featured
approximately 20,098 acre-feet of water supply divided as follows: 11,401 acre-feet of water from
groundwater sources (56.7 percent), 5,356 acre-feet of water from its surface water sources (26.7
99 West Valley Water District. Drought Update and Water Use Efficiency Guidelines. June 2, 2022. https://wvwd.org/drought-update-and-water-use-efficiency-guidelines/. (Accessed June 6, 2022). 100 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs.
Page 10-15. https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.81/n1s.6f9.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Part-2-Local-
Agency-Information.pdf (Accessed April 8, 2022). 101 Ibid. Page 10-16. 102 California Department of Water Resources. Historically Dry Conditions Impact Planned State Water Project Deliveries. Published
March 18, 2022. https://water.ca.gov/news/news-releases/2022/march-22/swp-allocation-march. (Accessed June 6, 2022).
53
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
percent), and 3,342 acre-feet of water from the SWP (16.6 percent).103 As water from the SWP is not
guaranteed, the WVWD maintains 100 percent reliability of its water supply from other sources,
including groundwater, surface water, and through water exchanges and transfers.104 Under a
worse-case scenario with a lack of either water supply or storage, the WVWD has an emergency
intertie within their IR-UWMP. WVWD has interconnections with the cities of Rialto, Colton, and San
Bernardino, as well as the Fontana Water Company, Marygold Mutual Water Company, and Valley
District, which may be used for short-term supply needs as needed. These connections are rarely
utilized for long periods of time. 105
WVWD indicates its projected water supply under a normal year scenario would include a surplus of
3,519 acre-feet in 2025 up to 4,464 acre-feet in 2045,106 and its projected water supply under single
and multiple dry years would include a surplus of 3,871 in 2025 up to 4,911 acre-feet in 2045.107
Even if allocation of water from the SWP were to cease completely, that would reduce the WVWD’s
supply by approximately 3,342 acre-feet per year, which would still result in a surplus of 177 acre-
feet in 2025 and 1,122 acre-feet in 2045 under a normal year scenario108 and a surplus of 529 acre-
feet in 2025 and 1,569 acre-feet in 2045 under single and multiple dry year scenarios.109
As stated previously, the WVWD established a year 2020 water use target of 232 gallons per capita
per day (GPCD) and currently reports an actual year 2020 demand of 201 GPCD. Based on the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (11th Edition) rates for Land Use 150 –
“Warehousing,” the proposed project would generate approximately 21 employees.110 Based on a
conservative rate of 232 GPCD, the projected employees of the project would consume
approximately 4,872 gallons per day111 or 1.78 million gallons or 5.46 AFY, which would be a worst-
case scenario assuming the employees would occupy the site 24 hours per day. The proposed
project is anticipated to create a water demand of up to 5.46 AFY, which is 3 percent of WVWD’s
surplus water under a normal year 2025 scenario112 and 1 percent of WVWD’s surplus water under
single and multiple dry year 2025 scenarios113 even under conditions where no SWP allocation
occurs. Therefore, the amount of water available for the project is sufficient for normal, single-dry,
and multiple-dry years.
Wastewater: The City of Rialto, the City of Colton, San Bernardino County, and the Inland Empire
Utilities Agency treat wastewater collected throughout the WVWD service territory. The City of
Rialto Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), which has a 12 million gallons per day (MGD) tertiary
103 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs. Table 10-10. https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.81/n1s.6f9.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Part-2-Local-
Agency-Information.pdf (Accessed April 8, 2022).
104 Ibid. Page 10-15.
105 Ibid. Page 10-19. 106 Ibid. Table 10-12.
107 Ibid. Table 10-134 and Table 10-15.
108 3,519 acre-feet (year 2025) – 3,342 acre-feet from SWP = 177 acre-feet surplus; 4,464 acre-feet (year 2045) – 3,342 acre-feet from
SWP = 1,122 acre-feet surplus. 109 3,871 acre-feet (year 2025) – 3,342 acre-feet from SWP = 529 acre-feet surplus; 4,911 acre-feet (year 2045) – 3,342 acre-feet from SWP = 1,569 acre-feet surplus.
110 Average 1.74 daily vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet gross floor area and average 5.05 daily vehicle trips per employee. 1.74 ÷ 5.05
= 0.345 employee per 1,000 square feet gross floor area. 0.345 × 60.90 thousand square feet = 21 employees. 111 232 GPCD × 21 persons = 4,872 gallons per day 112 5.46 AFY project demand ÷ 177 AFY normal year 2025 surplus = 3.08 percent.
113 5.46 AFY project demand ÷ 529 AFY single and multiple dry year 2025 surplus = 1.03 percent.
54
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
treatment capacity and a present flow of roughly 7 MGD, receives the bulk of the wastewater
collected in the WVWD service area.114 The City of Rialto's treatment facility effluent satisfies
Title 22 requirements for limited irrigation using recycled water. The average wastewater flow is
100 gallons per person per day.115 Under a worst-case scenario where the project site would be
occupied by 21 employees 24 hours per day, the project would generate 2,100 gallons of
wastewater per day116 or 766,500 gallons of wastewater per year. The project’s estimated
wastewater treatment demand represents 0.042 percent of WWTP current daily surplus capacity,117
and sufficient surplus wastewater treatment capacity is available to serve the project.
Solid Waste: Solid waste collection is a “demand-responsive” service, and current service levels can
be expanded and funded through user fees. Solid waste from the proposed Project would be hauled
by Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. and transferred to the West Valley Materials Recycling Facility
(MRF)/Transfer Station.118 From the MRF, the non-recyclable material would be transferred to
regional landfills as available. Solid waste generated by the proposed on-site uses would be
collected and processed by Burrtec, after which non-recyclable material would be sent to Mid-Valley
Landfill. Mid-Valley Landfill has a daily throughput of 7,500 tons with a remaining capacity of
61,219,377 cubic yards.119 Based on a generation rate of 6.7 pounds per employee per day
(21 employees),120 the project would generate approximately 140.7 pounds of solid waste per
day.121 This amount is equivalent to 0.000938 percent of the daily throughput at Mid-Valley
Landfill.122 The Mid-Valley Landfill has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project.
Summary: All proposed improvements and interconnection to drainage, electric power, natural gas,
water, and wastewater facilities would be installed simultaneously with finished grading activities
and required roadway frontage improvements for the project. The areas of potential impact from
drainage and utility infrastructure improvements are included in the analytical footprint of the
project and associated technical studies, and impacts are found to be less than significant. As a
result, interconnection to the existing utilities in the project vicinity would not result in substantial
disturbance to native habitat or soils, historical resources, or to the operation of existing roadways
and utilities. There would be no significant environmental effects specifically related to the
installation of utility interconnections that are not encompassed within the project’s construction
and operational footprints, and therefore are already identified, disclosed, and subject to all
applicable local, State, and federal regulations specified above. Therefore, the site can be
adequately served by all required utilities pursuant to Section 15332(e) of the CEQA Guidelines.
114 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs.
Page 10-17. https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.81/n1s.6f9.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Part-2-Local-Agency-Information.pdf. (Accessed June 13, 2022). 115 ESA Associates, Inc. IEUA Facilities Master Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016061064. Page 2-38.
December 2016.
116 100 gallons/person/day × 21 persons = 2,100 gallons per day
117 2,100 gallons per day Project demand ÷ 5,000,000 gallons per day WWTP surplus = 0.042 percent. 118 City of Fontana. Trash and recycling Services. https://www.fontana.org/541/Trash-and-Recycling-Services. (Accessed April 8, 2022). 119 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Facility/Site Summary Details: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/Summary/2662. (Accessed April 8, 2022).
120 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). State of Disposal and Recycling for Calendar Year 2019. Page 1. State of Disposal and Recycling Report for Calendar Year 2019 (1).pdf (Accessed June 13, 2022). 121 6.7 pounds per person per day × 21 employees = 140.7 pounds of solid waste per day.
122 140.7 pounds of solid waste per day ÷ 7,500 tons (15,000,000 pounds) daily surplus = 0.000938 percent.
55
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Public Services
Fire: The San Bernardino County Fire Department provides fire protection, fire prevention, and
emergency services to the Fontana Fire Protection District (FFPD) comprising City of Fontana and the
Project site.123 San Bernardino County Fire Station 77 (located at 17459 Slover) is the closest station
to the Project site approximately 600 feet to the north. Fire Station 77 is staffed with one captain,
one engineer, two firefighter paramedics, and one firefighter and is equipped with one medic squad
and one medic truck.124 Average travel time between Fire Station 77 and the project site is less than
one minute. Through compliance with California Vehicle Code 21806(A)(1), which requires all
vehicles to yield to emergency vehicles, the proposed Project is not expected to affect the FFPD’s
response times.
Development of the proposed project may incrementally increase the demand for fire protection
services through generation of 21 employees working at the site, but not to the degree that the
existing fire stations within the City could not meet demand. This is because Project design features
incorporated into the structural design and layout of the proposed warehouses would keep any
service demand increases to a minimum. For example, the project Applicant must coordinate with
the FFPD during the development review process pursuant to Division 11, Subdivision 1 (Design
Review) of the City Municipal Code to identify and minimize any fire hazards and ensure adequate
emergency water flow, fire-resistant design and materials, early warning systems and evacuation
routes, and two 40-foot-wide drive approaches connecting to a 30-foot-wide drive aisle to facilitate
emergency access to the proposed warehouse and parking lot as part of the project design. These
construction methods are far superior to the structures that currently exist on the Project site,
which are constructed of materials that are less resistant to fire. Additionally, the City maintains
mutual aid agreements with surrounding cities (i.e., Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, and Rialto) and San
Bernardino County, which allow for the services of nearby fire departments to assist the City during
major emergencies.
The proposed project design would be submitted to and approved by the FFPD prior the issuance of
building permits. Nevertheless, the addition of a 60,900 square-foot warehouse building consistent
with the General Plan and zoning and constructed on an infill site in accordance with applicable
policies designed to minimize fires (i.e., CBC and California Fire Code) would not require new or
physically altered fire protection facilities. Furthermore, the project would be required to pay
Development Impact Fees (DIFs) used to fund capital costs associated with constructing new public
safety structures and purchasing equipment for new public safety structures.
Police: The City of Fontana Police Department (FPD) headquarters is located at 17005 Upland
Avenue, approximately 3.7 miles north of the project site. Implementation of the project would
incrementally increase the demand for police services; however, the proposed warehouse could
operate 24 hours per day, which would help reduce the overall potential for crime on the site.
123 City of Fontana. State of California. Fontana Fire Protection District. https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/2110/Fire-District-Boundary-Map?bidId=. (Accessed April 7, 2022). 124 City of Fontana. About the Fontana Fire District, Stations & Equipment, Fire Station 73. https://www.fontana.org/639/Stations-
Equipment. (Accessed January 8, 2022).
56
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
In accordance with Resolution No. 2013-01, as adopted by the Fontana Planning Commission on
February 19, 2013,125 the FPD uses the principals of Crime Prevention Through Environmental
Design (CPTED) in reviewing plans for new construction to keep service demand increases to a
minimum. For example, the project would incorporate public zones and private zones via physical
and symbolic barriers to define acceptable uses of the proposed warehouse facility and determine
who has a right to occupy such zones. Additionally, the project site would be equipped with formal
surveillance through the use of closed-circuit television, electronic monitoring, and potentially
security patrols, as well as informal surveillance such as architecture, landscaping, and lighting
designed to minimize visual obstacles and eliminate places of concealment for potential assailants.
The FPD employs CPTED principles during the development review process for new construction and
offers CPTED inspection services free of charge to reduce the likelihood of criminal activity and
create safer places for the community.126
The City monitors staffing levels to ensure that adequate police protection and response times
continue to be provided as individual development projects are proposed and on an annual basis as
part of the City Council’s budgeting process. Additionally, the City employs a 5-year strategic
planning process to ensure adequate police services as buildout of the City occurs. The continual
monitoring of police staffing levels by the City would ensure the proposed project would not result
in a significant reduction in police response times.
The project would be designed and operated per applicable standards required by the City for new
development with regard to public safety. In addition, the City maintains mutual aid agreements
with police agencies in the surrounding cities (i.e., Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, and Rialto) and with
the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department, which allow for the services of nearby police
departments to assist the FPD during major emergencies. Payment of DIFs commensurate with the
increased demand for services in the City would offset any increase in demand for police services.
The addition of a 60,900 square-foot warehouse building consistent with the General Plan and zoning
and constructed on an infill site in accordance with applicable policies designed to minimize crime
(e.g., CPTED) would not require new or physically altered police protection facilities.
Additionally, funding for new police facilities commensurate with the increased demand for services
in the City would be provided from development improvement fees (DIFs) levied on new
development. These DIFs are one-time charges applied to new development and are imposed to
raise revenue for the construction or expansion of capital facilities located outside of project
boundaries of a new development that benefit the area. DIFs enable the City to collect fair-share
fees from new development projects to fund new infrastructure and services. DIFs are collected for
specific infrastructure needs and are deposited into different accounts representing these
requirements.
125 City of Fontana. C.P.T.E.D. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Guidelines. Resolution No. 2013-01. Adopted February 19, 2013. 126 Hillard Heintze. Fontana Police Department, An Independent Assessment of Law Enforcement Operations. Final Report. Pages 18 and
22. November 6, 2020. Hillard-Heintze-Report-for-the-Fontana-Police-Department-11-06-20. (Accessed June 13, 2022).
57
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
Schools: The Project does not include housing; therefore, no increase in the number of school-age
students is expected. The Project Applicant would be required to pay development fees127 in
accordance with Government Code 65995(h) and Education Code 17620. Per California Government
Code, “The payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement levied or imposed … are
hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts … on the provision of adequate
school facilities.” Therefore, the Project would not have an adverse effect related to schools.
Parks. The City maintains a performance standard of 5 acres for every 1,000 residents. The City
currently exceeds its performance standard of 5 acres for every 1,000 residents by approximately
300 acres of parkland citywide.128 Since the Project is consistent with the City General Plan, zoning
ordinance, and City growth projections, it is not expected to require construction of new or
expansion of existing park facilities. Although the Project-generated 21 employees could elect to
utilize the City’s park facilities, the Project would not involve the addition of any housing units that
would permanently increase the City’s population, and it is speculative to assume the number of
employees who would reside in the City. The closest park to the project site is the Sycamore Hills
Park located at 11075 Mayberry Street which is approximately 0.9-mile south of the project site.
This park is open to the public, and the amenities include barbecue areas, picnic tables, playground,
two basketball courts restrooms and open space.129 The Project would be required to pay applicable
development fees to offset impacts from deterioration to parks and recreation facilities in the City.
Therefore, development of the project would not create a significant increase in the use of existing
neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, or require construction of new or
expansion of existing park facilities.
Libraries and City Administrative Services: The type of use of the proposed project (industrial
warehouse) does not generate permanent population in the City that would require access to public
facilities, including the City’s three libraries (Lewis Library at 8437 Sierra Avenue, Summit Branch
Library at 15551 Summit Avenue, and Kaiser Branch Library at Kaiser High School at 11155 Almond
Avenue). Even if the 21 employees anticipated by the project would require access to public
facilities, the project is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and zoning of the site,
so the projected increase in population (through employment generation) would be consistent with
planned population growth in the City. This minimal increase in population would incrementally
increase the need for a number of public services, including those listed above, and others such as
libraries and City administrative facilities. In the same manner for those facilities, the project would
be required to pay DIFs used to fund capital costs associated with constructing new public facility
structures and purchasing equipment for new public facilities, including libraries. The incremental
and planned increase of employment by the project is not expected to result in the need to
construct or expand public facilities, including libraries. Therefore, the site can be adequately served
by all required public facilities pursuant to Section 15332(e) of the CEQA Guidelines.
127 California State Legislature, Legislative Analyst’s Office. An Evaluation of the School Facility Fee Affordable Housing Assistance
Programs, section (h) January 2001. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ion
Num=65995. (Accessed April 7, 2022). 128 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015–2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 5.12-34. June 8, 2018.
129 City of Fontana. Sycamore Hills Park. https://www.fontana.org/730/Sycamore-Hills-Park. (Accessed April 7, 2022).
58
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
3.0 EVALUATION OF EXCEPTIONS TO THE CLASS 32 (IN-FILL) EXEMPTION CRITERIA
Exceptions (Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines) to the CEQA Class 32 categorical exemption
would apply if the Project triggers any of the criteria or conditions described in this section:
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be
located—a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a
particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply
all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous
or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law
by federal, state, or local agencies.
The Project is consistent with the Class 32 Categorical Exemption (Section 15332 of the CEQA
Guidelines) and therefore is not subject to the Location Exception (Section 15300.2(a)).
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative
impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
Section 15300.2(b)) of the CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of the same types of projects in
the same place when determining if a project would have a significant cumulative effect.
Cumulative air quality impacts are based on projections in the regional Air Quality Management Plan
(AQMP). Because the project is consistent with the General Plan land use and zoning designations
for the site, the project is consistent with growth projections of the General Plan and would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of the regional AQMP.
In general, air quality in Fontana has notably improved in the past 20 years due to regulations imposed
by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) related to passenger cars, busses, and trucks, and it is
expected to continue to improve in the foreseeable future as SCAQMD’s Warehouse Indirect Source
Rule (Rule 2305) begins implementation and CARB prescribes additional regulations on freight trucks
(e.g., Heavy-Duty Inspection and Maintenance Program, Advanced Clean Fleets Regulation, Transport
Refrigeration Unit Regulation).130 Additionally, an independent study of air quality in Fontana reveals
that ozone (O3) concentrations in Fontana are below the basin-wide maximum, nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
concentrations in Fontana are below the federal standard, and particulate matter (PM2.5) in Fontana is
below the federal standard.131 Furthermore the City approved and adopted Ordinance No. 1879 to
add Article V to Chapter 9 (Environmental Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal
Code on April 12, 2022. Chapter 9, Article V, also known as the Industrial Commerce Centers
Sustainability Standards, is designed to exceed existing regional and State air quality standards to
further air quality improvement measures and standardize requirements for all warehouse
developments in the City. Table A lists the routine conditions prescribed to all warehouse projects in
the City pursuant to the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards and summarizes the
proposed project’s consistency with the standards that serve to reduce cumulative emissions of
130 Jayaram, Varalakshmi (Lakshmi), Joseph Hower, and Julia Lester. Ramboll. City of Fontana Air Quality Update. Pages 6-11. September 14, 2021.
131 Ibid.
59
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
criteria air pollutants and diesel particulates from warehouse development in the City. It was
determined the project is consistent with the Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards.
No single project is sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of ambient air quality
standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions would contribute to existing cumulatively
significant impacts to air quality. The SCAQMD developed the operational thresholds of significance
based on the level above which a project’s individual emissions would result in a cumulatively
considerable contribution to the Basin’s existing air quality conditions. Therefore, a project that
exceeds the SCAQMD operational thresholds would also have a cumulatively considerable
contribution to a significant cumulative impact.
Due to the nonattainment status of the Basin, the primary air pollutants of concern would be nitrogen
oxides (NOx) and reactive organic compounds (ROCs), which are ozone precursors, and particulate
matter less than 10 microns in size (PM10) and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5).
As detailed in Table L, long-term emissions were calculated for NOx, ROC, CO, sulfur dioxide (SO2),
PM10, and PM2.5 expected to be generated through operation of the proposed project, and project-
related emissions would not exceed the established SCAQMD daily emission thresholds for any criteria
pollutants. Without any exceedance in air quality emissions thresholds, the proposed project would
not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant air quality impacts.
A Trip Generation Memorandum was prepared for the project through consultation with the City’s
Traffic Engineering Division (Appendix C) and revealed the project is anticipated to add
approximately 11 passenger vehicle and freight truck trips during the a.m. peak hour and 12
passenger vehicle and freight truck trips during the p.m. peak hour. When freight truck trips are
converted to passenger car equivalent (PCE) trips, the project is anticipated to add approximately 18
PCE trips during the a.m. peak hour and 19 PCE trips during the p.m. peak hour.132 The number of
trips the Project would generate is well below the City’s 50-peak hour trip threshold to prepare a
TIA, which the City typically requires when there is a potential for a Project to have an adverse effect
on the surrounding transportation network. The City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment indicate TIAs are
required if a project generates 50 or more trips during the a.m. or p.m. peak hour.133 Since the
number of trips the Project would generate is well below the City’s threshold to prepare a TIA, the
addition of the proposed project traffic would not create any significant adverse impacts to nearby
intersections. Additionally, the City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment determined projects that generate fewer than
500 ADT are expected not to cause a substantial increase in the total Citywide or regional VMT and
therefore are presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT.134 The project is anticipated
to generate only 158 average daily PCE trips.135 Therefore, the project would not cause a substantial
132 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D)
133 City of Fontana. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. Page 4. October 21, 2020. 134 City of Fontana. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. Pages 13 and 14. October 21, 2020.
135 LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. Table A. April 6, 2022. (Appendix D).
60
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
increase in the total Citywide or regional VMT and can be screened out from further VMT
analysis.136
As stated previously, two traffic alternatives were evaluated for project-related traffic accessing the
project site to ensure the analysis captures a worst-case scenario for air quality. Alternative 2
assumes 100 percent of the truck traffic would take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be
constructed off Tamarind Avenue, across which the nearest sensitive receptors (residential uses) are
located. Although it is probable that normal operations at the proposed warehouse will have trucks
exiting onto the private drive aisle to the west of the project site (refer to Alternative 1), the HRA
focuses on two sub-scenarios under Alternative 2 to analyze the maximum possible exposure for
nearby residents.137
• Alternative 2a assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn north on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Slover Avenue, then north
on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
• Alternative 2b assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn south on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Santa Ana Avenue, then
north on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
Pursuant to Section 9-72(4) (Signage and Traffic Patterns) of Article V, Chapter 9 (Environmental
Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal Code, the project Applicant shall submit a
Truck Routing Plan to the City for approval prior to occupancy. Nevertheless, by evaluating a traffic
alternative that concentrates 100 percent of the truck traffic in proximity to the nearest sensitive
receptors along Tamarind Avenue, the analysis demonstrates that the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to TACs under a worst-case scenario.
Table N details the carcinogenic and chronic health risks from operation of the proposed project
under Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. The residential risk incorporates both the risk for a child
living in a nearby residence for 9 years (the standard period of time for child risk) and an adult living
in a nearby residence for 30 years (considered a conservative period of time for an individual to live
in any one residence). The cumulative increase in maximum individual cancer risk (MICR) that is the
sum of the calculated MICR values for all TACs would be considered significant if it would result in an
increased MICR greater than 10 in 1 million (1 x 10-5) at any receptor location. Health effects of the
project also would be considered significant if the cumulative increase in total chronic health index
or total acute health index for any target organ system would exceed 1.0 at any receptor location.
As indicated in Table N, the maximum cancer risk for the residential maximum exposed individual
(MEI) would be 0.16 in 1 million, less than the threshold of 10 in 1 million, under Alternative 2a and
0.11 in 1 million, less than the threshold of 10 in 1 million, under Alternative 2b. The maximum
cancer risk for the worker MEI would be 0.01 in 1 million, also less than the threshold of 10 in
1 million under both Alternative 2a and Alternative 2b. The chronic and acute health risks also are
136 Ibid. Page 2. 137 LSA Associates, Inc. Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana, California. Page 13. June 2022. (Appendix
F2).
61
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
shown in Table N under each of the alternative scenarios and indicate the hazard index for each of
these risks is below the threshold of 1.0. All health risk levels to nearby residents and workers from
emissions of TAC from the proposed project under worst case scenarios that assume truck trips are
concentrated in proximity to the nearest sensitive receptors would be below SCAQMD’s HRA
thresholds.
Table F and Table G respectively summarize the Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 scenarios, each
detailing the existing (year 2022) traffic noise levels without and with the project along roadways in
the project vicinity. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no
shielding is provided between the traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn. As
detailed in Table F and Table G, respectively, project-related traffic would increase roadway noise by
up to 1.8 dBA along the private drive aisle (Alternative 1) and by up to 0.5 dBA along Tamarind
Avenue (Alternative 2). Noise level increases less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human
ear in an outdoor environment.138 Therefore, cumulative traffic noise effects on off-site sensitive
receptors would not be significant.
Neither the project site nor the local area is particularly sensitive in terms of biological resources.
Regionally, the project site is located within the Jurupa Recovery Unit of the federally endangered
Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, and Delhi Sand Soils historically have been mapped within the
southwestern portion of the site.139 However, the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas
terminatus abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation prepared by the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFW), Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, indicates the Jurupa Hills Population
of this species within the Jurupa Recovery Unit is approximately 3.21 miles southwest of the project
site among the undeveloped Jurupa Hills.140 Additionally, the site-specific pedestrian survey
revealed the project site lacks suitable open soils required to support this species because any Delhi
Sands that potentially occur on the site have been compacted and covered in gravel base.141
Furthermore, previous disturbances on the site and vicinity from grading and development of
residential and industrial uses have removed any historical sand dune formations that may have
once occupied the site and/or vicinity.142 Additionally, the site’s location in an urbanized area,
relatively small size, and lack of suitable habitat renders the site unlikely to support any endangered,
rare, or threatened plant and animal species with potential to occur in the project vicinity. Ongoing
disturbances from residential occupation of the site, parking of passenger vehicles and freight trucks
on the site, and routine weed abatement and the resulting competitive exclusion by invasive non-
native plants limit the potential for native flora to occur or to host special-status, endangered, rare,
or threatened animal species on the site. Impacts to biological resources would not be cumulatively
considerable.
138 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page
5.10-4. June 8, 2018. 139 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region. Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly. Figure 5: Jurupa Recovery Unit. 1997.
140 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. Delhi Sands Flower-loving Fly
(Rhaphiomidas terminates abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Page 29. March 2008. 141 BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment Project, City of Fontana. Page 9. June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1).
142 Ibid.
62
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
The project site is not within a historic district. There are no known historical resources or
archaeological resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 on the project site.
According to the cultural resources records search conducted at the South Central Coastal
Information Center (SCCIC) on September 8, 2021, the project site was previously surveyed for
cultural resources, but no cultural resources have previously been recorded on or in proximity to the
site.143 Archival research revealed the project site was used for agriculture since at least 1938, and
residential buildings are noted in aerial photos from 1948.144 Agricultural activities on the site
ceased by the 1970s, and the majority of the site was cleared of vegetation by 2013 for staging of
truck trailers as development of the surrounding properties ensued.145 Currently, two residential
buildings, respectively constructed in 1948 (10642 Tamarind Avenue) and 1964 (10622 Tamarind
Avenue), are located on the site, with only the southwest portion of the site containing ruderal
vegetation.146 The existing structures on the site have been evaluated as less than significant
pursuant to CEQA (refer to Appendix H1 and Appendix H2). The project site has been disturbed and
regularly maintained for at least 20 years; therefore, it is unlikely that archaeological resources
would be found during construction. Impacts to cultural resources would not be cumulatively
considerable.
Finally, as detailed throughout Section 2.0(e), sufficient utilities and public facilities are available to
serve the project in addition to existing entitlements and capacity.
The project would not have a cumulatively considerable impact on the environment when evaluated
in conjunction with similar types of [warehouse] projects in the same place and therefore is not
subject to the Cumulative Impact Exception (Section 15300.2(b)).
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a
reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to
unusual circumstances.
As detailed in Section 3.0(b), the anticipated Project trip generation (18 PCE trips during the a.m.
peak hour and 19 PCE trips during the p.m. peak hour) is well below the City’s 50-peak hour trip
threshold to prepare a TIA, which the City typically requires when there is a potential for a project to
have an adverse effect on the surrounding transportation network. Since the number of trips the
project would generate is well below the City’s threshold to prepare a TIA, the addition of the
proposed project traffic would not create any significant adverse impacts to nearby intersections.
As stated previously, two traffic alternatives were evaluated for project-related traffic accessing the
project site to ensure the analysis captures a worst-case scenario for mobile noise. Alternative 1
assumes 100 percent of truck traffic would take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be
constructed off the private drive aisle on the west side of the site, and Alternative 2 assumes 100
143 Brian F. Smith and Associates. Cultural Resources Study for the Tamarind Avenue Project. City of Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California. Pages 1.0-15 and 1.0-16. January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022. (Appendix G1).
144 Weis Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue, Fontana, California 92316. Page 15. October 4, 2021. (Appendix A). 145 Ibid.
146 Ruderal vegetation consists of species (often invasive) that are first to colonize disturbed lands.
63
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
percent of the truck traffic would take access via the 40-foot-wide driveway to be constructed off
Tamarind Avenue.147
The Alternative 2 scenario conservatively concentrates transportation emissions and noise from
operation of the project in proximity to the nearest sensitive receptors east of the site across
Tamarind Avenue in order to consider the worst-case potential air quality health and ambient noise
effects of the project on the neighborhood. Although it is probable that normal operations at the
proposed warehouse will have trucks exiting onto the private drive aisle to the west of the project
site (refer to Alternative 1), the HRA focuses on two sub-scenarios under Alternative 2 in order to
analyze the maximum possible exposure for nearby residents.148
• Alternative 2a assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn north on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Slover Avenue, then north
on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
• Alternative 2b assumes 100 percent of the project trucks exit east onto Tamarind Avenue from
the project driveway, turn south on Tamarind Avenue, then west on Santa Ana Avenue, then
north on Sierra Avenue, continuing to Interstate 10.
Pursuant to Section 9-72(4) (Signage and Traffic Patterns) of Article V, Chapter 9 (Environmental
Protection and Resource Extraction) of the City Municipal Code, the project Applicant shall submit a
Truck Routing Plan to the City for approval prior to occupancy. Nevertheless, by evaluating a traffic
alternative that concentrates 100 percent of the truck traffic in proximity to the nearest sensitive
receptors along Tamarind Avenue, the analysis demonstrates that the project would not result in
any significant effects relating to TACs under a worst-case scenario.
As detailed in Table N, all health risk levels to nearby residents and workers from emissions of TAC
from operation of the proposed project would be below SCAQMD’s HRA thresholds. Additionally,
Table F and Table G indicate project-related traffic would increase roadway noise by up to 1.8 dBA
along the private drive aisle (Alternative 1) and by up to 0.5 dBA along Tamarind Avenue
(Alternative 2). Noise level increases less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in
an outdoor environment,149 so cumulative traffic noise effects on off-site sensitive receptors would
not be significant.
The Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Analysis, Health Risk Assessment, and Noise and Vibration
Impact Analysis for the proposed project conclude the project would not result in a significant
impact related to these topics. No amendments to an adopted planning document would be
required for implementation of the proposed project, and the project would be consistent with the
147 Pursuant to Section 9-72(4) (Signage and Traffic Patterns) of Article V, Chapter 9 (Environmental Protection and Resource Extraction)
of the City Municipal Code, the project Applicant shall submit a Truck Routing Plan to the City for approval prior to occupancy. Nevertheless, by evaluating a traffic alternative that concentrates 100 percent of the truck traffic in proximity to the nearest sensitive receptors, the analysis demonstrates that the project would not result in any significant effects relating to mobile noise
under a worst case scenario.
148 LSA Associates, Inc. Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana, California. Page 13. June 2022. (Appendix F2). 149 City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page
5.10-4. June 8, 2018.
64
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
City’s Municipal Code requirements. The Project conforms to the City’s General Plan land use
designation and zoning ordinance for the site and neighborhood and therefore is consistent with the
type and intensity of development anticipated by the City in this area. Given the urban nature of the
project site and the conservative analysis for adverse effects to the community, the project would
not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances and therefore is not
subject to the Significant Effect Exception (Section 15300.2(c)).
(d) Scenic Highways. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in
damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock
outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic
highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted
negative declaration or certified EIR.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Scenic Highway Program does not identify
any State-designated scenic highways near the project site.150 The nearest designated Scenic
Highway is the southern terminus of State Route 330 in the City of Highland, approximately 13.75
miles northeast of the project site. Because there are no scenic highways or roadways near the
project site, the project would not affect scenic resources within a State scenic highway and is not
subject to the Scenic Highways Exception (Section 15300.2(d)).
(e) Hazardous Waste Sites. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site
which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
Hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 are listed on the
“Cortese List” (named after the Legislator who authored the legislation that enacted it), which is
maintained by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. The project site is not on any
list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5151 and
therefore is not subject to the Hazardous Waste Sites Exception (Section 15300.2(e)).
(f) Historical Resources. A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
The project site was subject to a Cultural Resources Study comprising archival research, cultural
resources records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), and an intensive
pedestrian survey of the project site (Appendix G1). The Cultural Resources Study was peer
reviewed for CEQA compliance by LSA Associates, Inc. (Appendix G2).
150 California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map. https://www.arcgis.com/apps/
webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa. (Accessed April 7, 2022).
151 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). 2020. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?page=3&cmd=search&business_name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&status=ACT%2CBKLG%2CCOM&branch=&site_type=CSITES%2CFUDS&npl=&funding=&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCE
S+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29&reporttype=CORTESE&federal_superfund=&state_response=&voluntary_cleanup=&school_cleanup
=&operating=&post_closure=&non_operating=&corrective_action=&tiered_permit=&evaluation=&spec_prog=&national_priority_list=&senate=&congress=&assembly=&critical_pol=&business_type=&case_type=&searchtype=&hwmp_site_type=&cleanup_type=&ocieerp=&hwmp=False&permitted=&pc_permitted=&inspections=&complaints=&censustract=&cesdecile=&school_district=&order
by=city. (Accessed June 13, 2022).
65
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
The project site is developed with residential uses and is also being used for staging of truck trailers.
No prehistoric or historic-era archaeological resources were identified on the project site during the
intensive pedestrian survey. Because subsurface archaeological resources would not be observable
during a pedestrian survey, the City prescribes the following standard conditions to all development
projects in the City to address unanticipated encounters with archaeological resources during
construction pursuant to CEQA:
• Upon discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, cease construction activities in
the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All tribal cultural and
archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the
qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native American in
origin, interested Tribes (as a result of correspondence with area Tribes) shall coordinate with
the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will
request preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on
other parts of the project while evaluation takes place.
• Preservation in place shall be the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not
feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavation to
remove the resource along the subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. All Tribal
Cultural Resources shall be returned to the Tribe. Any historic archaeological material that is
not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research
interest in the materials, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution
accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to the Tribe or a local school or
historical society in the area for educational purposes.
• Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects
shall be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any
unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated
funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel shall meet the Secretary of the Interior
standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years’ experience as a principal
investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The
Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure that all other personnel are appropriately trained and
qualified.
These conditions would apply to the proposed project in the same manner they apply to all
development projects in the City for managing the potential for archaeological resources to occur.
Since there are no known archaeological resources on the project site, there is no identified impact
to any archaeological resource, and these conditions are prescribed as a precaution and not for the
purpose of mitigating an impact to any archaeological resource. Because there is no identified
impact and because these conditions would apply to all development projects in the City, they are
standard conditions of approval and not mitigation measures.
The residential structures on the project site were evaluated in a Historic Structure Assessment
(Appendix H1) and peer reviewed by LSA Associates, Inc. (Appendix H2) for historical significance
66
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
pursuant to CEQA Section 15064.5. Archival research revealed the project site was used for
agriculture since at least 1938, and residential buildings are noted in aerial photos from 1948.152
Agricultural activities on the site ceased by the 1970s, and the majority of the site was cleared of
vegetation by 2013 for staging of truck trailers as development of the surrounding properties
ensued.153 Currently, two residential buildings, respectively constructed in 1948 (10642 Tamarind
Avenue) and 1964 (10622 Tamarind Avenue), are located on the site, with only the southwest
portion of the site containing ruderal vegetation.154
The records search was requested at the SCCIC on September 8, 2021 and indicated the project site
was previously surveyed for cultural resources, but no cultural resources have previously been
recorded on the site.155 Thirteen resources (4 prehistoric and 9 historic) have been recorded within
one mile of the project site. The pedestrian survey was conducted on September 9, 2021 and
identified no prehistoric resources on or near the site; however, two historic single-family
residences with associated historic structures (10642 Tamarind Avenue and 10622 Tamarind
Avenue) were identified on the site.156
10642 Tamarind Avenue constructed in 1948 is a one-story ranch-style residence that is not
associated with any specific events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of California’s or Fontana’s history and/or cultural heritage, nor is it associated with the lives of any
persons important in California or local history.157 This ranch-style residence no longer possesses
integrity of design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association and does not possess
distinctive or extraordinary ranch-style architecture. Furthermore, this residence is not associated
with any significant individuals or events and would not yield additional information important in
California or local history or prehistory. Finally, the residence would not constitute a natural
environment or feature that would contribute to the well-being of residents or the neighborhood,
nor is it located in a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings,
structures or objects that are unified by past events or are unified aesthetically by plan or physical
development.158 The residence therefore does not meet the criteria for Historical Resources as
defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a).
10622 Tamarind Avenue constructed in 1964 is a one-story ranch-style residence that is not
associated with any specific events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns
of California’s or Fontana’s history and/or cultural heritage, nor is it associated with the lives of any
persons important in California or local history.159 This ranch-style residence no longer possesses
integrity of setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association and does not possess distinctive
or extraordinary ranch-style architecture. Furthermore, this residence is not associated with any
152 Weis Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue, Fontana, California 92316. Page
15. October 4, 2021. (Appendix A).
153 Ibid.
154 Ruderal vegetation consists of species (often invasive) that are first to colonize disturbed lands. 155 Brian F. Smith and Associates. Cultural Resources Study for the Tamarind Avenue Project. City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Pages 1.0-15 and 1.0-16. January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022. (Appendix G1).
156 Ibid. Page 3.0-1.
157 Brian F. Smith and Associates. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings. City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. Pages 30-35. January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022. (Appendix H1). 158 Ibid.
159 Ibid.
67
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
significant individuals or events and would not yield additional information important in California
or local history or prehistory. Finally, the residence would not constitute a natural environment or
feature that would contribute to the well-being of residents or the neighborhood, nor is it located in
a geographically definable area possessing a concentration of sites, buildings, structures or objects
that are unified by past events or are unified aesthetically by plan or physical development.160 The
residence therefore does not meet the criteria for Historical Resources as defined in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5(a).
Neither residence remaining on the project site conveys an association with any persons or events
or represents examples of an extraordinary architectural style, period, or region to meet the criteria
for Historical Resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(a). Therefore, the project is
not subject to the Historical Resources Exception (Section 15300.2(e)).
160 Brian F. Smith and Associates. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue Buildings. City of Fontana,
San Bernardino County, California. Pages 30-35. January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022. (Appendix H1).
68
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
4.0 REFERENCES
BLUE Consulting Group. Biological Assessment Report for Tamarind Avenue 2-Lot Redevelopment
Project, City of Fontana. June 13, 2022. (Appendix B1).
Brian F. Smith and Associates. Cultural Resources Study for the Tamarind Avenue Project. City of
Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. January 18, 2022; Revised April 18, 2022.
(Appendix G1).
Brian F. Smith and Associates. Historic Structure Assessment for the 10622 and 10642 Tamarind
Avenue Buildings. City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. January 18, 2022;
Revised April 18, 2022. (Appendix H1)
California Energy Commission. Building Energy Efficiency Standards – Title 24. https://www.energy.
ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards (Accessed April
8, 2022).
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). State of Disposal and
Recycling for Calendar Year 2019. State of Disposal and Recycling Report for Calendar Year
2019 (1).pdf (Accessed June 13, 2022).
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). Facility/Site Summary
Details: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/Site/
Summary/2662. (Accessed April 8, 2022).
California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List
(Cortese). 2020. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?page=3&cmd=
search&business_name=&main_street_name=&city=&zip=&county=&status=ACT%2CBKLG
%2CCOM&branch=&site_type=CSITES%2CFUDS&npl=&funding=&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+
WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29&reporttype=CORTESE&federal_su
perfund=&state_response=&voluntary_cleanup=&school_cleanup=&operating=&post_closu
re=&non_operating=&corrective_action=&tiered_permit=&evaluation=&spec_prog=&natio
nal_priority_list=&senate=&congress=&assembly=&critical_pol=&business_type=&case_typ
e=&searchtype=&hwmp_site_type=&cleanup_type=&ocieerp=&hwmp=False&permitted=&
pc_permitted=&inspections=&complaints=&censustract=&cesdecile=&school_district=&ord
erby=city. (Accessed June 13, 2022).
California Department of Transportation. California State Scenic Highway System Map.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f
1aacaa. (Accessed April 7, 2022).
California Department of Transportation. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis
Protocol. September 2013.
California Department of Water Resources. Historically Dry Conditions Impact Planned State Water
Project Deliveries. Published March 18, 2022. https://water.ca.gov/news/news-releases/
2022/march-22/swp-allocation-march. (Accessed June 6, 2022).
69
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
California Energy Commission. 2020 Total System Electric Generation. https://www.energy.ca.gov/
data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-
generation. (Accessed April 9, 2022)
California Energy Commission. Final 2017 Integrated Energy Policy Report. https://www.energy.
ca.gov/data-reports/reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2017-integrated-energy-
policy-report (Accessed April 8,, 2022).
California Energy Commission. Final 2019 Integrated Energy Policy Report including errata adopted
at the February 20, 2020 Business Meeting. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/
reports/integrated-energy-policy-report/2019-integrated-energy-policy-report (Accessed
April 8, 2022, 2022).
California State Legislature, Legislative Analyst’s Office. An Evaluation of the School Facility Fee
Affordable Housing Assistance Programs, section (h) January 2001. https://leginfo.
legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=65995.
(Accessed April 7, 2022).
City of Fontana. About the Fontana Fire District, Stations & Equipment, Fire Station 73.
https://www.fontana.org/639/Stations-Equipment. (Accessed January 8, 2022).
City of Fontana. C.P.T.E.D. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Guidelines. Resolution
No. 2013-01. Adopted February 19, 2013.
City of Fontana. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. https://www.fontana.org/295/
Crime-Prevention-Through-Environmental-D (accessed May 26, 2020).
City of Fontana. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. October 21,
2020.
City of Fontana. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact
Report. SCH #2016021099. June 8, 2018.
City of Fontana. Fontana Municipal Code. Article VII. – Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 30-522(1) –
Light Industrial (M-1). https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/zoning_and_
development_code?nodeId=CH30ZODECO_ARTVIIINZODI. Accessed May 27, 2022.
City of Fontana. Fontana Municipal Code. Ordinance No. 1879 (Article V of Chapter 9 (Environmental
Protection and Resource Extraction)), also known as the Industrial Commerce Centers
Sustainability Standards. Adopted April 12, 2022. In effect May 12, 2022.
City of Fontana. Sycamore Hills Park. https://www.fontana.org/730/Sycamore-Hills-Park. (Accessed
April 7, 2022).
City of Fontana. Trash and recycling Services. https://www.fontana.org/541/Trash-and-Recycling-
Services. (Accessed April 8, 2022).
70
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
City of Fontana. State of California. Fontana Fire Protection District. https://www.fontana.org/
DocumentCenter/View/2110/Fire-District-Boundary-Map?bidId=. (Accessed April 7, 2022).
City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Land Use Map. March 2, 2021.
City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Update 2015-2035. Chapter 9: Community Mobility
and Circulation. Adopted November 13, 2018.
City of Fontana, State of California. General Plan Update 2015–2035. Chapter 15: Land Use, Zoning,
and Urban Design Element. Adopted November 13, 2018.
ESA Associates, Inc. IEUA Facilities Master Plan Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. SCH
#2016061064. December 2016.
Federal Highway Administration. Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and
Guidance. Noise Fundamentals. Updated August 24, 2017. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/
environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm (Accessed June 6,
2022).
Federal Transit Administration. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report
No. 0123. September 2018. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/
research-innovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-
report-no-0123_0.pdf (Accessed June 3, 2022).
Hillard Heintze. Fontana Police Department, An Independent Assessment of Law Enforcement
Operations. Final Report. November 6, 2020. Hillard-Heintze-Report-for-the-Fontana-Police-
Department-11-06-20. (Accessed June 13, 2022).
Huitt-Zollars, Inc. Water Quality Management Plan for 10622 Tamarind Avenue Industrial. January 7,
2022. (Appendix C)
Jayaram, Varalakshmi (Lakshmi), Joseph Hower, and Julia Lester. Ramboll. City of Fontana Air Quality
Update. September 14, 2021.
LSA Associates, Inc. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Impact Analysis for the First
Tamarind II Logistics Project in Fontana, California. June 2022. (Appendix F1).
LSA Associates, Inc. Arborist Report for First Tamarind II Logistics Project in the City of Fontana,
California. April 22, 2022. (Appendix B3).
LSA Associates, Inc. First Tamarind II Logistics Project Traffic Memorandum. April 6, 2022. (Appendix
D).
LSA Associates, Inc. Health Risk Assessment, First Tamarind II Logistics Project, Fontana, California.
June 2022. (Appendix F2).
71
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
LSA Associates, Inc. Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the First Tamarind II Logistics Project in
Fontana, California. May 2022. (Appendix E).
LSA Associates, Inc. Round 3 Peer Review of the Biological Resources Assessment (June 13, 2022) for
the Tamarind Ave 2-Lot Redevelopment Project in Fontana, for CEQA Compliance. June 21,
2022. (Appendix B2).
San Bernardino County Department of Public Works. San Bernardino County Water Quality
Management Plan. http://cms.sbcounty.gov/Portals/50/Land/AppendixF-HCOCExemption
CriteriaandMap.pdf?ver=2013-02-28-193056-000. (Accessed June 6, 2022).
San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. Integrated Regional Urban Water Management
Plan. Part 2: Local Agency UWMPs. https://secureservercdn.net/104.238.69.81/n1s.6f9.
myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Part-2-Local-Agency-Information.pdf.
(Accessed April 8, 2022).
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board Order Number R8-2010-0033, National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No. CAS618033, as amended by Order No. R8-
2013-0024, also known as the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit.
South Coast Air Quality Management District. Final Localized Significance Thresholds Methodology.
June 2003, Revised July 2008.
State of California. California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Santa Ana Region. National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge requirements
for the San Bernardino County Flood Control. 2010. https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/
santaana/board_decisions/adopted_orders/orders/2010/10_036_sbc_ms4_permit_01_29_
10.pdf. (Accessed April 28, 2022).
State of California, Executive Department. Executive Order N-7-22. March 28, 2022.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/March-2022-Drought-EO.pdf.
(Accessed June 6, 2022).
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California. Delhi
Sands Flower-loving Fly (Rhaphiomidas terminates abdominalis) 5-Year Review: Summary
and Evaluation. March 2008.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Region. Final Recovery Plan for the Delhi Sands Flower
Loving Fly. 1997.
Weis Environmental. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 10622 and 10642 Tamarind Avenue,
Fontana, California 92316. October 4, 2021. (Appendix A).
West Valley Water District. Drought Update and Water Use Efficiency Guidelines. June 2, 2022.
https://wvwd.org/drought-update-and-water-use-efficiency-guidelines/. (Accessed June 6,
2022)
72
10/20/22 (P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx)
West Valley Water District. West Valley Water District Boundary Map. https://www.yourrialto.com/
DocumentCenter/View/1207/Map-of-West-Valley-Water-District-Boundaries. (Accessed
April 8, 2022).
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX A
PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX B1
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX B2
PEER REVIEW OF THE
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX B3
ARBORIST REPORT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX C
WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX D
TRIP GENERATION AND
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MEMORANDUM
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX E
NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX F1
AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX F2
HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX G1
ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX G2
PEER REVIEW OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX H1
HISTORIC STRUCTURE ASSESSMENT
CLASS 32 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION OCTOBER 2022 FIRST TAMARIND II LOGISTICS PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
P:\FRT2202_First Tamarind II CatEx\Categorical Exemption\Final CatEx\Categorical Exemption_First Tamarind II Logistics Project.docx (10/20/22)
APPENDIX H2
PEER REVIEW OF THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE ASSESSMENT