The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFinal Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana EIR Addendum (Nov 2022) ADDENDUM TO THE PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE SOUTHWEST INDUSTRIAL PARK SPECIFIC PLAN UPDATE AND ANNEXATION (State Clearinghouse #2009091089) Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana Master Case No. 21-103 Design Review No. 21-041 Tentative Parcel Map No. 20499 Prepared For: City of Fontana Planning Department 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, CA 92335 Contact: Jon Dille Prepared By: T&B Planning, Inc. 3200 El Camino Real Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92602 Contact: David Ornelas Project Applicant: QR Birtcher Banana Ave. Owner, LLC November 2022 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana i Table of Contents Section Number/Title Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Project Overview .................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 California Environmental Quality Act ..................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum ........................................................................................... 1-4 1.4 Review and Consideration of this EIR Addendum .................................................................................. 1-5 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Existing Condition of Project Site ........................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses ............................................................................... 2-1 2.4 Existing General Plan and Zoning ........................................................................................................... 2-2 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Project Components ............................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Project Technical Characteristics ............................................................................................................ 3-2 3.3 Summary of Requested Actions ........................................................................................................... 3-15 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................... 4-2 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ....................................................................................................... 4-4 4.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................... 4-5 4.4 Biological Resources ............................................................................................................................. 4-15 4.5 Cultural Resources ................................................................................................................................ 4-18 4.6 Energy ................................................................................................................................................... 4-22 4.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................. 4-25 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................... 4-31 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................................ 4-32 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................... 4-40 4.11 Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................................................... 4-45 4.12 Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................................ 4-46 4.13 Noise ..................................................................................................................................................... 4-46 4.14 Population and Housing ....................................................................................................................... 4-50 4.15 Public Services ...................................................................................................................................... 4-51 4.16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 4-54 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana ii 4.17 Transportation ...................................................................................................................................... 4-54 4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 4-59 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................................................ 4-60 4.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................. 4-62 4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................................................... 4-63 5.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 5-1 List of Figures Figure Number/Title Page Figure 2-1 Regional Map .................................................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-2 Vicinity Map .................................................................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-3 USGS Topographic Map .................................................................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-4 Aerial Photograph ........................................................................................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-5 Site Photographs – Views 1 – 5 ...................................................................................................... 2-7 Figure 2-6 Site Photographs – Views 6 - 10 ..................................................................................................... 2-8 Figure 3-1 Conceptual Site Plan ....................................................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-2 Conceptual Architectural Elevations .............................................................................................. 3-4 Figure 3-3 Conceptual Material Board ............................................................................................................ 3-5 Figure 3-4 Conceptual Landscape Plan ............................................................................................................ 3-6 Figure 3-5 Proposed Tentative Parcel Map ..................................................................................................... 3-7 Figure 3-6 Conceptual Utility Plan ................................................................................................................... 3-9 Figure 3-7 Conceptual Storm Drain Plan ....................................................................................................... 3-10 Figure 3-8 Proposed Grading Plan ................................................................................................................. 3-14 List of Tables Table Number/Title Page Table 3-1 Construction Schedule ...................................................................................................................... 3-11 Table 3-2 Construction Equipment Fleet .......................................................................................................... 3-12 Table 3-3 Summary of Project Approvals/Permits ........................................................................................... 3-15 Table 4-1 Project Construction Emissions Summary .......................................................................................... 4-8 Table 4-2 Project Operational Emissions Summary ........................................................................................... 4-8 Table 4-3 Project Construction Localized Emissions Summary ........................................................................ 4-12 Table 4-4 Project Operational Localized Emissions Summary .......................................................................... 4-13 Table 4-5 Summary of Construction Health Risks ............................................................................................ 4-13 Table 4-6 Summary of Project-Related Diesel Emissions Health Risks ............................................................ 4-14 Table 4-7 Annual Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................................... 4-32 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana iii List of Appendices Appendix Document/Reference Title A SWIP SP PEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program B Air Quality Impact Analysis C Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment D Habitat Assessment E Cultural Resources Study F Energy Analysis G Geotechnical Investigation H Infiltration Report I Greenhouse Gas Analysis J Phase I Environmental Site Assessment K Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan L Hydrology Report M Noise Impact Analysis N Traffic Study O Paleontological Resources Assessment Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents List of Acronyms Acronym Definition Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana iv AB Assembly Bill AB 32 Assembly Bill 32 AB 2185 Assembly Bill 2185 ACMs Asbestos-Containing Materials ACOE Army Corps of Engineers ADT average daily trips AIA Airport Influence Area ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Alden Alden Environmental AM Morning APN Assessor Parcel Number AQMP Air Quality Management Plan AQIA Air Quality Impact Analysis amsl above mean sea level BFSA Brian F. Smith and Associates, Inc. BMP Best Management Practice CalGreen California Building Standards Code CalTrans California Department of Transportation CARB California Air Resources Board CAGN California gnatcatcher CBC California Building Code CBSC California Building Standards Code CCR California code of Regulations CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife CEQA California Environmental Quality Act cfs Cubic Feet per Second CMP Congestion Management Program CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level CO Carbon Monoxide CO2 Carbon Dioxide cy Cubic Yards dB decibel dBA Leq decibel A-weighted equivalent sound level DOC California Department of Conservation DRP Design Review Project DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control e.g. “exempli gratia” meaning “for example” EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency EV Electric Vehicle Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents List of Acronyms Acronym Definition Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana v FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agent FWC Fontana Water Company GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) gpd gallons per day HMBEP Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning I-10 Interstate 10 I-15 Interstate 15 Ibid “in the same place” I-L Light Industrial IEUA Inland Empire Utilities Agency in/sec Inches per Second ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers i.e. “is est” meaning “that is” JND Jurupa North Research and Development District kBTU/yr kilo-British thermal units per year kWh kilowatt hours LBP Lead-Based Paint Lbs pounds LOS Level of Service MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MM Mitigation Measure MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MRZ-3 Mineral Resource Zone 3 MTCO2eq/year Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalents per Year No. Number NOx Nitrogen Oxide NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System ONT Ontario International Airport PCB polychlorinated biphenyls PCE Passenger Car Equivalent PEIR Program Environmental Impact Report Phase I ESA Phase I Environmental Site Assessment PM Evening PM Particulate Matter PM2.5 Particulate Matter (2.5 microns in diameter) PM10 Particulate Matter (10 microns in diameter) POC Point of Connection PPV Peak Particle Velocity REC Recognized Environmental Conditions ROG Reactive Organic Gas(es) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Table of Contents List of Acronyms Acronym Definition Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana vi RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments SB Senate Bill SB 18 Senate Bill 18 SB 32 Senate Bill 32 SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority SBKR San Bernardino kangaroo rat SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCE Southern California Edison SCG Southern California Geotechnical SCH State Clearinghouse s.f. Square Feet SGMA Sustainable Groundwater Management Act SP Specific Plan Sq. ft. Square Foot SWIP Southwest Industrial Park SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TPM Tentative Parcel Map USDA United States Department of Agriculture UST Underground Storage Tanks UWMP Urban Water Management Plan VEC Vapor Encroachment Condition VMT Vehicles Miles Traveled VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds Waterstone Waterstone Environmental, Inc. WQMP Water Quality Management Plan WS Water of the State WUS Water of the United States 1.0 INTRODUCTION Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Introduction Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 1-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Project Overview The City of Fontana (hereinafter “City”) received applications from QR Birtcher Banana Ave. Owner, LLC (hereinafter “Project Applicant”) to redevelop an approximately 15.0-gross-acre (13.4-net-acre), rectangular- shaped site (Project Site) with a 341,838 square-foot (sq. ft.) warehouse building, inclusive of 32,444 sq. ft. of ground floor office and mezzanine, and associated site improvements. The Project Site is generally located south of Santa Ana Avenue, west of Banana Avenue, east of Calabash Avenue, and north of Rose Avenue. The Project Site consists of twelve (12) parcels including Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 0236-161-04, -10, -31, -32, -33, -34, -35, -36, -44, -45, -46, and -77. The Project Site is developed and historically utilized for a mixture of uses, including legal non-conforming residences and industrial uses (commercial vehicle parking and auto body repair), although the Site is mostly vacant under existing conditions. The Project involves clearing the Site of existing structures and ornamental landscaping to construct and operate the proposed warehouse building. Site improvements associated with the Project include, but are not limited to, parking and loading areas, public utility connections, landscaping, and exterior lighting. The Project Applicant also would construct improvements to Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue along the Project Site’s frontages. 1.2 California Environmental Quality Act The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code Sections 21000-21177, applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. CEQA requires that public agencies inform their decision-makers of the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and to consider alternatives and mitigation measures (MMs) that could avoid or reduce the discretionary actions’ significant, adverse environmental effects. CEQA also gives other public agencies and the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental review process. 1.2.1 Prior CEQA Compliance The Project Site is located within the Southwest Industrial Park (SWIP) Specific Plan (SP) area. The City adopted the original SWIP SP in 1983. The SWIP SP was comprehensively updated in 2012, which included the addition of 1,318 acres to the SWIP SP area (bringing the total SP area to 3,111 acres). The SWIP SP establishes the overall vision and development plan for the SP area and acts as a bridge between the City’s General Plan and individual development proposals. The SWIP SP combines development standards and guidelines, capital improvement programs, and financing methods, which are tailored to meet the needs of the SWIP SP area, into a single, comprehensive plan. Potential environmental impacts associated with buildout of the SWIP SP were evaluated by the SWIP SP Update and Annexation Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). The SWIP SP PEIR was prepared as a PEIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a PEIR is “…an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related…”. The Fontana City Council certified the PEIR on May 8, 2012 (State Clearinghouse [SCH] Number [No.] 2009091089; hereinafter “SWIP SP PEIR”). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Introduction Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 1-2 In certifying the SWIP SP PEIR, the City Council found that the SWIP SP PEIR adequately addressed the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR identified the following seven (7) significant and unavoidable environmental impacts (identified as Impacts 4.1-1, 4.2-1, 4.2-2, 4.2-4, 4.7-3, 4.8-5, and 4.9-1) that would result from implementation of the SWIP SP:  Aesthetics: The SWIP SP PEIR found that buildout of the SWIP SP would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to scenic vistas, because the long-term buildout of industrial, commercial, and office uses would result in a significant alteration in views of the Jurupa Mountains to the south and the San Gabriel/San Bernardino Mountains to the north.  Air Quality: The SWIP SP PEIR found that development within the SWIP SP would generate short-term construction-related emissions of dust (particulate matter [PM]) and vehicle/equipment exhaust that could exceed South Coast Air Quality Management (SCAQMD) thresholds which would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded long-term operations within the SWIP SP area would generate emissions that would exceed SCAQMD daily thresholds for reactive organic gases (ROGs), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Furthermore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that because emissions associated with buildout of the SWIP SP would exceed SCAQMD thresholds, the emissions from the SWIP SP would result in a conflict with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would result in significant and unavoidable short-term and long-term air quality impacts.  Noise: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that buildout of the SWIP SP would result in significant and unavoidable mobile-source (traffic-related) noise impacts.  Public Services: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that implementation of the SWIP SP would generate additional demand for parks and recreational facilities. However, no development impact fees for parks and recreation facilities would be collected as part of the development of the SWIP SP because the SWIP would only include non-residential land uses. Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that a significant and unavoidable impact would occur.  Transportation and Traffic: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP’s addition of traffic would result in deficient operations at 9 roadway segments and 19 intersections within the study area under the Existing with Approved Project scenario and would contribute to deficient operations at 10 roadway segments and 19 intersections under the Forecast Year 2030 with Project scenario. Because the City of Fontana could not assure the installation of all needed traffic improvements, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts to these facilities would be significant and unavoidable. In conjunction with certifying the SWIP SP PEIR, the City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which stated that the benefits of the SWIP SP outweighed the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts summarized above. 1.2.2 CEQA Rules and Requirements for an Addendum The CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and re-use of the previously approved/certified CEQA document when a subsequent project is within the scope of the analysis of the earlier approved CEQA document and when some changes or additions to the original CEQA document are necessary but none of the following conditions are met: Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Introduction Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 1-3 a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: 1. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; 2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; 3. MMs or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the MM or alternatives; or 4. MMs or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the MM or alternative. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15162) If none of the circumstances listed above occur and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to update the previously approved/certified CEQA document, an Addendum may be prepared (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15164). 1.2.3 Finding for the Project The City, serving as the CEQA Lead Agency for the Project (See CEQA Guidelines Sections 15050–15051), determined in its independent judgment that the Project does not meet any of the circumstances from CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 and that an Addendum to the previously-certified SWIP SP PEIR is the appropriate CEQA compliance document for the Project. The City’s finding is based on the following facts: a. As demonstrated in detail in Section 4.0 of this document, the Project would not require major revisions to the previously-certified SWIP SP PEIR because implementation of the Project would neither result in any significant impacts to the physical environment that were not already disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR nor result in substantial increases in the severity of the environmental impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Subsequent to the certification of the SWIP SP PEIR, no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken have occurred that would require major revisions to the SWIP SP PEIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. c. There is no evidence in the public record that new information of substantial importance has become available that is applicable to the Project and/or Project Site, was not known and could not have been Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Introduction Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 1-4 known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified, and would alter the conclusions of the SWIP SP PEIR. 1.3 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum The following components comprise the EIR Addendum in its totality: a. This Introduction (Section 1.0), the Environmental Setting (Section 2.0), and the Project Description (Section 3.0). b. The environmental impact analysis (Section 4.0), which concludes that implementation of the Project would neither result in any new, significant environmental impacts that were not previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR nor substantially increase the severity of the significant environmental impacts beyond the levels disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Fourteen (14) technical reports and other documentation that evaluate the Project, which are attached as EIR Addendum Technical Appendices B-O. Appendix B Air Quality Impact Analysis Appendix C Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment Appendix D Habitat Assessment Appendix E Cultural Resources Study Appendix F Energy Analysis Appendix G Geotechnical Investigation Appendix H Infiltration Report Appendix I Greenhouse Gas Analysis Appendix J Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Appendix K Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan Appendix L Preliminary Hydrology Calculations Appendix M Noise Impact Analysis Appendix N Traffic Study Appendix O Paleontological Resources Assessment d. The Draft and Final SWIP SP PEIR, accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Technical Appendices to the SWIP SP PEIR, Findings and Statement of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and City Council Resolution No. 2012-035, as well as all associated staff reports, memoranda, public comments and other materials relating to the originally approved project and SWIP SP PEIR, which are all herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at City of Fontana Planning Division; 8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Introduction Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 1-5 1.4 Review and Consideration of this EIR Addendum The City of Fontana Planning Department directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR Addendum. Although prepared with assistance of the consulting firm T&B Planning, Inc., the content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this EIR Addendum reflect the sole independent judgment of the City. This EIR Addendum will be forwarded, along with the previously certified SWIP SP PEIR, to the Fontana Planning Commission for review as part of their deliberations concerning the Project. A public hearing will be held before the Planning Commission to evaluate the merits of the Project and the adequacy of this EIR Addendum. Public comments will be heard at the hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission will take action to approve, conditionally approve, or deny approval of the Project. If no appeal is filed, then the decision of the Planning Commission would be final. However, if the Planning Commission’s decision is appealed, the Fontana City Council will hold a public hearing to consider the Project. As part of their review of the Project, if appealed, the City Council would review and consider the report of the Director of Planning, the minutes of the Planning Commission, the Project’s staff report, and any comments made by members of the public. At the conclusion of the public hearing for the appeal, the City Council would sustain, modify, reject, or overrule the decision of the Planning Commission, based on its own independent judgment. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Setting Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 2-1 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 2.1 Project Location The Project Site is at the southwest corner of the Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue intersection in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. The Project Site is in the southwest portion of the City and is approximately 1.6 roadway miles southwest of the Cherry Avenue on/off-ramps to Interstate 10 (I-10) and approximately 3.4 roadway miles east of the Jurupa Street on/off-ramps to Interstate 15 (I-15). The Project’s location is illustrated in Figure 2-1, Regional Map, Figure 2-2, Vicinity Map, and Figure 2-3, USGS Topographic Map. 2.2 Existing Condition of Project Site As shown on Figure 2-4 through Figure 2-6, the Project Site contains a mixture of uses under existing conditions, including legal non-conforming residences and industrial uses (commercial trailer storage and auto body repair). The Project Site is heavily disturbed, mostly paved with concrete, and has patches of bare dirt. Chain link fencing is installed along the Site’s northern and western boundaries and between individual parcels within the Site. Portions of the Project Site are vacant and to prevent the vacant structures on-Site from falling into a state of disrepair and becoming blighted, the property owner has begun the process of demolishing vacant structures on the Site under approved City of Fontana Demolition Permit Nos. BLD21-004363 through -004367 and BLD21- 007257 and -007258. Although the Project Site historically contained several residences, these residences were present at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified in 2012 and demolition of these units was included within the scope of the project evaluated by the SWIP SP PEIR. 2.3 Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses The Project area was historically used for rural residential and agricultural land uses before transitioning to commercial/industrial land uses beginning in the 1950s (Waterstone, 2021, pp. 16-19). In recent years, the Project area has begun to transition to a hub of warehousing and distribution land uses. Existing land uses surrounding the Project Site include the following: North: Santa Ana Avenue is immediately north of the Project Site. Properties north of the Project Site, on the opposite side of Santa Ana Avenue, consist of industrial uses (vehicle and truck/trailer storage) and legal non-conforming residential uses. South: Properties immediately south of the Project Site include industrial uses (auto storage yard, auto parts store, paving company) and a vacant lot under existing conditions. The City is reviewing a development application to re-develop an approximately five-acre property that abuts the southeast corner of the Project Site with an approximately 87,000 sq. ft. warehouse distribution facility. Properties further south, on the opposite side of Rose Avenue, are occupied by an under construction industrial complex that will contain two buildings with a combined total building area of approximately 157,000 sq. ft. East: Banana Avenue is immediately east of the Project Site. Properties east of the Project Site, on the opposite side of Banana Avenue, consist of two warehouse distribution buildings – one building with approximately 297,000 sq. ft. of building area and the other with approximately 200,000 sq. ft. of building area – both of which are operational under existing conditions. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Setting Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 2-2 West: Properties immediately west of the Project Site consist of commercial uses (truck repair, tire shop) and industrial uses (manufacturing). Calabash Avenue is located further west of the Project Site. Properties further west, on the opposite side of Calabash Avenue, consist of industrial uses (vehicle storage) and legal non-conforming residential uses. 2.4 Existing General Plan and Zoning The City of Fontana General Plan and SWIP SP are the prevailing long-range planning documents that pertain to the Project Site. The City of Fontana General Plan Land Use Map identifies the Project Site as being within the SWIP SP area and designates the Project Site for Light Industrial (I-L) land uses. The SWIP SP establishes the specific zoning regulations, including development standards and design guidelines, for each of its nine (9) development districts. The Project Site is currently located within the Slover West Industrial District (SWD), which allows a mixture of industrial land uses, including general light industrial, manufacturing, warehousing, and logistics-based distribution uses. At the time the SWIP SP was adopted and the SWIP SP PEIR was certified, the Project Site was located within the Jurupa North Research and Development District (JND). Thus, for purposes of the analysis provided in this EIR Addendum, the potential environmental effects associated with the Project are compared against the environmental effects disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR for buildout of the JND area. The SWIP SP provides for the JND area to be re-developed with a mixture of development types and uses including light industrial, warehousing, logistics-based distribution, office, flex tech, research and development, and service commercial. The SWIP SP EIR assume that only 392,934 s.f. of existing development in the JND area would be retained and that a maximum of 7,739,500 s.f. of new development would be constructed in the JND area (for a total of 8,132,434 s.f. of total building area within the JND area). As a result, the SWIP SP PEIR assumed that the Project Site would be re- developed, with the proposed warehousing and distribution use as an allowable use for the subject property, and analyzed the potential impacts of such re-development accordingly. Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 2-3 Regional Map o o o o o SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY %&'(10 %&'(15 ·|}þ60 ·|}þ210 ·|}þ91 %&'(215San Bernardino Corona Chino ^_#PROJECT SITE Lytle Creek Wash %&'(215 %&'(15 %&'(10 ·|}þ210 ·|}þ91 ·|}þ60 %&'(15 %&'(215 Riverside Ontario Fontana Jurupa Valley Colton Norco!Upland Rancho Cucamonga Eastvale Rialto SAN TA A NA RIV E R Flabob Airport Riverside Municipal Airport Ontario International Airport Source(s): ESRI, Nearmap Imagery (2021), SB County (2021), RCTLMA (2021) 0 1.5 30.75 Miles Figure 2-1 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Setting Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 2-4 Vicinity Map %&'(10 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY FontanaOntario Jurupa Valley San BernardinoCounty RanchoCucamonga CAMPBELL ST#PROJECT SITE %&'(10 Ontario JURUPA AVE VALLEY BLVD SLOVER AVE CHERRY AVEBEECH AVEMULBERRY AVESAN BERNARDINO AVEFOURTH ST AIRPORT DR ETIWANDA AVESource(s): ESRI, SB County (2021), RCTLMA (2021), SCAG (2021) 0 1,500 3,000750 Feet Figure 2-2 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Setting Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 2-5 USGS Topographic Map#PROJECT SITE Source(s): ESRI, USGS (2019) 0 500 1,000250 Feet Figure 2-3 Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Setting %&'(10 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-1 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project evaluated by this EIR Addendum consists of two discretionary proposals: a Design Review Project (City Case No. DRP 21-041) and a Tentative Parcel Map (City Case No. TPM 21-023). The proposed discretionary actions are collectively referred to as Master Case No. 21-103. The application materials for the Project are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and copies are available for review at the City of Fontana Community Development Department, Planning Division, located at 8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, California, 92335. The individual components of the Project are discussed below. 3.1 Project Components 3.1.1 Design Review Project No. 21-041 (DRP 21-041) DRP 21-041 entails the redevelopment of the Project Site in conformance with the property’s I-L General Plan land use designation and SWIP SP zoning designation. DRP 21-041 complies with applicable design standards from Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 9, Article V (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards). DRP 21-041 provides the following. A. Conceptual Site Plan As illustrated on, Figure 3-1, Conceptual Site Plan, the Project is designed as a generally rectangular-shaped industrial warehouse building with its longer walls oriented parallel to the Project Site’s northern boundary and southern boundary and its shorter walls oriented parallel to the site’s western boundary and eastern boundary. The proposed 341,838 sq. ft. warehouse building would consist of approximately 309,397 square feet (s.f.) of warehouse space with 32,441 s.f. of supporting office floor space (including mezzanine). A gate-secured truck court with fifty-one (51) loading docks and eighty-five (85) trailer parking stalls would be provided on the south side of the building. The building’s trash enclosures would be located inside the secured truck court and would not be visible from the public streets that abut the Project Site. The site plan provides 91 automobile parking spaces on the east side of the building, including disabled access spaces and “Clean Air” parking spaces provided in accordance with the California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen). A 14-foot-tall solid concrete screen wall is provided along the eastern edge of the truck court to screen the loading docks and trailer parking spaces from view of the Banana Avenue public right-of-way. Additionally, 8-foot-tall metal fencing is provided along the portions of the western and southern property lines that abut the truck court (including the truck access lane on the west side of the proposed building) for site security. Access to/from the Project Site would be provided from one private driveway connecting to Santa Ana Avenue and two private driveways connecting to Banana Avenue. The proposed driveway to Santa Ana Avenue would be restricted to truck traffic only and would allow full access (left and right turns in and out of the site). The driveways proposed along Banana Avenue both would allow full access; however, the northern driveway would be restricted to passenger vehicles while the southern driveway could be utilized by passenger vehicles or trucks. B. Conceptual Architecture Plan The proposed building would feature a varied roofline for visual interest and to reduce the perceived bulk and scale of the building; the building height would vary between 45 feet and 51 feet above the finished floor elevation. The building would be constructed with painted concrete tilt-up panels and low-reflective, grey-glazed glass. The exterior color palette for the proposed building is comprised of various neutral colors, including shades Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-2 of white and gray with accents of yellow. Articulated building elements, mullions, and aluminum canopies as decorative elements. The proposed architectural elevations for the warehouse building are illustrated on Figure 3-2, Conceptual Architectural Elevations, and the proposed materials are illustrated on Figure 3-3, Conceptual Material Board. The proposed warehouse building would meet the minimum energy efficiency requirements of CalGreen base tier, which provides efficient office and warehouse lighting and efficient heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, and insulated glazing and walls in the office portion of the building and will provide electric vehicle (EV)-ready parking stalls as required by CalGreen. C. Conceptual Landscape Plan The Project Site has minimal plant/tree cover under existing conditions, all of which would be removed during Project construction. Proposed landscaping would be ornamental in nature and would feature drought-tolerant trees, shrubs, and accent plants in addition to a variety of groundcovers. As shown on Figure 3-4, Conceptual Landscape Plan, trees, shrubs, and groundcover are proposed along the Project Site’s interfaces with Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue, respectively. Landscaping also would occur at building entries and in and around automobile parking areas. The truck court would be devoid of plant materials to avoid inference with truck movements. Prior to building permit issuance, the Project Applicant would be required to submit final planting and irrigation plans to the City of Fontana for review and approval. The plans are required to comply with the “Landscape and Water Conservation Ordinance” from Chapter 28, Article IV, Section 28-91 through 28-119 of the Fontana Municipal Code, which establishes requirements for landscape design, automatic irrigation system design, and water-use efficiency. 3.1.2 Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 21-023) The proposed tentative parcel map would consolidate the Project Site’s twelve existing parcels – APNs 0236-161- 04, -10, -31, -32, -33, -34, -35, -36, -44, -45, -46, and -77 – into one parcel consisting of approximately 15.0-gross- acres (13.4-net-acres), as shown on Figure 3-5, Proposed Tentative Parcel Map. 3.2 Project Technical Characteristics 3.2.1 Public Road Improvements The Project Site abuts two public streets: Santa Ana Avenue to the north and Banana Avenue to the east. As part of the Project, frontage improvements would be made to each of these streets, as follows: Santa Ana Avenue Under existing conditions, four driveways connect to the Project Site to Santa Ana Avenue; all existing driveways connected to the Project Site would be removed and the south side of Santa Ana Avenue would be improved along the Site frontage to provide its ultimate half-width, including a 34-foot-wide paved vehicular travel way, curb and gutter, and a 12-foot parkway that includes a curb adjacent park strip and a six-foot-wide sidewalk. Banana Avenue Under existing condition, five driveways connect the Project Site to Banana Avenue; all existing driveways connected to the Project Site would be removed and the west side of Banana Avenue would be improved along the site frontage to provide its ultimate half-width, including a 32-foot-wide paved vehicular travel way, curb and gutter, and an eight-foot-wide parkway that includes a curb adjacent sidewalk. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-8 3.2.2 Utility Improvements The Project’s proposed utility plan is depicted on Figure 3-6, Conceptual Utility Plan and a description of the Project’s proposed utility plan is provided below. Water Infrastructure The Fontana Water Company (FWC) provides water service to all the structures on the Project Site under existing conditions. As part of Project construction, all existing points of connections (POCs) would be abandoned and removed and four new POCs would be constructed, as described further below. The Project would include the installation of two POCs within the northeast corner of the Project Site consisting of one domestic water line and one irrigation water line (for on-Site landscaping). The Project would also include the installation of two POCs related to fire flow: one fire flow related POC would be installed within the northwest corner of the Project Site and one fire flow related POC would be installed within the southeast corner of the Site. The proposed POCs located along Santa Ana Avenue would connect to the existing 10-inch-diameter water main beneath the roadway. The proposed POC along Banana Avenue would connect to the existing 8-inch-diameter water main beneath the roadway. All proposed water facilities would be designed and constructed in accordance with FWC standards. Additionally, the Project would provide new public fire hydrants along Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue. Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure The City of Fontana provides wastewater conveyance services to all structures on the Project Site under existing conditions. As part of Project construction, all existing POCs would be abandoned and removed. The proposed building would connect to an existing 8-inch-diameter sewer line within Banana Avenue through an on-Site sewer lateral within the southeast corner of the Project Site. The new sewer line connection to the existing sanitary sewer line would be constructed in accordance with City standards. Stormwater Drainage Infrastructure An on-Site storm drain system that consists of a network of catch basins, private storm drain pipes, and an underground infiltration basin is proposed as part of the Project. On-site “first flush” stormwater runoff flows (i.e., typically the first ¾-inch of initial surface runoff after a rainstorm, which contains the highest proportion of waterborne pollution) would be collected by the proposed catch basins and routed through a hydrodynamic separator before flowing into the underground infiltration basin located within the truck court on the southern portion of the Project Site. The hydrodynamic separator is a stormwater treatment device that separates floatables (e.g., trash, debris, and oil) and settleable particles, like sediment, from stormwater runoff. The stormwater that flows into the underground infiltration basin would ultimately percolate into the ground. Stormwater runoff captured after the first flush would bypass the underground infiltration basin and be discharged to an existing storm drain line beneath Banana Avenue. A flow discharge device would be installed to ensure that stormwater runoff flows discharged into the existing storm drain line beneath Banana Avenue would not exceed existing 25-year flow rates. Under the peak storm conditions, the discharge control device could cause the temporary detention (i.e., ponding) of runoff in the Project’s truck court at a maximum depth of 1.3 feet. Dry Utilities The Project would entail the removal of the six (6) existing above-ground transmission line poles along Santa Ana Avenue and three (3) existing above-ground power poles along Banana Avenue and the undergrounding of the associated above-ground electric distribution lines. The undergrounding of the power poles would be performed in coordination with Southern California Edison (SCE). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-11 3.2.3 Construction Characteristics The Project Applicant anticipates that Project construction will span a period of approximately 18 months. The expected duration of each stage of construction is summarized in Table 3-1, Construction Schedule. The composition of the construction equipment fleet that the Project Applicant intends to use to construct the warehouse facility is summarized in Table 3-2, Construction Equipment Fleet. Project construction activities and equipment would be required to comply with the applicable sustainability standards established by Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 9, Article V (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards). Table 3-1 Construction Schedule Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021c, Table 3-2) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-12 Table 3-2 Construction Equipment Fleet Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021c, Table 3-3) The Project’s proposed grading activities would result in physical disturbance to the entire Project Site. Other than the roadway and utility improvements described above, no other off-Site physical impacts are anticipated as part of the Project. Prior to the start of grading, all existing vegetation, and debris, including structures, footings, foundations, rubbles, trees, and root systems shall be removed from the site. Earthwork activities associated with Project construction would result in approximately 23,142 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 23,142 cubic yards of fill; the Project’s grading is anticipated to balance with no import or export of soil required. When grading is complete, the property would be in a generally flat condition, with the highest point of the Project Site located at the northwestern corner of the Project Site (approximately 957 feet above mean sea level [amsl]) and the lowest point located at the southeastern corner of the Project Site (approximately 947 feet amsl); the Project Site would have a slight downward slope from west to east. Underground utilities would be installed to a depth of approximately ten feet below grade. The Project grading concept is illustrated on Figure 3-8, Proposed Grading Plan. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-13 3.2.4 Operational Characteristics The user of the Project is not known at this time but the Project Applicant anticipates that the proposed building will be occupied by warehouse distribution operators, with the potential for up to 25 percent of the building’s floor area to be used for cold/refrigerated storage uses. For purposes of this Addendum, the potential operational impacts from the building were analyzed under the most conservative assumption, that it would operate 24 hours per day, seven days per week, with exterior loading and parking areas illuminated at night. Lighting would be subject to compliance with Fontana Municipal Code Section 30-365, which states that exterior lighting shall be energy-efficient, shielded or recessed, and directed downward and away from adjoining properties. The building is designed such that business operations would be conducted within the enclosed building, except for traffic movement, parking, and the loading, and unloading of tractor trailers at designated loading bays. As a practical matter, dock doors on warehouse buildings are not occupied by a truck at all times of the day. There are typically many more dock door positions on warehouse buildings than are needed for receiving and shipping volumes. The dock doors that are in use at any given time are usually selected based on interior building operation efficiencies. In other words, trucks ideally dock in the position closest to where the goods carried by the truck are stored inside the warehouse. As a result, many dock door positions are frequently inactive throughout the day. Pursuant to State law, on-road diesel-fueled trucks are required to comply with various air quality and greenhouse gas emission standards, including but not limited to the type of fuel used, engine model year stipulations, aerodynamic features, and idling time restrictions. Compliance with State law is mandatory. In addition, Project operational activities and equipment would be required to comply with the applicable sustainability standards established by Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 9, Article V (Industrial Commerce Centers Sustainability Standards). During long-term operating conditions, employees, visitors, and vehicles hauling goods will travel to and from the Project Site daily. Using the trip generation rates given in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition) and based on calculations from the Project’s transportation analysis (Appendix N.1), the Project is calculated to generate approximately 616 total vehicle trips per day, including 45 trips during the morning peak hour and 49 during the evening peak hour. The proposed warehouse facility is estimated to result in a demand for approximately 29,480 gallons of water per day12. For purposes of analysis herein, the Project is estimated to result in a generation rate of approximately 29,480 gallons of wastewater per day. The wastewater generate rate used is conservative because it assumes that all water used by the Project enters the wastewater system; however, the Project’s water demand including landscape irrigation, which does not flow into the sewer system or require wastewater treatment. Based on calculations from the Project’s energy report (Appendix F), the Project’s energy use is estimated at approximately 3,358,318 kWh per year, and natural gas usage is estimated at approximately 4,086,455 thousand British thermal units per year (kBTU/yr)3. 1 FWC standard demand rates for industrial warehouse/distribution land use are 2,200 gallons per acre per day. 2 13.4 acres x 2,200 gallons/acre/day 3 Although the Project will not receive natural gas service, in order to provide the most conservative analysis, this Addendum assumes the Project will utilize natural gas based on the default demand projections of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Project Description Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 3-15 3.3 Summary of Requested Actions The City of Fontana has primary approval responsibility for the Project. As such, the City is serving the Lead Agency for this EIR Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15050. The City will consider the information contained in this EIR Addendum and this EIR Addendum’s Administrative Record in its decision-making processes. In the event of approval of the Project and this EIR Addendum, the City subsequently would issue administrative permits to implement the Project. A list of the primary actions related to the Project under City jurisdiction and the jurisdiction of other agencies is provided in Table 3-3, Summary of Project Approvals/Permits. This EIR Addendum covers all federal, State, local government and quasi-government approvals which may be needed to construct or implement the Project, whether or not they are explicitly listed in Table 3-3, or elsewhere in this EIR Addendum (CEQA Guidelines Section 15124(d)). Table 3-3 Summary of Project Approvals/Permits Public Agency Approvals and Decisions City of Fontana Project – City of Fontana Discretionary Approvals City of Fontana Planning Commission • DRP 21-041 • TPM 20499 (Case No. TPM 21-000023) • EIR Addendum along with the appropriate CEQA Findings Subsequent City of Fontana Discretionary and Ministerial Approvals City of Fontana Implementing Approvals • Final Maps, parcel mergers, or parcel consolidations, as may be appropriate • Precise site plan(s) and landscaping/irrigation plan(s), as may be appropriate • Grading Permits • Building Permits • Encroachment/Construction Permits • Road Improvement Plans • Public right-of way dedications • Sewer and storm drain infrastructure • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Other Agencies – Subsequent Approvals and Permits Fontana Water Company • On and off-site water infrastructure • Removal of existing water meters Southern California Edison • Undergrounding existing power lines Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board • Construction Activity General Construction Permit • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit • WQMP 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-2 4.1 Aesthetics Would the Project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR identified scenic vistas adjacent to the southeastern portion of the SWIP SP area in the form of uninterrupted, panoramic views of the San Gabriel/San Bernardino Mountains to the north and Jurupa Mountains to the south, as well as scenic vistas in the form of isolated windrows viewed across large open spaces and along several roadways within the southern portion of the SWIP SP. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that although the SWIP SP includes various design features to minimize impacts to scenic vistas and would comply with existing local requirements related to scenic vistas, implementation of the SWIP SP would result in significant and unavoidable direct and cumulatively considerable impacts to scenic vistas and there were no feasible MMs that would reduce the impacts to a level below significance. The City of Fontana adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact in conjunction with certification of the SWIP SP EIR. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is located in the western portion of the SWIP SP area, which is not an area identified within the SWIP SP PEIR as having scenic vistas. The Project Site does not provide scenic vistas of contiguous, undisturbed windrows (the Project Site has sparse ornamental vegetation) and does not provide prominent views of local scenic resources. Implementation of the Project is not anticipated to substantially change views of the Jurupa Mountains looking southeast across the Project Site from Santa Ana Avenue as views of the Jurupa Mountains are obstructed by existing structures and trees located on-site, east of Banana Avenue, and south of Rose Avenue. Views of the San Gabriel/San Bernardino Mountains from Banana Avenue are currently partially obstructed by existing structures and trees that occur on-site and around the Project Site. The implementation of the Project would further obstruct views of the San Gabriel/San Bernardino Mountains from Banana Avenue; however, the type and character of development that would occur on the Project Site is similar to what was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR and the obstruction/loss of views of the San Gabriel/San Bernardino Mountains from public viewpoints within the SWIP SP area was previously anticipated and disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to scenic vistas than the significant and unavoidable direct and cumulative considerable impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP area does not contain any geologic formations or historic structures that could be characterized as scenic resources. Further, the SWIP SP PEIR concludes that compliance with Article III - Preservation of Heritage, Significant and Specimen Trees of the City of Fontana Municipal Code would minimize impacts to mature trees within the SWIP SP. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts to scenic resources would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: According to the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), there are no State- designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the Project Site (CalTrans, 2021). Furthermore, the Project Site does not contain any scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings. Accordingly, the Project would have no impact on any scenic resources, including scenic resources within a state Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-3 scenic highway corridor. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to scenic resources within a State scenic highway than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public Views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that construction activities within the SWIP SP area that occur near residentially-zoned property would result in temporary significant impacts to the visual quality/character of the SWIP SP area. However, the SWIP SP PEIR included a MM (MM 4.1-3a) that would require development projects located within or near residentially-zoned property to incorporate practices during construction to minimize visual impact. With application of the identified mitigation, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts to visual quality/character during construction would be less than significant. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that long-term impacts to visual quality/character would be less than significant with mandatory adherence to the land use and development regulations established in the SWIP SP. Analysis of Project: Project-related changes to local visual character would be less than significant during near- term construction activities because construction activity is common in the City (and in the SWIP SP area), would be temporary in nature, and would not substantially degrade the visual character of the area. Because the Project Site is neither zoned for residential land uses nor abuts residentially-zoned properties, the City of Fontana determined that SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.1-3a is not applicable to the Project and that the Project would not be required to implement any special construction practices to address adverse aesthetics impacts. The proposed warehouse building would reflect a contemporary architectural design consisting of concrete tilt-up panels painted various natural shades of white and gray, yellow accents, low-reflective, grey-glazed glass, and decorative building elements. The Project Site would be planted with an attractive selection of plants, including trees, shrubs, and groundcovers, that would improve the visual condition of the Project Site relative to existing conditions. The City conducted a thorough review of the Project’s design and determined that the Project would be consistent with the applicable development standards and design guidelines from the SWIP SP. Accordingly, there are no components of the Project that would degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and surroundings beyond what was evaluated and disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to visual character and quality than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that implementation of the SWIP SP would have the potential to create new sources of outdoor light and glare in the form of streetlights, exterior lighting, and security lighting, as well as glare effects caused by reflective surfaces. However, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that light and glare impacts would be less than significant because development within the SWIP SP area would be required to comply with the lighting requirements of the Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 30 which would minimize the potential for light and/or glare effects to occur. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that light and/or glare impacts from implementation of the SWIP SP would be less than significant. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-4 Analysis of Project: The Project would be required to comply with the SWIP SP design guidelines applicable to outdoor lighting. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the outdoor lighting standards contained in the Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 30. The Municipal Code lighting standards govern the placement and design of outdoor lighting fixtures to ensure adequate lighting for public safety while also minimizing light pollution and glare and precluding public nuisances (e.g., blinking/flashing lights, unusually high intensity, or bright lighting). Through mandatory compliance with these standards, Project implementation would result in a less-than-significant impact related to lighting and glare by: 1) ensuring that the Project would be compatible with the setting of the surrounding area; 2) preventing substantial light or glare from falling on public streets or property adjoining the Project Site; and 3) preventing “spillover” effects from the Project Site that could interfere with day or nighttime views in the area. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to lighting/glare than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that implementation of the SWIP SP would not convert any “Prime Farmland,” “Unique Farmland,” or “Farmland of Statewide Importance” to non-agricultural use, as there is no prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance located within the SWIP SP boundaries. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impact would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is mapped by the California Department of Conservation (DOC) as “Urban and Built-Up Land” (DOC, 2019). Implementation of the Project would, therefore, not result in the conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. No impact would occur. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to agricultural resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that none of the lands within the SWIP SP area were designated or zoned for agricultural use, or subject to a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impacts would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is not zoned for agricultural use. The SWIP SP PEIR determined that there are no Williamson Act contracts within the SWIP SP area; therefore, under existing conditions, the Project Site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or with a Williamson Act contract. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to agricultural resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-5 c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that there are no areas zoned for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production exist within the vicinity of the SWIP SP. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is not zoned for forest land or timberland. Additionally, there are no lands in the Project Site vicinity that are zoned for forest land or timberland. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not conflict with, or cause the rezoning of, forest land or timberland. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to forestry resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that the SWIP SP exists within an urbanized area, occupied primarily by industrial uses, and that no forest land exists within the site vicinity. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is not zoned for forest land nor does any forest land exist in the vicinity of the SWIP SP. The Project Site, and the surrounding area, is highly urbanized and is used primarily for industrial purposes (Google Earth Pro, 2021). Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of forest land, nor will any forest land be converted to non-forest land. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to forestry resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that there are no active agricultural areas or forest land areas within the SWIP SP area. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impacts would occur. Analysis of Project: As previously discussed above, the current Project Site does not include Farmland (defined as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance) or forest land and, therefore, would not convert Farmland to non-agricultural use of forest land to non-forest use. The Project would not result in any impacts to agricultural and/or forestry resources. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to agricultural/forestry resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.3 Air Quality An Air Quality Impact Analysis (dated December 10, 2021) (Urban Crossroads, 2021a) and Mobile Health Risk Assessment (date January 5, 2022) (Urban Crossroads, 2022a) were prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Urban Crossroads) to evaluate potential criteria and hazardous air pollutant emissions that could result from the Project’s construction and operation. These reports are included as Appendices B and C, respectively, to this EIR Addendum and their findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-6 Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that emissions resulting from buildout of the SWIP SP would exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would potentially result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards. Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that buildout of the SWIP SP would conflict with the 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the South Coast Air Basin (2007 AQMP). The SWIP SP PEIR included mitigation to minimize the SWIP SP’s air pollutant emissions; however, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that air quality impacts related to a conflict with or obstruction of the implementation of the 2007 AQMP would be significant and unavoidable. The City of Fontana adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact in conjunction with certification of the SWIP SP EIR. Analysis of Project: The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB or “Basin”). The SCAQMD is principally responsible for air pollution control in the SCAB. The SCAQMD has adopted a series of AQMPs to reduce air emissions in the Basin. When the SWIP SP PEIR was certified, the SCAQMD’s 2007 AQMP was the applicable air quality plan for the SCAB. Since that time, the SCAQMD has adopted the 2016 AQMP which was approved in March 2017 and is in effect at this time. For purposes of evaluation and to determine whether the Project would result in any new or more severe significant air quality impacts than disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, consistency with both the 2007 AQMP, which was applicable at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was written, and the 2016 AQMP, which is applicable today, are discussed below. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that buildout of the SWIP SP would conflict with the 2007 AQMP due to the resulting operational emissions that would impede the region’s ability to meet State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards. The Project would implement the SWIP SP land use plan but would, in fact, generate substantially fewer net daily traffic trips than the land uses assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR (the Project’s daily traffic is discussed in further detail in EIR Addendum Subsection 4.17). Thus, the Project would reduce vehicle tailpipe emissions within the SWIP SP area relative to the levels disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, although the emissions reductions provided by the Project would not be sufficient to avoid the significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2007 AQMP that was disclosed in the SWIP EIR. Further, the Project will be required to comply with much stricter regulations than those that existed in 2012, including regulations applicable to truck and other vehicle emissions that are much more protective of the environment, which will incrementally reduce emissions when compared to the emissions that the SWIP SP PEIR assumed would occur from the development of the Project Site. Implementation of the Project would contribute to a significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2007 AQMP; but, would neither result or contribute to a new, significant conflict with the 2007 AQMP nor increase the severity of the conflict previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, and would instead result in less severe air quality impacts. The Project is consistent with the SWIP SP, which was approved by the City of Fontana in 2012, reflected on the City of Fontana’s General Plan Land Use Map, and accounted for by the growth projections utilized by SCAQMD during preparation of the 2016 AQMP. Thus, the Project would be consistent with the 2016 AQMP, which relies on adopted local General Plans for growth (and emissions) projections. Furthermore, the Project would not increase the severity of existing air quality violations; cause or contribute to new violations; or delay the timely attainment of the air quality standards established in the 2016 AQMP (as discussed under the responses to Items “b” and “c” of Subsection 4.3, below). Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not conflict with or Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-7 obstruct implementation of the 2016 AQMP. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to related to air quality than the significant and unavoidable impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that implementation of the SWIP SP would result in cumulatively considerable net increases of criteria pollutants, including ozone precursors, for which the SCAB is in non-attainment of applicable federal and/or state ambient air quality standards. The SWIP SP PEIR included mitigation to minimize the SWIP SP’s air pollutant emissions; however, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that cumulative air quality impacts would be significant and unavoidable. The City of Fontana adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact in conjunction with certification of the SWIP SP EIR. Analysis of Project: The Project Applicant would redevelop the Project Site with land uses planned by the SWIP SP; therefore, the Project would not generate air pollutant emissions that were not already anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Further, as stated above, regulations enacted since 2012 would generally reduce the Project’s emissions when compared to the emissions assumed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Notwithstanding, an Air Quality Impact Analysis (AQIA, Appendix B) was prepared to quantify air pollutant emission associated with the implementation of the Project. The Project’s maximum construction-related criteria pollutant emissions and operational criteria pollutant emissions are summarized in Table 4-1, Project Construction Emissions Summary, and Table 4-2, Project Operational Emissions Summary, respectively. The methodology used to calculate the air pollutant emissions associated with the Project is described in detail in Appendix B of this EIR Addendum. It should be noted that although the Project would be required to comply with all applicable MMs from the SWIP SP PEIR that were required to reduce air pollution, the analysis below does not take credit for any emission reductions that would result from the implementation of the SWIP SP PEIR MMs. Thus, the actual construction and operational emissions associated with the Project is expected to be less than the quantities disclosed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2. As shown in Table 4-1 and Table 4-2, Project-related construction and operational activities would not exceed the SCAQMD significance threshold for any criterial pollutant. The SCAQMD considers any project-specific criteria pollutant emissions that exceed applicable SCAQMD significance thresholds also to be cumulatively considerable. Conversely, if a project does not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds, then SCAQMD considers that project’s air pollutant emissions to not be cumulatively considerable because criteria pollutant emissions that fall below the significance threshold would not adversely affect SCAQMD’s ability to meet air quality standards within the SCAB. Thus, because Project construction and operation would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds, implementation of the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, including any pollutants for which the SCAB does not attain applicable federal or State ambient air quality standards. Furthermore, it bears noting that the Project operations would generate substantially fewer net daily traffic trips than the land uses assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR (the Project’s daily traffic is discussed in further detail in EIR Addendum Subsection 4.17). Thus, the Project would reduce vehicle tailpipe emissions within the SWIP SP area relative to the levels disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, although the emissions reductions provided by the Project would not be sufficient to avoid the significant and unavoidable cumulative impact that was disclosed in the SWIP EIR. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to related to air quality than the significant and unavoidable direct and cumulative considerable impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-8 Table 4-1 Project Construction Emissions Summary Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021a, Table 3-5) Table 4-2 Project Operational Emissions Summary Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021a, Table 3-8) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-9 Mitigation: Although the Project would not contribute cumulatively considerable volumes of criteria pollutant emissions, the Project would be required to comply with applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce cumulative air pollutant emissions across the SWIP SP area, as presented below in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). MM 4.2-1a All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operation condition so as to reduce emissions. The construction contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per the manufacturer’s specification. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. The following additional MMs, as determined applicable by the City Engineer, shall be included as conditions of the Grading Permit issuance: • Provide temporary traffic controls such as flag person, during all phases of construction to maintain smooth traffic flow. • Provide dedicated turn lanes for movement of construction trucks and equipment on- and off-site. • Reroute construction trucks away from congested streets or sensitive receptor areas. • Appoint a construction relations officer to act as a community liaison concerning on-site construction activity including resolution of issues related to PM10 generation. • Improve traffic flow by signal synchronization, and ensure that all vehicles and equipment will be properly tuned and maintained according to manufactures’ specifications. • Require the use of 2010 and newer diesel haul trucks (e.g., material delivery trucks and soil import/export). If the lead agency determines that 2010 model year or newer diesel trucks cannot be obtained the lead agency shall use trucks that meet EPA 2007 model year NOX and PM emissions requirements. • During project construction, all internal combustion engines/construction equipment operating on the Project Site shall meet EPA-Certified Tier 3 emissions standards, or higher according to the following: o January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2014: All off-road diesel-powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet Tier 3 off-road emissions standards. In addition, all construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations. o Post-January 1, 2015: All off-road diesel-powered construction equipment greater than 50 hp shall meet the Tier 4 emissions standards, where available. In addition, all construction equipment shall be outfitted with BACT devices certified by CARB. Any emissions control device used by the contractor shall achieve emissions reductions that are no less than what could be achieved by a Level 3 diesel emissions control strategy for a similarly sized engine as defined by CARB regulations. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-10 o A copy of each unit’s certified tier specification, BACT documentation, and CARB or SCAQMD operating permit shall be provided at the time of mobilization of each applicable unit of equipment. MM 4.2-1b Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, all Applicants shall submit construction plans to the City of Fontana denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction MMs imposed by the SCAQMD as well as City Planning Staff. MM 4.2-1c All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Specifically, the following MMs shall be implemented, as feasible: • Use coatings and solvents with a VOC content lower than that required under AQMD Rule 1113. • Construct or build with materials that do not require painting. • Require the use of pre-painted construction materials. MM 4.2-1d Projects that result in the construction of more than 19 single-family residential units, 40 multifamily residential units, or 45,000 square feet of retail/commercial/industrial space shall be required to apply paints either by hand or high volume, low pressure (HVLP) spray. These MMs may reduce volatile organic compounds (VOC) associated with the application of paints and coatings by an estimated 60 to 75 percent. Alternatively, the contractor may specify the use of low volatility paints and coatings. Several of currently available primers have VOC contents of less than 0.85 pounds per gallon (e.g., dulux professional exterior primer 100 percent acrylic). Top coats can be less than 0.07 pounds per gallon (8 grams per liter) (e.g., lifemaster 2000-series). This latter measure would reduce these VOC emissions by more than 70 percent. Larger projects should incorporate both the use of HVLP or hand application and the requirement for low volatility coatings. MM 4.2-1e All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. MM 4.2-1f Prior to the issuance of grading permits or approval of grading plans for future development projects within the project area, future developments shall include a dust control plan as part of the construction contract standard specifications. The dust control plan shall include MMs to meet the requirements of SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Such MMs may include, but are not limited to, the following: • Phase and schedule activities to avoid high-ozone days and first-stage smog alerts. • Discontinue operation during second-stage smog alerts. • All haul trucks shall be covered prior to leaving the site to prevent dust from impacting the surrounding areas. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-11 • Comply with AQMD Rule 403, particularly to minimize fugitive dust and noise to surrounding areas. • Moisten soil each day prior to commencing grading to depth of soil cut. • Water exposed surfaces at least twice a day under calm conditions, and as often as needed on windy days or during very dry weather in order to maintain a surface crust and minimize the release of visible emissions from the construction site. • Treat any area that will be exposed for extended periods with a soil conditioner to stabilize soil or temporarily plant with vegetation. • Wash mud-covered tires and under carriages of trucks leaving construction sites. • Provide for street sweeping, as needed, on adjacent roadways to remove dirt dropped by construction vehicles or mud, which would otherwise be carried off by trucks departing Project Sites. • Securely cover all loads of fill coming to the site with a tight-fitting tarp. • Cease grading during periods when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. • Provide for permanent sealing of all graded areas, as applicable, at the earliest practicable time after soil disturbance. • Use low-sulfur diesel fuel in all equipment. • Use electric equipment whenever practicable. • Shut off engines when not in use. MM 4.2-2c All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods pursuant to Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 2485, which limits idle times to not more than five minutes. MM 4.2-2d The City shall require that both industrial and commercial uses designate preferential parking for vanpools. MM 4.2-2e The proposed commercial and industrial areas shall incorporate food service. MM 4.2-2f All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to post both bus and MetroLink schedules in conspicuous areas. MM 4.2-2g All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be requested to configure their operating schedules around the MetroLink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. MM 4.2-2j All residential, commercial, and industrial structures shall be required to incorporate light colored roofing materials. Note: The City determined that the following SWIP SP PEIR MMs do not apply to the Project or have been satisfied as part of the City’s review of the Project’s proposed entitlement applications: MMs 4.2-2a and 4.2-2b do not apply to the Project based on the location of the Project Site within the SWIP SP area; MMs 4.2-2h and 4.2-2i do not apply to the Project because these MMs only apply to residential and commercial buildings; and MMs 4.2-2k Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-12 and 4.2-2l were satisfied by the Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix B) and Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment (Appendix C) prepared for the Project. In sum, implementation of the Project with these mitigation measures would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to related to air quality than the significant and unavoidable direct and cumulative considerable impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that construction and operation of the SWIP SP would not expose any sensitive receptors to substantial, localized pollutant concentrations. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that air quality impacts related to localized pollutant concentrations would be less than significant and no mitigation was required. Analysis of Project: The Project would redevelop the Project Site with land uses planned by the SWIP SP; therefore, the types of air pollutant emissions generated by the Project already were anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Further, as stated above, regulations enacted since 2012 would generally reduce the Project’s emissions when compared to the emissions assumed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Notwithstanding, an air quality impact analysis was performed to quantify localized criteria air pollutant emissions associated with construction and operation of the Project. The methodology used to calculate the localized criteria air pollutant emissions associated with the Project is described in detail in Appendix B. Project-related construction localized emissions are presented in Table 4-3, Project Construction Localized Emissions Summary. The data presented in Table 4-3 confirms the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for localized air pollutant emissions during construction. Therefore, Project construction would expose sensitive receptors near the Project Site to less-than-significant localized criteria pollutant concentrations. Table 4-3 Project Construction Localized Emissions Summary Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021a, Table 3-10) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-13 Project-related construction localized emissions are presented in Table 4-4, Project Operational Localized Emissions Summary. The data presented in Table 4-4 confirms the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD significance thresholds for localized air pollutant emissions during operation. Therefore, Project operation would expose sensitive receptors near the Project Site to less-than-significant localized criteria pollutant concentrations. Table 4-4 Project Operational Localized Emissions Summary Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021a, Table 3-12) Additionally, a mobile source health risk analysis was prepared to evaluate the potential for localized diesel emissions associated with Project (i.e., truck trips) to result in carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk impacts to nearby residential, worker, and school child receptors near the Project Site. It should be noted that there are no schools located within 0.25-mile (1,320 feet) of the Project Site. Because proximity to toxic emissions is the primary factor for carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic health risk impacts and because approximately 80 percent of toxic emissions settle out of the air between 500 and 800 feet from the source, the Project would not result in substantial adverse impacts to any schools or school child in the vicinity of the Project (Urban Crossroads, 2022a, p. 2). The methodology used to calculate Project-related localized diesel emissions is described in detail in Appendix C. The results of the mobile source health risk analysis are summarized Table 4-5, Summary of Construction Health Risks and Table 4-6, Summary of Project-Related Diesel Emissions Health Risks which show that the Project’s construction and operation would result in less-than-significant health risks (carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic) to sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity. Table 4-5 Summary of Construction Health Risks Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022a, Table ES-1) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-14 Table 4-6 Summary of Project-Related Diesel Emissions Health Risks Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022a, Table ES-2) Lastly, the Air Quality Impact Analysis concluded that the Project would not produce the volume of traffic required to cause or contribute to the formation of a CO “hot spot” (Urban Crossroads, 2021a, pp. 53-55). Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors near the Project Site to significant pollutant concentrations during construction and operation. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to related to air quality than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting substantial number of people? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would not expose a substantial number of people to objectionable odors. Analysis of Project: Project construction activities could produce odors resulting from construction equipment exhaust, application of asphalt, and/or the application of architectural coatings; however, standard construction practices would minimize the odor emissions and their associated impacts. Furthermore, any odors emitted during construction would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature, and would cease upon the completion of the respective phase of construction. In addition, construction activities on the Project Site would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits the discharge of odorous emissions that would create a public nuisance. Accordingly, the Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during construction. During long-term operation, the proposed Project would include warehousing land uses, which are not typically associated with objectionable odors. The temporary outdoor storage of refuse associated with the proposed Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-15 Project’s long-term operational use could be a potential source of odor; however, Project-generated refuse is required to be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City’s solid waste regulations, thereby precluding any substantial odor effects. Furthermore, the proposed Project would be required to comply with Fontana Municipal Code Section 30-261, Odors, and SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits the discharge of odorous emissions that would create a public nuisance, during long-term operation. As such, long-term operation of the proposed Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. The Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people during either construction or long-term operation; impacts would be less than significant. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to related to objectional odors than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.4 Biological Resources A Habitat Assessment (dated November 22, 2021) (Alden, 2021) was prepared for the Project by Alden Environmental (Alden). The Habitat Assessment evaluates the existing biological resources on the Project Site and evaluates the potential impacts to these resources that may occur as a result of Project implementation. The Habitat Assessment is included as Appendix D to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis herein. Would the Project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that implementation of the SWIP SP had the potential to result in direct and/or indirect impacts to sensitive species, including the Delhi Sands flower loving fly, burrowing owl, northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, western pocket mouse, western mastiff bat, western yellow bat, and San Diego desert woodrat. The SWIP SP PEIR also determined that portions of the SWIP SP area contain habitat for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat, California gnatcatcher, and sensitive pocket mice. Lastly, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that construction activities within the SWIP SP area could disturb/destroy active raptor and/or migratory bird nests, which would be a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.3-1a through 4.3-1h to reduce potential impacts to sensitive species and migratory birds (including the burrowing owl) to a level below significance. Analysis of Project: The entire Project Site is developed and does not support any native or sensitive vegetation communities. Existing uses on-Site included residences, truck/vehicle areas, pavement, structures, and storage areas; however, at the time of the site visit, the Site had been mostly cleared of the previously existing buildings, leaving two houses, debris piles, building foundations, and paved areas (Alden, 2021, p. 3). Due to the developed condition of the Project Site and the amount of human activity that occurs on-site daily, the Project Site has a low likelihood of supporting any of the sensitive species identified in the SWIP SP PEIR as potentially occurring within the SWIP SP area (Alden, 2021, pp. 3-4). No bird nests were observed on-Site; however, birds have the potential Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-16 to build nests on-site (Alden, 2021, p. 4). Accordingly, the Project would be required to comply with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.3-1b to preclude substantial impacts to nesting birds – this MM requires pre-construction nesting bird surveys in the event that construction activities occur during the avian nesting season. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with MM 4.3-1c to preclude potential impacts to bats that may roost in trees on- Site. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts to sensitive wildlife or plant species than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce impacts related to sensitive plant and animal species continue to apply to the Project, as presented below and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). MM 4.3-1b Any future land disturbance for site-specific developments within the Project Site shall be conducted outside of the State-identified bird nesting season (February 15 through September 1). If construction during the nesting season must occur, the site shall be evaluated by a City- approved biologist prior to ground disturbance to determine if nesting birds exist on-site. If any nests are discovered, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest, depending on the species and type of construction activity. Only construction activities approved by the biologist shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. MM 4.3-1c Prior to any ground disturbance, trees scheduled for removal shall be evaluated by a City- approved biologist for roosting bats. If a roost is present the biologist will develop a plan to minimize impacts to the bats to the greatest extent feasible. Note: The City determined that the following SWIP SP PEIR MMs do not apply to the Project or have been satisfied as part of the City’s review of the Project’s proposed entitlement applications: MMs 4.3-1a, 4.3-1d, 4.3-1e, 4.3-1f, 4.3-1g, 4.3-1h do not apply due to the Project Site’s condition as fully developed/disturbed and the lack of natural or sensitive habitat on-site; MM 4.3-3a does not apply due to the lack of natural drainage courses or wetlands on the Project Site. b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would not result in the loss of riparian habitat but could result in the loss or degradation of Designated Critical Habitats of two Federally- listed species: the San Bernardino kangaroo rat (SBKR) and the California gnatcatcher (CAGN). The SWIP SP PEIR applied mitigation (i.e., MMs 4.3-1a through 4.3-1h) to future development projects within the SWIP SP area to reduce potential impacts to sensitive natural communities to less than significant. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is completely developed/disturbed, as it was in 2012 when the SWIP SP PEIR was certified. The Project Site is mostly paved with concrete and has patches of bare dirt. The Project Site does not have any riparian/riverine communities, vernal pools, or potential waters of United States (WUS) or waters of the State (WS) and the Site does not support any aquatic features necessary for the development of these resources (Alden, 2021, p. 3). Accordingly, the Project would not result in significant impacts to riparian habitat Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-17 or other sensitive natural communities. The City determined that the Project would not be subject to MMs 4.3- 1a through 4.3-1h, except for MMs 4.3-1b and 4.3-1c as described in the preceding subsection, due to the lack of riparian habitat or potentially sensitive natural communities on the Project Site. Implementation of the Project would not result in a new or more severe significant impacts to riparian habitats or sensitive natural communities than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that there is a potential for streambeds, wetlands, and/or riparian areas to occur within the SWIP SP area, and that impacts to these water features and vegetation may require compliance with permit requirements of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). The SWIP SP PEIR included MM 4.3-3a requiring jurisdictional delineations be performed for future development proposals that could potentially affect jurisdictional drainages or wetlands. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.3-3a would reduce potential impacts to streambeds, wetlands, and/or riparian to a level below significance. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is completely developed/disturbed, as it was in 2012 when the SWIP SP PEIR was certified. The Project Site does not have any streambeds, wetlands, and/or riparian habitat (Alden, 2021, p. 3). Accordingly, the Project would not result in significant impacts to State or federally protected wetland and SWIP SP MM 4.3-3a would not be applicable to the Project due to the lack of potential streambeds, wetlands, and/or riparian habitat on the Project Site. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to State or federally protected wetlands than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that because the SWIP SP is surrounded by urban development (paved roads, industrial, commercial and residential development, and the I-10 freeway) no migratory corridors exist within or near the SWIP SP area that would be affected by the development of the SWIP SP. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: Under existing conditions, the Project Site has no wildlife habitat value due to its developed/disturbed condition and lack of vegetation (Alden, 2021, p. 3). Moreover, no local or regional wildlife corridors are present within or adjacent to the Project Site (Alden, 2021, p. 5). As such, implementation of the Project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to wildlife movement corridors than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that implementation of the SWIP SP could involve the removal of heritage, significant, or specimen trees. However, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that all development Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-18 within the SWIP SP would be subject to compliance with Chapter 28 Article III of the City’s Municipal Code (which establishes regulations for the protection and preservation of heritage trees, significant trees, and specimen trees on public and private property). Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that mandatory compliance with Chapter 28 Article III of the City’s Municipal Code would ensure that impacts associated with tree removals would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: The Project Applicant would be subject to mandatory compliance with Chapter 28 Article III of the Fontana Municipal Code during the grading and building permit review processes and would be required to demonstrate compliance to the City. Accordingly, the implementation of the Project would not conflict with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance. There are no other local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources that are applicable to the Project. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts due to a conflict with a local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that buildout of the SWIP SP would not conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan because there were no adopted/approved habitat conservation plans applicable to the SWIP SP area at the time that the SWIP SP PEIR was prepared. A recovery plan was released in 1997 for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly that included the SWIP SP area; however, an assessment of the recovery of Delhi Sands flower-loving fly in 2008 indicated that much of the Jurupa Recovery Unit may no longer provide conservation value for Delhi Sands flower-loving fly. Regardless, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with the MMs included in the EIR would reduce potential impacts to the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly to a level below significance. Analysis of Project: There are no habitat conservation plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans that are applicable to the Project Site (CDFW, 2019). As disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, a recovery plan for the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly was released in 1997 that included the SWIP SP area. However, based on soil data published by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Project’s Biological Resources Assessment, the Project Site does not contain Delhi series soils, which are a requirement for the species (USDA, 2019; Alden, 2021, p. 4). Because there is no potential for the Project Site to support the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly, implementation of the Project would not conflict with the provisions of the recovery plan for the species. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with the provisions of an applicable habitat conservation plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts related to conflicts with an adopted habitat conservation plan, natural community conservation plan or other approved habitat conservation plan than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.5 Cultural Resources A Cultural Resources Study (dated November 22, 2021) (BFSA, 2021a) was prepared for the Project by Brian F. Smith and Associated (BFSA) to identify potential archaeological and historical that may be affected by the Project. This report includes the findings from an archaeological pedestrian survey; a cultural records search and sacred Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-19 lands search and an inventory of all recorded archaeological and historical resources located on the Project Site and within a one-mile radius of the Project Site. This report is included as Appendix E to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR identified nine (9) historical resources in the SWIP SP area, none of which were identified as significant historical resources under CEQA. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP area has low sensitivity for historical resources. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs that require future development projects within the SWIP SP area to perform a pre-construction historical resources survey (and implement a mitigation program if important resources are present) and to implement safeguards during grading to protect/preserve historical resources that may be uncovered during grading activities (MMs 4.4-1a and 4.4-1b). With application of the required MMs, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts to historic resources would be less-than-significant. Analysis of Project: In conformance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-1a, a historic resources assessment was conducted for the Project by BFSA. BFSA did not find any evidence of any important historic events or individuals associated with any of the structures on the Project Site and, also, did not observe distinctive characteristics of type, period, region, or method of construction in any of the structures on the Project Site (BFSA, 2021a, pp. 19-21). In addition, BFSA did not observe any historic artifacts on the Project Site (ibid.) BFSA conducted a records search with the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton, which resulted in the identification of 15 previously recorded historic structures within one mile of the Project Site, none of which are located on the Project Site. The historic resources in the Project vicinity include Southern Pacific Railroad alignments, a farm complex, single-family residences, a motel, transmission lines, and the Kaiser Steel Mill. (BFSA, 2021a, p. 18)which suggested that historic buildings and sites associated with the agricultural history of the region are most likely cultural resources to be encountered within the Project Site (BFSA, 2021a, p. 19). Accordingly, the Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to known historical resources. Notwithstanding, BFSA recommended the implementation of a historic artifact recovery program during grading in the event that buried historic artifacts are uncovered. As a standard practice for all development projects in Fontana, the City would require the Project Applicant to comply with conditions of approval that establish protocols for consultation, monitoring, and resource recovery programs during construction. The City’s standard conditions of approval would satisfy BFSA’s recommendations and would be consistent with the requirement of SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4- 1b. With application of the City’s standard conditions of approval and SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-1b, the potential for Project construction activities to adversely impact important, previously unknown/buried historic resources would be less than significant. This determination is consistent with the conclusion from the SWIP SP PEIR, which assumed that the Project Site would be fully developed. The Project would not result in a new or more severe significant impact to historical resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce impacts to cultural resources continue to apply to the Project as listed below and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-20 MM 4.4-1b If any historical resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities and to take appropriate MMs to protect or preserve them for study. Note: The City determined that MM 4.4-1a was satisfied by the Cultural Resources Study (Appendix E) that was prepared for the Project. b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that no archaeological resources or Native American sites exist within the SWIP SP area, and that the likelihood of encountering potentially significant prehistoric archaeological resources within the SWIP SP area is considered low. The City of Fontana consulted with the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians and the Morongo Band of Mission Indians as part of the Senate Bill 18 (SB 18) Native American tribal consultation process for the SWIP SP. The Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians identified the site as being located within the tribe’s Tribal Traditional Use Area. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs to minimize impacts related to Native American resources and previously undiscovered archaeological resources that could be encountered during ground disturbing activities (MMs 4.4-2a through 4.4-2c). Following implementation of mitigation, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts to prehistoric archaeological resources. Analysis of Project: The Project Site was surveyed by BFSA for the presence/absence of prehistoric archaeological resources in accordance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-2a. No prehistoric archaeological artifacts were observed within the Project Site (BFSA, 2021a, pp. 19-21). According to the records search and literature review conducted by BFSA with the SCCIC, there is a low potential for prehistoric sites to be located within the boundaries of the Project Site due to the extensive nature of past ground disturbances and the lack of natural resources associated with prehistoric sites. Additionally, no prehistoric sites are recorded within one mile of the Project Site. (BFSA, 2021a, p. 19) Accordingly, the Project would result in no impacts to any known prehistoric archeological resources. However, as a standard practice for all development projects in Fontana, the City would require the Project Applicant to comply with conditions of approval that establish protocols for consultation, monitoring, and resource recovery to protect inadvertent discoveries of buried/masked prehistoric archaeological resources. The City’s standard conditions of approval are consistent with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-2b, which requires the Project Applicant to retain a qualified archaeological monitor during grading activities and implement a mitigation recovery program, and SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-2c, which requires the Project Applicant to consider the requests of the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians and Morongo Band of Mission Indians concerning procedures for the treatment of any Native American cultural resources. Compliance with the City’s standard conditions of approval, which would ensure compliance with mitigation measures from the SWIP SP PEIR, would ensure the Project’s potential impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant. The SWIP SP EIR assumed that the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to archaeological resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce impacts to cultural resources continue to apply to the Project as listed below and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-21 MM 4.4-2b If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading, the developer shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities and to take appropriate MMs to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Fontana shall: • Enact interim MMs to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities at a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the area’s archaeological heritage. • Propose MMs and recommend conditions of approval (if a local government action) to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report, with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. MM 4.4-2c Where consistent with applicable local, State and federal law and deemed appropriate by the City, future site-specific development projects shall consider the following requests by the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians and Morongo Band of Mission Indians: • In the event Native American cultural resources are discovered during construction for future development, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the overall project may continue during this period; • Initiate consultation between the appropriate Native American tribal entity (as determined by a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards) and the City/project applicant; • Transfer cultural resources investigations to the appropriate Native American entity (as determined by a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards) as soon as possible; • Utilize a Native American Monitor from the appropriate Native American entity (as determined by a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards) where deemed appropriate or required by the City, during initial ground disturbing activities, cultural resource surveys, and/or cultural resource excavations. Note: The City of Fontana determined that MM 4.4-1a was satisfied by the Cultural Resources Study (Appendix E) prepared for the Project. c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR did not identify any cemeteries or archaeological sites that may contain human remains within the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with mandatory compliance with the Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-22 California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5-7055 and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts with respect to disturbance of human remains. Analysis of Project: The Project Site does not contain a known cemetery. While not anticipated, in the unlikely event that human remains are discovered during Project grading or other ground-disturbing activities, the Project would be required to comply with the applicable provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 as well as Public Resources Code Section 5097 et. seq. Mandatory compliance with these provisions of California state law would require that human remains, if unearthed during construction activities, to be appropriately treated thereby ensuring that Project impacts would be less than significant. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed that the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in new or more severe significant impacts related to the potential discovery of human remains than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.6 Energy An Energy Analysis (dated December 13, 2021) (Urban Crossroads, 2021b) was prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads to quantify anticipated energy usage associated with the construction and operation of the Project, determine if the usage amounts are efficient, typical, or wasteful for the land use type, and identify any potential methods of avoiding or reducing inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. This report is included as Appendix F to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? SWIP SP PIER Finding: While energy was not a specifically called out topic at the time, the SWIP SP PEIR was prepared, it nonetheless analyzed potential impacts in this regard and concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP, including construction and operation, would not result in wasteful or unjustifiable consumption of energy resources. Analysis of Project: The Project would implement the SWIP SP land use plan and the Project’s proposed land use and development intensity is consistent with the development regulations contained within the SWIP. Therefore, the development proposed by the Project – and its energy use – is within the scope of the project that was evaluated in the SWIP SP PEIR. Furthermore, the Project would be required to comply with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.2- 5 to minimize the amount of energy consumed during operation. Project construction would represent a “single-event” electric energy and fuel demand and would not require on- going or permanent commitment of energy or diesel fuel resources for this purpose. In summary, the Project’s construction process is estimated to consume approximately 187,240-kWh of electricity, approximately 105,908 gallons of fuel (diesel and gasoline) (Urban Crossroads, 2021b, pp. 23-32). The amount of energy anticipated to be consumed during the Project’s construction is typical for a construction project at the Project’s scale (ibid.). Further, the Project’s energy demand can be accommodated within the context of available resources and energy delivery systems and Project construction equipment would conform to applicable California Air Resources Board Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-23 (CARB) emissions standards which act to promote equipment fuel efficiencies (ibid.). As supported by the foregoing analysis, Project construction energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary. During Project operation, energy would be consumed by building operations and maintenance (electricity and natural gas) and by vehicles traveling to/from the Project Site (diesel fuel and gasoline). The Project’s building operations and maintenance energy demands are estimated to be 4,086,455 kBTU/year of natural gas and 3,358,318 kWh/year of electricity (Urban Crossroads, 2021b, pp. 33-34). The Project’s anticipated operations are not inherently energy intensive, and the Project’s anticipated energy demands are comparable to, or less than, other warehouse project of similar scale and configuration. Additionally, the Project is required by law to comply with the California building Standards Code (CalGreen), which will minimize the Project’s demand for energy, including energy produced from non-renewable resources. These regulations have become more protective of the environment since the certification of the SWIP SP PEIR, and as a result the Project’s energy use will generally be less than was assumed in the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project’s anticipated annual fuel demand is calculated to be 402,844 gallons (diesel and gasoline). The trips generated by the Project and the miles traveled by those trips (vehicle miles traveled [VMT]) are consistent with other warehouse uses in the Inland Empire of similar scale and configuration. (Urban Crossroads, 2021b, p. 34) Additionally, the Project is expected to result in a substantial reduction in daily vehicle trips to/from the Site relative to what was assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR; therefore, implementation of the Project is anticipated to result in lower gasoline and diesel fuel consumption compared to the condition that was disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR (refer to EIR Addendum Subsection 4.17 for more information regarding the Project’s traffic). The Project is not anticipated to result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips or VMT or associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption (Urban Crossroads, 2021b, p. 36). Based on the foregoing, implementation of the Project would not result in a significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction and operation. Implementation of the Project would not result in new or more severe significant impacts related to energy resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to maximize energy efficiency continue to apply to the Project as listed below and included in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). MM 4.2-5a Prior to the issuance of building permits, future development projects shall demonstrate the incorporation of project design features that achieve a minimum of 28.5 percent reduction in GHG emissions from business as usual conditions. Future projects shall include, but not be limited to, the following list of potential design features. Energy Efficiency • Design buildings to be energy efficient and exceed Title 24 requirements by at least 5 percent. • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. Site and design building to take advantage of daylight. • Use trees, landscaping and sun screens on west and south exterior building walls to reduce energy use. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-24 • Install light colored “cool” roofs and cool pavements. • Provide information on energy management services for large energy users. • Install energy efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control systems (e.g., minimum of Energy Star rated equipment). • Implement design features to increase the efficiency of the building envelope (i.e., the barrier between conditioned and unconditioned spaces). • Install light emitting diodes (LEDs) for traffic, street and other outdoor lighting. • Limit the hours of operation of outdoor lighting. Renewable Energy • Install solar panels on carports and over parking areas. Ensure buildings are designed to have “solar ready” roofs. • Use combined heat and power in appropriate applications. • Water Conservation and Efficiency • Create water-efficient landscapes with a preference for a xeriscape landscape palette. • Install water-efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture-based irrigation controls. • Design buildings to be water-efficient. Install water-efficient fixtures and appliances (e.g., EPA WaterSense labeled products). • Restrict watering methods (e.g., prohibit systems that apply water to nonvegetated surfaces) and control runoff. • Restrict the use of water for cleaning outdoor surfaces and vehicles. • Implement low-impact development practices that maintain the existing hydrologic character of the site to manage storm water and protect the environment. (Retaining storm water runoff on-site can drastically reduce the need for energy-intensive imported water at the site). • Devise a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and location. The strategy may include many of the specific items listed above, plus other innovative MMs that are appropriate to the specific project. • Provide education about water conservation and available programs and incentives. Solid Waste MMs • Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste (including, but not limited to, soil, vegetation, concrete, lumber, metal, and cardboard). • Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste and adequate recycling containers located in public areas. • Provide education and publicity about reducing waste and available recycling services. Transportation and Motor Vehicles • Limit idling time for commercial vehicles, including delivery and construction vehicles. • Promote ride sharing programs (e.g., by designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for ride sharing vehicles, designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas for ride sharing vehicles, and providing a web site or message board for coordinating rides). Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-25 • Create local “light vehicle” networks, such as neighborhood electric vehicle (NEV) systems. • Provide the necessary facilities and infrastructure to encourage the use of low or zero- emission vehicles (e.g., electric vehicle charging facilities and conveniently located alternative fueling stations). • Promote “least polluting” ways to connect people and goods to their destinations. • Incorporate bicycle lanes and routes into street systems, new subdivisions, and large developments. • Incorporate bicycle-friendly intersections into street design. • For commercial projects, provide adequate bicycle parking near building entrances to promote cyclist safety, security, and convenience. For large employers, provide facilities that encourage bicycle commuting (e.g., locked bicycle storage or covered or indoor bicycle parking). • Create bicycle lanes and walking paths directed to the location of schools, parks and other destination points. b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: Although the SWIP SP PEIR did not specifically address this question, the SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that all future development within the SWIP SP area would be required to comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulation (of which Part 6 establishes the State’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards), development standards and design requirements related to sustainability and energy conservation contained in the City of Fontana Municipal Code, and current and future State legislation, executive orders, and regulatory guidance to maximize energy efficiency. Furthermore, the SWIP SP PEIR also acknowledged that it was probable that new technologies would emerge and be incorporated into future development to reduce energy consumption. Lastly, the SWIP SP PEIR included a MM (MM 4.2-5a) that would require future development to incorporate design features that would minimize the consumption of energy. Analysis of Project: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, as discussed in detail in the Project’s Energy Analysis (Appendix F), and the Project would be required to comply with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.2-5 to minimize the amount of energy consumed by the Project. Implementation of the Project would not result in new or more severe significant impacts related to energy resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.2-5a, as presented above and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR, attached hereto as Appendix A, continue to apply to the Project. Monitoring: Monitoring shall occur as specified in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR; refer to Appendix A. 4.7 Geology and Soils A Geotechnical Investigation (dated December 3, 2021) (SCG, 2021a) and Infiltration Report (dated December 3, 2021) (SCG, 2021b) were prepared for the Project by Southern California Geotechnical (SCG) to evaluate the geotechnical conditions of the subject property, identify any geological hazards, and provide recommendations for the future development of the Project. Additionally, a Paleontological Resources Assessment (November 22, Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-26 2021) (BFSA, 2021b), was prepared by BFSA to evaluate the potential for the Project Site to contain significant, non-renewable paleontological (fossil) resources. These reports are included as Appendices G, H, and O, respectively, to this EIR Addendum and their findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that there are no Alquist-Priolo earthquake faults located within the SWIP SP area. The nearest fault to the SWIP SP area is the Cucamonga Fault which traverses through the northern portion of the City of Fontana approximately 7.0 miles north of the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that because no known earthquake faults are known to exist beneath the SWIP SP area, impacts related to fault rupture would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: SCG did not observe any evidence of faulting on the Project Site and the Site is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zone (SCG, 2021a, p. 9). Accordingly, the Project would not expose people or structures to adverse effects related to the rupture of an earthquake fault. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to fault rupture than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that development within the SWIP SP area could be exposed to strong seismic ground shaking due to the numerous active faults located in the southern California region. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future development’s adherence to standard engineering practices and design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) would reduce the significance of impacts related to seismic ground shaking to a level below significance. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is located in a seismically active area of Southern California and is anticipated to experience moderate-to-severe ground shaking during the Project’s lifetime. This risk is not considered substantially different than that of other similar properties in the Southern California area. Consistent with the conclusion in the SWIP SP PEIR concerning impacts related to seismic ground shaking, the Project is required to adhere to standard engineering practices and design criteria relative to seismic and geologic hazards in accordance with the CBC, including the California Building Standards Code (CBSC), also known as California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24 (Part 2), and the Fontana Building Code, which is based on the CBSC with local amendments. The CBSC and Fontana Building Code provide standards that must be met to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures, and these standards have been specifically tailored for California earthquake conditions. In addition, SCG provided recommendations for Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-27 construction of the Project to minimize on-site hazards from strong seismic ground shaking, which will be implemented as one of the City’s conditions of Project approval. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. With mandatory compliance with State and local building standards, the Project would not expose people and structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury, or death, involving seismic ground shaking. The Project would result in new or more severe significant impacts related to seismic ground- shaking than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that although the potential exists for liquefaction to occur within the SWIP SP area, future development within the SWIP SP would be subject to site-specific geotechnical investigations and would comply with existing CBSC standards to minimize any potential ground failure or liquefaction hazards. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would not expose people or structures to potential impacts related to seismic ground failure or liquefaction. Analysis of Project: According to SCG’s examination of the Project Site and regional information sources, the Project Site is not within an area of liquefaction susceptibility (SCG, 2021a, p. 11). Accordingly, the Project would not expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury, or death, involving liquefaction. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Therefore, the Project would not result in new or more severe significant impacts related to liquefaction than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. iv. Landslides? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the risk of landslides in the SWIP SP area is low due to the relatively flat topography of the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impact would occur with regard to landslides. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is flat and has no substantial natural or man-made slopes under existing conditions. Additionally, there are no substantial natural or man-made slopes in proximity to the Project Site. Therefore, the potential for landslides on- or off-site is low. Proposed grading would not create manufactured slopes; therefore, implementation of the Project would not create a landslide risk to surrounding properties. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. The Project would not result in new or more severe significant impacts related to landslide than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with all requirements set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for construction activities (e.g., implementation of BMPs through preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan [SWPPP]) would preclude potential soil erosion impacts. Analysis of Project: The analysis below summarizes the likelihood of the Project to result in substantial soil erosion during temporary construction activities and/or long-term operation. As demonstrated in the analysis below, Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-28 implementation of the Project would not result in substantial effects related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to soil erosion than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, which assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Construction Activities Project construction would involve demolition, grading, paving, utility installation, building construction, and landscaping installation, which has the potential to temporarily expose on-site soils that are currently covered by concrete and could be subject to erosion during rainfall events or high winds. Pursuant to State Water Resources Control Board requirements, the Project Applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the State’s General Construction Storm Water Permit for construction activities (NPDES permit). The NPDES permit is required for all projects that include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation that disturb at least one (1) acre of total land area. Compliance with the NPDES Permit requires the Project Applicant to prepare and submit to the City for approval a Project-specific SWPPP. The SWPPP would identify a combination of erosion control and sediment control MMs (i.e., BMPs) to reduce or eliminate sediment discharge to surface water from stormwater and non-stormwater discharges during construction. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 403, which establishes requirements for the control of dust during construction (including wind erosion) (SCAQMD, 2005). With mandatory compliance to the requirements noted in the Project’s SWPPP, as well as applicable regulatory requirements, there would be no potential for substantial water and/or wind erosion impacts during Project construction. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to soil erosion than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Operational Activities Upon Project build-out, the Project Site would be redeveloped with a warehouse building, landscaping, and impervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the Project Site would be captured and treated to reduce waterborne pollutants (including sediment). A portion of the runoff that occurs on the Project Site would be routed to an on-Site infiltration basin, where it would percolate into the ground, while excess runoff would be conveyed off-Site via an on-site storm drain system. The City’s Municipal Storm Water Permit will require the Project Applicant to prepare and implement a WQMP (see City of Fontana Municipal Code Section 5-14 & Chapter 23, Article IX). The WQMP is required to identify an effective combination of erosion control and sediment control MMs (i.e., BMP) to reduce or eliminate sediment discharge to surface water from stormwater and non-stormwater discharges. The Preliminary WQMP for the Project is attached hereto as Appendix K. Compliance with the WQMP would be required as a condition of Project approval and long-term maintenance of on-site water quality features is required. Because the Project would be required to utilize erosion and sediment control MMs to preclude substantial, long-term soil erosion and loss of topsoil, substantial soil erosion would not occur. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to soil erosion than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-29 SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP area is not located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The SWIP SP EIR concluded that a less-than- significant impact would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site does contain some undocumented fill that could experience settlement; however, the settlement hazard can be attenuated through the removal of near surface soils down to competent materials and replacement with properly compacted fill, which is included as a recommendation in the Geotechnical Investigation (SCG, 2021a, p. 12). The Project would be required to implement the design, grading, and construction recommendations within its Geotechnical Investigation pursuant to Chapter 26, Division 4 of the City of Fontana Municipal Code, which would ensure that the Project Site’s soils remain stable post-development. (The City will assign a condition of approval to the Project requiring implementation of the Geotechnical Investigation pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 26, Division 4.) Based on the foregoing analysis, implementation of the Project would not expose people or structures to significant hazards related to unstable soils. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to unstable soils than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (since renamed as the California Building Code), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that soils in portions of the SWIP SP area are susceptible to expansion. However, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that because future development within the SWIP SP would be subject to site-specific geotechnical investigations and would be required to comply with CBSC standards addressing expansive soil hazards, impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: Soils on the Project Site soils generally consist of gravelly sands, sands, silty sands, and silty sands with no appreciable clay content; these materials are classified as non-expansive (SCG, 2021a, p. 12). Accordingly, the Project would not create substantial risks to life or property through locating structures on expansive soil. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to expansive soil than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR did not identify any significant adverse effects related to septic systems, because the SWIP SP would be served by sewer facilities and therefore not entail the installation of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Analysis of Project: The Project would connect to the municipal sewer system and does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-30 f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that the southern portion of the SWIP SP area is underlain by Pleistocene older fan deposits, which have a high potential to contain important fossil resources. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.4-3a and 4.4-3b which require future development projects within the SWIP SP to analyze potential impacts to paleontological resources on a site-specific basis prior to construction and, then, implement any recommended mitigation program (if required). The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with implementation of mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts to paleontological resources. Analysis of Project: In accordance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-3a, a Paleontological Resources Assessment (Appendix O), was prepared for the Project Site by BFSA. The Paleontological Assessment concluded that fossiliferous, late-to-middle Pleistocene old alluvial fan deposits are present at shallow depths on the Project Site (BFSA, 2021b, p. 9). Older Pleistocene deposits, specifically in the Inland Empire, are considered to be of high paleontological sensitivity. Accordingly, BFSA concluded that the strata underlying the Project Site has the potential to contain important fossil deposits and, thusly, recommended paleontological monitoring be performed during the Project’s grading, excavation, or utility trenching activities that occur at or below 5 feet below the existing ground surface (ibid.). The Project’s monitoring program would be required to comply with the performance standards established by SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4-3b. With compliance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.4- 3b, the Project would minimize the significance of the Project’s potential effects to important paleontological resources to less-than-significant levels. This conclusion is consistent with the conclusion from the SWIP SP PEIR, which assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts to paleontological resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce impacts to paleontological resources continue to apply to the Project, as listed below and included in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). MM 4.4-3b Should mitigation monitoring be recommended for a specific project within the Project Site, the program shall include, but not be limited to, the following MMs: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained, and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, earth-disturbing activities shall be diverted elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor shall immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • All recovered fossils shall be prepared, identified, and curated for documentation in the summary report and transferred to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • A summary report shall be submitted to City of Fontana. Collected specimens shall be transferred with copy of report to San Bernardino County Museum. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-31 Note: The City determined that MM 4.4-3a was satisfied by the Paleontological Resources Assessment (Appendix O) that was prepared for the Project. 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions A Greenhouse Gas Analysis (dated December 10, 2021) (Urban Crossroads, 2021c) was prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads to quantify the GHG emissions that would result from Project-related construction and operational activities. This report is included as Appendix I to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that implementation of the SWIP SP would result in GHG emissions equal to 1,147,515.21 MTCO2eq/year absent project design features and mitigation. The SWIP SP PEIR included mitigation (MM 4.2-5a) that would require the individual development projects within the SWIP SP area to incorporate sustainable practices related to water usage, energy usage, solid waste generation, and transportation. The SWIP SP PEIR determined that implementation of the reduction MMs required by MM 4.2-5a would reduce GHG emission from buildout of the SWIP SP to 774,572.77 MTCO2eq/year (an approximate 32.5 percent reduction relative to the unmitigated emissions). The SWIP SP PEIR determined that because MM 4.2-5 would result in GHG reductions that would exceed the mandate of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, that implementation of the SWIP SP would not generate GHG emissions that have a significant impact on the environment and, also, that the SWIP SP would be consistent with applicable plans and policies related GHG emissions reductions. Analysis of Project: The Project’s annual GHG emissions are summarized in Table 4-7, Annual Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The GHG emissions reported in Table 4-7 are unmitigated and do not account for any mitigation required by the SWIP SP PEIR. The methodology used to quantify the Project’s annual GHG emission is described in Appendix I. The Project would implement the SWIP SP land use plan and the Project’s proposed land use and development intensity is consistent with the development regulations contained within the SWIP. Therefore, the GHG emissions produced by the Project are within the scope of the project that was evaluated in the SWIP SP PEIR. Of note, the proposed warehouse building would generate fewer daily traffic trips than the land uses assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR (the Project’s daily traffic is discussed in further detail in EIR Addendum Subsection 4.17); therefore, the Project would reduce vehicle tailpipe emissions within the SWIP SP area relative to the levels disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR (vehicle tailpipe emissions represent a substantial share of GHG emissions). Senate Bill 32 (SB 32), which was not in effect at the time the SWIP SP EIR was certified, establishes a more stringent GHG reduction target than Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), and the Project will have to comply with these more stringent GHG reduction targets , as well as other regulations that have been enacted since 2012 that are more protective of the environment and will reduce the Project’s GHG emissions when compared to the impacts that SWIP SP PEIR Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-32 assumed would occur from the development of the Project Site. Accordingly, the Project’s GHG emissions do not represent a new, significant air quality impact or an increase in the severity of a significant air quality impact previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Table 4-7 Annual Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2021c, Table 3-7) Additionally, the Project’s GHG Analysis demonstrates that the Project would be consistent with and would not conflict with implementation of the goals and objectives established by applicable GHG emissions reductions plans, and policies, including AB 32, SB 32, and the CARB Scoping Plan. Refer to Appendix I for a detailed analysis of the Project’s consistency with the consistency GHG emissions reductions plans and policies. Lastly, the Project would be required to comply with MM 4.2-5a from the SWIP SP PEIR, which would reduce the Project’s GHG emissions below the levels listed in Table 4-7 (and further reduce GHG emissions below the levels disclosed by the SWIP SP PEIR). Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project’s GHG emissions would be less than significant and would be further reduced by after the application of required mitigation from the SWIP SP PEIR. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to conflicts with goals and objectives established by applicable GHG emissions reductions plans, and policies than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.2-5a, as presented previously in EIR Addendum Subsection 4.6 applies to the Project. 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA, dated February 9, 2021) (Waterstone, 2021) was prepared by Waterstone Environmental, Inc. (Waterstone) to determine the presence/absence of hazards and hazardous Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-33 materials on the Project Site. This report is included as Appendix J, to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated in the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the land uses proposed by the SWIP SP could entail the routine transport, use, storage, and/or disposal of hazardous materials. The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that all future development within the SWIP SP would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local regulations related to handling, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR established mitigation that prohibits the siting of facilities that handle hazardous materials near sensitive receptors (i.e., schools, childcare facilities, and senior centers) and requires businesses that handle hazardous materials to submit hazardous materials inventories to the San Bernardino County Fire Department (MM 4.5-1a and 4.5-1c, respectively). The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that mandatory compliance with applicable regulations and implementation of the MMs included in the SWIP SP PEIR would ensure that the SWIP SP would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: As demonstrated in the analysis below, the Project would not result in a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts, as compared to the analysis presented in the SWIP SP PEIR. Existing Conditions Waterstone performed a comprehensive Phase I ESA, including soil testing and soil vapor sampling, to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs) that may pose potential environmental risks associated with the Project Site. During the Phase I ESA field investigation, two RECs were observed on-Site: 1) an organochlorine pesticide (i.e., dieldrin) was detected at concentrations above applicable screening thresholds on portions of the Site associated with the addresses 11010 Banana Avenue and 14044 Rose Avenue; and 2) diesel fuel was detected in soils near the location of a former underground storage tank (UST) on the 14044 Rose Avenue property (the UST was removed from the property in 1998 under the supervision of the County of San Bernardino) (Waterstone, 2021, p. 37). To address the two RECs observed on the Project Site, the Project Applicant would be required to comply with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5-2b, which requires the excavation/removal, remediation, and off-site transport and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local requirements. Compliance with SWIP SP PERIR MM 4.5-2b would adequately address the two RECs and would ensure that none of the hazardous materials that are present on the Project Site under existing conditions would present a substantial hazard to people or the environment. The Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts, as compared to the analysis presented in the SWIP SP PEIR. Construction Activities Heavy equipment would be used on the Project Site during the Project’s construction, which would be fueled and maintained by substances such as oil, diesel fuel, gasoline, hydraulic fluid, and other liquid materials that would Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-34 be considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, roofing materials, solvents, and other substances typically used in building construction would be present on the Project Site during construction. Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials could result in accidental releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling, transportation, or spills associated with the Project than would occur on any other similar construction site. Construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction-related materials, including but not limited requirements imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), SCAQMD, Santa Ana RWQCB, and the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase. The Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts, as compared to the analysis presented in the SWIP SP PEIR. Operational Activities The Project would redevelop the Project Site with a warehouse building. The future building occupant(s) for the Project Site are not yet identified; however, the Project is designed to house warehouse distribution and light industrial occupants, and it is possible that hazardous materials could be used during a future building users’ daily operation. State and federal Community-Right-to-Know laws allow the public access to information about the amounts and types of chemicals in use at local businesses. Laws also are in place that require businesses to plan and prepare for possible chemical emergencies. Any business that occupies a building on the Project Site and that handles hazardous materials (as defined in Section 25500 of California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95) will require a permit from the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District – Hazardous Materials Division to register the business as a hazardous materials handler. Such businesses also are required to comply with California’s Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law, which requires immediate reporting to the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District – Hazardous Materials Division and the State Office of Emergency Services regarding any release or threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless of the amount handled by the business. In addition, any business handling at any one time, greater than 500 pounds of solid, 55 gallons of liquid, or 200 cubic feet of gaseous hazardous material, is required, under Assembly Bill 2185 (AB 2185), to file a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan (HMBEP). A HMBEP is a written set of procedures and information created to help minimize the effects and extent of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material. The intent of the HMBEP is to satisfy federal and State Community Right-To-Know laws and to provide detailed information for use by emergency responders. Lastly, the Project would be required to comply with City of Fontana Municipal Code Section 9-1, which establishes development and performance standards, as well as reporting and permitting requirements for the use, handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous materials. If businesses that use or store hazardous materials occupy the Project, the business owners and operators would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper use, storage, use, emission, and disposal of hazardous substances (as described above and as required by SWIP SP EIR MM 4.5-1c). With mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project is not anticipated to pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to hazardous materials than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-35 Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce hazards and hazardous materials impacts continue to apply to the Project, as presented below and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR, attached hereto as Appendix A. MM 4.5-1c The City shall require all businesses that handle hazardous materials above the reportable quantity to submit an inventory of the hazardous materials that they manage to the San Bernardino County Fire Department – Hazardous Materials Division in coordination with the Fontana Fire Protection District. MM 4.5-2b Prior to potential remedial evacuation and grading activities within the site (if remediation is required), impacted areas shall be cleared of all maintenance equipment and materials (e.g., solvents, grease, waste-oil), construction materials, miscellaneous stockpiled debris (e.g., scrap metal, pallets, storage bins, construction parts), above ground storage tanks, surface trash, piping, excess vegetation and other deleterious materials. These materials shall be removed off-site and properly disposed of at an approved disposal facility. Once removed, a visual inspection of the areas beneath the removed materials shall be performed. Any stained soils observed underneath the removed materials shall be sampled. In the event concentrations of materials are detected above regulatory cleanup levels during demolition or construction activities, the project applicant shall comply with the following MMs in accordance with Federal, State, and local requirements: • Excavation and disposal at a permitted, off-site facility; • On-site remediation, if necessary, or • Other MMs as deemed appropriate by the County. MM 4.5-2c Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, a Certified Environmental Professional shall confirm the presence or absence of asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) and lead-based paint (LBPs) prior to structural demolition/renovation activities. Should ACMs or LBPs be present, demolition materials containing ACMs and/or LBPs shall be removed and disposed of at an appropriate permitted facility. MM 4.5-2d In the event any electrical transformers require relocation as a result of future development associated with the project, the relocation shall be conducted under the purview of the local electricity purveyor to identify property-handling procedures regarding potential polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Note: The City determined that the following SWIP SP PEIR MMs do not apply to the Project or have been satisfied as part of the City’s review of the Project’s proposed entitlement applications: MMs 4.5-1a, 4.5-1b, 4.5-1d were addressed during City review; MM 4.5-2a was addressed by the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment that was prepared for the Project (Appendix X); MMs 4.5-2e and 4.5-2f are not applicable to the Project due to the Project Site’s location. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-36 b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: Short-Term Construction Activities The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the existing structures within the SWIP SP area likely contain LBP, ACMs, and/or other contaminants, and therefore demolition of the buildings would potentially create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, which presents a potentially significant impact. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5-2c requiring an ACM/LBP survey and any necessary abatement be conducted prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, as well as compliance with SCAQMD Rule 1403, would reduce potential impacts associated with demolition to the existing buildings to a less-than- significant level. The SWIP SP PEIR also determined that grading and excavation for future development within the SWIP SP area could expose construction workers and the public to unidentified hazardous substances present in the soil or groundwater associated with the I-10 freeway, Union Pacific Railroad alignment, and unidentified underground storage tanks (USTs). The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs to ensure that future development projects evaluate potential, site-specific hazardous conditions and implement remediation programs, as needed, to ensure that development activities within the SWIP SP area would not increase the potential for accident conditions that could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment (i.e., MM 4.5-2a, 4.5-2b, 4.5-2d-4.5-2f). The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with the required MMs and applicable regulatory requirements would reduce potential construction-related impacts to a level below significance. Long-Term Operational Activities The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the operation of future development associated with the SWIP SP could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that typical incidents associated with operations of typical commercial and industrial development projects that could result in accidental release of hazardous materials include leaking storage tanks, spills during transport, inappropriate storage, inappropriate use, and/or natural disasters. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with mandatory regulations and SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5-1a through 4.5-1d, which prohibit the siting of facilities that handle hazardous materials near sensitive receptors (i.e., schools, childcare facilities and senior centers) and the transportation of hazardous materials near sensitive receptors, and requires businesses that handle hazardous materials to submit hazardous materials inventories to the San Bernardino County Fire Department would ensure that operational impacts are less than significant. Analysis of Project: As discussed above under the analysis for Item “a,” in the event that hazardous materials are used or stored on the Project Site under near-term construction or long-term operational activities, the Project would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations and MMs from the SWIP SP EIR to ensure the safe handling of hazardous materials. Mandatory compliance with these regulations and MMs would ensure that, if an accident involving hazardous materials occurs on-site, it would be treated appropriately to avoid a significant hazard to the public or the environment. With mandatory compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations and implementation of the applicable SWIP SP EIR MMs related to hazardous materials that Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-37 are discussed herein, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment in the event an accident on-site results in the release of hazardous materials. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to hazardous materials than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to mitigate hazards and hazardous materials impacts continue to apply to the Project, as listed above. Refer to the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR, attached hereto as Appendix A. Note: The City determined that the following SWIP SP PEIR MMs do not apply to the Project or have been satisfied as part of the City’s review of the Project’s proposed entitlement applications: MMs 4.5-1a, 4.5-1b, 4.5-1d were addressed during City review; MM 4.5-2a was addressed by the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the Project (Appendix J); MMs 4.5-2e and 4.5-2f are not applicable to the Project due to the Project Site’s location. c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that there are four (4) schools located either inside or within one-quarter mile of the SWIP SP boundaries and that hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous materials or substances would occur within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with standard regulatory requirements and MMs from the SWIP SP PEIR would ensure that impacts associated with construction and operation of the SWIP SP are less than significant. Analysis of Project: There are no schools within one quarter of a mile of the Project Site. The closest school to the Project Site is Henry J. Kaiser High School, which is approximately 0.34-mile southeast from the Project Site. As such, the Project would not emit hazardous emission or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Nonetheless, the Project would comply with standard regulatory requirements and MMs from the SWIP SP PEIR to ensure safe handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste (as described in the response to Item “a,” above). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to hazardous materials than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that there are various hazardous material sites listed on federal, State, and local records databases located within the SWIP SP area. As previously discussed under the analysis for Items “a” and “b,” above, the SWIP SP PEIR included mitigation that requires future development projects within the SWIP SP area to conduct site-specific investigations (i.e., Phase I ESAs) and perform remedial activities, as necessary, prior to construction to correct any identified environmental conditions (SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5-2a and 4.5-2b, respectively). The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with the required mitigation, impacts would be reduced to a level below significance. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-38 Analysis of Project: Government Code Section 65962.5 requires DTSC, the State Department of Health Services, State Water Resources Control Board, and the State Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to maintain a list of hazardous materials sites that fall within specific, defined categories. According to the records search, the Project Site was listed in 9 environmental databases; these listings show that the Project Site generated small amounts of hazardous waste but do not identify the Project Site as having an undocumented release. Although the Project Site is listed on 9 environmental/hazardous materials databases, none of the databases where the Project Site is listed fall within the categories regulated by Government Code Section 65962.5. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to hazardous materials than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that the Ontario Airport is located approximately three miles west of the SWIP SP Area and that the southwestern portion of the SWIP SP area is located within the Ontario Airport’s “Airport Influence Area.” The SWIP SP PEIR determined that development within the SWIP SP area would consist of industrial, commercial, and office development and would not result in a safety hazard for people working in the SWIP SP area. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that a less-than-significant impact would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is located within the “Airport Influence Area” (AIA) for the Ontario Airport. However, the Project Site is not located in any of the Ontario Airport’s safety or noise impact zones, and the height of the Project’s buildings would be consistent with the applicable airspace protection zones in the Project area. (City of Ontario, 2011, Map 2-1) Therefore, development of the Project would neither introduce a hazard to the Ontario Airport nor would the Ontario Airport pose a hazard to future employees on the Project Site. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to air travel than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. f. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that construction activities associated with future development could temporarily impact traffic on streets that would serve as evacuation routes due to roadway improvements and extension of construction activities into the rights-of-way. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.5-6a and 4.5- 6b, which require the implementation of a traffic control plan during construction of future development projects within the SWIP SP area and, also, require coordination between the City of Fontana Engineering Department and City of Fontana Police Department to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles during the construction of future development projects within the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with implementation of the recommended mitigation, future construction activities related to the SWIP SP would result in less-than- significant impacts with regard to emergency access. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that all future development would be required to provide sufficient emergency access, as required by the City’s Zoning Code. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with regulatory requirements would ensure the operational impacts of the SWIP SP would be less than significant with regard to emergency access. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-39 Analysis of Project: The Project Site does not have any emergency facilities nor is it identified as an emergency evacuation route by any emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans (City of Fontana, 2018a). During construction and at Project build out, adequate emergency vehicle access would be required to be always maintained. As part of the City’s discretionary review process, the City reviewed the Project’s plans and found that appropriate emergency ingress and egress is available to and from the site to ensure public safety, and that the Project would not substantially impede emergency response times in the local area. Furthermore, the Project would be required to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles is maintained throughout the Project’s construction activities pursuant to SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5-6a. Mandatory compliance with SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.5- 6a would ensure the Project’s impacts regarding interference with the City’s emergency response plan and evacuation routes would be less than significant. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to emergency response plans than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to mitigate hazards and hazardous materials impacts – as presented below – continue to apply to the Project. Refer to the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR, attached hereto as Appendix A. MM 4.5-6a Prior to the issuance of grading permits, future developers shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan for implementation during the construction phase. The Plan may include the following provisions, among others: • At least one unobstructed lane shall be maintained in both directions on surrounding roadways. • At any time only a single lane is available, the developer shall provide a temporary traffic signal, signal carriers (i.e., flagpersons), or other appropriate traffic controls to allow travel in both directions. • If construction activities require the complete closure of a roadway segment, the developer shall provide appropriate signage indicating detours/alternative routes. MM 4.5-6b Prior to construction, the City of Fontana Engineering Department shall consult with the City of Fontana Police Department to disclose temporary closures and alternative travel routes, in order to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles when construction of future projects would result in temporary lane or roadway closures. g. Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP is located in an urbanized area, and no wildlands exist in the vicinity of the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impact related to wildland hazards would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is in an urbanized area and is not located adjacent to wildlands (Google Earth Pro, 2021). The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be fully developed. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-40 wildland fires. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to wildland fires than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality A Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) (dated August 31, 2021) (Thienes, 2021a) and Hydrology Report (dated August 30, 2021) (Thienes, 2021b) were prepared for the Project by Thienes Engineering, Inc. (Thienes). The purpose of the Preliminary WQMP is to help identify pollutants of concern, establish the BMP for the Project to minimize the release of pollutants of concern, and establish long term maintenance responsibilities for the Project’s water quality features. The Hydrology Report identifies drainage patterns and off-site flow tributary to the Project Site and evaluates post-development runoff conditions. The hydraulic calculations are intended to be used to design the Project’s storm drain system. These reports are included as Appendices K and L, respectively, to this EIR Addendum and their findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that development of the SWIP SP could adversely affect water quality through the discharge of various waterborne pollutants. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future development projects within the SWIP SP would be required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations and implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce water pollution from urban runoff. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with adherence to existing State water quality requirements, impacts to water quality would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: As demonstrated in the analysis below, the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. The Project would not result in any significant impacts that were not disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR or increase the severity of any significant impacts identified in the SWIP SP PEIR. Construction Activities Construction of the Project would involve clearing and demolition, grading, paving, utility installation, building construction, and landscaping activities. Construction activities would result in the generation of potential water quality pollutants such as silt, debris, and construction chemicals (such as paints and solvents), and other chemicals with the potential to adversely affect water quality (should these materials come into contact with water that reaches the groundwater table or flows off-site). Pursuant to the requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB and Fontana Municipal Code Section 5-14 & Chapter 23, Article IX, the Project Applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the State’s General Construction Storm Water Permit for construction activities (NPDES permit). The NPDES permit is required for all development projects that include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation, that disturb at least one (1) acre of total land area. In addition, the Project Applicant would be required to comply with the Santa Ana RWQCB’s Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program. Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction-related activities. The SWPPP will specify the BMPs that the Project’s construction contractors would Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-41 be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that potential pollutants of concern are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged from the subject property. Examples of BMPs that may be utilized during construction include, but are not limited to sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro-seeding. Mandatory compliance with the SWPPP would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities. Operational Activities To meet the requirements of the City’s Municipal Storm Water Permit – and in accordance with Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 23, Article IX – the Project Applicant would be required to prepare and implement a WQMP. A WQMP is a site-specific post-construction water quality management program designed to minimize the release of potential waterborne pollutants, including pollutants of concern for downstream receiving waters, under long- term conditions via BMPs. Implementation of the WQMP ensures on-going, long-term protection of the watershed basin. The Project’s Preliminary WQMP, prepared by Thienes, is included as Appendix K to this EIR Addendum. As identified in the Preliminary WQMP, the Project is designed to include structural source control BMPs consisting of catch basins, an underground infiltration basin, and hydrodynamic separator, as well as operational source control BMPs (including but not limited to: activity restrictions, landscape management BMPs, employee training, catch basin inspection program) to minimize, prevent, and/or otherwise appropriately treat stormwater runoff flows before they are discharged into the City’s storm drain system (Thienes, 2021a, p. 4-2). Compliance with the Preliminary WQMP would be required as a condition of approval for the Project. Long-term maintenance of on-site water quality features also would be required as a condition of approval to ensure the long-term effectiveness of all on-site water quality features. Additionally, the NPDES program requires certain land uses, including certain industrial land uses, to prepare a SWPPP for operational activities and to implement a long-term water quality sampling and monitoring program, unless an exemption has been granted (Industrial General Permit). Under this currently effective NPDES Industrial General Permit, the Project would be required to prepare a SWPPP for operational activities and implement a long-term water quality sampling and monitoring program or receive an exemption. Because the permit is dependent upon a detailed accounting of all operational activities and procedures, and the Project’s building users and their operational characteristics are not currently known, details of the operational SWPPP (including BMPs) or potential exemption to the SWPPP operational activities requirement cannot be determined with certainty at this time. However, based on the performance requirements of the NPDES Industrial General Permit, the Project’s mandatory compliance with all applicable water quality regulations would further reduce potential water quality impacts during long-term operation. Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality during long-term operation. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to water quality than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-42 SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the majority of the SWIP SP area is developed and urbanized and, therefore, that implementation of the SWIP SP would not introduce substantial new impervious surfaces to the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR also disclosed that no groundwater extraction would occur as part of the SWIP SP. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts related to depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge. Analysis of Project: The Project would be required to connect to the City of Fontana’s municipal water system; therefore, no water wells would be constructed on the Project Site and Project operations would not directly draw groundwater supplies. The Project Site is underlain by the Chino Groundwater Basin. Most of the groundwater recharge in the Chino Groundwater Basin occurs within percolation basins located mostly in the northern and western portions of the Basin (and north and west of the City of Fontana) (CBWCD, n.d.). The Project would not physically impact any of the major groundwater recharge facilities in the Basin. The Project includes design features that would maximize the percolation of on-site storm water runoff into the groundwater basin, such as the proposed underground infiltration basin and permeable landscape areas. Accordingly, buildout of the Project with these design features would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge or impede sustainable groundwater management of the Chino Groundwater Basin. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe significant impacts related to groundwater supplies and management than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that the SWIP SP area is located within an urbanized area that is served by existing stormwater drainage facilities operated by the City of Fontana and the County of San Bernardino. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the drainage infrastructure proposed by the SWIP SP would adequately serve future development within the SWIP SP area and would minimize impacts related to erosion or siltation, resulting in less-than-significant impacts regarding erosion or siltation. Analysis of Project: As previously discussed in Subsection 4.7 (refer to response to Item “b”), implementation of the Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to soil erosion or siltation than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run off in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would not result in a substantial increase in surface runoff and would result in less-than-significant impacts related to flooding. Analysis of Project: The Project would implement industrial land uses on the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land plan; therefore, the site development activities proposed by the Project (and the resulting surface Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-43 runoff flows) were planned by the SWIP SP (and its storm drain master plan) and anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR, which assumed the entire Project Site would be developed. The Hydrology Report calculated that the Project would reduce the current 25-year and 100-year storm event flow rates from 34.9 cubic feet per second (cfs) and 43.3 cfs, respectively, to 25.6 cfs (Thienes, 2021b, p. 4). Therefore, implementation of the Project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on- or off- site. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to flooding on- or off-site than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would require the installation of drainage infrastructure improvements; but that existing and planned stormwater drainage systems would have adequate capacity to convey surface runoff flows from the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR also concluded that the SWIP SP would not generate substantial, additional sources of polluted runoff. Analysis of Project: As discussed in the response to Item “a,” above, the Project will be required to comply with a SWPPP and a site-specific WQMP (refer to Appendix K), which will identify BMPs that are required to ensure that near-term construction activities and long-term post-development activities would not result in substantial amounts of polluted runoff. The Project would generate stormwater runoff that neither exceeds existing runoff from the Project Site nor the capacity of existing and planned master planned storm drain facilities (Thienes, 2021b, p. 4). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to existing or planned stormwater drainage systems than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. iv. Impede or redirect flood flow? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that although portions of the SWIP SP area would be located within the 100-year base flood plain, the SWIP SP area is already developed with urbanized uses, and future development of structures within the SWIP SP area would not occur within an existing floodway or otherwise impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the SWIP SP would result in a less- than-significant impact. Analysis of Project: According to Figure 4-2, Flood Hazard Map, of the City’s General Plan EIR, the Project Site and surrounding area are not within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone (City of Fontana, 2018b). Accordingly, the Project would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area that could impede or redirect flood flows, which the same area that the SWIP SP PEIR assumed would be developed with structures. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to flood flows than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP area is not located near a major dam or within a dam inundation area. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR did not identify any significant effects within the SWIP SP area related to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-44 Analysis of Project: The Pacific Ocean is located over 42 miles southwest of the Project Site; consequently, there is no potential for the Project Site to be impacted by a tsunami as tsunamis typically only reach up to a few miles inland. The Project Site is not subject to flooding hazards associated with a seiche as the nearest large body of surface water (Prado Reservoir) is located approximately more than 10 miles southwest of the Project Site. Due to distance, the Project would not be affected by inundation caused by a seiche. Furthermore, as noted in the City of Fontana General Plan EIR on Figure 4-2, Dam Inundation Areas in Fontana, the Project Site is not located within any mapped dam inundation area, which the same area that the SWIP SP PEIR assumed would be developed with structures (City of Fontana, 2018b). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to inundation than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future development within the SWIP SP area would be required to adhere to State water quality requirements and would not result in substantial adverse water quality effects. Although the SWIP SP PEIR did not specifically address the potential for the SWIP SP PEIR to conflict with or obstruct implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan, the PEIR did address the potential for the SWIP SP to deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge (and concluded that such impacts would be less than significant). Analysis of Project: As discussed in the response to Item “a,” above, the Project Site is located within the Santa Ana River Basin and Project-related construction and operational activities would be required to comply with the Santa Ana RWQCB’s Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan by preparing and adhering to a SWPPP and WQMP. Implementation of the Project would not conflict with or obstruct the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan. The Project Site is located within the Chino Groundwater Basin, which is an adjudicated groundwater basin. Adjudicated basins, like the Chino Groundwater Basin are exempt from the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) because such basins already operate under a court-ordered management plan to ensure the long-term sustainability of the Subbasin. It should be noted that the Project includes an underground infiltration basin, which is anticipated to help recharge the basin. No component of the Project would obstruct with or prevent implementation of the management plan for the Chino Groundwater Basin. As such, the Project’s construction and operation would not conflict with any sustainable groundwater management plan. Based on the foregoing information, implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to the implementation of water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-45 4.11 Land Use and Planning Would the Project: a. Physically divide an established community? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined the SWIP SP would not divide an established community, as it would implement a range of industrial, commercial, public, and residential land uses similar to the land uses that already existed within the SWIP SP boundaries. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that existing development within the SWIP SP area was already divided by the existing local roadway network, and the SWIP SP would not create additional physical barriers between these land uses. Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: The Project would implement the land use plan for the SWIP SP. While there are legal non- conforming residences scattered on properties adjacent to and throughout the vicinity of the Project Site, none of these residences are linked as part of a planned residential community and some – but not all – of these structures are vacant and unoccupied. Thus, the Project would not divide an established community nor would the Project prevent or obstruct access to an established community. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to physically dividing an established community than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP would not directly conflict with the policy or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, including the City’s General Plan and Zoning and Development Code. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the SWIP SP would result in a less-than-significant impact. Analysis of Project: The Project Site would be developed in accordance with the land use regulations and development standards contained within the SWIP SP; therefore, the development activities proposed by the Project were anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR, and in fact, the Project would implement the vision of the SWIP SP, making the Project Site more much consistent with applicable land use policies, plans and regulations that existing uses. As noted above, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that implementation of the SWIP SP would not conflict with any land use policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of mitigating or avoiding an environmental impact. Thus, because the Project is consistent with the SWIP SP and because the SWIP SP was previously found to not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, implementation of the Project would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a land use planning conflict. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to conflicts with a land use plan, policy, or regulation than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-46 4.12 Mineral Resources Would the Project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that according to the City’s General Plan, no known deposits of precious gemstones, ores, or unique, or rare minerals have been identified within the vicinity of the SWIP SP area. Thus, no impact would occur in this regard. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is located within the mineral resource zone 3 (MRZ-3), which is classified as an area where the significance of mineral deposits cannot be determined from available data (DOC, 1984). As such, the Project Site does not contain a “known mineral resource.” Additionally, the Project Site is not zoned for mining. The Project, which would develop an area that the SWIP SP PEIR assumed would be developed, would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to mineral resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR did not identify any significant environmental effects within the SWIP SP area related to the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impact would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is not located in an area that the City’s General Plan or the SWIP SP have identified as being of local importance for mineral resources. Accordingly, implementation of the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.13 Noise A Noise Impact Analysis (dated January 24, 2022) (Urban Crossroads, 2022b) was prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads to evaluate Project-related long-term operational and short-term construction noise impacts. This report is included as Appendix M to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project result in: a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-47 SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that although the construction of future development and improvements in the SWIP SP Area would be required to adhere to the hours permitted by the City’s Municipal Code (between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays), due to the proximity of residential and institutional uses to the SWIP SP area, such construction could result in temporary, localized increases in noise levels and vibration that may exceed established standards. As such, the SWIP SP PEIR included mitigation to minimize potential adverse effects to sensitive receptors (SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.7-1a and 4.7-1b). The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that compliance with the City’s permitted hours of construction and implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.7-1a and 4.7-1b would ensure construction-related noise levels do not exceed regulatory standards, and impacts would be less than significant. The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development in the SWIP SP area could, potentially, result in a permanent exposure of sensitive receptors to ambient noise from stationary sources that exceeds established standards. The SWIP SP PEIR included MM 4.7-2a, which requires industrial facilities in proximity to existing sensitive receptor land uses to implement design MMs such as noise walls and berms to minimize operational noise levels. Additionally, the SWIP SP includes design guidelines and development standards that are aimed at reducing noise impacts, including building orientation, wall placement, lot dimensions, maximum intensity, outdoor storage, setbacks, buffers, edge conditions, and landscaping that would serve to minimize noise impacts on sensitive land uses in the vicinity. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with implementation of the SWIP SP design guidelines and development standards and implementation of mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than- significant stationary source noise impacts. The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development in the SWIP SP area could result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels from mobile sources (vehicular traffic and rail) in excess of established standards. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future mobile noise source impacts from buildout of the SWIP SP would be significant and unavoidable. Analysis of Project: The analysis below summarizes the potential for Project-related activities to generate or expose sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of applicable standards during temporary construction activities and/or long-term operation. As demonstrated in the analysis below, implementation of the Project would not result in any new or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts, as compared to the analysis presented in the SWIP SP PEIR. Refer to the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix N) for a detailed discussion of the methodologies and assumptions used to calculate the Project’s construction and operational noise. Construction Activities The Project would generate short-term noise during construction ranging between 56.9 and 62.1 decibels equivalent sound level (dBA Leq) at sensitive receiver locations nearest the Project Site, which would not exceed the City’s daytime noise standard of 70 dBA Leq (Urban Crossroads, 2022b, p. 51). The Project would implement the land uses planned for the Project Site by the SWIP SP land use plan; therefore, the construction activities that would occur on-site would be similar to those anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR, which disclosed that construction within the SWIP SP area could expose sensitive receptors to high-noise levels. The Project would be required to comply with SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.7-1a, which requires the Project’s construction contractor to comply with the permitted daytime hours of construction as defined in Section 18-63 of the City’s Municipal Code and with defined performance criteria to minimize noise emissions from the Project Site during construction. Compliance with Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-48 applicable mitigation from the SWIP SP PEIR and applicable standards from the City’s Municipal Code would ensure that the Project’s construction activities. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe impacts from construction noise than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Operational Activities – On-Site Stationary Noise The Project would generate long-term stationary noise from routine outdoor activities (e.g., utilization of loading docks) and the operation stationary mechanical equipment (e.g., building heating/cooling equipment). The long- term stationary noise from Project operation would range from 53.1 to 61.7 dBA Leq at nearby receiver locations, which would not exceed the City’s standards for residential uses of 70 dBA Leq (daytime) or 65 dBA Leq (nighttime) (Urban Crossroads, 2022b, p. 42). Additionally, the implementation of the Project would increase ambient noise levels by 0.3 to 2.8 dBA Leq during daytime hours and by 0.6 to 3.8 dBA Leq during nighttime hours at the nearest receiver locations (Urban Crossroads, 2022b, pp. 44-45). The Project-related operational noise level increases would not exceed the significance criteria used by the City (Urban Crossroads, 2022b, pp. 44-45). Accordingly, operation of the Project would not result in the generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project Site in excess of the standards from the City of Fontana’s Noise Ordinance. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts from on-site stationary operational noise sources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Operational Activities – Off-Site Traffic Noise The Project would implement the SWIP SP land use plan; therefore, the mobile-source noise emissions (i.e., traffic noise) produced by the Project were anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project’s proposed land uses would generate fewer daily traffic trips than the land uses assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR (the Project’s daily traffic is discussed in further detail in Subsection 4.17); therefore, the Project would reduce mobile-source noise emissions within the SWIP SP area relative to the levels disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR but the mobile-source noise reductions afforded by the Project would not be sufficient to avoid the significant and unavoidable mobile-source noise impact, as identified in the SWIP SP PEIR. Notwithstanding and based on the foregoing, the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts from mobile sources than the significant and unavoidable impacts that were previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. All applicable MMs (MMs) identified in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce noise impacts continue to apply to the Project, as listed below and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR (attached hereto as Appendix A). MM 4.7-1a The following MMs shall be implemented when construction is to be conducted within 500 feet of any sensitive structures or has the potential to disrupt classroom activities or religious functions. • The City shall restrict noise intensive construction activities to the days and hours specified under Section 18-63 of the City of Fontana Municipal Code. These days and hours shall also apply any servicing of equipment and to the delivery of materials to or from the site. • All construction equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g., intake silencers and noise shrouds) no less effective than those provided on the original equipment and no equipment shall have an unmuffled exhaust. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-49 • The City shall require that the contractor maintain and tune-up all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. • Stationary equipment shall be placed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive use structures. • All equipment servicing shall be performed so as to maintain the greatest possible distance to the sensitive use structures. • If construction noise does prove to be detrimental to the learning environment, the City shall allow for a temporary waiver thereby allowing construction on Weekends and/or holidays in those areas where this construction is to be performed in excess of 500 feet from any residential structures. • The construction contractor shall provide an on-site name and telephone number of a contact person. Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow for surrounding owners and residents to contact the job superintendent. If the City or the job superintendent receives a complaint, the superintendent shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the action taken to the reporting party. In the event that construction noise is intrusive to an educational process, the construction liaison will revise the construction schedule to preserve the learning environment. Note: The City of Fontana determined that the following SWIP SP PEIR MMs do not apply to the Project or have been satisfied as part of the City’s review of the Project’s proposed entitlement applications: MM 4.7-1b does not apply to the Project because the Project does not require soil import/export during grading, the Project would balance; MMs 4.7-2a and 4.7-3b were satisfied by the Noise Analysis (Appendix N) prepared for the Project; MM 4.7-3a does not apply to the Project because the Project is not a noise-sensitive land use and due to the location of the Project Site. b. Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that construction activities associated with the SWIP SP could potentially expose sensitive receptors to sporadic, high vibration levels. However, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.7-1a and 4.7-1b (previously described under Threshold “a”), the SWIP SP would generate less-than-significant ground borne vibration or ground borne noise during construction activities. Analysis of Project: During peak Project construction activities, the maximum vibration levels at the nearest sensitive receptor would be 0.011 inches per second (in/sec) peak particle velocity (PPV) at the nearest receptor (Urban Crossroads, 2022b, p. 55). Based on the CalTrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual threshold of 0.3 PPV in/sec, Project-related construction activities would not produce excessive vibration levels. During long-term operation, vibration levels from truck activity on the Project Site and along the public streets that abut the Project Site is anticipated to be similar to existing conditions due to the substantial amount of truck activity that already occurs on the Project site. Accordingly, there is no potential for operation of the Project to expose persons to or generate excessive (i.e., significant) ground borne vibration or noise. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to excessive ground borne vibration or noise levels than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-50 c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that people residing or working within the SWIP SP area would not be exposed to excessive aircraft noise levels from operations at the Ontario International Airport (located approximately 11 miles to the west of the SWIP SP area). Therefore, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that a less-than-significant impact would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for the Ontario International Airport (ONT) and is subject to the 60-65 decibel community noise equivalent level (dB CNEL) Noise Impact Zone. According to Table 2-3 of the ONT ALUCP, light industrial and warehouse operations – as proposed by the Project – are compatible within the 60-65 dB CNEL noise contour (City of Ontario, 2011, Table 2-3). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to noise from air travel than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.14 Population and Housing Would the Project: a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the SWIP SP would be a growth-inducing project due to the following factors: development of infrastructure improvements that would provide additional capacity necessary to support development within the SWIP SP area; the creation of 39,416 new employment positions that would foster economic expansion and growth within the City of Fontana; and direct growth in the City’s population due to the potential for future employees (and their families) to relocate to the City of Fontana. Accordingly, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded the SWIP SP would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to growth inducement. Analysis of Project: The Project does not include a residential component and, therefore, would not directly induce population growth within the area. The Project would create additional employment opportunities and foster economic growth within the City which, could indirectly induce population growth in the area. However, the Project is merely implementing the approved SWIP SP land plan – which designates the Project Site for industrial land uses – and development proposed by the Project was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Accordingly, the Project would not induce population growth in the SWIP SP area to a greater degree than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, but instead implements the predicted development analyzed therein. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to substantial unplanned population growth than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-51 b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined the SWIP SP would not result in any direct impacts to existing residences located within the SWIP SP area that would necessitate construction of replacement housing. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: There are no dwelling units on the Project Site under existing conditions. Although the Project Site historically contained several residences, these residences were present at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified in 2012 and the demolition of these units was included within the scope of the project evaluated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to the displacement of substantial numbers of existing people or housing than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.15 Public Services Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a. Fire Protection? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP would increase the need for fire protection and emergency medical services within the SWIP SP area. However, all future development projects located within the SWIP SP area would be required to pay the City’s development impact fee and the SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.8-2a through 4.8-2c that established performance goals for the City to monitor to ensure that acceptable fire protection resources, service ratios, and response times are met. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with payment of development impact fees and implementation of the required mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding fire protection services. Analysis of Project: The Project Applicant would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, the Project’s demand for fire protection services was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project Applicant would also be required to pay applicable development impact fees, as specified in the SWIP SP PEIR, to offset its demand for fire protection services. (The City uses a portion of collected development impact fees to fund fire protection facilities.) Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to fire protection services than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-2a through 4.8-2c, which address impacts to fire protection services, are policy-level actions that fall under the City’s responsibility and do not require any actions from private development projects. No component of the Project would prevent or obstruct the City’s implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-2a through 4.8-2c. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-52 b. Police Protection? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP would increase the need for police protection services within the SWIP SP area. However, all future development projects located within the SWIP SP area would be required to pay the City’s development impact fee and the SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.8-1a through 4.8-1i that established performance goals and identified community outreach and involvement programs to ensure that acceptable police protection resources, service ratios, and response times are met. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with payment of development impact fees and implementation of the required mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding police protection services. Analysis of Project: The Project would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, the Project’s demand for police protection services was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project Applicant would also be required to pay applicable development impact fees, as specified in the SWIP SP PEIR, to offset its demand for police protection services. (The City uses a portion of collected development impact fees to fund police protection services/facilities.) Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to police protection services than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-1a through 4.8-1i, which address impacts to police protection services, are policy-level actions that fall under the City’s responsibility and do not require any actions from private development projects. No component of the Project would prevent or obstruct the City’s implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-1a through 4.8-1i. c. Schools? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP could increase the demand for public school services. However, all future development projects located within the SWIP SP area would be required to pay the applicable school district development impact fee and the SWIP SP PEIR included MM 4.8-3a through 4.8-3f to ensure that acceptable public-school resources are available. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with payment of development impact fees and implementation of the required mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts regarding public school services. Analysis of Project: The Project would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, the Project’s indirect demand for public school services was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project Applicant would be required to pay all applicable development impact fees, as required by State law, to offset its demand for public school services. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to school facilities than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-3a through 4.8-3f, which address impacts to public schools, are policy-level actions that fall under the City’s responsibility and do not require actions from private development projects. No component of the Project would prevent or obstruct the City’s implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-3a through 4.8-3f. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-53 d. Parks? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP could attract new residents to the City of Fontana that would increase the demand for parks and recreation facilities in the City. The SWIP SP does not propose any new neighborhood and community park facilities nor does the SWIP SP propose any development that would directly contribute park development impact fees to the City (i.e., residential); therefore, existing recreational facilities within the City would be accessed by new residents indirectly generated by the SWIP SP without the addition of new revenue sources to offset the potential deterioration of such facilities. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future park and recreational facility impacts resulting from future development associated with the SWIP SP would be significant and unavoidable. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.8-5a through 4.8-5g to ensure the City achieves park design requirements and parkland standards in other areas of the City; nevertheless, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts would be significant and unavoidable after mitigation. Analysis of Project: The Project would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, would not create a demand for public park areas that was not previously anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. (Although it should be noted that, as a proposed industrial use, the Project is not anticipated to create a substantial demand for public park facilities.) Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to park facilities than the significant and unavoidable impacts previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-5a through 4.8-5g, which address impacts to public parks, are policy-level actions that fall under the City’s responsibility and do not require actions from private development projects. No component of the Project would prevent or obstruct the City’s implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-5a through 4.8-5g. e. Other Public Facilities? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that future industrial, commercial, and office development associated with the SWIP SP would create substantial employment opportunities within the SWIP SP area, which could, in turn, lead to a population increase within the City and an associated increase in demand for library facilities. However, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP would not significantly increase the demand for library services to the extent that would require construction of additional library facilities. Additionally, library facility impact fees would be imposed on future development projects within the SWIP SP area that would fund improvements to the library system. The SWIP SP PEIR also included MM 4.8-4a, which tasked the City with pursuing opportunities to expand library services. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that with payment of library facility impact fees and implementation of mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts to library facilities. Analysis of Project: The Project Applicant would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, would not create a demand for public library services that was not previously anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. The Project Applicant would be required to pay all applicable development impact fees, as specified in the SWIP Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-54 SP PEIR, to offset its demand for public library services and ensure that impacts to public library services remain less than significant. (The City uses a portion of collected development impact fees to fund library facilities.) Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to other public facilities than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.8-4a, which addresses impacts to other public services, is a policy-level action that falls under the City’s responsibility and does not require actions from private development projects. No component of the Project would prevent or obstruct the City’s implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MM 4.8-4a. 4.16 Recreation Would the Project: a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b. Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that future development associated with the SWIP SP could attract new residents to the City of Fontana that would increase the demand for parks and recreation facilities in the City. The SWIP SP does not propose any new neighborhood and community park facilities nor does the SWIP SP propose any development that would directly contribute park development impact fees to the City (i.e., residential); therefore, existing recreational facilities within the City would be accessed by new residents indirectly generated by the SWIP SP without the addition of new revenue sources to offset the potential deterioration of such facilities. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that future park and recreational facility impacts resulting from future development associated with the SWIP SP would be significant and unavoidable. The SWIP SP PEIR included MMs 4.8-5a through 4.8-5g (which are policy-level actions that fall under the City’s responsibility, as noted above) to ensure the City achieves park design requirements and parkland standards in other areas of the City; nevertheless, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that impacts would be significant and unavoidable after mitigation. Analysis of Project: The Project would develop the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land use plan. Accordingly, the development activities proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, thus, the Project’s indirect demand for parks was anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. As a proposed industrial use, the Project is not anticipated to create a substantial demand for public park facilities and is not anticipated to include any action that would increase the availability of park land in the City. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to recreational facilities than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.17 Transportation A Traffic Impact Analysis (dated April 1, 2022) (Urban Crossroads, 2022c) was prepared for the Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. to quantify the total daily and peak hour traffic expected during Project and to quantify the Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-55 Project’s transportation impacts, respectively. The Trip Impact Analysis is included as Appendix N to this EIR Addendum and its findings are incorporated into the analysis presented herein. Would the Project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The Project Site is located within the JND of SWIP SP. The JND is divided into three subzones, JND West, JND Central, and JND East. The Project Site is located within the JND West subzone. The SWIP SP provides for the development 3,348,781 sq. ft. of new development within the JND West subzone. According to the SWIP SP PEIR, buildout of the JND West would generate approximately 29,278 new net daily traffic trips, including 4,214 net AM peak hour trips and 3,946 net PM peak hour trips. (Net traffic represents total traffic volumes after then-existing traffic within the JND area was subtracted from traffic volumes that were expected upon buildout of the JND pursuant to the SWIP SP). The traffic projections from the SWIP SP PEIR for the JND West subarea correlate to 8.74 net daily traffic trips, including 1.25 net AM peak hour trips and 1.18 PM peak hour trips, for every 1,000 s.f. of new industrial building area in the JND. The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that the addition of traffic from the SWIP SP would cause nine (9) roadway segments and 19 deficient intersections within the study area to operate deficiently (“Existing with Project” traffic analysis scenario). However, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that upon implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.9-1a through 4.9-1cc, which include a range of new roadway improvements, including roadway widenings, signalizations, and intersection improvements, the study area intersections and roadway segments would operate at a satisfactory level of service (LOS). Notwithstanding, because the majority of the recommended improvements were either unfunded - or only partially funded - at the time the SWIP SP was approved and several of the needed improvements are situated outside of the City’s jurisdiction, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded the full implementation of the needed improvements could not be assured and, therefore, impacts would be significant and unavoidable in the short-term. The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that, under long-term conditions, the addition of trips from the SWIP SP would contribute to deficient operations at 10 roadway segments and 19 intersections within the study area (“2030 with Project” traffic analysis scenario). However, the SWIP SP PEIR determined that upon implementation of SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.9-1dd through 4.9-1ll, which include a range of new roadway improvements, including roadway widenings, signalizations, and intersection improvements, the study area intersections and roadway segments would operate at a satisfactory LOS. Notwithstanding, because the majority of the recommended improvements were either unfunded - or only partially funded - at the time the SWIP SP was approved and several of the needed improvements are situated outside of the City of Fontana’s jurisdiction, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded the full implementation of the needed improvements could not be assured and therefore impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Analysis of Project: According to the Project’s Traffic Study and using trip generation rates from the 11th Edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual, the Project is calculated to generate 616 vehicle trips per day (436 passenger vehicles and 180 truck trips) (Urban Crossroads, 2022c, p. 35). When converted to passenger car equivalent (PCE), which reports passenger cars and trucks as a single, weighted metric, the Project Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-56 is calculated to generate 916 trips per day with 67 trips during the AM peak hour and 74 trips during the PM peak hour (ibid.). The Project’s PCE traffic generation correlates to approximately 2.68 net daily traffic trips, per 1,000 s.f. of proposed building area, which is an approximately 70 percent reduction in the daily traffic assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR for development sites within the JND West subzone. Additionally, the Project’s PCE traffic generation correlates to approximately 0.20 AM peak hour and 0.22 PM peak hour trips per 1,000 s.f. of proposed building area, which represents more than an 80 percent reduction to the peak hour traffic assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR for development sites within the JND West subzone. For comparison, the Project would be expected to generate 2,990 trips per day, including 427 AM peak hour and 404 PM peak hour using the traffic generation factors from the SWIP SP PEIR (Urban Crossroads, 2022c, p. 36). Because the Project would result in a substantial reduction in total daily and peak hour traffic relative to the assumptions used in the SWIP SP PEIR, implementation of the Project would neither result in new significant transportation impacts that were not disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR nor substantially increase the severity of the significant transportation effects previously identified in the SWIP SP PEIR. Although the Project would generate substantially less traffic than assumed by the SWIP SP PEIR, the reduction in traffic would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable traffic impacts identified in the SWIP SP PEIR, traffic levels which are longer be considered an environmental impact under CEQA. Mitigation: In accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) adopted changes to the CEQA Guidelines in December 2018 related to the evaluation of transportation impacts from development projects. As of December 2018, when the revised CEQA Guidelines were adopted, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” (LOS) and other similar metrics, no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA. Accordingly, the following information is disclosed for informational purposes but does not relate to an environmental impact or mitigation under CEQA. Due to the relatively small volume of peak hour traffic generated by the Project and the Project Site’s location (which does not abut any roadway facility identified in the SWIP SP PEIR as requiring improvement), the City of Fontana Engineering Department determined the Project was not responsible for directly implementing any of the transportation improvements identified in the SWIP SP PEIR. However, prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant would be required to pay applicable development impact fees to the City of Fontana, from which the City would reserve a portion to fund the design and construction roadway improvements that would improve traffic conditions within the City generally and within the SWIP SP area specifically. Additionally, as part of construction of the Project, the Project Applicant would improve the segments of Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue abutting the Project Site’s frontage, thereby implementing the SWIP SP Circulation Master Plan and improving local vehicular and non- vehicular circulation. b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 or will conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand MMs, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The topic of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was not specifically addressed in the SWIP SP PEIR as this threshold of significance was not in place at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified. Notwithstanding, VMT was assessed as part of the air quality impact analysis included as part of the SWIP SP PEIR. Thus, the SWIP SP PEIR contained sufficient information was available to the public about projected VMT resulting from vehicle trips originating from or terminating within the SWIP SP area that associated effects could be determined with the exercise of reasonable diligence. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-57 The SWIP SP PEIR determined that because the City has a standard program (Circulation Development Fees) to fund regional improvements, the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) considers the City exempt from congestion management plan (CMP) traffic impact analysis and no CMP analysis was required for the SWIP SP. (Since certification of the SWIP SP PEIR, SANBAG was re-organized as the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority [SBCTA].) Analysis of Project: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(c) is clear that “[t]he provisions of [Section 15064.3] shall apply prospectively as described in [CEQA Guidelines] Section 15007.” CEQA Guidelines Section 15007(c) specifically states: “[i]f a document meets the content requirements in effect when the document is sent out for public review, the document shall not need to be revised to conform to any new content requirements in Guideline amendments taking effect before the document is finally approved.” The CEQA Guidelines changes with respect to VMT took effect on July 1, 2020, whereas the SWIP SP PEIR was certified in 2012. As such, and in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15064.3(c) and 15007(c), revisions to the SWIP SP PEIR are not required under CEQA in order to conform to the new requirements established by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. Once a project is approved, CEQA does not require that it be analyzed anew every time another discretionary action is required to implement the project. Quite the opposite, where an EIR or MND has previously been prepared for a project, CEQA expressly prohibits agencies from requiring a subsequent or supplemental EIR or MND, except in specified circumstances (Pub. Res. Code Section 21166.). Under CEQA, “Section 21166 comes into play precisely because in-depth review has already occurred, the time for challenging the sufficiency of the original EIR has long since expired, and the question is whether circumstances have changed enough to justify repeating a substantial portion of the process.” (Citizens Against Airport Pollution v. City of San Jose (“CAAP”) (2014), 227 Cal.App.4th at 796.) There was no CEQA requirement to analyze VMT at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified; thus, there is no need to analyze VMT impacts in connection with this EIR Addendum. Furthermore, the new VMT requirements set forth by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 do not relate to a different type of impact, but merely a different way of analyzing transportation impacts. The SWIP SP PEIR included a detailed assessment of potential impacts, including potential impacts to air quality as a result of projected VMT. As this information was disclosed as part of the SWIP SP PEIR, VMT associated with buildout of the SWIP SP do not comprise “new information” that was not known or could not have been known at the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified. Because VMT impacts were known, the adoption of the requirement to analyze VMT therefore does not constitute significant new information requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 1301, 1320. In the case of the proposed Project, there are no changed circumstances that would warrant additional analysis under Public Resources Code Section 21166. Even if an analysis was conducted, the results of such an analysis would show that VMT from the Project is less than what would occur under the development assumptions utilized in the SWIP SP PEIR, based on the Project’s substantial reduction in passenger vehicle and heavy truck traffic relative to the calculations utilized in the SWIP SP PEIR. As shown in the preceding response, the Project is calculated to eliminate 2,074 daily vehicle traffic trips within the SWIP SP area based on the original traffic generation factors that were assumed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Therefore, there is substantial evidence that the Project as proposed would result in reduced VMT as compared to the project evaluated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-58 Regarding the Project’s potential to conflict with the applicable congestion management program (the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program), the Project would not contribute substantial traffic, which is defined as 50 or more peak hour trips, to any San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program facility and, therefore, would have no potential to result in substantial adverse effects/conflicts to appliable level of service standards. Implementation of the Project would not result in any impacts that were not previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Therefore, and based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would not result in any new impacts not already analyzed in the SWIP SP PEIR, and the Project would not increase the severity of a significant impact as previously identified and analyzed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR did not identify any safety hazards related to a design feature or land use proposed by the SWIP SP. Analysis of Project: Based on the City staff’s review of the Project’s application materials, no unsafe design features are proposed as part of the Project. All improvements planned as part of the Project would be in conformance with applicable City engineering/design standards and would not result in any hazards due to a design feature. Additionally, the Project Applicant would not introduce an incompatible use to the Project Site. Impacts would be less than significant. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to hazards due to a geometric design feature than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Result in inadequate emergency access? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR did not identify substantial adverse impacts related to inadequate emergency access. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that potential impacts to emergency access caused by construction activities associated with the SWIP SP would be addressed through the required implementation of a traffic management plan, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the improvements proposed by the SWIP SP would be implemented in a manner that would improve local circulation and emergency access, and, therefore, impacts would be less than significant without the need for mitigation. Analysis of Project: The Project would construct industrial land uses on the Project Site, which would require the need for emergency access to-and-from the site. The City reviewed the Project’s design to ensure that adequate access to-and-from the site would be provided for emergency vehicles. The City also will require the Project to provide adequate paved access to-and-from the site (via a condition of approval) and will review all future Project construction drawings to ensure that adequate emergency access is maintained along abutting public streets during temporary construction activities. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to inadequate emergency access than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-59 4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: Although the SWIP SP PEIR did not specifically address this subject, the SWIP SP PEIR disclosed all recorded historical resources in the SWIP SP area and identified the potential for discovery of historic and archaeological resources during earth moving construction activity. Mitigation was included in the SWIP SP PEIR to reduce impacts to historical and archaeological resources to a level below significance. Analysis of Project: The Project Site – which the SWIP SP PEIR assumed would be fully developed – does not have any resources listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in any local register of historical resources. Accordingly, the Project would not impact a tribal cultural resource is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to tribal cultural resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. SWIP SP PEIR Finding: Although the SWIP SP PEIR did not specifically address this subject, the SWIP SP PEIR contained sufficient information related to the SWIP SP’s cultural setting to conclude that there was the potential for tribal cultural resources to be located within the SWIP SP area. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is highly disturbed and no known tribal cultural resources were determined to occur on the Project Site or in the Project Site’s immediate vicinity (refer to Item “b” under Subsection 4.5 of this EIR Addendum). Notwithstanding, as a standard practice for all development projects in Fontana, the City would require the Project Applicant to comply with conditions of approval that establish protocols for consultation, monitoring, and resource recovery to protect inadvertent discoveries of buried/masked prehistoric archaeological resources. The City’s standard conditions of approval would be consistent with SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.4-1b, 4.4-2b, and 4.4-2c. Mandatory compliance with the City’s standard conditions of approval (which would ensure implementation of SWIP SP EIR MMs 4.4-1a, 4.4-1b, 4.4-2a, and 4.4-2b) would preclude potential impacts to tribal cultural resources as defined in Public Resources Code 5024.1(c). Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to tribal cultural resources than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-60 Mitigation: No new or updated MMs are required. SWIP SP EIR MMs 4.4-2b and 4.4-2c apply to the Project, as presented in Subsection 4.5 of this EIR Addendum and in the MMRP for the SWIP SP PEIR, attached hereto as Appendix A. 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems Would the Project: a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, telecommunication facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR disclosed that each future development proposal within the SWIP SP area will be reviewed by the City staff to confirm that utility/infrastructure improvements would be available to serve the project or that improvements planned by the SWIP SP would be installed as part of development. Analysis of Project: The utility and infrastructure improvements proposed by the Project Applicant are discussed in Section 3.0 of this EIR Addendum. The installation of the infrastructure improvements proposed by the Project Applicant would result in physical environmental impacts; however, these impacts have already been disclosed throughout this EIR Addendum and were determined to be within the scope of the analysis for the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that the City would have sufficient water supply to meet the water demands of the SWIP SP in addition to the City’s existing and projected future service obligations. Analysis of Project: The Project would implement industrial land uses on the Project Site in accordance with the SWIP SP land plan. Accordingly, the development activities – and water demand – proposed by the Project were planned by the SWIP SP and, therefore, anticipated by the SWIP SP PEIR. Furthermore, the FWC’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), which anticipates buildout of the SWIP SP and its associated water demand, indicates that the FWC has sufficient water supplies to meet its service demand for normal, single-dry year, and multiple-dry year conditions through at least the year 2045 (FWC, 2021, pp. 7-6 - 7-8). Accordingly, the Project would not require new or expanded water entitlements. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to water supplies than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. c. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that existing wastewater treatment facilities could accommodate the SWIP SP’s demand for wastewater treatment services. Analysis of Project: For purposes of analysis herein, the Project is estimated to produce approximately 29,480 gallons of wastewater per day. Wastewater generated by the Project would be conveyed to the Inland Empire Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-61 Utilities Agency (IEUA) RP-1 for wastewater treatment. The RP-1 facility has an existing treatment capacity of approximately 44 million gallons of wastewater per day and treats approximately 28 million gallons of wastewater per day (gpd)on average (IEUA, 2019). The RP-1 facility has approximately 16 million gallons of excess treatment capacity under existing conditions (44 million gpd - 28 million gpd = 16 million gpd). The wastewater generated by the Project would represent less than one percent of the excess daily treatment capacity of RP-1; therefore, it is anticipated that RP-1 has adequate treatment capacity to provide service to the Project. The Project would not require the construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to wastewater treatment than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid wastes reduction goals? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: Solid waste from the SWIP SP area would be disposed at the Mid-Valley Landfill. The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the Mid-Valley Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the solid waste disposal needs of the SWIP SP. The SWIP SP PEIR incorporated mitigation from the City of Fontana General Plan EIR that pertain to solid waste as MMs 4.8-9a through 4.8-9d to further reduce the amount of solid waste that would be diverted to the Mid-Valley Landfill. (SWIP SP PEIR MMs 4.8-9a through 4.8-9d are policy-level actions that are the responsibility of the City that do not require any actions of development projects.) Analysis of Project: The Project Site would receive landfill services from the Mid-Valley Landfill. The Mid-Valley Landfill is permitted to receive 7,500 tons of refuse per day and has a total capacity of 101,300,000 cy. According the CalRecycle, the Mid-Valley Landfill has a total remaining capacity of 61,219,377 cy as of June 30, 2019. The Mid-Valley Landfill is estimated to reach capacity, at the earliest time, in the year 2045 (CalRecycle, 2021a). In May 2021, the peak daily disposal at the Mid-Valley Landfill was 5,282.84 tons, which correlates to an excess daily disposal capacity of 2,217.16 tons (CalRecycle, 2021b). The analysis below summarizes the Project’s potential to generate solid waste during construction and/or operation that would exceed the disposal capacity of local landfill facilities. As demonstrated in the analysis below, the Project would generate less-than-significant volumes of solid waste and would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of previously identified significant impacts, as compared to the analysis presented in the SWIP SP PEIR. Construction Impact Analysis The Project would generate solid waste requiring disposal during the construction process, primarily consisting of discarded materials and packaging. Based on the size of the Project and construction waste generation factor of 4.34 pounds per s.f. (lbs/s.f.) for non-residential uses, approximately 742 tons of solid waste are expected to be generated during the Project’s construction phase (EPA, 2009, p. 10). CalGreen requires a minimum of 65 percent of all solid waste be diverted from landfills (by recycling, reusing, and other waste reduction strategies); therefore, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 260 tons of construction waste requiring landfill disposal. The Project’s construction phase is estimated to have a duration of approximately 435 days; therefore, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 0.60 tons of solid waste per day requiring landfill during construction. The Project’s daily solid waste generation would utilize less than one-tenth of one percent of the excess daily disposal Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-62 capacity at the Mid-Valley Landfill ([0.6 tons/2,217.16 tons] x 100 ≈ 0.02 percent). Accordingly, the Mid-Valley Landfill would have sufficient daily capacity to accept solid waste generate by the Project’s construction phase. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts related to solid waste generation than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Operational Impact Analysis Based CalRecycle’s daily waste generation rate for industrial uses, which is 1.42 lbs/100 s.f., long-term operation of the Project would generate approximately 2.4 tons (1.42 lbs/100 s.f. x 341,838 s.f. ≈ 4,854.1 lbs x 1 ton/2,000 lbs ≈ 2.4 tons) of solid waste per day (CalRecycle, 2021c). CalGreen requires a minimum of 65 percent of all solid waste be diverted from landfills (by recycling, reusing, and other waste reduction strategies); therefore, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 0.84 tons per day of waste requiring landfill disposal. The solid waste generated by the Project would represent less than one percent ([0.84 tons/2,217.16 tons] x 100 ≈ 0.04 percent) of the excess daily capacity at the Mid-Valley Landfill. Accordingly, the Mid-Valley Landfill would have sufficient daily capacity to accept solid waste generate by the Project’s operation. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to solid waste generation than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. e. Comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid wastes? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that SWIP SP would be in compliance with all State and local requirements related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Analysis of Project: The Project would be required to comply with Chapter 24 of the City’s Municipal Code, which would require future tenants of the Project to segregate and place solid waste generated by the Project into containers for collection. There are no components of the Project that would result in non-compliance with federal, state, or local statutes or regulations related to solid waste. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to conflicts with federal, State, and local management and reduction statues than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.20 Wildfire If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones would the project: a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary ongoing impact to the environment? d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-63 SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR determined that the SWIP SP is located in an urbanized area, and no wildlands exist in the vicinity of the SWIP SP area. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that no impact related to wildland hazards would occur. Analysis of Project: The Project Site is not located in or near a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones (Cal Fire, 2008; City of Fontana, 2018a); therefore, implementation of the Project would not exacerbate existing wildfire hazard risks or expose people or the environment to adverse environmental effects related to wildfires within a state responsibility area or very high fire hazard severity zone. The SWIP SP PEIR assumed the Project Site would be developed. Implementation of the Project would not result in any new or more severe significant impacts related to wildfire hazards than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance Does the Project: a. Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that, following mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less- than-significant impacts to sensitive plant and animal species as well as habitats. Additionally, the SWIP SP PEIR concluded that, with mitigation, the SWIP SP would result in less-than-significant impacts to archaeological, historical, and paleontological resources, and, therefore, would not eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Analysis of Project: As indicated throughout the analysis presented herein, implementation of the Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife populations to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, to a greater degree than previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. b. Have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR addressed cumulative impacts for each of the environmental topics evaluated. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded the SWIP SP would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts regarding the following issues: • Aesthetics (scenic vistas); • Air Quality (construction-related and operational emissions); Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR Environmental Analysis Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 4-64 • Noise (long-term mobile noise and increases to incremental noise levels); • Recreation (parks/recreation facilities); and • Transportation/Traffic (roadway segments/intersections performance). Analysis of Project: As described throughout this analysis, implementation of the Project would not result in new environmental impacts that were not previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR and would not increase the severity of environmental impacts disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR. There is also no new information of substantial importance since the time the SWIP SP PEIR was certified that was not already known and analyzed in the SWIP SP PEIR. Therefore, there is no potential for the Project to result in cumulatively considerable effects to the environment beyond those previously disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR (and already disclosed throughout this analysis), and instead, the Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed and analyzed in the SWIP SP PEIR. The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that cumulative effects would be significant and unavoidable for the topics of aesthetics, air quality, noise, recreation, and transportation and traffic. c. Have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? SWIP SP PEIR Finding: The SWIP SP PEIR concluded that while changes to the environment that could indirectly affect human beings would be possible in all of the designated CEQA issue areas, those changes to the environment that the SWIP SP would cause that could directly affect human beings include: • Air Quality (construction-related and operational emissions); • Hazards and Hazardous Materials (contaminated soil and groundwater [SWIP SP PEIR concluded impacts in this issue area would be less than significant with implementation of MMs]); • Noise (long-term mobile noise and increases to incremental noise levels); • Recreation (parks/recreation facilities); and • Transportation/Traffic (roadway segments/intersections performance). Analysis of Project: Implementation of the Project would not result in environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, beyond those disclosed in the SWIP SP PEIR, and instead, the Project’s impacts are generally less than the impacts assumed and analyzed in the SWIP SP PEIR. 5.0 REFERENCES Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR References Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 5-1 5.0 REFERENCES This Addendum was prepared by: City of Fontana Associate Planner ........................................................................................................................................... Jon Dille T&B Planning, Inc. Principal-in-Charge ............................................................................................................................. Tracy Zinn, AICP Senior Project Manager ......................................................................................................................... David Ornelas Environmental Analyst .................................................................................................................... Christhida Mrosla Graphics Specialist ................................................................................................................................ Cristina Maxey The following information sources were used during the preparation of this Addendum: Cited As Reference Alden, 2021 Alden Environmental, Inc. (Alden), 2021. Birtcher Logistics Center Biological Resources. November 22, 2021. (Appendix D). BFSA, 2021a Brian F. Smith and Associates, 2021a. Cultural Resources Study for the Birtcher Logistics Center Project. November 22, 2021. (Appendix E). BFSA, 2021b Brian F. Smith and Associates, 2021b. Paleontological Resources Study for the Birtcher Logistics Center Project. November 22, 2021. (Appendix O). CalFire, 2008 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2008. Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Web. Available at: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5943/fontana.pdf. Accessed: August 04, 2021. CalRecycle, 2021a California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2021a. Facility/Site Summary Details: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill (36-AA-0055). Web. Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?siteID=2662. Accessed: August 04, 2021. CalRecycle, 2021b California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2021b. Inspection Detail: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill. Web. Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteInspection/Details/328975 CalRecycle, 2021c California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle), 2021c. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Web. Available at: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates. Accessed August 04, 2021. Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR References Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 5-2 Cited As Reference CalTrans, 2021 California Department of Transportation, 2021. Scenic Highways. Web. Available at: https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=2e921695c43643b1 aaf7000dfcc19983. Accessed: August 04, 2021. CBWM, n.d Chino Basin Watermaster, n.d. District Map. Web. Available at: https://www.cbwcd.org/241/District-Maps. Accessed August 04, 2021. CDFW, 2019 California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Natural Community Conservation Plans – April 2019. Web. Available at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline. Accessed November 12, 2019 City of Fontana, 2018a City of Fontana, 2018. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Adopted November 13, 2018. Web. Available at: https://www.fontana.org/2632/General-Plan- Update-2015---2035. Accessed August 04, 2021. City of Fontana, 2018b City of Fontana, 2018. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental Impact Report. June 8, 2018. Web. Available at: https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact- Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update. Accessed August 04, 2021. City of Ontario, 2011 City of Ontario, 2011. Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Adopted April 19, 2011. Web. Available at: http://www.ontarioplan.org/wp- content/uploads/sites/4/2015/05/chapter-2.pdf. Accessed August 06, 2021. County of San Bernardino, 2021 County of San Bernardino, 2021. Public San Bernardino County Parcel Viewer. Web. Available at: https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=87e70bb9b6994559ba75127 92588d57a DOC, 1984 Department of Conservation, 1984. Special Report 143 Mineral Land Classification of the Greater Los Angeles Area Part VII Classification of Sand and Gravel Resource Areas, San Bernardino Production – Consumption Region. Web. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sr/SR_143/PartVII/SR_143_PartVII_Text.pdf. Accessed August 04, 2021. DOC, 2019 Department of Conservation, 2019. San Bernardino County Important Farmland Finder. Web. Available at: ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2014/sbd14_so.pdf. Accessed August 06, 2021. DTSC, n.d. Department of Toxic Substances Control. Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese). Web. Available at: https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&sit Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR References Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 5-3 Cited As Reference e_type=CSITES,FUDS&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUB STANCES+SITE+LIST+ percent28CORTESE percent29. Accessed August 04, 2021. EPA, 2009 Environmental Protection Agency, 2009. Estimating 2003 Building-Related Construction and Demolition Materials Amounts. March 2009. Web. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017- 09/documents/estimating2003buildingrelatedcanddmaterialsamounts.pdf. Accessed August 04, 2021. FEMA, 2008 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. Web. Available at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=14801 percent20Slover percent20Avenue percent2C percent20Fontana#searchresultsanchor Accessed August 04, 2021. FWC, 2021 Fontana Water Company (FWC), 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Web. Available at: https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FWC-2020- UWMP-June-2021-Final.pdf. Accessed August 04, 2021. Google Earth Pro, 2021 Google Earth Pro. Google Earth. Web. Available at: https://www.google.com/earth/ IEUA, 2019 Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA), 2019. Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 1. Web. Available at https://www.ieua.org/facilities/regional-water-recycling-plant-no-1/. Accessed August 06, 2021. SCAQMD, 2005 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2005. Rule 402. Web. Available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/rule-book/rule-iv/rule-403.pdf. Accessed: August 06, 2021. SCG, 2021a Southern California Geotechnical, 2021a. Updated Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Distribution Center SWC of Banana Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue, Fontana, California for Birtcher Development. December 3, 2021. (Appendix G). SCG, 2021b Southern California Geotechnical, 2021b. Results of Additional Infiltration Testing Proposed Warehouse SWC Banana Avenue and Santa Ana Avenue Fontana, California. December 3, 2021. (Appendix H) Thienes, 2021a Thienes Engineering, Inc, 2021a. Storm Water Quality Management Plan for Santa Ana Avenue Industrial Building SWC of Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue Fontana, 92337. August 31, 2021. (Appendix K) Addendum to the SWIP Specific Plan Update and Annexation PEIR References Birtcher Logistics Center Fontana 5-4 Cited As Reference Thienes, 2021b Thienes Engineering, Inc, 2021b. Preliminary Hydrology Calculations for Santa Ana Avenue Industrial Building Santa Ana Avenue and Banana Avenue Fontana, 92337. August 30, 2021. (Appendix L) Urban Crossroads, 2021a Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2021a. Birtcher Logistics Center Air Quality Impact Analysis. December 10, 2021. (Appendix B) Urban Crossroads, 2022a Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2022a. Birtcher Logistics Center Mobile Source Health Risk Assessment. January 5, 2022. (Appendix C). Urban Crossroads, 2021b Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2021b. Birtcher Logistics Center Energy Analysis. December 13, 2021. (Appendix F). Urban Crossroads, 2021c Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2021c. Birtcher Logistics Center Greenhouse Gas Analysis. December 10, 2021. (Appendix I). Urban Crossroads, 2022b Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2022b. Birtcher Logistics Center Noise Impact Analysis. January 24, 2022. (Appendix M). Urban Crossroads, 2022c Urban Crossroads, Inc (Urban Crossroads), 2022c. Birtcher Logistics Center Traffic Study. April 1, 2022. (Appendix N) USDA, 2019 United States Department of Agriculture, 2019. Web Soil Survey. Web. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed August 04, 2021. Waterstone, 2021 Waterstone Environmental, Inc. (Waterstone), 2021. Phase I Environmental Assessment Report and Results of Soil and Soil Vapor Sampling. February 9, 2021. (Appendix J)