HomeMy WebLinkAboutFontana Square Project Public Draft Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration
MC No. 20-083
CITY OF FONTANA
FONTANA SQUARE PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
December 2022
Prepared By:
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
3880 Lemon Street, Suite 420
Riverside, CA 92501
MC No. 20-083
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page i
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ................................ 1
1.1 Project Overview ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose and Scope of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ............................. 1
1.3 Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 1
1.4 Mitigation Measures ......................................................................................................... 1
1.5 Environmental Resource Topics ......................................................................................... 2
1.6 Report Organization .......................................................................................................... 2
1.7 Initial Study Public Review Process .................................................................................... 3
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT ......................................................................................... 4
2.1 Location, Setting, Proposed Project ................................................................................... 4
2.2 Proposed Project ............................................................................................................... 5
3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST .......................................................................................................... 52
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ................................................................................ 55
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 56
Aesthetics................................................................................................................................... 56
Agriculture and Forestry REsources ............................................................................................ 60
Air Quality .................................................................................................................................. 62
Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 80
Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 94
Energy ...................................................................................................................................... 102
Geology and Soils ..................................................................................................................... 107
Greenhouse gas Emissions ........................................................................................................ 115
Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................. 131
Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................... 136
Mineral Resources .................................................................................................................... 145
Noise ........................................................................................................................................ 147
Population and Housing ............................................................................................................ 165
Public Services .......................................................................................................................... 167
Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 170
Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 171
Tribal Cultural REsources .......................................................................................................... 176
Utilities And Service Systems .................................................................................................... 181
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page ii
Wildfire .................................................................................................................................... 187
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................ 191
5.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 193
Tables
Table 1: Existing Land Use Designation and Zoning District ...................................................................... 4
Table 2: Parking Requirements ................................................................................................................ 7
Table 3: Other Permits and Approvals.................................................................................................... 52
Table 4: Ambient Air Quality Data .......................................................................................................... 65
Table 5: Sensitive Receptors .................................................................................................................. 66
Table 6: South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds ............................................. 66
Table 7: Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations (Maximum Pounds Per Day) .......... 67
Table 8: Construction-Related Emissions ............................................................................................... 70
Table 9: Long-Term Operational Emissions ............................................................................................ 71
Table 10: Equipment-Specific Grading Rates .......................................................................................... 74
Table 11: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions .................................................................... 75
Table 12: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions ...................................................................... 75
Table 13: Cultural Resources and Reports Located Within One Mile of the Project Site .......................... 96
Table 14: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................. 120
Table 15: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................................... 121
Table 16: Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency ...................... 124
Table 17: Project Consistency with Applicable CARB Scoping Plan Measures ....................................... 126
Table 18: Existing Traffic Noise Levels .................................................................................................. 149
Table 19: Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibrations .. 150
Table 20: Sensitive Receptors .............................................................................................................. 151
Table 21: Typical Construction Noise Levels ......................................................................................... 155
Table 22: Project Construction Noise Levels at Nearest Receptor ......................................................... 157
Table 23: Existing and Project Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................... 159
Table 24: Horizon Year and Horizon Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels ........................................... 159
Table 25: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels ................................................................. 161
Table 26: Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels ............................................................................................ 163
Table 27 – SBCTA VMT Screening Tool Results ..................................................................................... 173
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page iii
Exhibits
Exhibit 1: Regional Location ................................................................................................................... 14
Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity .......................................................................................................................... 16
Exhibit 3: Aerial View ............................................................................................................................. 18
Exhibit 4: Project Site Plan ..................................................................................................................... 20
Exhibit 5: Banquet Hall Elevations .......................................................................................................... 22
Exhibit 6: Banquet Hall Floor Plan .......................................................................................................... 24
Exhibit 7: Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites Elevations ........................................................................ 26
Exhibit 8: Staybridge Suites Elevations ................................................................................................... 28
Exhibit 9: Dual Brand Hotel Floor Plan ................................................................................................... 30
Exhibit 10: C-Store/Restaurant Elevations .............................................................................................. 32
Exhibit 11: C-Store/Restaurant Floor Plan .............................................................................................. 34
Exhibit 12: In-N-Out Elevations .............................................................................................................. 36
Exhibit 13: In-N-Out Floor Plan .............................................................................................................. 38
Exhibit 14a: Preliminary Landscape Plan ................................................................................................ 40
Exhibit 14b: Preliminary Landscape Plan ................................................................................................ 42
Exhibit 14c: Preliminary Landscape Plan ................................................................................................ 44
Exhibit 15: Conceptual Utility Plan ......................................................................................................... 46
Exhibit 16: Street Light Improvement Plan ............................................................................................. 48
Exhibit 17: Conceptual Grading Plan ...................................................................................................... 50
Appendices
Appendix A Air Quality Assessment
Appendix B Habitat Assessment
Appendix C Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix D Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
Appendix E Water Quality Management Plan
Appendix F Drainage Study
Appendix G Noise Assessment
Appendix H Traffic Impact Analysis
Appendix I Shared Parking Assessment
Appendix J Water Supply Assessment
Appendix K Sewer Availability Letter
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page iv
This page intentionally left blank.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE OF THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
1.1 Project Overview
This Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was prepared by Kimley-Horn and
Associates (Kimley-Horn) for the City of Fontana (City) to assess whether the implementation of
the Fontana Square Project (“Project or proposed Project”), located 16014 S. Highland Avenue,
south of State Route (SR) 210 (SR 210), north of south Highland Avenue, west of Catawba, and
east of Citrus Avenue, in the City of Fontana. This IS/MND was prepared pursuant with the
requirements set in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to determine significant
impacts on specific environmental areas. Where a potentially significant impact may occur,
appropriate mitigation measures(s) have been identified to avoid or mitigation the potential
impact to a less than significant level.
1.2 Purpose and Scope of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources
Code [PRC] Section 21000 et seq.) and its Guidelines (California Code of Regulations [CCR],
Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.), this IS/MND has been prepared to evaluate the potential
environmental effects associated with the construction and operation of the Fontana Square
Project. Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Fontana (City) is the
lead agency for the Project. The lead agency is the public agency that has the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a project.
As set forth in the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, an Initial Study leading to a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS/MND) can be prepared when the Initial Study has identified potentially
significant environmental impacts, but revisions have been made to a project, prior to public
review of the Initial Study, that would avoid or mitigate the impacts to a level considered less
than significant; and there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public
agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.
1.3 Summary of Findings
Section 3.0 of this document contains the Environmental Checklist that was prepared for the
proposed project pursuant to CEQA requirements. The Environmental Checklist indicates
whether the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts with the implementation of
mitigation measures, as identified where applicable throughout this document.
1.4 Mitigation Measures
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15041, Authority to Mitigate, gives the lead agency for a project
the authority to require feasible changes in any or all activities involved in the project in order to
substantially lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment, consistent with applicable
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 2
constitutional requirements such as the “nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards. CEQA
Guidelines Section 15364 defines “feasible” as capable of being accomplished in a successful
manner within a reasonable period of time, considering economic, environmental, legal, social,
and technological factors. Mitigation measures will be adopted to reduce the environmental
impacts to less than significant levels.
Several forms of mitigation under CEQA Section 15370 are summarized as follow:
• Avoiding the impact by not taking a certain action(s)
• Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation.
• Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impact environment.
• Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action
• Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or
environment.
Avoiding impacts is the preferred form of mitigation, followed by minimizing or rectifying the
impact to less than significant levels. Compensating for impacts would be pursued if no other
form of mitigation is not feasible.
1.5 Environmental Resource Topics
This IS/MND evaluates the proposed Project’s impacts on the following resource topics:
• Aesthetics • Hydrology and Water Quality
• Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Land Use and Planning
• Air Quality • Mineral Resources
• Biological Resources • Noise
• Cultural Resources • Population and Housing
• Energy • Public Services
• Geology and Soils • Transportation
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Utilities and Service Systems
• Hazardous and Hazardous Materials • Wildfire
1.6 Report Organization
This document has been organized into the following sections:
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 3
Section 1.0 Introduction & Purpose of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. This
section provides an introduction and overview describing the conclusions of the
Initial Study.
Section 2.0 Description of Proposed Project. This section identifies key project characteristics
and includes a list of anticipated discretionary actions.
Section 3.0 Initial Study Checklist. The Environmental Checklist Form provides an overview of
the potential impacts that may or may not result from Project implementation.
Section 4.0 Environmental Analysis. This section contains an analysis of environmental
impacts identified in the Environmental Checklist Form.
Section 5.0 References. The section identifies resources used to prepare the Initial Study.
1.7 Initial Study Public Review Process
The Initial Study and a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an MND will be distributed to responsible
and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, and other parties for a 20-day public review
period. Written comments regarding this MND should be addressed to:
Salvador Quintanilla
Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 4
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
2.1 Location, Setting, Proposed Project
Project Location
The proposed Project site is located at 16014 S. Highland Avenue, south of State Route (SR) 210
(SR 210), north of south Highland Avenue, west of Catawba, and east of Citrus Avenue, in the City
of Fontana (Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs]: 0228-301-01 through -08, 0228-310-20, -21, -22,
-23, 0228-310-33 through -49, -51, and 52). The Project site is bounded by SR 210 to the north,
S. Highland Avenue and single-family residential to the south, Citrus Avenue and vacant land to
the east, and Catawba Avenue and vacant land to the west; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Location.
Existing Conditions
The Project site is a vacant rectangular-shaped site on 8.876-acres. Historical images show that
the Project site was previously developed on the southern half of the site with residential
dwelling units; refer to Exhibit 2, Local Vicinity. The Project site is currently vacant and shows
signs of ruderal grasses, but no native habitat remains on-site; refer to Exhibit 3, Aerial View.
Existing General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designations
The City’s General Plan Update 2015 – 2035 (General Plan) Land Use Map was updated and
adopted on November 13, 2018.1 Furthermore, the City’s Zoning Map was updated on
September 10, 2019.2 The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of General
Commercial (C-G) and is within the General Commercial (C-2) Zoning District. Adjacent land use
and zoning designations are listed in Table 1, Existing Land Use Designation and Zoning District.
Table 1: Existing Land Use Designation and Zoning District
Location General Plan Land Use Designation Zoning District
Project Site (C-G) General Commercial (C-2) General Commercial
North SR-210 - Right-Of-Way (ROW) and
(C-G) General Commercial
SR-210 - Right-Of-Way (ROW) and
Sierra Lakes Specific Plan
South (R-SF) Single-Family Residential (2.1-5 du/ac) (R-1) Single-Family Residential (2.1-5 du/ac)
East (C-G) General Commercial (C-2) General Commercial
West (R-SF) Single-Family Residential (2.1-5 du/ac) (R-1) Single-Family Residential (2.1-5 du/ac)
Sources:
• City of Fontana, State of California General Plan Land Use Map (Adopted November 13, 2018), accessible at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26777/Land-Use-Map---Exhibit-158 and City of Fontana, State of
California Zoning District Map (Last revised April 18, 2017).
• City of Fontana. (2019). Zoning District Map. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/30623/Zoning-District-Map. Accessed on March 10, 2021.
1 City of Fontana. (2018). General Plan Land Use Map. Available at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26777/Land-Use-Map---
Exhibit-158. Accessed on July 15, 2020.
2 City of Fontana. (2019). Zoning District Map. Available at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/30623/Zoning-District-Map.
Accessed on July 15, 2020.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 5
2.2 Proposed Project
The proposed Project is a commercial development composed of a banquet hall (Development
A), a Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suite and a Staybridge Suites (Development B), a convenience
(C-Store)/Restaurant (Development C), and an In-N-Out Burger (Development D). The
establishments would be generally located closer to the northern property boundary with most
of the vehicle parking stalls along S. Highland Avenue, Citrus Avenue. Parking is also provided
throughout the site and between the various establishments.
The development would be buffered by decorative landscaping throughout the perimeter of the
site. Main ingress and egress to the site would be via a 52’-foot-wide driveway (Driveway No.1),
divided a raised median, located directly across from Tokay Avenue. Driveway No.1 would allow
for full ingress movements on all directions and would allow southbound, eastbound, and
westbound egress onto Tokay Avenue and S. Highland Avenue. Driveway No. 2 is a 35’-foot-wide
driveway located on the southwest corner of the site, directly across from Jacaranda Avenue.
Driveway No.3 is an approximately 23’-foot-wide-driveway, located on the northwest corner of
the site with direct access to Catawba Avenue. Driveway No. 4 is a 35’-foot-wide driveway located
southeast portion of the site, directly across Cherimoya Avenue.
The proposed development buildings would vary in heights. The tallest structure would be
Development B with 5-stories at 65’-7” high. The proposed Project will include trash enclosures
throughout the site serving each of the proposed uses. The trash enclosures will have a locking
roll-up door and locking device to discourage illegal dumping. The proposed Project will include
a fire access route, fire hydrants, and speed humps throughout the site. Table 2, Parking
Requirements, provides a breakdown of the parking needs for the proposed development. Also
refer to Exhibit 4, Project Site Plan. Due to the variety of services provided on-site, it is anticipated
that Development B will operate 24/7, 7 day per weeks, 365 days a year. However, the balance
of the proposed developments would operate during regular business hours for that type of
development.
Development Area (A): Banquet Hall
The proposed Project consists of the construction of a new two-story (approximately 32’)
banquet hall (38,907-square-feet (SF)) with an 810-seat capacity; refer to Exhibit 5, Banquet Hall
Elevations. The banquet hall would be located on the northwest corner of the site on 1.65-acres
of the overall Project site. The banquet hall would be bordered by landscaping, vehicle parking,
a 12x45 loading area, trash enclosure, Driveway No.3, and SR-210 to the north. To the south, the
banquet hall is surrounded by standard and electric vehicle (EV) parking stalls, landscaping, two
porch areas, Driveway No. 2, and S. Highland Avenue. To the east of the banquet hall is additional
landscaping, standard parking stalls, and Development B. To the west, the banquet hall is
bordered by a pedestrian sidewalk, standard vehicle parking and an existing liquor store, not part
of the proposed Project.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 6
The main entrance for guests would be provided on the south side of the banquet hall via two
lobbies located on the southeast and southwest corners of the building. The Banquet Hall would
provide a full kitchen, break room, dish washer, two dry storage rooms, walk in cooler, walk in
freezer, men’s & women’s restrooms, and two bride rooms; refer to Exhibit 6, Banquet Hall Floor
Plan. The banquet hall is required to provide a minimum of 209 parking spaces: consistent with
the City’s parking requirements. Development A would share parking with the Developments B,
C, and D via a shared-parking agreement with the other on-site businesses that are part of the
proposed Project.
Development Area (B):
Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites and Staybridge Suites
Development B would be a combined 121,094-SF, double branded 5-story hotel building,
approximately 65’-7” in height; refer to Exhibit 7, Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites Elevations,
and Exhibit 8, Staybridge Suites Elevations. The proposed use would be generally located on the
western half of the site on 2.28-acres of the overall Project site. Development B would be
surrounded by a pool, patio, vehicle parking, landscaping, a 12’x45’ loading dock, and SR-210 to
the north; vehicle parking stalls, landscaping, S. Highland Avenue, and Driveway No, 1 to the
south; landscaping, vehicle parking stalls, and Development A; vehicle parking, internal sidewalk,
and Development C
The main entrance for guest would be provided on the south side of the building via one lobby
located on the southwest corner of the building. Development B would provide 184 hotel rooms
and associated amenities such as pool, hot tub, and patio; refer to Exhibit 9, Dual Brand Hotel
Floor Plan. Development B will provide 184 parking spaces, plus 10 employee parking spaces
which is consistent with the City’s minimum parking standards.
Development Area (C): C-Store Area/Restaurant
Development D would be approximately 5,000-SF, one-story building, approximately 32’-10” in
height; refer to Exhibit 10, C-Store/Restaurant Elevations. The proposed use would be generally
located on the eastern portion of the site and would have an approximate 3,750-square-feet of
seating area. Development C would be bordered by 12’X70’ loading area and a trash
compartment to the north; vehicle parking stalls, landscaping, Driveway No. 4, and S. Highland
Avenue to the south; parking stalls, a pedestrian sidewalk, and Development D to the east;
vehicle parking, a pedestrian sidewalk, and Development B to the west.
The main entrance would be provided on the southeast corner of the building. Development C
would provide sit-down dining opportunities, but tenants are to be determined; refer to Exhibit
11, C-Store/Restaurant Floor Plan. Development C will provide 38 parking spaces which is
consistent with the City’s minimum parking standards.
Development Area (D): In-N-Out Burger
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 7
Development E would be a 3,885-SF, one-story building, approximately 23’-0” in height; refer to
Exhibit 12, In-N-Out Elevations. The proposed use would be located on the northeast portion of
the site and would have an approximate 3,885-square-feet of seating area. Development D would
be bordered by the drive-thru and SR-210 to the north; by guest outdoor seating area, vehicle
parking stalls, landscaping, and S. Highland Avenue to the south; outdoor seating area and a
double-lane drive-thru, landscaping, and Citrus Avenue to the east; internal driving aisle and
Development C to the west.
The main entrance would be provided on the south side of the building. Development D would
provide sit-down dining; refer to Exhibit 13, In-N-Out Floor Plan. Development D will provide 59
parking spaces which is consistent with the City’s minimum parking standards.
Parking
Pursuant to Table 30-685A of the Fontana Municipal Code, the Project proposes the following
parking data, as identified in Table 2 below:
Table 2: Parking Requirements
Development Area Parking Standard1 Parking Required
(A): Banquet Hall 1/40 @8,630 Net Seating Sq.Ft. + Office
Parking 214
(B): Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suite and
Staybridge Suites
1 Space: 1 Room @ 184 Rooms +
Employee Parking 194 Employee Stalls
(C): C-Store Area/Restaurant 1 Space: 100 Sq.Ft. @ 3,750 Sq.Ft. 38
(D): In-N-Out Burger 1/75 @ 3,885 Sq.Ft. + Outdoor seating 59
Gross Parking Required 505
Gross Parking Required (After 15% Reduction) 430
Gross Parking Provided2 455
Parking Surplus (Deficit) 25
Note:
1City of Fontana Municipal Code, Section 30-685.
2Parking for the Project site was analyzed through a site-specific parking analysis. The individual commercial developments have a shared-
parking agreement that allows the sharing of parking areas to supplement the parking needs of the overall site. Based on the City of Fontana’s
Municipal Code, the gross parking requirement for the Project is estimated to be 505 parking spaces. Based on a preliminary Shared Parking
analysis, the shared parking reduction factor is estimated to be 15%, resulting in an adjusted parking requirement for the project of 50 parking
spaces. As noted above, the project would provide 455 parking spaces. The 15% parking reduction identified in the Shared Parking Analysis is
based on the Urban Land Institute’s (ULI) Shared Parking (3rd Edition) methodology.
Source:
Kimley-Horn. March 2021. Shared Parking Analysis.
Landscaping
According to City landscape standards, the Project is required to provide landscaping equivalent
to a minimum of 15 percent of the site area, excluding building footprints, which would equate
to 48,319-square-feet of minimum required site landscaping. The Project is anticipated to
provide 68,488-square-feet of site landscaping or approximately 23.5 percent of the site area
excluding building footprints. Landscaping areas bordering the southern property line will double
as bio retention areas, identified as Bio Retation Area No. 1 through 4. Refer to Exhibits 14a
through 14c, Preliminary Landscape Plan.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 8
Utilities
The following are the existing on-site/adjacent utilities:
• Two existing 5” inch water lines traversing the water lines in an east-west direction (to be
removed).
• A 17 3/8” existing water main runs along S. Highland Avenue, just south of the southern
property line.
• Existing street lighting is located on the northeast and southeast corners.
• Seven sewer manholes are located along S. Highland Avenue.
• An 8” sewer lines run along S. Highland Avenue which will be used to tie into from the
Project site.
The following are the proposed utilities:
An 8” inch water line will be installed across the Project site. The water line will traverse the width
of the site in an east-west direction along the northern property line and just south of the various
developments. The northern water line and southern water line will be connected via water lines
traversing in a north-south direction between Developments C and D, and between
Developments A and B, and just west of Development A. Similarly, an 8” sewer line will run just
south of the various developments, just west of Development A, and along the northern property
line. The sewer lines connect to 4” cleanouts at various points, including along the northern
property line, just above Development B, at a 6” cleanout just south of Development C, and an
8” cleanout near Driveway No. 2.
Development A
• Development A will include a 6” cleanout, 6” sewer line, a 6” fire/water line, and a 3”
domestic water line that will connect to the proposed 8” water and sewer lines running
east-west just south of Development A. Additionally, Development A would include a fully
automatic fire sprinkler system. Development A would meet the fire flow requirements
which is 1,750 gallons per minute gal/m (reduced 50% due to full sprinkler system) at 20
pounds per square inch (PSI) residual pressure.
Development B
• Development B will include an 8” cleanout, 8” sewer line, a 4” domestic water line, a 6”
fire waterline, and an 8” fire water line. All utilities would connect to the 8” water and
sewer lines running east-west just south of Development B. Additionally, Development B
would include a fully automatic fire sprinkler system. Development B would meet the fire
flow requirements which is 3,750 gallons per minute gal/m (reduced 50% due to full
sprinkler system) at 20 (PSI) residual pressure.
Development C
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 9
• Development C would include a 6” sewer line, a 1-1/2” domestic water line, and a 4” fire
water line. The sewer line would connect to the 6” sewer line running south of the
Development C, the water line would connect eastward to the 8” water line, and the fire
water line would connect to the 8” water line running along the norther property line.
Development D
• Development D would include a 6” sewer line, a 2” domestic water service of 1-1/2”
meter, 1-1/2” irrigation meter off a 1” meter, and a 6” fire line.
All utility boxes are to be underground; refer to Exhibit 15, Conceptual Utility Plan.
Lighting
The Project would adhere to the city standard of one-foot candle minimum for all entrances,
exits, pedestrian paths, parking lots, and activity areas. The Project will reflect all light fixtures
on the site plan. All such areas will be illuminated during all hours of darkness and all luminaries
will be vandal-resistant fixtures. The type of lighting will be fluorescent, white L.E.D.s or metal
halide. Refer to Exhibit 16, Street Light Improvement Plan.
Construction
The Project is anticipated to be developed in one phase. Upon Project approval, construction is
anticipated to occur over a duration of approximately 18 months, beginning in the last quarter
of 2022and culminating in the first quarter of 2024. Construction activities would include the
construction of a 6’-foot high concrete masonry units (CMU)/glass perimeter wall, fire access
route, decorative paving, electrical vehicle charging stations. Off-site improvements include
perimeter curb and gutter along Citrus Avenue and S. Highland Avenue. Additionally, the Project
would provide 57’-foot half right-of-way (ROW) on Citrus Avenue, would stripe a 200’-foot long
southbound right-turn lane on Citrus Avenue, an 8’-foot storage lane. The Project would provide
a 104’-foot ROW near Driveway No. 2 and a 52’-foot half ROW near Driveway No. 1.
As part of the site’s grading activities, it is anticipated that the site would export 3,512.50 cubic
yards (CY) of soil and import 5,490.50 CY of soil; refer to Exhibit 17, Conceptual Grading Plan.
Tentative Parcel Map No. 20-021
The Project includes the request to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 20021 to combine thirty-
one parcels into four individual parcels.
Conditional Use Permit No. 20-025
The Project includes the request to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 20025 for an 83-room
Holiday Inn hotel.
Conditional Use Permit No. 20-026
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 10
The Project includes the request to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 20026 for a 99-room
Staybridge Suites hotel.
Development Review Permit No. 20-031
The Project includes the request for architectural review of the two proposed hotels, two eating
establishments, and the banquet hall located on the northwest corner of S. Highland Avenue and
Citrus Avenue (APNs: 0228-301-01 through -08, 0228-310-20, -21, -22, -23, 0228-310-33 through
-49, -51, and 52).
Variance No. 20-0001
The Project includes the request to reduce the rear landscape setback abutting Interstate 10 (I-
10) from 25 feet to two feet in a partial location at the rear setback area abutting parking spaces.
Project Approvals
The City as the Lead Agency is responsible for preparing reviewing and adopting the MND before it
may consider issuing the following approvals: site plan, tentative parcel map, conditional use
permits, off-site and on-site construction permits, sewer connection approval, and storm drain
connection approval. Other permits required for the Project may include, but are not limited to,
the following: issuance of encroachment permits for driveways, and utilities; security and parking
area lighting; permits; building permits; grading permits; tenant improvement permits; and
permits for new utility connections.
Project Features and Compliance Measures
SC AQ-1: Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the City Engineer shall
confirm that the Grading Plan, Building Plans and Specifications
require all construction contractors to comply with South Coast
Air Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD’s) Rules 402 and
403 to minimize construction emissions of dust and particulates.
The measures include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Portions of a construction site to remain inactive
longer than a period of three months would be
seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or
otherwise stabilized.
• All on-site roads would be paved as soon as feasible
or watered periodically or chemically stabilized.
Prior to Issuance
of Grading
Permits
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 11
• All material transported off-site would be either
sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent
excessive amounts of dust.
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading,
earthmoving, or excavation operations would be
always minimized.
• Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter
adjacent public streets, the streets would be swept
daily or washed down at the end of the workday to
remove soil tracked onto the paved surface.
SC CUL-1 If human remains are encountered during the undertaking, State
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a
determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be
notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined
to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a
Most Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the
landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may
inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the
inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC.
Per California Code, Health and Safety Code - HSC § 7050.5:
(b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains
in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be
no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby
area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the
coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered
has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing
with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the
Government Code , that the remains are not subject to the
provisions of Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other
related provisions of law concerning investigation of the
circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the
recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of
the human remains have been made to the person responsible
for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in
the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two
During grading
activities.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 12
working days from the time the person responsible for the
excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the
coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
(c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to
his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human
remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe
that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact,
by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage
Commission.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 13
This page intentionally left blank.
Project Site
City of Fontana
Exhibit 1: Regional Location
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 15
This page intentionally left blank.
LEGEND
Parcels
Project Site
Exhibit 2: Local Vicinity
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 17
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 3: Aerial View
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Project Site
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 19
This page intentionally left blank.
FRONTPORCH
CANOPY ABOVE
PATIO
POOL
VEST.001
CANOPY ABOVE
INTERSTATE FREEWAY 210
CITRUS AVECHERIMOYA TOKAY JACARANDA S. HIGHLAND AVECATAWBA AVENUEAVEENUE AVENUEAVENUEPARCEL 1 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 3 PARCEL 4
NOTE: REFER DETAILED
IN-N-OUT PLANS ALONGWITH THIS SUBMITTAL
Exhibit 4: Project Site Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 21
This page intentionally left blank.
(SOUTH)
(NORTH)
Exhibit 5: Banquet Hall Elevations
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 23
This page intentionally left blank.
136'-338"
33'-6"34'-338"30'-0"38'-0"4
2
4
4 2
5
5
4
4
4
4
1
AIRCURTAIN
5 5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
1
5
5
5
5
5
5
55 5
2
2
4
4
2 2 2 2
4
3
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1
G1 G1
G1G1
G1
G1
G22 G22
G23G20
G21
G22 G22
G19
G16
G15
G14
G17
G18
G10
G11
G4a
G9
G23
G3
G4aG3
G3
G12 G13
G1
G8
G7
G6
G5
G1
G5
G7 C1C1
C2
C2
C2
C3
C2
D1
D2
D2
7'-4"
136'-338"210'-938"60'-1"15'-718"42'-014"20'-278"15'-2"9'-358"2'-3"18'-5"5'-1158"31'-1034"28'-8"12'-1078"22'-1178"4'-11"49'-378"60'-1"31'-1034"28'-8"12'-1078"22'-1178"4'-11"49'-378"210'-938"7'-4"15'-718"42'-014"20'-278"15'-2"9'-358"2'-3"18'-5"5'-1158"
Exhibit 6: Banquet Hall Floor Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 25
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 7: Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites Elevations
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 27
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 8: Staybridge Suites Elevations
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 29
This page intentionally left blank.
2 4 5 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19
A
B
C
D
E
H
I
8 17136
J
F
G
K
L
M
STUDIO KINGCUSTOMISESTUDIO KINGADASTUDIO KINGADA
STUDIO KING A
ELECTRICAL STORAGECORR. BSTUDIO KING A
GUESTSTORAGE
LOW ROOF
STORAGEVEST.GUESTSTORAGE
GUESTSTORAGE
GUESTSTORAGE
GUESTSTORAGE
ELEV. LOBBY
HOUSEKEEPING
ELEV. 2 ELEV. 1
STAIR #1
CANOPY BELOW
RD
M1.1M1.1
ONE BEDROOMKING
STUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING A
STUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING ASTUDIO KING A
STUDIO KING A
ACC. ONEBEDROOM KING
1A3.2.0
2A3.2.0
2
A3.2.0
3A3.2.0LINENCHUTE
IDF
FEFE
RD
KING
ONE BEDROOMKING
STUDIO KING A
KINGSUITE
STUDIO KING A
STUDIO KING A
STUDIO KING A
STUDIO KING A
KING
KING
KING
DOUBLE QUEEN SUITE
ACC.DOUBLE QUEEN
DOUBLE QUEEN SUITE
DOUBLE QUEEN
KING
KING
STUDIO QUEENQUEEN
STUDIO KING A
DOUBLE QUEEN
DOUBLE QUEEN
STAIR #2 UP
DN
ELECTRICAL
ELEV. 2 ELEV. 1
DOUBLE QUEEN
ACC.KINGSUITE
HOUSEKEEPING
LOW ROOF
LOW ROOF
UP
DN
KING WIDE
STUDIO KING A
17'-514"17'-8"17'-8"17'-8"17'-514"23'-212"17'-514"17'-8"17'-1058"9'-018"27'-6"27'-6"4'-2"
1'-478"
26'-1"31'-7"23'-212"52'-1178"9'-018"60'-6"4'-2"7'-1058"10'-018"17'-8"17'-514"7'-1058"5'-6"16'-358"3'-712"19'-3"53'40'32'-778"136'-738"38'-758"17'-514"7'-1058"5'-6"9'-938"3'-712"73'-878"43'-712"136'-738"4'-2"
27'-6"5'-6"27'-6"9'-018"17'-1058"17'-8"17'-514"23'-212"17'-514"17'-8"17'-8"17'-8"17'-514"26'-1"5'-6"26'-1"
1'-478"60'-6"9'-018"17'-1034"17'-8"17'-514"23'-212"69'-514"
4'-1"
14'-934"58'-738"
296'-978"19'-3"19'-3"13'-9"13'-2"13'-2"12'-11"53'18'-238"16'-358"87'-1012"18'-238"9'-938"5'-6"26'-1"5'-6"26'-1"
1'-478"
296'-978"3'-078"10'-1112"4'-2"
Exhibit 9: Dual Brand Hotel Floor Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 31
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 10: C-Store/Restaurant Elevations
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 33
This page intentionally left blank.
7'-914"18'-878"7'-1058"7'-0"7'-0"13'-314"27'-9"
5'-612"4'-634"7'-0"45'-934"
62'-11"
3'-8"
24'-778"3'-8"3'-8"25'-078"3'-8"22'-518"29'-914"6'-558"20'-934"24'-5"25'-534"24'-314"5'-358"3'-8"15'-018"3'-814"4'-514"3'-814"13'-212"3'-814"6'-314"3'-814"19'-1138"3'-8"79'-534"35'-1178"16'-1158"3'-8"37'-10"3'-8"3'-8"28'-558"3'-8"79'-534"35'-4"13'-734"10'-0"3'-1118"
3'-8"25'-278"
3'-8"3'-8"
24'-758"3'-8"
62'-11"
Exhibit 11: C-Store/Restaurant Floor Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 35
This page intentionally left blank.
13'-7"23'-0"19'-10"13'-7"19'-10"23'-0"EAST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION
Exhibit 12: In-N-Out Elevations
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 37
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 13: In-N-Out Floor Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
FIRE RISER
ROOM
PREP AREA
105
COOLER
106
DINING ROOM
100
VESTIBULE
116
SELF
SERVINGBAR AREA KITCHEN AREA
103
DRIVE THRU
CL CLCL
POTATO
PEELING
107
KITCHEN
ACCESSORY
AREA104
POTATO
STORAGE
115
DRESSING
109
DRESSING
110
OFFICE
108
MIS ROOM
108A
74 seats A12.0
1
2
3
4
2A
1
4
54A
3A
3
9
10
8
2
C1
C1
C
C
F
G
H
I
J
B
A
A12.0
5
6
7
8
SERVING
AREA102
A12.1
1
2
3
A12.1
1
4
5
6
A12.0
9
101112
A12.1
9
7
8
A12.114
151617A12.1
10
111213
A12.1
18
192021
A12.1
30
313233
E E1 K
L
A12.11819
20
21
℄
A12.0
14
15
16
13
A12.09
14A15.0 5A15.0
14A15.0
5A15.0
1
A16.0
5
A15.0
BA10.0
2A8.0
AA10.0
AA10.0
D
A10.1
2A9.0
CA10.1
BA10.01A8.0
CA10.1EA10.1 1A9.0
1A16.0
5A16.1
1A16.0
5A15.0
11A14.0
14A17.0
14A17.0
5A15.0
6A15.0
1A16.0 1A15.0 2A15.0
4A15.01A15.0
SIM
4A15.06A15.01A15.02A15.01A16.01A15.0
3A16.1
5A16.1
12A16.0
12A16.0
SIM
3
A19.0
7A14.0
10A14.0
6A14.0 8A14.0
7A17.0
5A17.0
3A16.1
5
A15.0
GENERAL NOTES
C
13A16.1
A12.017
SCALE:
1
A5.0
FLOOR PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
CCLLL
5A15.01A16.0 1
A16.0
5
A15.0
2
A16.0
OPP.
9
A17.0FA10.1
CLLC
HALLWAY111
WOMEN'S113
RESTROOM
VESTIBULE
114
6
6A
7
MEN'S
112
A12.1
22
232425
A12.1
26
272829
A19.0/1
1
24
1/A19.03
2/A19.0234 2/A19.01
7A14.0
SIM.";EXIT";EXIT 5A20.0
9A20.0
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 39
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 14a: Preliminary Landscape Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 41
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 14b: Preliminary Landscape Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 43
This page intentionally left blank.
Exhibit 14c: Preliminary Landscape Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 45
This page intentionally left blank.
FRONTPORCH
PATIO
POOL
VEST.001
FF=1506.00
FF=1504.50 FF=1507.40
FF=1506.75Exhibit 15: Conceptual Utility Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 47
This page intentionally left blank.
SLOPE
FRONTPORCH
CANOPY ABOVE
CANOPY ABOVE
PATIO
POOL
VEST.001
Exhibit 16: Street Light Improvement Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 49
This page intentionally left blank.
FRONTPORCH
PATIO
POOL
VEST.001
FF=1504.50
FF=1506.00
FF=1506.75FF=1507.40
PROJECT
Exhibit 17: Conceptual Grading Plan
City of Fontana
Fontana Square Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 51
This page intentionally left blank.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 52
3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
1. Project title:
Fontana Square Project
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
3. Contact person and phone number:
Salvador Quintanilla, Senior Planner
(909) 350-6656
4. Project location:
The proposed Project site is located at 16014 S. Highland Avenue, south of State Route
(SR) 210 (SR 210), north of south Highland Avenue, west of Catawba, and east of Citrus
Avenue, in the City of Fontana (Assessor's Parcel Numbers [APNs]: 0228-301-01 through
-08, 0228-310-20, -21, -22, -23, 0228-310-33 through -49, -51, and 52). The Project site is
bounded by SR 210 to the north, S. Highland Avenue and single-family residential to the
south, Citrus Avenue and vacant land to the east, and Catawba Avenue and vacant land
to the west.
5. Project applicant’s/sponsor's name and address:
Ray Allard
Citrus Development, LLC
16866 Seville Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
6. General plan designation:
Current: General Commercial (C-G)
Proposed: No change.
7. Zoning designation:
Current: General Commercial (C-2)
Proposed: No change
8. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
Table 3: Other Permits and Approvals
Agency Permit or Approval
Fontana Fire Protection
District
Building Plan check and approval. Review for compliance with 2019 California Fire
Code, 2019 California Building Code, California Health & Safety Code and Fontana
Municipal Code. Plans for fire detection and alarm systems, and automatic sprinklers.
Fontana Water Company Letter of authorization/consent for proposed improvements to provide water supply
connection to new development.
Southern California Edison
Company (SCE)
Letter of authorization/consent for proposed improvements to provide electrical
supply connection to new development.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 53
9. Project summary:
The proposed Project is a commercial development composed of a banquet hall
(Development A), a Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suite and a Staybridge Suites (Development
B), a C-Store/Restaurant (Development C), and an In-N-Out Burger (Development D). The
establishments would be generally located closer to the northern property boundary with
most of the vehicle parking stalls along S. Highland Avenue and Citrus Avenue. Parking is
also provided throughout the site and between the various establishments.
The development would be buffered by decorative landscaping throughout the perimeter
of the site. Main ingress and egress to the site would be via a 52’-foot-wide driveway
(Driveway No.1), divided by a raised median, located directly across from Tokay Avenue.
Driveway No.1 would allow for full ingress movements on all directions but would only
allow eastbound and westbound egress onto S. Highland Avenue. Driveway No. 2 is a 35’-
foot-wide driveway located on the southwest corner of the site, directly across from
Jacaranda Avenue. Driveway No.3 is an approximately 23’-foot-wide-driveway located on
the northwest corner of the site with direct access to Catawba Avenue. Driveway No. 4 is a
35’-foot-wide driveway located southeast portion of the site, directly across Cherimoya
Avenue.
The proposed development buildings would vary in heights. The tallest structure would be
Development B with 5-stories at approximately 65-7” high. The proposed Project will
include trash enclosures throughout the site serving each of the proposed uses. The trash
enclosures will have a locking roll-up door and locking device to discourage illegal dumping.
The proposed Project will include a fire access route and gates equipped with a Knox box
system for fire access, fire hydrants, and speed humps throughout the site.
10. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the
Project area requested consultation pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a
plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of
impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project
proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal
cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See
PRC Section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage
Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources
Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC
Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
The city completed the Assembly Bill (AB) 52 tribal consultation for the proposed Project. In
March 2021, the city initiated tribal consultation with interested California Native American
tribes consistent with AB52. The city requested consultation from the following tribes: the
Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (San
Manuel), Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the
San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians. The Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
requested consultation with the city about the Project. The consultation occurred on March
15, 2021. At the conclusion of the consultation, the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians –
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 54
Kizh Nation identified a potential to impact tribal cultural resources and for this reason
requested that Mitigation Measures TCR-1 through TCR-3 be implemented. Refer to Section
18 of this document for additional information.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 55
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
Aesthetics
Air Quality
Agricultural and Forestry
Resources
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population/Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities/Service Systems
Wildfire
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION:
Based on this initial evaluation (check one):
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to
be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures
that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
CERTIFICATION:
Signature
_____
Date
CDR+J Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 56
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
AESTHETICS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
1. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the Project:
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
X
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
X
c) Would the project, 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 in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
Regional Context
The City of Fontana is in southern San Bernardino County and adjacent to major highways,
including Interstate-10 (I-10), Interstate-15 (I-15) and State Route 210 (SR 210). The City of
Fontana encompasses approximately 42 square miles of incorporated area, with an additional
fifteen square miles under the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI). This land area consists of large
residential communities, shopping centers, and heavy and light industrial uses increasing towards
the north and southwest. The city is bordered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga to the west, City
of Rialto to the east, City of Riverside to the southeast and City of Jurupa Valley to the south.
Scenic Views
Under CEQA, a scenic vista is defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a highly
valued landscape for the benefit of the public. The city is located on the desert valley floor
between the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and the Jurupa Hills to the south. Panoramic
scenic view corridors towards the mountains and views of the city from the mountains dominate
the City’s visual landscape character. Fontana’s open space consists of a mix of foothill natural
areas, utility corridors, and parks. Open space is also found in northern Fontana at the base of
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 57
the San Gabriel Mountains and to the south in the Jurupa Hills. 3 The General Plan does not
officially designate any scenic vistas near the Project site, but the San Bernardino Mountains (7.0
miles) and San Gabriel Mountains (2.5 miles) can be seen to the north.
Scenic Resources within Scenic Highways
Scenic highways and routes are a unique component of the regions circulation system as they
traverse areas of scenic or aesthetic value. The purpose of the California Scenic Highway Program,
which was established in 1963, is to “Preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change
which would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways.”4 This program provides
guidance for signage, aesthetics, grading, and screening to help maintain the scenic value of the
roadway.5 No highways within the City are eligible or are officially designated state or county
scenic highways. Therefore, the provisions of the California Scenic Highway Program do not
apply.
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located approximately 2.5 miles south of
the base of the San Gabriel Mountains, approximately 7.0 miles southwest of the San
Bernardino Mountains, and approximately 7.0 miles north of the Jurupa Hills. The
proposed development buildings would vary in heights. The tallest structure would be
Development B with 5-stories at 65’-7” high applicable to the C-2 district. (See City
Municipal Code, Section 30-949.) The Project site is surrounded by vacant land to the east,
SR 210 to the north, residential units to the south, an existing liquor store and vacant land
to the west. Viewsheds of the mountains to the north and south would not be
compromised since the proposed buildings would be separated by the Project’s proposed
lot and setbacks via the proposed landscaping. Due to the vast distance from prominent
scenic features in the area, proposed building heights, and the required distance created
between residential viewsheds to the south, impacts associated with scenic vistas would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees,
rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
3 City of Fontana. 2019. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 – Draft Environmental Impact Report.
4 Caltrans. (2011) District 3 – Scenic Highway Program. Accessed March 11, 2021. Available at https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-
programs/d3-maintenance/d3-scenic-hwy-
program#:~:text=California%27s%20Scenic%20Highway%20Program%20was%20created%20by%20the,Streets%20and%20Highway%20Code
%2C%20Section%20260%20et%20seq.
5 Caltrans. (2011) District 3 – Scenic Highway Program. Accessed March 11, 2021. Available at https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-
programs/d3-maintenance/d3-scenic-hwy-
program#:~:text=California%27s%20Scenic%20Highway%20Program%20was%20created%20by%20the,Streets%20and%20Highway%20Code
%2C%20Section%20260%20et%20seq.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 58
No Impact. As described above, no highways within the City are eligible or officially
designated state or county scenic highways. The closest Officially Designated State Scenic
Highway is Route 330 located in San Bernardino County, approximately 14.6 miles to the
east, at the base of the San Bernardino Mountains. Therefore, the proposed Project would
not substantially damage scenic resources within a State Scenic Highway. No impact would
occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
c) Would the project, 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 in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
Less Than Significant Impact.
The Project site is a vacant site with ruderal vegetation. The surrounding area to the north
is fully developed with SR-210, residential uses to the south, vacant land to the east and
west. The Project would fully improve the current vacant parcels and commercial uses with
associated development features such as landscaping, security lighting, vehicle parking,
and other typical amenities of commercial developments, consistent with the City’s
General Plan and Municipal code to improve the aesthetic nature of the Project site.
Therefore, the change in visual character would not significantly impact the site or the
surrounding area. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. Existing sources of light and glare in the immediate Project
area include streetlights, outdoor safety and security lighting associated with adjacent
developments, and the residential development in the general area to the south. The
Project side does not generate any existing night-time lighting.
Project construction would be limited to daytime hours (unless otherwise approved by the
City of Fontana), and nighttime lighting would not be required until the Project is
operational. Therefore, no short-term impacts associated with light, and glare would
occur.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 59
The Project would include security lighting and nighttime lighting throughout the Project
site including street lighting; refer to Exhibit 17. Consistent with Section No. 30-184 (Light
and Glare) of the City’s Municipal Code6, all lighting used on the Project site is required to
be directed and/or shielded to minimize the light from adversely affecting adjacent
properties, and no structures or features that create adverse glare effects are permitted.
This would require all exterior lighting to be shielded/hooded to prevent light trespass
onto nearby properties. In the lighting analysis conducted for the Project, illumination
results showed that lighting is expected to only exceed several feet beyond the Project site
perimeter. The applicant will also verify the dimensional accuracy of the lighting analysis
along with compliance with any applicable electrical, lighting, or energy code to ensure
that lighting is maintained on-site.
Although some new reflective improvements (i.e., windows and building front treatments)
would be introduced to the site, the Project would not be a source of glare in the Project
area. This is mainly due to the use of non-reflective building materials included in the
Project design features such as stone, stucco, shingles, and metal wall panels all using dark
or earth-tone colors, which would minimize the reflectiveness of these improvements.
Therefore, long-term impacts associated with light, and glare would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The potential aesthetic impacts related to views, aesthetics, and light and glare are site-specific.
The Project would be consistent with current land use and zoning designations and would adhere
to applicable state and local codes and regulations. Therefore, all Project-related impacts would
be less than significant.
6 City of Fontana. 2019. Chapter 30 – Zoning and Development Code. Available at
https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH30ZODECO, accessed on March 13, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 60
AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources
are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project:
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
X
c) Would the project 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))?
X
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X
e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
X
a-e) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use? Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? Would the project 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))? Would the project result in the loss of
forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Would the project involve other
changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use?
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 61
No Impact (a-e). The Project site has not been historically used for agricultural purposes.
According to the California Department of Conservation (DOC) Important Farmland Map,
the Project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. According to DOC, Urban and
Built-up Land is used for residential, industrial, commercial, construction, institutional,
public administrative purposes, railroad yards, cemeteries, airports, golf courses, sanitary
landfills, sewage treatment plants, water control structures, and other development
purposes such as highways, railroads, and other transportation facilities mapped as a part
of Urban and Built-up Land, if they are a part of the surrounding urban areas.7
The Project site is in an area surrounded by existing and planned residential and
commercial uses. Therefore, the Project site does not meet the definition of lands
designated as forestland or timberland as defined by PRC Sections 12220(g), 4526, and
51104(g). The Project site is not used and has not been used in the past for agricultural
purposes. The Project site is not classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland). Furthermore, the Project site is not subject
of a Williamson Act Contract. Implementation of Project would be consistent with existing
land use and zoning designations and would not cause rezoning of forest land (as defined
in PRC Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), or timberland
zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g)); the
existing Project site land use designation and zoning is General Commercial. Overall, the
Project would not propose any changes in the existing environment which would result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest
use. No impacts related to the loss of agricultural resources would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project would have no impact on agricultural and forestry resources since the
surrounding uses are currently used for commercial or residential purposes. Therefore,
implementation of the Project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact in the
conversion of Farmland to non-farmland.
7 California Department of Conservation. (2020). Important Farmland Finder. Retrieved from: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.
Accessed March 14, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 62
AIR QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air quality plan? X
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
X
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations?
X
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial
number of people)?
X
An Air Quality Assessment was prepared for the proposed Project by Kimley-Horn and Associates
in December 2021. This report is summarized below and are included as Appendix A of this Initial
Study.
The original Project assumptions for the preparation of the Air Quality Study assumed the
development of approximately 195,906 square feet of commercial space, inclusive of 235
combined hotel rooms between two hotels (Holiday Inn and Staybridge Suites). Additionally, the
model assumed 450 vehicle parking spaces. The model output with the original assumptions
resulted in a less than significant impact on all aspects regarding potential impacts to Air Quality.
The proposed Project has been revised to include the consolidation of the two hotels into a single
shared building totaling 184 hotel rooms, an increase of 4,973 square feet in the size of the
banquet hall, and the increase in parking spaces to 455. Overall, the revised Project would
decrease the total development area by 23,530 SF and decrease the number of daily vehicle trips
by 180.
As explained and documented in the Air Quality Consistency Analysis Memorandum included in
Appendix A, the updated Project would generate fewer overall emissions than the original
proposal and thus would not result in any air quality impacts beyond those identified in the Air
Quality Study; as a result, use of the Air Quality study, including the data presented below, for
the updated Project is appropriate (and conservative).
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 63
Construction emissions and operational emissions would continue to be less than significant with
implementation of Standard Condition AQ-1.
Air Pollutants of Concern
The air pollutants emitted into the ambient air by stationary and mobile sources are regulated
by state and federal laws. These regulated air pollutants are known as “criteria air pollutants”
and are categorized into primary and secondary pollutants.
Primary air pollutants are emitted directly from sources. Carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic
gases (ROG), nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter (PM10), fine
particulate matter (PM2.5), and lead (Pb) are primary air pollutants. Of these, CO, NOX, SO2, PM10,
and PM2.5 are criteria pollutants. ROG and NOX are criteria pollutant precursors and form
secondary criteria pollutants through chemical and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere.
For example, the criteria pollutant ozone (O3) is formed by a chemical reaction between ROG and
NOX in the presence of sunlight. O3 and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are the principal secondary
pollutants.
Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are airborne substances that can cause short‐term (acute) or long‐
term (i.e., chronic, carcinogenic, or cancer-causing) adverse human health effects (i.e., injury or
illness). TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances. They may be emitted from
a variety of common sources including gasoline stations, automobiles, dry cleaners, industrial
operations, and painting operations. The current California list of TACs includes more than 200
compounds, including particulate emissions from diesel‐fueled engines.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) identified diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a toxic
air contaminant. DPM differs from other TACs in that it is not a single substance but rather a
complex mixture of hundreds of substances produced when an engine burns diesel fuel. DPM is
a concern because it causes lung cancer; many compounds found in diesel exhaust are
carcinogenic. DPM includes the particle-phase constituents in diesel exhaust. The chemical
composition and particle sizes of DPM vary between different engine types (heavy-duty, light-
duty), engine operating conditions (idle, accelerate, decelerate), fuel formulations (high/low
sulfur fuel), and the year of the engine. Some short-term (acute) effects of diesel exhaust include
eye, nose, throat, and lung irritation, and diesel exhaust can cause coughs, headaches, light-
headedness, and nausea. DPM poses the greatest health risk among the TACs. Almost all diesel
exhaust particle mass is 10 microns or less in diameter. Due to their extremely small size, these
particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung.
Ambient Air Quality
CARB monitors ambient air quality at approximately 250 air monitoring stations across the State.
These stations usually measure pollutant concentrations ten feet above ground level; therefore,
air quality is often referred to in terms of ground-level concentrations. Existing levels of ambient
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 64
air quality, historical trends, and projections near the Project are documented by measurements
made by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), the air pollution regulatory
agency in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) that maintains air quality monitoring stations which
process ambient air quality measurements.
Pollutants of concern in the SCAB include O3, PM10, and PM2.5. The closest air monitoring station
to the Project that monitors ambient concentrations of these pollutants is the Fontana-Arrow
Monitoring Station (located approximately 3.0 miles to the southwest). Local air quality data from
2018 to 2020 are provided in Table 4, Ambient Air Quality Data, which lists the monitored
maximum concentrations and number of exceedances of state or federal air quality standards
for each year.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 65
Table 4: Ambient Air Quality Data
Criteria Pollutant 2018 2019 2020
Ozone (O3) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.141 0.124 0.151
8-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.111 0.109 0.111
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.09 ppm) 38 41 56
NAAQS 8-hour (>0.070 ppm) 69 67 89
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 5.41 2.75 5.46
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>35 ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS 1-hour (>20 ppm) 0 0 0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) 1
1-hour Maximum Concentration (ppm) 0.063 0.076 0.066
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 1-hour (>0.100 ppm) 0 0 0
CAAQS 1-hour (>0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns (PM10) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration 64.1 88.8 76.8
State 24-hour Maximum Concentration 61.5 85.1 73.6
State Annual Average Concentration (CAAQS=20
µg/m3) — — —
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>150 µg/m3) 0 0 0
CAAQS 24-hour (>50 µg/m3) 8 11 6
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5) 1
National 24-hour Maximum Concentration 29.2 81.3 57.6
State 24-hour Maximum Concentration 29.2 81.3 57.6
Number of Days Standard Exceeded
NAAQS 24-hour (>35 µg/m3) 0 3 4
Notes:
NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards; CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standards; ppm = parts per million.
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; – = not measured
1 Measurements taken at the Fontana-Arrow Monitoring Station at 14360 Arrow Boulevard, Fontana, California 92335 (CARB# 36197)
Source: All pollutant measurements are from the CARB Aerometric Data Analysis and Management system database
(https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam) except for CO, which were retrieved from the CARB Air Quality and Meteorological Information System
(https://www.arb.ca.gov/aqmis2/aqdselect.php).
Sensitive Receptors
Sensitive populations are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than is the general
population. Sensitive receptors that are in proximity to localized sources of toxics are of particular
concern. Land uses considered sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds,
childcare centers, long‐term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers,
and retirement homes. Sensitive land uses surrounding the Project consist mostly of residential
communities. Sensitive land uses near the Project include single-family residential homes,
approximately 105 feet to the south on the opposite side of S. Highland Avenue, single-family
residential homes approximately 270 feet to the west on Highland Avenue, and a school,
A.B. Miller High School, located approximately 1,600 feet to the southeast of the Project.
Sensitive land uses nearest to the Project are shown in Table 5, Sensitive Receptors.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 66
Table 5: Sensitive Receptors
Receptor Description Distance and Direction from the Project
Single-Family Residences 105 feet to the south
Single-Family Residences 270 feet to the west
Fontana A.B. Miller High School 1,600 feet to the southeast
Source: Google Earth, 2021.
Methodology
Based upon the criteria derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a Project normally
would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
Project region is in nonattainment under an applicable state or federal ambient air quality
standard.
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
• Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people.
SCAQMD Thresholds
The significance criteria established by SCAQMD may be relied upon to make the above
determinations. According to the SCAQMD, an air quality impact is considered significant if the
Project would violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations. The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality during
construction and operational activities of land use development projects, as shown in Table 6,
South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds.
Table 6: South Coast Air Quality Management District Emissions Thresholds
Criteria Air Pollutants and Precursors Emissions (Maximum Pounds Per Day)
Construction-Related Operational-Related
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) 75 55
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 100 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Sulfur Oxides (SOX) 150 150
Coarse Particulates (PM10) 150 150
Fine Particulates (PM2.5) 55 55
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, South Coast AQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds, April 2019.
Localized Carbon Monoxide
Along with the daily thresholds listed above, development associated with the Project would also
be subject to ambient air quality standards. These are addressed through an analysis of localized
CO impacts. The significance of localized impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels near
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 67
the Project above state and federal CO standards are (the more stringent California standards
are 20 ppm for 1-hour and 9 ppm for 8-hour). The SCAB has been designated as attainment under
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
Localized Significance Thresholds
In addition to the CO hotspot analysis, the SCAQMD developed Localized Significance Thresholds
(LSTs) for emissions of NO2, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 generated at new development sites (off-site
mobile source emissions are not included in the LST analysis). LSTs represent the maximum
emissions that can be generated at a project without expecting to cause or substantially
contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent state or federal ambient air quality standards.
LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the Project source
receptor area (SRA), as demarcated by the SCAQMD, and the distance to the nearest sensitive
receptor. LST analysis for construction is applicable for all projects that disturb 5-acres or less on
a single day. The Project site is located within SCAQMD SRA 34. For informational purposes,
Table 7, Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations, shows the LSTs for a 1-acre,
2-acre, and 5-acre project in SRA 34 within 25 meters of the Project. Table 7 shows that the LSTs
increase as acreages increase. In addition, LSTs also increase as distances between the source
and receptors increase. It should be noted that LSTs are screening thresholds and are therefore
conservative. The construction LST acreage is determined based on daily acreage disturbed. The
operational LST acreage is based on the total area of the Project site.
Table 7: Local Significance Thresholds for Construction/Operations (Maximum Pounds Per Day)
Project Size Nitrogen Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse Particulates
(PM10)
Fine Particulates
(PM2.5)
1 Acre 118/118 667/667 4/1 3/1
2 Acres 170/170 972/972 7/2 4/1
5 Acres 270/270 1,746/1,746 14/4 8/2
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District, Localized Significance Threshold Methodology, July 2008.
Construction and Operations
Air quality impact analysis considers construction and operational impacts associated with the
Project. Where criteria air pollutant quantification was required, emissions were modeled using
the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod). CalEEMod is a Statewide land use
emissions computer model designed to quantify potential criteria pollutant emissions associated
with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects. Air quality impacts
were assessed according to methodologies recommended by CARB and the SCAQMD.
Construction equipment, trucks, worker vehicles, and ground-disturbing activities associated
with Project construction would generate emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors. Daily
regional construction emissions are estimated by assuming construction occurs at the earliest
feasible date (i.e., a conservative estimate of construction activities) and applying off-road,
fugitive dust, and on-road emissions factors in CalEEMod.
Project operations would result in emissions of area sources (consumer products), energy
sources (natural gas usage), and mobile sources (motor vehicles from Project generated vehicle
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 68
trips). Project-generated increases in operational emissions would be predominantly associated
with motor vehicle use. The increase of traffic over existing conditions because of the Project was
obtained from the Project’s Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Kimley-Horn
(October 2021). Other operational emissions from area, energy, and stationary sources were
quantified in CalEEMod based on land use activity data.
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As part of its enforcement responsibilities, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires each state with nonattainment areas to
prepare and submit a State Implementation Plan that demonstrates the means to attain
the federal standards. The State Implementation Plan must integrate federal, state, and
local plan components and regulations to identify specific measures to reduce pollution in
nonattainment areas, using a combination of performance standards and market-based
programs. Similarly, under State law, the CCAA requires an air quality attainment plan to
be prepared for areas designated as nonattainment regarding the state and federal
ambient air quality standards. Air quality attainment plans outline emissions limits and
control measures to achieve and maintain these standards by the earliest practical date.
The Project is located within the SCAB, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The
SCAQMD is required, pursuant to the FCAA, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for
which the SCAB is in nonattainment. To reduce such emissions, the SCAQMD drafted the
adopted 2016 AQMP. The 2016 AQMP establishes a program of rules and regulations
directed at reducing air pollutant emissions and achieving state (California) and national
air quality standards. The 2016 AQMP is a regional and multi-agency effort including the
SCAQMD, CARB, SCAG, and EPA. The plan’s pollutant control strategies are based on the
latest scientific and technical information and planning assumptions, including SCAG’s
growth projections and RTP/SCS, updated emission inventory methodologies for various
source categories, and SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were
defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.
The Project is subject to the SCAQMD’s AQMP.
Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined by the following
indicators:
▪ Consistency Criterion No. 1: The Project will not result in an increase in the frequency
or severity of existing air quality violations, or cause or contribute to new violations, or
delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions
specified in the AQMP.
▪ Consistency Criterion No. 2: The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP,
or increments based on the years of the Project build-out phase.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 69
According to the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the purpose of the consistency
finding is to determine if a project is inconsistent with the assumptions and objectives of
the regional air quality plans, and thus if it would interfere with the region’s ability to
comply with CAAQS and NAAQS.
The violations to which Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers are CAAQS and NAAQS. As shown
in Table 8, Construction-Related Emissions and Table 9, Long-Term Operational Emissions
below. The Project would not exceed the construction or operational standards; therefore,
the Project would not contribute to an existing air quality violation. Thus, the Project would
be consistent with the first criterion.
Concerning Consistency Criterion No. 2, the AQMP contains air pollutant reduction
strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s growth forecasts were
defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.
The Project site has a General Plan land use designation of General Commercial (C-G) and
is within the General Commercial (C-2) Zoning District. The Project is consistent with the
City’s General Plan Land Use Designations and the Zoning Designations and would not
require a General Plan Amendment (GPA) and/or a Zone Change. As such, the Project is
consistent with SCAG’s latest growth forecasts. Thus, the Project is consistent with the
second criterion. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the Project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact.
Construction Emissions
Construction associated with the Project would generate short-term emissions of criteria
air pollutants. The criteria pollutants of primary concern within the Project area include
O3-precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOX) and PM10 and PM2.5. Construction-generated
emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction
activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of
pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.
Construction results in the temporary generation of emissions resulting from site grading,
road paving, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and worker
trips, and the movement of construction equipment, especially on unpaved surfaces.
Emissions of airborne particulate matter are largely dependent on the amount of ground
disturbance associated with site preparation activities as well as weather conditions and
the appropriate application of water.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 70
The duration of construction activities associated with the Project is estimated to last
approximately 18 months. Construction-generated emissions associated the Project were
calculated using the CARB-approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to
model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction
requirements. See Appendix A: Air Quality Modeling Data of the AQ Assessment for more
information regarding the construction assumptions used in the AQ Assessment. Predicted
maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the Project are summarized in Table
8, Construction-Related Emissions.
Fugitive dust emissions may have a substantial, temporary impact on local air quality. In
addition, fugitive dust may be a nuisance to those living and working in the Project vicinity.
Uncontrolled dust from construction can become a nuisance and potential health hazard
to those living and working nearby. SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 (prohibition of nuisances,
watering of inactive and perimeter areas, track out requirements, etc.), are applicable to
the Project and were applied in CalEEMod to minimize fugitive dust emissions. Standard
Condition (SC) AQ-1 requires the implementation of Rule 402 and 403 dust control
techniques to minimize PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations.
Table 8: Construction-Related Emissions
Construction Year
Pollutant (Maximum Pounds per Day)
Reactive
Organic
Gases
(ROG)
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Sulfur
Dioxide
(SO2)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine
Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
2022 4.29 33.13 41.99 0.09 9.47 5.47
2023 28.34 17.92 25.78 0.06 3.52 1.45
SCAQMD
Threshold 75 100 550 150 55 150
Exceed SCAQMD
Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes: SCAQMD Rule 403 Fugitive Dust applied. The Rule 403 reduction/credits include the following: properly maintain mobile and
other construction equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover
stockpiles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages
from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. No mitigation was applied to construction equipment.
Refer to Appendix A for Model Data Outputs.
Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A of AQ Assessment for model outputs.
As shown in Table 8 above, all criteria pollutant emissions would remain below their
respective thresholds. While impacts would be considered less than significant, the Project
would be subject to SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403, described in SC AQ-1. The proposed
Project construction emissions would not worsen ambient air quality, create additional
violations of federal and State standards, or delay SCAB’s goal for meeting attainment
standards.
Operational Emissions
Project-generated emissions would be primarily associated with motor vehicle use and
area sources, such as the use of landscape maintenance equipment and architectural
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 71
coatings. Long-term operational emissions attributable to the Project are summarized in
Table 9, Long-Term Operational Emissions. Each of these sources are described below.
▪ Area Source Emissions. Area source emissions would be generated due to consumer
products (e.g., fertilizers/pesticides, detergents; cleaning compounds; polishes; floor
finishes; cosmetics; personal care products; home, lawn, and garden products;
disinfectants; sanitizers; aerosol paints, etc.), architectural coating, and gasoline-
powered landscaping equipment that were previously not present on the site.
▪ Energy Source Emissions. Energy source emissions would be generated due to
electricity and natural gas usage associated with the Project. Primary uses of
electricity and natural gas by the Project would be for space heating and cooling,
water heating, ventilation, lighting, appliances, and electronics.
▪ Mobile Source. Mobile sources are emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe
and evaporative emissions. Depending upon the pollutant being discussed, the
potential air quality impact may be of either regional or local concern. For example,
ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 are all pollutants of regional concern. NOX and ROG react
with sunlight to form O3, known as photochemical smog. Additionally, wind currents
readily transport PM10 and PM2.5. However, CO tends to be a localized pollutant,
dispersing rapidly at the source.
▪ Project-generated vehicle emissions are based on the trip generation within the
Project Traffic Impact Analysis and incorporated into CalEEMod as recommended by
the SCAQMD. Per the TIA, the Project would generate 4,924 daily vehicle trips.
Table 9: Long-Term Operational Emissions
Source
Pollutant (Maximum Pounds per Day)
Reactive
Organic
Gases
(ROG)
Nitrogen
Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon
Monoxide
(CO)
Sulfur
Dioxide
(SO2)
Coarse
Particulate
Matter
(PM10)
Fine Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
Unmitigated
Area Source
Emissions
4.40 <0.01 0.05 0.00 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Emissions 0.61 5.52 4.63 0.03 0.42 0.42
Mobile Emissions 13.79 7.23 81.45 0.67 14.49 4.85
Total Emissions 18.79 12.75 86.13 0.70 14.92 5.27
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
With GHG Mitigation
Area Source Emissions 4.40 <0.01 0.05 0.00 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Emissions 0.49 4.44 3.73 0.03 0.34 0.34
Mobile Emissions 13.58 6.57 72.39 0.55 11.81 3.96
Total Emissions 18.47 11.01 76.17 0.58 12.15 4.30
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A of AQ Assessment for model outputs.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 72
As shown in Table 9, unmitigated operational emissions would remain below the SCAQMD
criteria pollutant thresholds. Although mitigation is not required to reduce pollutants
below SCAQMD criteria pollutant thresholds, mitigation is required to reduce greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions below City thresholds. Table 9 includes air quality improvements
resulting from GHG mitigation for informational purposes only. All criteria pollutant
emissions would remain below their respective thresholds during Project operations.
Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact.
Cumulative Short-Term Emissions
The SCAB is designated nonattainment for O3, PM10, and PM2.5 for State standards and
nonattainment for O3 and PM2.5 for Federal standards. Appendix D of the SCAQMD White
Paper on Potential Control Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution
(2003) notes that projects that result in emissions that do not exceed the project specific
SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance should result in a less than significant impact
on a cumulative basis unless there is other pertinent information to the contrary. The
mass-based regional significance thresholds published by the SCAQMD are designed to
ensure compliance with both NAAQS and CAAQS and are based on an inventory of
projected emissions in the SCAB. Therefore, if a project is estimated to result in emissions
that do not exceed the thresholds, the project’s contribution to the cumulative impact on
air quality in the SCAB would not be cumulatively considerable. As shown in Table 8,
Project construction-related emissions by themselves would not exceed the SCAQMD
significance thresholds for criteria pollutants. Therefore, the proposed Project would not
generate a cumulatively considerable contribution to air pollutant emissions during
construction.
The SCAQMD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in
the AQMP pursuant to the FCAA mandates. The analysis assumed fugitive dust controls
would be utilized during construction, including frequent water applications. SCAQMD
rules, mandates, and compliance with adopted AQMP emissions control measures would
also be imposed on construction projects throughout the SCAB, which would include
related projects. Compliance with SCAQMD rules and regulations would further reduce the
Project construction-related impacts. Therefore, Project-related construction emissions,
combined with those from other projects in the area, would not substantially deteriorate
local air quality. Construction emissions associated with the Project would not result in a
cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative air quality impacts.
Cumulative Long-Term Impacts
The SCAQMD has not established separate significance thresholds for cumulative
operational emissions. The nature of air emissions is largely a cumulative impact. As a
result, no single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient
air quality standards. Instead, individual project emissions contribute to existing
cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. The SCAQMD developed the
operational thresholds of significance based on the level above which individual project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 73
emissions would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the SCAB’s existing
air quality conditions. Therefore, a project that exceeds the SCAQMD operational
thresholds would also be a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant
cumulative impact.
As shown in Table 9 above, the Project operational emissions would not exceed SCAQMD
thresholds. As a result, operational emissions associated with the Project would not result
in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative air quality impacts.
Additionally, adherence to SCAQMD rules and regulations would alleviate potential
impacts related to cumulative conditions on a project-by-project basis. Project operations
would not contribute a cumulatively considerable net increase of any nonattainment
criteria pollutant.
Standard Conditions:
SC AQ-1 Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Building Official shall confirm that the
Grading Plan, Building Plans and Specifications require all construction contractors to
comply with SCAQMD’s Rules 402 and 403 to minimize construction emissions of dust
and particulates. The measures include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Portions of a construction site to remain inactive longer than a period of three
months will be seeded and watered until grass cover is grown or otherwise
stabilized.
• All on-site roads will be paved as soon as feasible or watered periodically or
chemically stabilized.
• All material transported off-site will be either sufficiently watered or securely
covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
• The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earthmoving, or excavation operations
will be minimized at all times.
• Where vehicles leave a construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the
streets will be swept daily or washed down at the end of the workday to remove
soil tracked onto the paved surface.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact.
Localized Construction Significance Analysis
The nearest sensitive receptors are the single-family residences located 105 feet
(32 meters) to the south of the Project on the opposite side of South Highland Avenue. To
identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing LSTs for
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 74
construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards'
Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final
Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for
guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts
associated with Project-specific emissions.
Since CalEEMod calculates construction emissions based on the number of equipment
hours and the maximum daily soil disturbance activity possible for each piece of
equipment, Table 10, Equipment-Specific Grading Rates, is used to determine the
maximum daily disturbed acreage for comparison to LSTs. The appropriate SRA for the
localized significance thresholds is the Central San Bernardino Valley (SRA 34) since this
area includes the Project. LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAQMD produced
look-up tables for projects that disturb areas less than or equal to 5 acres in size. Project
construction is anticipated to disturb a maximum of 3.5 acres in a single day. As the LST
guidance provides thresholds for projects disturbing 1-, 2-, and 5-acres in size and the
thresholds increase with size of the site, the LSTs for a 3.5-acre threshold for were
interpolated and utilized for this analysis.
Table 10: Equipment-Specific Grading Rates
Construction
Phase
Equipment
Type
Equipment
Quantity
Acres Graded
per 8-Hour Day
Operating
Hours per Day
Acres Graded
per Day
Site Preparation Tractors 4 0.5 8 2.0
Dozers 3 0.5 8 1.5
Total Acres Graded per Day 3.5
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.
The SCAQMD’s methodology states that “off-site mobile emissions from the Project should
not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, only emissions included in
the CalEEMod “on-site” emissions outputs were considered. The nearest sensitive
receptors are the single-family residences located 105 feet (32 meters) south of the
Project. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100,
200, and 500 meters. Therefore, LSTs for receptors have been conservatively interpolated
for a distance of 30 meters and utilized in this analysis. Table 11, Localized Significance of
Construction Emissions, shows the results of localized emissions during construction. This
table represents the worst-case scenario and are based on peak earthwork volumes
anticipated.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 75
Table 11: Localized Significance of Construction Emissions
Construction Activity
Emissions (Maximum Pounds Per Day)
Nitrogen Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
Demolition (2022) 25.72 20.59 3.43 1.49
Site Preparation (2022) 33.08 19.70 9.28 5.42
Grading (2022) 20.86 15.27 3.70 2.20
Building Construction (2022) 15.62 16.36 0.81 0.76
Building Construction (2023) 14.38 16.24 0.70 0.66
Paving (2023) 11.12 14.58 0.57 0.52
Architectural Coating (2023) 1.30 1.81 0.07 0.07
SCAQMD Localized Screening
Threshold (adjusted for 3.5 acres at 30
meters)
226 1,473 15 6
Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.
Table 11 above shows that the maximum daily emissions of pollutants during each phase
of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby
sensitive receptors. Significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during
construction.
Localized Operational Significance Analysis
Interpolated LSTs for receptors located at 30 meters for SRA 34 were used in this analysis.
The project site is approximately 8.7 acres, the 5-acre threshold was conservatively used
for evaluation of operational emissions. As noted above, the LSTs increase as site acreage
increases. Therefore, the 5-acre LSTs are conservative for evaluation of an 8.7-acre site.
The on-site operational emissions are compared to the LST thresholds in Table 12,
Localized Significance of Operational Emissions. Table 12 shows that the maximum daily
emissions of these pollutants during Project operations would not result in significant
concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Project would
result in a less than significant impact concerning LSTs during operational activities.
Table 12: Localized Significance of Operational Emissions
Activity
Emissions (Maximum Pounds Per Day)
Nitrogen Oxide
(NOx)
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
Coarse Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
On-Site and Mobile Source Emissions 5.52 4.68 0.42 0.42
SCAQMD Localized Screening Threshold
(5 acres at 30 meters) 276 1,876 5 2
Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.
Criteria Pollutant Health Impacts
On December 24, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued an opinion identifying the
need to provide sufficient information connecting a project’s air emissions to health
impacts or explain why such information could not be ascertained (Sierra Club v. County of
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 76
Fresno [Friant Ranch, L.P.] [2018] Cal.5th, Case No. S219783). As noted above, the Project’s
operational emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds, resulting
in less than significant long-term air quality impacts.
NOX and ROG are precursor emissions that form ozone in the atmosphere in the presence
of sunlight where the pollutants undergo complex chemical reactions. It takes time and
the influence of meteorological conditions for these reactions to occur, so ozone may be
formed at a distance downwind from the sources. Breathing ground-level ozone can result
health effects that include reduced lung function, inflammation of airways, throat
irritation, pain, burning, or discomfort in the chest when taking a deep breath, chest
tightness, wheezing, or shortness of breath. In addition to these effects, evidence from
observational studies strongly indicates that higher daily ozone concentrations are
associated with increased asthma attacks, increased hospital admissions, increased daily
mortality, and other markers of morbidity. The consistency and coherence of the evidence
for effects upon asthmatics suggests that ozone can make asthma symptoms worse and
can increase sensitivity to asthma triggers.
According the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP, ozone, NOX, and ROG have been decreasing in the
Basin since 1975 and are projected to continue to decrease in the future. Although vehicle
miles traveled in the Basin continue to increase, NOX and ROG levels are decreasing
because of the mandated controls on motor vehicles and the replacement of older
polluting vehicles with lower-emitting vehicles. NOX emissions from electric utilities have
also decreased due to the use of cleaner fuels and renewable energy. The 2016 AQMP
demonstrates how the SCAQMD’s control strategy to meet the 8-hour ozone standard in
2023 would lead to sufficient NOX emission reductions to attain the 1-hour ozone standard
by 2022. In addition, since NOX emissions also lead to the formation of PM2.5, the NOX
reductions needed to meet the ozone standards will likewise lead to improvement of PM2.5
levels and attainment of PM2.5 standards.
The SCAQMD’s air quality modeling demonstrates that NOX reductions prove to be much
more effective in reducing ozone levels and will also lead to significant improvement in
PM2.5 concentrations. NOX-emitting stationary sources regulated by the SCAQMD include
Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM) facilities (e.g., refineries, power
plants, etc.), natural gas combustion equipment (e.g., boilers, heaters, engines, burners,
flares) and other combustion sources that burn wood or propane. The 2016 AQMP
identifies robust NOX reductions from new regulations on RECLAIM facilities, non-refinery
flares, commercial cooking, and residential and commercial appliances. Such combustion
sources are already heavily regulated with the lowest NOX emissions levels achievable but
there are opportunities to require and accelerate replacement with cleaner zero-emission
alternatives, such as residential and commercial furnaces, pool heaters, and backup power
equipment. The AQMD plans to achieve such replacements through a combination of
regulations and incentives. Technology-forcing regulations can drive development and
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 77
commercialization of clean technologies, with future year requirements for new or existing
equipment. Incentives can then accelerate deployment and enhance public acceptability
of new technologies.
The 2016 AQMD also emphasizes that beginning in 2012, continued implementation of
previously adopted regulations will lead to NOX emission reductions of 68 percent by 2023
and 80 percent by 2031. With the addition of 2016 AQMP proposed regulatory measures,
a 30 percent reduction of NOX from stationary sources is expected in the 15-year period
between 2008 and 2023. This is in addition to significant NOX reductions from stationary
sources achieved in the decades prior to 2008.
As previously discussed, localized effects of on-site Project emissions on nearby receptors
were found to be less than significant (refer to Table 11 and Table 12). The LSTs represent
the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an
exceedance of the most stringent applicable state or federal ambient air quality standard.
The LSTs were developed by the SCAQMD based on the ambient concentrations of that
pollutant for each SRA and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The ambient air
quality standards establish the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate margin of
safety, to protect public health, including protecting the health of sensitive populations
such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. However, as discussed above, neither the
SCAQMD nor any other air district currently have methodologies that would provide Lead
Agencies and CEQA practitioners with a consistent, reliable, and meaningful analysis to
correlate specific health impacts that may result from a proposed project’s mass
emissions. Information on health impacts related to exposure to ozone and particulate
matter emissions published by the U.S. EPA and CARB have been summarized above and
discussed in the Regulatory Framework section. Health studies are used by these agencies
to set the NAAQS and CAAQS.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
An analysis of CO “hot spots” is needed to determine whether the change in the level of
service of an intersection resulting from the Project would have the potential to result in
exceedances of the CAAQS or NAAQS. It has long been recognized that CO exceedances
are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when vehicles are idling at intersections.
Vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last 20 years.
Currently, the CO standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams per mile for passenger
cars (requirements for certain vehicles are more stringent). With the turnover of older
vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of control technology on
industrial facilities, CO concentrations have steadily declined. Accordingly, with the
steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do not result
in exceedances of the CO standard.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 78
The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) was re-designated as attainment for CO in 2007 and is no
longer addressed in the SCAQMD’s AQMP. The 2003 AQMP is the most recent version that
addresses CO concentrations. As part of the SCAQMD CO Hotspot Analysis, the Wilshire
Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection, one of the most congested intersections in
Southern California with an average daily traffic (ADT) volume of approximately 100,000
vehicles per day, was modeled for CO concentrations. This modeling effort identified a
CO concentration high of 4.6 ppm, which is well below the 35-ppm Federal standard. Based
on data within the Project Traffic Impact Analysis, the surrounding roadways would have
maximum ADT volume of 44,541 during the horizon year plus Project scenario. Therefore,
the Project would not produce the volume of traffic required to generate a CO hot spot in
the context of SCAQMD’s CO Hotspot Analysis. As the CO hotspots were not experienced at
the Wilshire Boulevard/Veteran Avenue intersection even as it accommodates 100,000
vehicles daily, it can be reasonably inferred that CO hotspots would not be experienced at
any vicinity intersections resulting from 4,924 additional vehicle trips attributable to the
Project. Therefore, the Project would not result in a CO hotspot and impacts would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely
affecting a substantial number of people)?
Less Than Significant Impact.
Construction
Odors that could be generated by construction activities are required to follow SCAQMD
Rule 402 to prevent odor nuisances on sensitive land uses. SCAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance,
states:
A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air
contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or
annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which
endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public,
or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business
or property.
During construction-related activities, some odors (not substantial pollutant
concentrations) that may be detected are those typical of construction vehicles
(e.g., diesel exhaust from grading and construction equipment). These odors are a
temporary short-term impact that is typical of construction projects, are not expected to
affect a substantial number of people and would disperse rapidly. Furthermore, odors that
could be generated by construction activities are required to follow SCAQMD Rule 402
(Nuisance) to prevent odor nuisances on sensitive land uses. Therefore, impacts related to
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 79
odors associated with the Project’s construction-related activities would be less than
significant.
Operations
The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook identifies certain land uses as sources of odors.
These land uses include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants,
food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies,
and fiberglass molding. The Project would not include any of the land uses that have been
identified by the SCAQMD as odor sources. Therefore, the proposed Project would not
create objectionable odors.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative setting for air quality includes the City of Fontana and SCAB. SCAB is designated
as a nonattainment area for State standards of ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. The SCAB is designated
as a nonattainment area for federal standards of ozone and PM2.5, attainment, and serious
maintenance for federal PM10 standards, and is designated as unclassified or attainment for all
other pollutants. Cumulative growth in population and vehicle use could inhibit efforts to
improve regional air quality and attain the ambient air quality standards.
The SCAQMD’s approach to assessing cumulative impacts is based on the AQMP forecasts of
attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with requirements of the FCAA and
CCAA. As discussed above, the proposed Project would be consistent with the AQMP, which is
intended to bring SCAB into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Since the Project’s estimated
construction and operational emissions would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD daily
significance thresholds that are designed to assist the region in attaining both NAAQS and CAAQS,
cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 80
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
X
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
X
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
X
A Habitat Assessment (HA) was prepared for the proposed Project by ELMT Consulting (ELMT) on
May 4, 2021. The report is summarized below and is included as Appendix B, of this Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Methodology
A literature review and records search were conducted to determine which special-status
biological resources have the potential to occur on or within the general vicinity of the Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 81
site. In addition to the literature review, a general habitat assessment or field investigation of the
Project site was conducted to document existing conditions and assess the potential for special-
status biological resources to occur within the Project site.
Literature Review
Prior to conducting the field investigation, a literature review and records search was conducted
for special-status biological resources potentially occurring on or within the vicinity of the Project
site. Previously recorded occurrences of special-status plant and wildlife species and their
proximity to the Project site were determined through a query of the CDFW’s QuickView Tool in
the Biogeographic Information and Observation System (BIOS), CNDDB Rarefind 5, the California
Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of
California, Calflora Database, compendia of special-status species published by CDFW, and the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species listings.
All available reports, survey results, and literature detailing the biological resources previously
observed on or within the vicinity of the Project site were reviewed to understand existing site
conditions and note the extent of any disturbances that have occurred within the Project site
that would otherwise limit the distribution of special-status biological resources. Standard field
guides and texts were reviewed for specific habitat requirements of special-status and non-
special-status biological resources, as well as the following resources:
• Google Earth Pro historic aerial imagery (1985-2020).
• United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resource Conservation Service
(NRCS), Soil Survey8;
• USFWS Critical Habitat designations for Threatened and Endangered Species; and
• USFWS Endangered Species Profiles.
The literature review provided a baseline from which to inventory the biological resources
potentially occurring within the project site. The CNDDB database was used, in conjunction with
ArcGIS software, to locate the nearest recorded occurrences of special-status species and
determine the distance from the project site.
Habitat Assessment/Field Investigation
Following the literature review, biologists Travis J. McGill and Jacob H. Lloyd Davies inventoried
and evaluated the condition of the habitat within the project on April 4, 2021. Plant communities
and land cover types identified on aerial photographs during the literature review were verified
by walking meandering transects throughout the project site. In addition, aerial photography was
reviewed prior to the site investigation to locate potential natural corridors and linkages that may
support the movement of wildlife through the area. These areas identified on aerial photography
were then walked during the field investigation.
8 A soil series is defined as a group of soils with similar profiles developed from similar parent materials under comparable climatic and
vegetation conditions. These profiles include major horizons with similar thickness, arrangement, and other important characteristics, which
may promote favorable conditions for certain biological resources.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 82
Results
Soil Series Assessment
On-site and adjoining soils were researched prior to the field investigation using the USDA NRCS
Soil Survey for San Bernardino County, California. In addition, a review of the local geological
conditions and historical aerial photographs was conducted to assess the ecological changes that
the project site has undergone.
Plant Communities
Plant communities were mapped using 7.5-minute USGS topographic base maps and aerial
photography. The plant communities were classified in accordance with Sawyer, Keeler-Wolf and
Evens (2009), delineated on an aerial photograph, and then digitized into GIS ArcView. The
ArcView application was used to compute the area of each plant community and/or land cover
type in acres.
Plants
Common plant species observed during the field investigation were identified by visual
characteristics and morphology in the field and recorded in a field notebook. Unusual and less-
familiar plants were photographed in the field and identified in the laboratory using taxonomic
guides. Taxonomic nomenclature used in this study follows the 2012 Jepson Manual (Hickman
2012). In this report, scientific names are provided immediately following common names of
plant species (first reference only).
Wildlife
Wildlife species detected during the field investigation by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other sign
were recorded during surveys in a field notebook. Field guides used to assist with identification
of wildlife species during the survey included The Sibley Field Guide to the Birds of Western North
America (Sibley 2003), A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians (Stebbins 2003), and A
Field Guide to Mammals of North America (Reid 2006). Although common names of wildlife
species are well standardized, scientific names are provided immediately following common
names in this report (first reference only).
Topography and Soils
The Project site is located at an approximate elevation of 1,500 feet above mean sea level with
no areas of topographic relief. There are a few elevated areas (mounds) onsite from soil/material
stockpiling. Based on the NRCS USDA Web Soil Survey, the Project site is historically underlain by
Soboba gravelly loamy sand (0 to 9 percent slopes). Soils on-site have been mechanically
disturbed and compacted from historic agricultural activities, stockpiling activities, and on-site
and surrounding development.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 83
Vegetation
Due to historic and existing land uses, no native plant communities or natural communities of
special concern were observed on or adjacent to the Project site. The Project site consists of a
mixture of developed and undeveloped land that was historically used for agricultural purposes,
supported housing developments, and/or has undergone routine weed abatement. These
disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that once occurred on and
surrounding the Project site. The Project site consists of one (1) vegetation community, non-
native grassland, and two (2) land cover types that would be classified as disturbed and
developed.
Non-Native Grassland
The non-native grassland community is dominated by non-native grasses such as ripgut brome
(Bromus diandrus), wild oat (Avena fatua), and long beaked filaree (Erodium botrys) and other
weedy/early successional species. Other plant species observed in the non-native grassland
community include Spanish lotus (Acmispon americanus), puncture vine (Tribulus terrestris),
tumbling pigweed (Amaranthus albus), western ragweed (Ambrosia psilostachya), doveweed
(Croton capitatus), sun cups (Camissoniopsis bistorta), tacolote (Centaurea melitensis), Jimson
weed (Datura stramonium), fiddleneck (Amsinckia sp.), and common cryptantha (Cryptantha
intermedia). This plant community is found on the southern half of the Project site that
historically supported residential developments.
Disturbed
Disturbed land occurs in the northern half of the project site. These areas have been subject to a
routine soil/material stockpiling activities, which continue to persist onsite. These areas support
minimal non-native/ruderal plant species.
Developed
The northwest boundary of the Project site supports developed land in the form of an existing
asphalt road, and on the southeast corner of the site in the form of a concrete walkway.
Wildlife
Plant communities provide foraging habitat, nesting/denning sites, and shelter from adverse
weather or predation. This section provides a discussion of those wildlife species that were
observed or are expected to occur within the project site. The discussion is to be used a general
reference and is limited by the season, time of day, and weather conditions in which the field
investigation was conducted. Wildlife detections were based on calls, songs, scat, tracks,
burrows, and direct observation. The project site provides limited habitat for wildlife species
except those adapted to a high degree of anthropogenic disturbances and development.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 84
Fish
No fish or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) with frequent sources
of water that would support populations of fish were observed on or within the vicinity of the
Project site. Therefore, no fish are expected to occur and are presumed absent from the Project
site.
Amphibians
No amphibians or hydrogeomorphic features (e.g., creeks, ponds, lakes, reservoirs) with frequent
sources of water that would support populations of amphibians were observed on or within the
vicinity of the Project site. Therefore, no amphibians are expected to occur and are presumed
absent from the Project site.
Reptiles
The Project site provides marginal foraging and cover habitat for a limited variety of reptile
species adapted to a high degree of anthropogenic disturbance. The only reptile species observed
during the field investigation was western side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana elegans).
Common reptilian species adapted to a high degree of human disturbance that could potentially
occur on-site include and great basin fence lizard (Sceloporus occidentalis longipes) and San Diego
alligator lizard (Elgaria multicarinata webbii).
Birds
The Project site provides suitable foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of bird species
adapted to a high degree of anthropogenic disturbance. Bird species detected during the field
investigation include northern mockingbird (Mimus polyglottos), Say’s phoebe (Sayornis saya),
house finch (Haemorhouse mexicanus), lesser goldfinch (Spinus psaltria), Cassin’s kingbird
(Tyrannus vociferans), bushtit (Psaltriparus minimus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), rock
pigeon (Columbia liva), and western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta).
Mammals
The Project site provides marginal foraging and cover habitat for a mammalian species adapted
to a high degree of anthropogenic disturbance. The only mammalian species detected during the
field investigation was desert cottontail (Sylvilagus audubonii). Common mammalian species
adapted to a high degree of human disturbance that could potentially occur on-site include
opossum California ground squirrel (Otospermophilus beecheyi), opossum (Didelphis virginiana),
and raccoon (Procyon lotor).
Nesting Birds
No active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed during the field survey, which
was conducted during breeding season. Although subjected to routine disturbance, the
ornamental vegetation found on-site has the potential to provide suitable nesting habitat for
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 85
year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the
area that area adapted to urban environments. (Charadrius vociferans). No raptors are expected
to nest on-site due to lack of suitable nesting opportunities.
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and California Fish
and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession, or
destruction of birds, their nests, or eggs). If construction occurs between February 1st and
August 31st, a pre-construction clearance survey for nesting birds shall be conducted within
three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that
no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction.
Migratory Corridors and Linkages
Habitat linkages provide connections between larger habitat areas that are separated by
development. Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for
animals to disperse or migrate between areas. A corridor can be defined as a linear landscape
feature of sufficient width to allow animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed
habitat fragments. Adequate cover is essential for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement
area. It is possible for a habitat corridor to be adequate for one species yet still inadequate for
others. Wildlife corridors are features that allow for the dispersal, seasonal migration, breeding,
and foraging of a variety of wildlife species. Additionally, open space can provide a buffer against
both human disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources.
According to the San Bernardino County General Plan, the project site has not been identified as
occurring within a Wildlife Corridor or Linkage. As designated by the San Bernardino County
General Plan Open Space Element, major open space areas documented in the vicinity of the
project site include the Lytle Creek Wash, located approximately 3.4 miles to the northeast.
The proposed project will be confined to existing areas that have been heavily disturbed and are
isolated from regional wildlife corridors and linkages. In addition, there are no riparian corridors,
creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the site
to a recognized wildlife corridor or linkage. As such, implementation of the proposed project is
not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore, impacts to wildlife corridors
or linkages are not expected to occur.
Special-Status Biological Resources
The CNDDB Rarefind 5 and the CNPS Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants
of California were queried for reported locations of special-status plant and wildlife species as
well as special-status natural plant communities in the Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. Only
one quadrangle was queried since the project site is surrounded by existing development and
does not connect with any natural areas or native plant communities in the region. The habitat
assessment evaluated the conditions of the habitat(s) within the boundaries of the project site
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 86
to determine if the existing plant communities, at the time of the survey, have the potential to
provide suitable habitat(s) for special-status plant and wildlife species.
The literature search identified twenty (20) special-status plant species, forty-one (41) special-
status wildlife species, and three (3) special-status plant communities as having potential to occur
within the Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. Special-status plant and wildlife species were
evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site based on habitat requirements,
availability, and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Species determined to have
the potential to occur within the general vicinity of the project site is presented in Attachment D:
Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources.
Special-Status Plants
According to the CNDDB and CNPS, twenty (20) special-status plant species have been recorded
in the Devore quadrangle (refer to Attachment D). No special-status plant species were observed
on-site during the habitat assessment. Most of the project site has been subject to anthropogenic
disturbances from historic agricultural activities, soil/material stockpiling, and surrounding
development. These disturbances have reduced the suitability of the habitat to support special-
status plant species known to occur in the general vicinity of the project site. Based on habitat
requirements for specific special-status plant species and the availability and quality of habitats
needed by each species, it was determined that the project site does not provide suitable habitat
for any of the special-status plant species known to occur in the area and are presumed to be
absent from the project site. No focused surveys are recommended.
Special-Status Wildlife
According to the CNDDB, forty-one (41) special-status wildlife species have been reported in the
Devore quadrangle (refer to Attachment D). No special-status wildlife species were observed
onsite during the habitat assessment. The project site consists of vacant, undeveloped land that
has been subject to a variety of anthropogenic disturbances and is surrounded by existing
development. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant communities that once
occurred onsite which has reduced potential foraging and nesting/denning opportunities for
wildlife species.
Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of onsite
habitats, it was determined that the proposed project site has a low potential to provide suitable
habitat for Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii), burrowing owl, California horned lark (Eremophila
alpestric actia), prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus), and loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus).
Further it was determined that the project site does not provide suitable habitat for any of the
other special-status wildlife species known to occur in the area since the project site have been
heavily disturbed from onsite disturbances and surrounding development.
None of the species are federally or state listed as endangered or threatened. To ensure impacts
to the species do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, a pre-construction
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 87
nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. With
implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the species will
be less than significant and no mitigation will be required.
Based on regional significance, the potential occurrence of burrowing owl and San Bernardino
kangaroo rat within the project site is described below.
Burrowing Owl
The burrowing owl is currently listed as a California Species of Special Concern. It is a grassland
specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short
vegetation and bare ground within shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls
use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with well-drained, level to gently sloping
areas characterized by sparse vegetation and bare ground (Haug and Didiuk 1993; Dechant et al.
1999). Burrowing owls are dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (such as ground
squirrels) whose burrows are used for roosting and nesting (Haug and Didiuk 1993). The presence
or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or
absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been
found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drainpipes, stand-pipes,
and dry culverts. Burrowing mammals may burrow beneath rocks and debris or large, heavy
objects such as abandoned cars, concrete blocks, or concrete pads. They also require open
vegetation allowing line-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage as well as
watch for predators.
The project site is unvegetated and/or vegetated with a variety of low-growing plant species that
allow for line-of-sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, no burrowing owls or
recent sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) was observed during the field
investigation. Further, no suitable burrows (>4 inches) were observed during the field
investigation. In addition, tall fences, powerlines, and ornamental trees surround the project site,
which decreases the likelihood that burrowing owls would occur on the project site as these
features provide perching opportunities for larger raptor species (i.e., red-tailed hawk [Buteo
jamaicensis]) that prey on burrowing owls.
Based on the results of the field investigation, it was determined that the project site has a low
potential to provide suitable habitat for burrowing owls and focused surveys are not
recommended. However, a pre-construction burrowing owl clearance survey shall be conducted
prior to development to ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site.
San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat
The San Bernardino kangaroo rat, federally and State listed as endangered, is one of several
kangaroo rat species in its range know to occur in the area. San Bernardino kangaroo rat
historically ranged from the San Bernardino Valley in San Bernardino County to southwest Perris,
Bautista Canyon, and Murrieta Hot Springs in Riverside County, with at least 25 separate localities
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 88
identified. Currently, populations of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat are limited to seven widely
separated locations in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, four of which (City Creek,
Etiwanda, Reche Canyon, and South Bloomington) support only small, remnant populations. The
Santa Ana River, Lytle and Cajon washes, and the San Jacinto River support the largest extant
concentrations of San Bernardino kangaroo rat and the largest areas of habitat for this species
(approximately 3,200 acres total) (USFWS 2009).
San Bernardino kangaroo rat is found primarily on sandy and loamy sand substrates, where they
can readily excavate simple, shallow burrows. This is almost exclusively associated with
Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS) habitats, a relatively uncommon desert-influenced
plant community in southern California that develops on alluvial fans and floodplains subjected
to scouring and deposition (USFWS 2009). Adjacent upland habitat provide refuge for San
Bernardino kangaroo rat during flood events. Animals occupying this refugia habitat are able to
repopulate core habitat areas within the floodplain following major flood events. Most of the
drainages have been historically altered as a result of flood control efforts and the resulting
increased use of river resources, including mining, off-road vehicle use and road and housing
development. This increased use of river resources has resulted in a reduction in both the amount
and quality of habitat available for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. The past habitat losses and
potential future losses prompted the emergency listing of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat as an
endangered species (USFWS, 1998a).
The project site and surrounding area are no longer exposed to fluvial processes needed to
maintain the intermediate RAFSS habitat that would be required for long-term San Bernardino
kangaroo rat conservation. The site has been isolated from the influences of the alluvial fans
extending out of the San Gabriel Mountains since the late 1950s from the construction of
Interstate 15, construction of Interstate 210, and channelization of the drainages extending out
of the San Gabriel Mountains for flood control purposes. Further, the project site is not located
within federally designated Critical Habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat.
Due to the history of agricultural use, including the removal of native habitat and several decades
of farming/manipulating native soils, the loss of fluvial scouring due to flood control activities,
and isolation from known occupied habitat, the project site no longer supports native RAFSS
habitat. Further the site is no longer accessible to San Bernardino kangaroo rat due to the
fragmentation and isolation of the project site from native habitats from on the San Gabriel
alluvial fans. No sign of San Bernardino kangaroo rat use was found within the project site or
neighboring areas. San Bernardino kangaroo rat is presumed absent, and no further studies are
recommended.
Special-Status Plant Communities
According to the CNDDB, three (3) special-status plant communities have been reported in the
Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle: Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub, southern riparian
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 89
forest, and Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland. Based on the results of the field
investigation, no special-status plant communities were observed onsite. Therefore, no special-
status plant communities will be impacted by project implementation.
Critical Habitats
Under the federal Endangered Species Act, “Critical Habitat” is designated at the time of listing
of a species or within one year of listing. Critical Habitat refers to specific areas within the
geographical range of a species at the time it is listed that include the physical or biological
features that are essential to the survival and eventual recovery of that species. Maintenance of
these physical and biological features requires special management considerations or protection,
regardless of whether individuals or the species are present or not. All federal agencies are
required to consult with the USFWS regarding activities they authorize, fund, or permit which
may affect a federally listed species or its designated Critical Habitat. The purpose of the
consultation is to ensure that projects will not jeopardize the continued existence of the listed
species or adversely modify or destroy its designated Critical Habitat. The designation of Critical
Habitat does not affect private landowners, unless a project they are proposing is on federal
lands, uses federal funds, or requires federal authorization or permits (e.g., funding from the
Federal Highways Administration or a Clean Water Act Permit from the United States Army Corps
of Engineers). If a there is a federal nexus, then the federal agency that is responsible for
providing the funding or permit would consult with the USFWS.
The project site is not located within federally designated Critical Habitat. The nearest designated
Critical Habitat is located approximately 0.5 mile north of the project site for San Bernardino
kangaroo rat. Therefore, the loss or adverse modification of Critical Habitat from site
development will not occur and consultation with the USFWS for impacts to Critical Habitat will
not be required for implementation of the proposed project.
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.
As noted above, there is no evidence of candidate, sensitive, or special status species on
the Project site. Implementation of the proposed Project would not cause a substantial
adverse effect either directly or through habitat modifications on any special-status
biological resources, special-status plants, or special-status wildlife.
Although none of the aforementioned species are federally or state listed as endangered
or threatened. To ensure impacts to the aforementioned species do not occur from
implementation of the proposed Project, a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 90
(Mitigation Measure BIO-1) shall be conducted prior to ground disturbance. With
implementation of the pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey, impacts to the
aforementioned species will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
BIO-1 Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Fish and Game Code.
Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and
California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take,
possession, or destruction of birds, their nests, or eggs). To protect migratory bird species,
a nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted prior to any ground disturbance or
vegetation removal activities that may disrupt the birds during the nesting season.
If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre-construction clearance
survey for nesting birds shall be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any
vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be
disturbed during construction. The biologist conducting the clearance survey shall
document a negative survey with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active
avian nests will occur. If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre-construction
clearance survey, construction activities shall stay outside of a no-disturbance buffer. The
size of the no-disturbance buffer will be determined by the wildlife biologist and will
depend on the level of noise and/or surrounding anthropogenic disturbances, line of sight
between the nest and the construction activity, type and duration of construction activity,
ambient noise, species habituation, and topographical barriers. These factors will be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis when developing buffer distances. Limits of construction
to avoid an active nest will be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other
appropriate barriers; and construction personnel will be instructed on the sensitivity of
nest areas. A biological monitor shall be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer
area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely
affected by the construction activity. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the
nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, construction activities within
the buffer area can occur.
Mitigation Measure: MM BIO-1.
Level of Significance: Less than Significant impact with Mitigation.
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact.
Jurisdictional Drainage and Wetlands
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 91
Aerial photography was reviewed prior to conducting a field investigation to locate and
inspect any potential natural drainage features, ponded areas, or water bodies that may
fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional
Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board), or CDFW. In general, surface drainage
features indicated as blue-line streams on USGS maps that are observed or expected to
exhibit evidence of flow are considered potential riparian/riverine habitat and are also
subject to state and federal regulatory jurisdiction. In addition, ELMT reviewed
jurisdictional waters information through examining historical aerial photographs to gain
an understanding of the impact of land-use on natural drainage patterns in the area. The
USFWS National Wetland Inventory (NWI) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Water Program “My Waters” data layers were also reviewed to determine whether any
hydrologic features and wetland areas have been documented on or within the vicinity of
the Project site.
Jurisdictional Areas
No jurisdictional drainage and/or wetland features were observed on the Project site
during the habitat assessment that would be considered jurisdictional by the Corps,
Regional Board, or CDFW. A query of the NWI database found no potential blueline
streams, riverine, or other aquatic resources within or adjacent to the Project site. Results
suggest that Project implementation would not result in any impact to jurisdictional
resources.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological?
No Impact. Refer to response b) above. No signs of jurisdictional water or other traces of
wetlands occur on site. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant. As discussed above, the Project site provides suitable foraging and
nesting habitat for a variety of bird species adapted to a high degree of anthropogenic
disturbance. However, no active nests or birds displaying nesting behavior were observed
during the field survey. Additionally, according to the San Bernardino County General Plan,
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 92
the project site has not been identified as occurring within a Wildlife Corridor or Linkage.
As designated by the San Bernardino County General Plan Open Space Element, major
open space areas documented in the vicinity of the Project site include the Lytle Creek
Wash, located approximately 3.4 miles to the northeast. As such, implementation of the
proposed project is not expected to impact wildlife movement opportunities. Therefore,
impacts to wildlife corridors or linkages are not expected to occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. Due to historic and existing land uses, no native plant communities or natural
communities of special concern were observed on or adjacent to the Project site. The
Project site consists of a mixture of developed and undeveloped land that was historically
used for agricultural purposes, supported housing developments, and has undergone
routine weed abatement. These disturbances have eliminated the natural plant
communities that once occurred on and surrounding the Project site.
Additionally, as described in the Biological Resources Assessment, ornamental trees
surround the Project site. The City of Fontana’s Municipal Code (FMC) 28-61 outlines
provisions and guidelines for tree removal, installation, preservation, and maintenance
within the City; this is especially important when considering native and special status tree
species within the City. All trees that are intended for removal as part of a project require
a removal permit and must be approved by the Planning Director. However, none of these
trees were identified as protected species under the City of Fontana Municipal Code, et
seq.
Since the Project would not conflict with any local policy or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as tree preservation policy or ordinance, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located with an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan,
and does not contain a special plant or animal species, impacts would be less than
significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 93
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project would result in no significant impacts to biological resources with the
implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1. The chances of cumulative impacts occurring
because of Project implementation plus implementation of other projects in the region is not
likely since all proposed projects would be subject to individual project-level environmental
review. Since there would be no significant project-specific impacts and due to the Project’s
compliance with existing laws and regulations in place to protect biological resources, the
potential incremental effects of the proposed Project would not be cumulatively considerable.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 94
CULTURAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the Project:
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §
15064.5?
X
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to § 15064.5?
X
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?
X
This section discusses the historic and archaeological resources that may be impacted due to
Project Implementation. Cultural resources are defined as places, objects, and settlements that
reflect group or individual religious, archaeological, architectural, or paleontological activities.
Such resources provide information on scientific progress, environmental adaptations, group
ideology, or other human advancements. By statute, CEQA is primarily concerned with two
classes of cultural resources: “historical resources,” which are defined in PRC Section 21084.1
and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, and “unique archaeological resources,” which are defined
in PRC Section 21083.2. Tribal cultural resources are generally described as sites, features, places,
cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American
tribe and are further defined in PRC Section 21074(a)(1)(A) and (B). Refer to the Tribal Cultural
Resources section of this document for additional information.
The information and analysis in this section is based on the proposed Project’s Cultural Resources
Assessment (BCR Consulting, October 2021; see Appendix C of this Initial Study), the City of
Fontana General Plan (2007), City of Fontana General Plan Update 2015 – 2035 (2018), and
applicable consultation.
Historical Resources
Historical resources consist of any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or
manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the
architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political,
military, or cultural annals of California. Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead
agency to be ‘historically significant’ if the resource meets the criteria for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources” (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 14(3), Section 15064.5(a)(3)).
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 95
Archaeological Resources
Archaeological resources are any material remains of human life or activities which are at least
100 years of age, and which are of archaeological interest. The Archaeological Resources
Protection Act of 1979 governs the excavation of archaeological sites on federal and Indian lands
in the United States, and the removal and disposition of archaeological collections from those
sites.
Paleontological Resources
Paleontology, exclusive of the study of human fossils, is a natural science closely associated with
geology and biology. In geologically diverse California, vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant fossils
are usually found in sedimentary and metasedimentary deposits. CEQA provides guidance
relative to significant impacts on paleontological resources, indicating that a project would have
a significant impact on paleontological resources if it disturbs or destroys a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Section 5097.5 of the California Public
Resources Code specifies that any unauthorized removal of paleontological remains is a
misdemeanor. Furthermore, California Penal Code Section 622.5 sets the penalties for damage
or removal of paleontological resources.
CEQA documentation prepared for projects would be required to analyze paleontological
resources in connection with the CEQA process to disclose potential impacts. As of January 2018,
paleontological resources are considered in the geological rather than cultural category.
Therefore, paleontological resources are discussed in Geology and Soils discussion.
Methodology9
Records Search
Prior to fieldwork, an archaeological records search was conducted by SCCIC staff using data on
file at California State University, Fullerton. This included a review of all recorded historic and
prehistoric cultural resources, as well as a review of known cultural resources within 0.5 mile of
the Project site and survey and excavation reports generated from projects completed within
0.5 miles of the Project site. In addition, a review was conducted of the National Register of
Historic Places (National Register), the California Register of Historical Resources (California
Register), and documents and inventories from the California Office of Historic Preservation
including the lists of California Historical Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, Listing
of National Register Properties, and the Built Environment Resource Directory (BERD). BCR
Consulting performed additional research by studying available aerial photographs of the Project
(USDA 1936, 1938, 1948, 1952, 1959, 1966, 1980, 1994, 2002)
9 BCR Consulting LLC. (2021). Cultural Resources Assessment; Methodology. Accessed October 2021. Refer to Appendix C for more
information.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 96
Field Survey
A pedestrian cultural resources field survey of the Project site was conducted on March 17, 2021.
The survey was conducted by walking parallel transects spaced approximately 15 meters apart
across 100 percent of the project site. Transect intervals were narrowed to between one and five
meters where resources were identified. Soil exposures, including natural and artificial clearings
were carefully inspected for evidence of cultural resources. Cultural Resources were recorded
per the California OHP Instructions for Recording Historical Resources in the field using:
• Detailed notetaking on DPR Forms (Appendix A of the Cultural Report)
• Hand-held Garmin Positioning systems for mapping purposes
• Digital photography of all cultural resources (Appendix A and B of the Cultural Report)
Results10
Research
Records search results conducted by SCCIC staff using data on file at California State University,
Fullerton indicate that 24 previous cultural resources assessments have been conducted within
a 0.5-mile radius of the Project site, resulting in the recordation of 24 historic-period cultural
resources. Of these, one cultural resources assessment (SB-2621) has assessed the Project site
and no cultural resources have been previously identified within the Project site. The records
search results are summarized in Table 13, Cultural Resources and Reports Located Within One
Mile of the Project Site, and a full bibliography is provided in Appendix E of the Cultural Report,
provided as Appendix C of this Initial Study.
Table 13: Cultural Resources and Reports Located Within One Mile of the Project Site
USGS 7.5 Min
Quad.
Cultural Resources Within One Mile of Project Site Studies Within One Mile
Devore, Calif.
(1988)
P-36-6251: historic-period foundation (200 ft E)
P-36-7326: historic-period foundation/dump (½ mile W)
P-36-7327: historic-period well (1/5 Mile SE)
P-36-14191: historic-period structure (1/10-mile SE)
P-36-14192: historic-period structure (3/5-mile W)
P-36-14193: historic-period structure (3/5-mile W)
P-36-14194: historic-period structure (1/5-mile W)
P-36-14195: historic-period structure (3/5-mile NW)
P-36-14196: historic-period structure (1/10-mile NW)
P-36-14197: historic-period structure (1/10-mile E)
P-36-14198: historic-period structure (1/10-mile E)
P-36-14199: historic-period structure (1/4-mile E)
P-36-14200: historic-period structure (1/4-mile E)
P-36-14201: historic-period structure (1/2-mile E)
P-36-15291: historic-period structure (1/4-mile E)
P-36-15376: Historic-Period District (4/5-mile N)
P-36-19910: historic-period structure (2/5-mile S)
P-36-19911: historic-period structure (1/4-mile SE)
SB-438, 1011, 1189,
1611, 1737, 1983, 2064,
2096, 2621*, 2765,
2766, 3172, 3173, 4018,
4020, 4022, 4207, 4209,
4548, 5095, 6016, 6392,
6414, 6450
10 BCR Consulting LLC. (2020). Cultural Resources Assessment; Results. Accessed September 9, 2020. Refer to Appendix C for more information.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 97
USGS 7.5 Min
Quad.
Cultural Resources Within One Mile of Project Site Studies Within One Mile
P-36-19912: historic-period structure (1/4-mile SE)
P-36-19913: historic-period structure (3/5-mile E)
P-36-20915: historic-period structure (2/5-mile NW)
P-36-20916: historic-period structure (1/4-mile NW)
P-36-20917: historic-period structure (4/5-mile NW)
P-36-20918: historic-period structure (4/5-mile NW)
Source: BCR Consulting, LLC. October 2021. Cultural Resources Assessment.
Review of historic aerial photographs and San Bernardino County Assessor’s Office records has
revealed that the Project site was vacant until construction of residences along the south border
of the Project property began in 1952. By 1953 residences located at 15956, 15966, 15984,
16006, and 16024 Torrey Avenue were constructed. Additional residences were constructed,
filling the southern half of the project property by 1955. One additional residence was
constructed by 1966 located at 92336 Highland Avenue, in the central portion of the north half
of the project site. The residences on the south side of the project site were demolished between
1994 and 2002, most likely in 1996 when the city assumed ownership of the parcels (San
Bernardino County Assessor 2021; USDA 1936, 1938, 1948, 1952, 1959, 1966, 1980, 1994, 2002).
Field Survey
During the field survey, BCR Consulting identified site KIM2104-H-1 a historic-period utility
alignment, running through the center of the Project site in an east to west direction. This
resource is described in detail below. There is approximately 20 to 40 percent surface visibility
within the Project site. All traces of the buildings that were visible in historic aerial photos in the
southern portion of the site have been removed. Vegetation included dried seasonal grasses,
non-native and native brush, and several species of deciduous trees. Sediments were dominated
by fine gravel and sand. The resource is described as follows:
KIM2104-H-1. This resource consists of a historic-period utility alignment made up of 11 wooden
utility poles, eight of which are original and were installed before 1945 according to inspection
date nails. The alignment is positioned in an east to west orientation and runs the length of the
Project site (1,250 feet). Utilities are still actively being supplied by this alignment to the
surrounding community. The eight historic-period poles in this segment of the alignment all
feature one crossarm, and a guy wire. No other historic-period or prehistoric resources were
identified during the survey, indicating low sensitivity for subsurface deposits in the Project site.
Significance Evaluations
During the field survey an historic-period utility alignment (KIM2104-H-1) was identified. CEQA
calls for the evaluation and recordation of historic and archaeological resources. The criteria for
determining the significance of impacts to cultural resources are based on Section 15064.5 of the
CEQA Guidelines and Guidelines for the Nomination of Properties to the California Register.
Properties eligible for listing in the California Register and subject to review under CEQA are those
meeting the criteria for listing in the California Register, or designation under a local ordinance.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 98
Significance Criteria
California Register of Historical Resources. The California Register criteria are based on National
Register criteria. For a property to be eligible for inclusion on the California Register, one or more
of the following criteria must be met:
1. It is associated with the events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the U.S.
2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or U.S. history.
3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of
construction, represents the work of a master, possesses high artistic values; and/or
4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or
history of the local area, California, or the nation.
In addition to meeting one or more of the above criteria, the California Register requires that
sufficient time has passed since a resource’s period of significance to “obtain a scholarly
perspective on the events or individuals associated with the resources.” (CCR 4852 [d][2]). The
California Register also requires that a resource possess integrity. This is defined as the ability for
the resource to convey its significance through seven aspects: location, setting, design, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association.
Finally, CEQA requires that significant effects on unique archaeological resources be considered
and addressed. CEQA defines a unique archaeological resource as any archaeological artifact,
object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the
current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria:
1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and there
is a demonstrable public interest in that information.
2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available
example of its type.
3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic
event or person.
a & b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical and
archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the significance criteria,
research has failed to associate the historic-period utility alignment with any important
events or persons (Criteria 1 and 2). The site does not embody any distinctive
characteristics, represent the work of a master, or possess high artistic values (Criterion
3). Intensive survey has not identified any potential for the site to yield information
important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation (Criterion
4). The site is not recommended eligible for the California Register and is not
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 99
recommended a historical resource under CEQA. Finally, the site does not contain
information relevant to important scientific research questions and lacks special or
qualities. As such it is not a unique archaeological resource and is also not recommended
a “historical resource” under CEQA and does not warrant further consideration. Based on
these results BCR Consulting recommends that no additional cultural resource work or
monitoring is necessary for any earthmoving proposed within the Project site.
However, if previously undocumented cultural (historical or archaeological) resources are
identified during earthmoving activities, Mitigation Measure (MM) CUL-1 shall be
implemented.
Mitigation Measures
MM CUL-1 Historic Archaeological Resources
a. If archaeological resources are unearthed by project construction activities, these
shall be evaluated by a qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant. If the
resources discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, construction
activities in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease until the find can be assessed.
If all finds are Native American in origin, interested Tribes (as a result of
correspondence with area Tribes) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding
treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request
preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on
other parts of the project while evaluation takes place.
b. Preservation in place shall be the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in
place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data
recovery excavation to remove the resource along the subsequent laboratory
processing and analysis. All Tribal Cultural Resources shall be returned to the Tribe.
Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be
curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, if
such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the
archaeological material, they shall be offered to the Tribe or a local school or historical
society in the area for educational purposes.
c. Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction
projects shall be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to
avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human
remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel shall
meet the Secretary of the Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of
10 years’ experience as a principal investigator working with Native American
archaeological sites in southern California. The Qualified Archaeologist shall ensure
that all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 100
Thus, a less than significant impact is anticipated on historical and archaeological resources from
implementation of the proposed Project with implementation of MM CUL-1.
Mitigation Measure: MM CUL-1.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigation.
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located within a known or suspected
cemetery and the field survey revealed no known human remains within the Project site.
Additionally, the results of the records search conducted through the Western Science
Center (WSC) concluded that the Project area is mapped entirely as alluvial gravel and sand
deposits dating from the Holocene period. While Holocene alluvial units are considered to
be of high preservation value, material found is unlikely to be fossil material due to the
relatively modern associated dates of the deposits. However, if development requires any
substantial depth of disturbance, the likelihood of reaching Pleistocene alluvial sediments
would increase.
The WSC does not have localities within the Project area or within a 1-mile radius. While
the presence of any fossil material is unlikely, if excavation activity disturbs deeper
sediment dating to the earliest parts of the Holocene or Late Pleistocene periods, the
potential for scientifically significant resources could increase. Based on the WSC results
and history of the general Project area, excavation activity associated with the
development of the Project area is unlikely to be paleontologically sensitive and a less than
significant impact on human remains is anticipated, but caution during development shall
be observed. The following Standard Condition would be carried out during Project
construction.
Standard Condition
SC CUL-1 If human remains are encountered during the undertaking, State Health and Safety
Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County
Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find
immediately. If the remains are determined to be prehistoric, the coroner will notify the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which will determine and notify a Most
Likely Descendant (MLD). With the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized
representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete
the inspection within 48 hours of notification by the NAHC.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 101
Per California Code, Health and Safety Code - HSC § 7050.5:
(b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other
than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the
site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the
coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in
accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of
Title 3 of the Government Code , that the remains are not subject to the provisions of
Section 27491 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning
investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of any death, and the
recommendations concerning the treatment and disposition of the human remains have
been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized
representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time
the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative,
notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
(c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and
if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has
reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by
telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project would not create a significant cumulative impact to any known historical
or archaeological resources or known human remains with implementation of SC-1. All proposed
projects in the surround area would be subject to individual project-level environmental review.
Since there would be no Project-specific impacts and due to existing laws and regulations in place
to protect cultural resources and prevent significant impact to paleontological resources, the
potential incremental effects of the proposed Project would not be cumulatively considerable.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 102
ENERGY
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
6. ENERGY. Would the Project:
a) Would the project result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
Project construction or operation?
X
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Building Energy Conservation Standards
Energy conservation standards for new residential and non-residential buildings were adopted
by the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (now the
California Energy Commission) in June 1977 and are updated every three years (Title 24, Part 6,
of the California Code of Regulations). Title 24 requires the design of building shells and building
components to conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for
consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. On
May 9, 2018, the California Energy Commission (CEC) adopted the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency
Standards (Energy Code), which went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CEC is currently
preparing the 2022 Energy Code, which will improve upon the 2019 Energy Code for new
construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and non-residential buildings.
Proposed standards will be adopted in 2021 with an effective date of January 1, 2023. The
California Energy Commission updates the standards every three years.11
The current 2019 Energy Code improve upon the previous 2016 Energy Code. Under the 2019
Title 24 standards, residential buildings are about 7 percent more energy efficient, and when the
required rooftop solar is factored in for low-rise residential construction, residential buildings
that meet 2019 Title 24 standards use about 53 percent less energy than those built to meet the
2016 standards. Non-residential buildings use about 30 percent less energy due mainly to lighting
upgrades.12
Senate Bill 350
11 California Energy Commission, 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-
topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency, Accessed March 4, 2021.
12 California Energy Commission, 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked Questions, Available at:
https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/Title_24_2019_Building_Standards_FAQ_ada.pdf, Accessed March 4, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 103
In September 2015, then California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill (SB) 350 (de León).
This legislation established tiered increases to the Renewable Portfolio Standard—40 percent by
2024, 45 percent by 2027, and 50 percent by 2030.
Senate Bill 100
SB 100, referred to as “The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2019,” was signed into law by
Governor Brown in September 2018 and increased the required Renewable Portfolio Standards
established in SB 350. Under SB 100, the total kilowatt hours (kWh) of energy sold by electricity
retailers to their end-use customers must consist of at least 50 percent renewable resources by
2026, 60 percent renewable resources by 2030, and 100 percent renewable resources by 2045.
SB 100 also establishes a state policy that eligible renewable energy resources and zero-carbon
resources supply 100 percent of all retail sales of electricity to California end-use customers and
100 percent of electricity procured to serve all State agencies by December 31, 2045. Under the
bill, the State cannot increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid or allow resource
shuffling to achieve the 100 percent carbon-free electricity target.
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during Project construction or
operation?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.
Electricity. Southern California Edison (SCE) provides electricity to the project area. The
project is expected to use approximately 3,757,845 kilowatt-hours per year (kWh/year)
based on California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod); refer to Appendix D,
Greenhouse Gas Study of this IS/MND. Project implementation would result in a
permanent increase in electricity over existing conditions. The increased demand is
expected to be adequately served by the existing SCE electrical facilities. Total electricity
demand in SCE’s service area is forecast to increase by approximately 12,000 gigawatt-
hours (GWh)—or 12 billion kWh—between 2015 and 2026.13 The increase in electricity
demand from the project would represent an insignificant percent increase compared to
overall demand in SCE’s service area. Therefore, projected electrical demand would not
significantly impact SCE’s level of service.
Based on the project schedule, the project would be required to comply with the 2019
Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which took effect on January 1, 2020. Prior to
issuance of a building permit, the City of Fontana Building and Safety Department would
review and verify that the project plans demonstrate compliance with the current version
of the Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The project would also be required adhere
to the provisions of CALGreen, which establishes planning and design standards for
sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code
requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and internal air contaminants.
13 California Energy Commission, California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, Figure 49 Historical and Projected Baseline
Consumption SCE Planning Area, Available at: https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=223244, Accessed November 29, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 104
Project development would not interfere with achievement of the 60 percent Renewable
Portfolio Standard set forth in SB 100 for 2030 or the 100 percent standard for 2045. These
goals apply to SCE and other electricity retailers. As electricity retailers reach these goals,
emissions from end user electricity use would decrease from current emission estimates.
Natural Gas. Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) provides natural gas service to
the project area. The project is expected to use approximately 16,537,393 kilo-British
thermal units per year (KBTU/year) of natural gas based on California Emissions Estimator
Model (CalEEMod); refer to Appendix D of this Initial Study. The increased demand is
expected to be adequately served by the existing SoCalGas facilities. From 2020 to 2035,
core demand is expected to decline from 934 million cubic feet (mcf) to 806 mcf, while
supplies remain constant at 3.775 billion cubic feet per day (bcfd)14 from 2015 through
2035.15 Therefore, the natural gas demand from the proposed project would represent a
nominal percentage of overall demand in SoCalGas’ service area. The proposed project
would not result in a significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.
Fuel. During construction, transportation energy use depends on the type and number of
trips, vehicle miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation
energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction
equipment, delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and construction employee vehicles that
would use diesel fuel and/or gasoline. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would
fluctuate according to the phase of construction and would be temporary. Most
construction equipment during demolition and grading would be gas-powered or diesel-
powered, and the later construction phases would require electricity-powered equipment.
Impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be temporary and
would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure;
impacts would not be significant.
During operations, energy consumption would be associated with visitor and employee
vehicle trips; delivery and supply trucks; and trips by landscape and maintenance crews.
The project is in an urbanized area, south of SR-210, and near gasoline fuel facilities and
existing infrastructure. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a
substantial demand for energy that would require expanded supplies or the construction
of other infrastructure or expansion of existing facilities. Existing rules and regulations
concerning vehicle fuel consumption efficiencies (CAFE Standards)16 would ensure that
vehicle trips generated by the proposed project would not be considered as inefficient,
wasteful, or unnecessary. The proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient,
14 1 bcfd is equivalent to about 1.03 billion kBTU
15 California Gas and Electric Utilities, 2020 California Gas Report, Southern California Gas Company Annual Gas Supply 2020-2035 Table 1-SCG,
Available at:
https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2020-10/2020_California_Gas_Report_Joint_Utility_Biennial_Comprehensive_Filing.pdf,
Accessed November 29, 2021.
16 U.S. Department of Transportation (2014). Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards, Available at:
https://www.transportation.gov/mission/sustainability/corporate-average-fuel-economy-cafe-standards, Accessed August 24, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 105
or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts are less than significant, and no
mitigation is required.
Although the Project does not require mitigation for energy consumption, the Project will
be required to incorporate mitigation measures for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions which
will also have a beneficial impact on energy consumption. MM GHG-1 requires the Project
to meet or exceed 2019 CALGreen Tier 2 standards. MM GHG-2 requires the Project to
install solar panels, or other sources of renewable energy generation on-site, or otherwise
acquire energy from the local utility that has been generated by renewable sources (for
example, Southern California Edison Green Rate), that would provide 100 percent of the
expected building load. MM GHG-3 requires the Project operator to prepare and submit a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program that will reduce the use of single
occupant vehicles by employees and reduce vehicle fuel consumption.
Mitigation Measures: MM GHG-1, GHG-2, and GHG-3.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigation.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project design and operation would comply with State
Building Energy Efficiency Standards, appliance efficiency regulations, and green building
standards. Project development would not cause inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary
energy consumption, and no adverse impact would occur. As one measure of energy
conservation, the city participates in the California Energy Commission’s Gridscape
Solutions grant. The grant demonstrates the business case for advanced micro-grids in
support of California’s energy and Greenhouse Gases (GHG) policies to aid in the reduction
of energy consumption and GHG emissions to meet the goals of AB 32.
The proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of
an agency adopted to reduce GHG emissions, including Title 24, AB 32, and SB 32.
Therefore, the project would not conflict with any state or local plan for renewable energy
or energy efficiency and impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
Construction and operations associated with implementation of the Project would not result in
the inefficient or wasteful consumption of fuel and energy. New capacity or supplies of energy
resources would not be required. Additionally, the Project would be subject to compliance with
all Federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 106
The anticipated impacts from the proposed Project, in conjunction with cumulative development
in the site vicinity, would increase urbanization and result in increased energy consumption.
Potential land use impacts are site-specific and require evaluation on a case-by-case basis. Each
cumulative project would require separate discretionary approval and CEQA assessment, which
would address potential energy consumption impacts and identify necessary mitigation
measures, where appropriate.
As noted above, the proposed Project would not result in significant energy consumption
impacts. The proposed Project would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary with
regard to energy. Thus, the proposed Project is not anticipated to result in a significant
cumulative impact. Therefore, potential impacts are considered less than significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 107
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the Project:
a) Would the project 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.
x
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? x
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
x
iv) Landslides? x
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
x
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-
site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, or collapse?
x
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life
or property?
x
e) Would the project 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?
x
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
x
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 108
California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The purpose of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Act) is to provide for the adoption
and administration of zoning laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations by cities and counties in
implementation of the general plan to assist cities, counties, and state agencies in the exercise
of their responsibility to prohibit the location of developments and structures for human
occupancy across the trace of active faults. Further, it is the intent of this chapter to provide the
citizens of the state with increased safety and to minimize the loss of life during and immediately
following earthquakes by facilitating seismic retrofitting to strengthen buildings, including
historical buildings, against ground shaking.17
Ground Shaking
Ground shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth’s surface resulting
from an earthquake and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. The extent of
ground shaking is controlled by the magnitude and intensity of the earthquake, distance from
the epicenter, and local geologic conditions. Magnitude is a measure of the energy released by
an earthquake; it is assessed by seismographs. Intensity is a subjective measure of the perceptible
effects of seismic energy at a given point and varies with distance from the epicenter and local
geologic conditions.
Ground shaking is the primary cause of damage and injury during earthquakes and can result in
surface rupture, liquefaction, landslides, lateral spreading, differential settlement, tsunamis,
building failure, and broken gas and other utility lines, leading to fire and other collateral damage.
The intensity and severity of ground motion is dependent on the earthquake’s magnitude,
distance from the epicenter and underlying soil and rock properties. Areas underlain by thick,
saturated, unconsolidated soils will experience greater shaking motion than areas underlain by
firm bedrock.18
Seismicity and Seismic Hazards, and Liquefaction
The Cucamonga and San Jacinto faults, two of the most active faults in southern California,
extend across the northern portion of the city of Fontana. Three possible faults have been
mapped at depth under the city of Fontana and its area of interest. The city of Fontana also lies
within a few miles of the San Andreas Fault. As a result, the entire study area is susceptible to
very strong ground shaking, and some areas of the city can be impacted by surface fault rupture.
Given that ground water may occur within 40 feet of the surface in that portion of the Lytle Creek
channel located within the city, the channel is considered susceptible to liquefaction which is the
sudden loss of soil shear strength and sudden increase in porewater pressure caused by shear
strains, as could result from an earthquake. Other areas in the southern portion of the city may
17 State of California. (1994). CHAPTER 7.5. Earthquake Fault Zoning [2621 - 2630]. Available at
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=7.5.&lawCode=PRC. Accessed March 14, 2021.
18 City of Fontana. (2018). Fontana Forward General Plan - Draft Environmental Impact Report; LHMP page 61. Accessed September 14, 2020.
Available at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact-Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 109
also have a moderate susceptibility to liquefaction due to seasonal saturation of the near-surface
sediments.
The severity of an earthquake generally is expressed in two ways—magnitude and intensity. The
energy released, as measured on the Moment Magnitude (MW) scale, represents the magnitude
of an earthquake. The intensity of an earthquake is measured by the Modified Mercalli Intensity
(MMI) scale, which emphasizes the seismic response at a subject site and measures ground-
shaking severity according to damage done to structures, changes in the earth surface, and
personal accounts.19
Landslides
Shaking during an earthquake may lead to seismically induced landslides, especially in areas that
have previously experienced landslides or slumps, in areas of steep slopes, or in saturated
hillsides. The city is generally flat and not at risk from the threat of landslides. Potential areas
where seismically induced landslides could occur are in the foothill portions of the city.
Surface Fault Rupture Potential
Surface rupture occurs when the ground surface is broken due to fault movement during a
seismic event. The location of surface rupture generally can be assumed to be along an active
major fault trace. Since there are no preventive measures to stop surface rupture, faults are
identified with the purpose of delineating zones over the surface tract of potentially hazardous
faults where construction shall be avoided.
Soil Erosion
Erosion refers to the removal of soil from exposed bedrock surfaces by water or wind. The effects
of erosion are intensified with an increase in slope (as water moves faster, it gains momentum
to carry more debris), the narrowing of runoff channels (which increases the velocity of water),
and by the removal of groundcover (which leaves the soil exposed to erosive forces). Surface
improvements, such as paved roads and buildings, decrease the potential for erosion on-site, but
can increase the rate and volume of runoff, potentially causing off-site erosion.
Subsidence
Soil subsidence at the land surface can result from both natural and man-made phenomena.
Natural phenomena that may induce subsidence include tectonic deformation and seismically
induced settlements (liquefaction); soil consolidation; oxidation or dewatering of organic-rich
soils; and collapse of subsurface cavities. Human activities that may help induce subsidence
include decreases in pore pressure caused by the excessive withdrawal of subsurface fluids
(pumping), including water and hydrocarbons.
Soil Settlement
19 City of Fontana. 2019. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 – Draft Environmental Impact Report.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 110
Soil settlement is the condition where soils deform in a vertical direction when a vertical load is
placed on top of it. The compression of the soil bed by the vertical load results from the
characteristics of the soil particles that are contained in the soil bed, as the spaces that are filled
with either air or water between the soil particles are squeezed out. According to the General
Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), site-specific geotechnical investigation would, on a case-
by-case basis, determine the potential for soil settlement in a given area to ensure that final
project design incorporates all necessary and appropriate engineering features to reduce the
potential geologic hazards.
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils are common throughout California and can cause damage to foundations and
slabs, separation of masonry, or failure of paved surfaces unless properly treated during
construction. Expansive soil conditions could cause damage to facility components if they are not
designed with proper engineering and grading practices. The hazard for expansive behavior is
considered a low risk for alluvial fan locations because soils in these areas are frequently
saturated and generally do not contain clay-sized particles.
a) Would the project 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.
Less Than Significant Impact. The nearest Alquist-Priolo faults are the Lytle Creek and
Cucamonga faults located more than approximately 2.8 miles north of the Project site.20
Furthermore, no faults traverse beneath the Project site.21 Therefore, since the Project site
is not located in a designated earthquake fault zone or on an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone, no
impacts associated with fault rupture would occur. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Threshold 7 a-i, above. Although the Project is not
located within or near an earthquake fault zone, southern California is prone to strong
seismic activity which would expose the proposed Project strong seismic ground shaking
through its lifespan. Consequently, the Project would comply with the seismic design
parameters set forth in the latest California Building Code (CBC) which would minimize the
20 California Geological Survey (CGS). (2020). Data Viewer. Available at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/ Accessed
March 14, 2021.
21 California Geological Survey (CGS). (2020). Data Viewer. Available at https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/ Accessed
March 14, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 111
potential of strong seismic ground shaking impacts. The CBC was adopted by all
municipalities within southern California on January 1, 2017, and is updated every three
years. The CBC provides procedures for earthquake-resistant structural design that include
considerations for on-site soil conditions, occupancy, and the configuration of the
structure including the structural system and height. With conformance to the CBC, a less
than significant impact from ground shaking would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
iii, and iv) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? And Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the San Bernardino County Map FH21C of the
Devore Quadrangle22, the Project is not located in an area prone to seismic-related ground
failure, liquefaction susceptibility, and landslide susceptibility. The nearest mapped
liquefaction and landslide zones are located 2.6 miles north and of the site. Therefore, less
than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Hydrology and Water Quality threshold
a) through c) below for more information.
The Project would implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to comply with
the requirements set by the City of Fontana and the NPDES Areawide Stormwater Program
including the County’s Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which includes but
is not limited to erosion-control and sediment-control Best Management Practices (BMPs)
that would meet or exceed measures required by the CGP to control potential
construction-related pollutants. Erosion-control BMPs are designed to prevent erosion,
whereas sediment controls are designed to trap sediment once it has been mobilized.
During operations, the site would be paved throughout with associated Project
components that would continue to be subject to the WQMP. Landscaping shall be
maintained according to the Project’s WQMP via the SWPPP. Therefore, compliance with
regional and local permitting and regulation would ensure soil erosion or loss of topsoil
during construction and operations of the Project are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
22 County of San Bernardino. 2010. Geologic Hazards Overlays. Available at
http://www.sbcounty.gov/Uploads/lus/GeoHazMaps/FH21C_20100309.pdf, accessed on March 15, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 112
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c, d) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the Project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? And be located on expansive soil,
as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct
or indirect risks to life or property?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan lists the types of
geologic hazards known to occur in the city regarding slope instability, leading to possible
mudflow, liquefaction, and collapsible or expansive soils. As discussed above, the Project
site is not located in an area identified as susceptible to slope instability, landslide
susceptibility, and liquefaction susceptibility.23 If expansive soils are encountered during
site grading, special attention would be given to the Project’s design and maintenance. If
any unusual conditions arise, additional studies and revised recommendations would be
implemented. Therefore, impacts associated with unstable and expansive soils would be
less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
e) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project will be connected to the City’s wastewater sewer
system. No septic system will be part of the Project. As such, a less than significant impact
associated with the septic tanks or alternative waste-water disposal system would occur
as part of the proposed Project’s implementation and no mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The Cultural Resources Assessment
conducted for the Project site determined the geologic units underlying this Project are
mapped primarily as alluvial sand and gravel deposits dating from the Holocene period,
While Holocene alluvial units are of high preservation value, material found is unlikely to
be fossil material due to the relatively modern associated dates of the soil deposits. If
development requires any substantial depth of disturbance, the likelihood of reaching
Pleistocene periods, the potential for the material to contain fossil resources would
23 DOC. 2021. Available at Data Viewer (ca.gov), accessed October 18, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 113
increase. However, it is worth noting that the Wester Science Center (WSC) does not have
localities within the Project area or within a 1-mile radius.
While the presence of any fossil material is unlikely, if excavation activity disturbs deeper
sediment dating to the earliest parts of the Holocene or Late Pleistocene periods, the
potential for the material to contain fossil resources would increase Excavation activity
associated with the development of the project area is unlikely to be paleontologically
sensitive, but in the event that paleontological resources are encountered during
excavation/construction activities, implementation of MM GEO-1 would reduce impacts
to the found paleontological resources to a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measure
MM GEO-1 In the event that paleontological resources are found during excavation or grading
activities, a Paleontological Construction Monitoring and Compliance Plan will be
prepared and implemented to reduce potential impacts to paleontological
resources to less than significant which includes the following.
▪ Prior to substantial excavations into older finer-grained Quaternary deposits, the
Applicant shall retain 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 substantial 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.
▪ The construction can re-commence with approval of the City of Fontana.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigation incorporated.
Cumulative Impacts
The potential cumulative impact related to earth and geology is generally site-specific. The
analysis herein determined that the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts
related to landform modification, grading, or the destruction of a geologically significant
landform or feature with implementation of mitigation. Furthermore, the Project will comply
with existing State and local laws and regulations set in place to protect people and property
from substantial adverse geological and soils effects, including fault rupture, strong seismic
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 114
ground shaking, seismic-induced ground failure (including liquefaction), landslide and adverse
effects from soil erosion, expansive soils, loss of topsoil, development on an unstable geologic
unit. These existing laws and regulations, along with Project design features and mitigation
required for the proposed Project, would render potentially adverse geological and soil affects
less than significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 115
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the Project:
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
X
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
The following analysis is based on the Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs) Assessment prepared
by Kimley-Horn and Associates dated December 2021 and included as Appendix D.
The original Project assumptions for the preparation of the Greenhouse Gas Emissions assumed
the development of approximately 195,906 square feet of commercial space, inclusive of 235
combined hotel rooms between two hotels (Holiday Inn and Staybridge Suites). Additionally, the
model assumed 450 vehicle parking spaces. The model output with the original assumptions
resulted in a less than significant impact on all aspects regarding potential impacts to Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. The Project has been revised to include the consolidation of the two hotels into a
single shared building totaling 184 hotel rooms, an increase of 4,973 square feet in the size of the
banquet hall, and the increase in parking spaces to 455. Overall, the updated Project would
decrease the total development area by 23,530 SF and decrease the number of daily vehicle trips
by 180.
As explained and documented in the Greenhouse Gas Consistency Analysis Memorandum
included in Appendix D, the updated Project would not generate more emissions than the original
proposal and thus would not result in any greenhouse gas impacts beyond those identified in the
GHG Emissions Assessment; as a result, use assessment, including the data presented below, for
the updated Project is appropriate (and conservative).GHG emissions associated with the Project
would continue to be less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures GHG-1
through GHG-4.
Background
The “greenhouse effect” is the natural process that retains heat in the troposphere, the bottom
layer of the atmosphere. Without the greenhouse effect, thermal energy would “leak” into space
resulting in a much colder and inhospitable planet. With the greenhouse effect, the global
average temperature is approximately 61˚F (16˚C). Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are the
components of the atmosphere responsible for the greenhouse effect. The amount of heat
retained is proportional to the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere. As more GHGs are
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 116
released into the atmosphere, GHG concentrations increase and the atmosphere retains more
heat, increasing the effects of climate change. The Kyoto Protocol identified six gases for emission
reduction targets: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons
(HFC), perfluorocarbons (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). When accounting for GHGs, all types
of GHG emissions are expressed in terms of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) and are typically quantified
in metric tons (MT) or million metric tons (MMT).
Approximately 80 percent of the total heat stored in the atmosphere is caused by CO2, CH4, and
N2O. These three gases are emitted by human activities as well as natural sources. Each of the
GHGs affects climate change at different rates and persists in the atmosphere for varying lengths
of time. Global warming potential (GWP) is the relative measure of the potential for a GHG to
trap heat in the atmosphere. The GWP allows comparisons of the global warming impacts of
different gases. Specifically, it is a measure of how much energy the emissions of one ton of a gas
will absorb over a given period, relative to the emissions of one ton of CO2. The larger the GWP,
the more that a given gas warms the Earth compared to CO2 over that period. GWPs provide a
common unit of measure, which allows analysts to add up emissions estimates of different gases
(e.g., to compile a national GHG inventory), and allows policymakers to compare emissions
reduction opportunities across sectors and gases.
GHGs, primarily CO2, CH4, and N2O, are directly emitted as a result of stationary source
combustion of natural gas in equipment such as water heaters, boilers, process heaters, and
furnaces. GHGs are also emitted from mobile sources such as on-road vehicles and off-road
construction equipment burning fuels such as gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, propane, or natural gas
(compressed or liquefied). Indirect GHG emissions result from electric power generated
elsewhere (i.e., power plants) used to operate process equipment, lighting, and utilities at a
facility. Included in GHG quantification is electric power which is used to pump the water supply
(e.g., aqueducts, wells, pipelines) and disposal and decomposition of municipal waste in
landfills.24
Regulations and Significance Criteria
State
California Air Resources Board
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is responsible for the coordination and oversight of
State and local air pollution control programs in California. Various statewide and local initiatives
to reduce California’s contribution to GHG emissions have raised awareness about climate
change and its potential for severe long-term adverse environmental, social, and economic
effects. California is a significant emitter of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) in the world and produced
418.2 million gross metric tons of CO2e in 2019.25 In the State, the transportation sector is the
24 California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan, 2008.
25 California Air Resources Board, Current California GHG Emission Inventory.2021
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 117
largest emitter of GHGs, followed by industrial operations such as manufacturing and oil and gas
extraction.
The State of California legislature has enacted a series of bills that constitute the most aggressive
program to reduce GHGs of any state in the nation. Some legislation, such as the landmark
Assembly Bill (AB) 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was specifically enacted
to address GHG emissions. Other legislation, such as Title 24 building efficiency standards and
Title 20 appliance energy standards, were originally adopted for other purposes such as energy
and water conservation, but also provide GHG reductions. This section describes the major
provisions of the legislation.
Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006)
AB 32 instructs the CARB to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verification of
statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 also directed CARB to set a GHG emissions limit based on 1990
levels, to be achieved by 2020. It set a timeline for adopting a scoping plan for achieving GHG
reductions in a technologically and economically feasible manner.
CARB Scoping Plan
CARB adopted the Scoping Plan to achieve the goals of AB 32. The Scoping Plan established an
overall framework for the measures that would be adopted to reduce California’s GHG emissions.
CARB determined that achieving the 1990 emissions level would require a reduction of GHG
emissions of approximately 29 percent below what would otherwise occur in 2020 in the absence
of new laws and regulations (referred to as “business-as-usual”). The Scoping Plan evaluates
opportunities for sector-specific reductions, integrates early actions and additional GHG
reduction measures by both CARB and the State’s Climate Action Team, identifies additional
measures to be pursued as regulations, and outlines the adopted role of a cap-and-trade
program. Additional development of these measures and adoption of the appropriate
regulations occurred through the end of 2013. Key elements of the Scoping Plan include:
• Expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs, as well as building and
appliance standards.
• Achieving a statewide renewables energy mix of 33 percent by 2020.
• Developing a California cap-and-trade program that links with other programs to create
a regional market system and caps sources contributing 85 percent of California’s GHG
emissions (adopted in 2011).
• Establishing targets for transportation related GHG emissions for regions throughout
California and pursuing policies and incentives to achieve those targets (several
sustainable community strategies have been adopted).
• Adopting and implementing measures pursuant to existing State laws and policies,
including California’s clean car standards, heavy-duty truck measures, the Low Carbon
Fuel Standard (amendments to the Pavley Standard adopted 2009; Advanced Clean Car
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 118
standard adopted 2012), goods movement measures, and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard
(adopted 2009).
• Creating targeted fees, including a public goods charge on water use, fees on gasses with
high global warming potential, and a fee to fund the administrative costs of the State of
California’s long-term commitment to AB 32 implementation.
In 2016, the Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 32, which codifies a 2030 GHG emissions reduction
target of 40 percent below 1990 levels. With SB 32, the Legislature passed companion legislation,
AB 197, which provides additional direction for developing the Scoping Plan. On
December 14, 2017, CARB adopted a second update to the Scoping Plan.26 The 2017 Scoping Plan
details how the State will reduce GHG emissions to meet the 2030 target set by Executive Order
B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. Other objectives listed in the 2017 Scoping Plan are to provide
direct GHG emissions reductions; support climate investment in disadvantaged communities;
and support the Clean Power Plan and other Federal actions.
SB 375 (The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008)
Signed into law on September 30, 2008, SB 375 provides a process to coordinate land use
planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities to help California meet the GHG
reduction goals established by AB 32. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations to
include sustainable community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG
emissions, aligns planning for transportation and housing, and creates specified incentives for
the implementation of the strategies.
Executive Order B-30-15
Issued on April 29, 2015, Executive Order B-30-15 established a California GHG reduction target
of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and directed CARB to update the Climate Change
Scoping Plan to express the 2030 target in terms of million metric tons of CO2e (MMTCO2e). The
2030 target acts as an interim goal on the way to achieving reductions of 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050, a goal set by Executive Order S-3-05. The executive order also requires the State’s
climate adaptation plan to be updated every three years and for the State to continue its climate
change research program, among other provisions. With the enactment of SB 32 in 2016, the
Legislature codified the goal of reducing GHG emissions by 2030 to 40 percent below 1990 levels.
Regional
South Coast Air Quality Management District Thresholds
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) formed a GHG California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Significance Threshold Working Group, which last met in
September 2010, to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG
emissions in their CEQA documents. Although the last Working Group did not adopt a threshold
26 California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed December 9, 2021.
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 119
for evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency,
it developed a tiered approach for evaluating such emissions.
With the tiered approach, the Project is compared with the requirements of each tier sequentially
and would not result in a significant impact if it complies with any tier. Tier 1 excludes projects
that are specifically exempt from SB 97 from resulting in a significant impact. Tier 2 excludes
projects that are consistent with a GHG reduction plan that has a certified final CEQA document
and complies with AB 32 GHG reduction goals. Tier 3 excludes projects with annual emissions
lower than a screening threshold. The SCAQMD released draft guidance regarding interim CEQA
GHG significance thresholds. Based on a 90 percent capture rate, SCAQMD adopted a threshold
of 10,000 metric tons of CO2e (MTCO2e) per year for industrial projects on December 5, 2008. A
threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for residential/commercial projects was proposed but has
not been formally adopted. Under this proposal, non-industrial projects that emit fewer than
3,000 MTCO2e per year would be assumed to have a less than significant impact on climate
change.
Tier 4 consists of three decision tree options. Under the Tier 4 first option, SCAQMD initially
outlined that a project would be excluded if design features and/or mitigation measures resulted
in emissions 30 percent lower than business as usual emissions. However, the Working Group
did not provide a recommendation for this approach. The Working Group folded the Tier 4
second option into the third option. Under the Tier 4 third option, a project would be excluded if
it was below an efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population per year. Tier 5
would exclude projects that implement offsite mitigation (GHG reduction projects) or purchase
offsets to reduce GHG emission impacts to less than the proposed screening level.
GHG efficiency metrics are utilized as thresholds to assess the GHG efficiency of a project on a
per capita basis or on a service population basis (the sum of the number of jobs and the number
of residents provided by a project) such that a project would allow for consistency with the goals
of AB 32 (i.e., 1990 GHG emissions levels by 2020 and 2035). GHG efficiency thresholds can be
determined by dividing the GHG emissions inventory goal of the State, by the estimated 2035
population and employment. This method allows highly efficient projects with higher mass
emissions to meet the overall reduction goals of AB 32, and is appropriate, because the threshold
can be applied evenly to all project types (residential or commercial/retail only and mixed use).
Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
On September 3, 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal (2020 - 2045 Regional
Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy [2020 RTP/SCS]). The RTP/SCS charts a
course for closely integrating land use and transportation so that the region can grow smartly
and sustainably. The strategy was prepared through a collaborative, continuous, and
comprehensive process with input from local governments, county transportation commissions,
tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses, and local stakeholders within the
counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The RTP/SCS
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 120
is a long-range vision plan those balances future mobility and housing needs with economic,
environmental, and public health goals. The SCAG region strives toward sustainability through
integrated land use and transportation planning. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal
air quality standards and is required by state law to lower regional GHG emissions.
Methodology
The Project’s construction and operational emissions were calculated using the CalEEMod
version 202.4.0. Details of the modeling assumptions and emission factors are provided in
Appendix D. For construction, CalEEMod calculates emissions from off-road equipment usage
and on-road vehicle travel associated with haul, delivery, and construction worker trips. GHG
emissions during construction were forecasted based on the proposed construction schedule and
applying the mobile-source and fugitive dust emissions factors derived from CalEEMod. The
Project’s construction-related GHG emissions would be generated from off-road construction
equipment, on-road hauling, and vendor (material delivery) trucks, and worker vehicles. The
Project’s operations related GHG emissions would be generated by vehicular traffic, area sources
(e.g., landscaping maintenance, consumer products), electrical generation, natural gas
consumption, water supply and wastewater treatment, and solid waste and were quantified with
CalEEMod.
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that
may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant impact with mitigation.
Short-Term Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The Project would result in direct emissions of GHGs from construction. The approximate
quantity of emissions generated by construction equipment utilized to build the Project is
depicted in Table 14, Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Table 14: Construction-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Category MTCO2e
2022 Construction 601.75
2023 Construction 323.67
Total Construction Emissions 924.42
30-Year Amortized Construction 30.85
Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Appendix D for model outputs.
As shown in Table 14, the Project would result in the generation of approximately 924.42
MTCO2e over the course of construction. Construction GHG emissions are typically
summed and amortized over the lifetime of the Project (assumed to be 30 years), then
added to the operational emissions.27 The amortized Project construction emissions would
27 The project lifetime is based on the standard 30-year assumption of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (South Coast Air
Quality Management District, Minutes for the GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group #13, August 26, 2009).
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 121
be 30.85 MTCO2e per year. Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG
emissions would cease.
Long-Term Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Operational or long-term emissions occur over the life of the Project. GHG emissions would
result from direct emissions such as Project generated vehicular traffic, on-site combustion
of natural gas, and operation of any landscaping equipment. Operational GHG emissions
would also result from indirect sources, such as off-site generation of electrical power, the
energy required to convey water to, and wastewater from the Project, the emissions
associated with solid waste generated from the Project, and any fugitive refrigerants from
air conditioning or refrigerators.
Total GHG emissions associated with the Project are summarized in Table 15, Project
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. As shown in Table 15, the unmitigated Project would generate
approximately 2,141.44 MTCO2e annually from both construction and onsite operation
and 2,273.79 MTCO2e from mobile sources (vehicles accessing the Project site), for a
combined total of 4,415.23 MTCO2e per year which exceeds the City’s 3,000 MTCO2e per
year threshold for mixed use projects. Therefore, mitigation measures (MM) GHG-1
through GHG-4 are required to reduce Project emissions to less than significant levels.
MM GHG-1 requires the Project to meet or exceed CALGreen Tier 2 standards to improve
energy efficiency and MM GHG-2 requires that 100 percent of the electricity used by the
Project be generated by a renewable energy source. MM GHG-3 requires the
implementation of a transportation demand management (TDM) program to reduce single
occupant vehicle trips and encourage public transit. MM GHG-4 requires the Project to
divert 75 percent of waste from landfills.
Table 15: Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Emissions Source
MTCO2e per Year
Unmitigated Mitigated
Stationary Sources
Area Source 0.01 0.01
Energy1,2 1,933.71 1,557.62
Renewable Energy3 0.0 -669.87
Waste4 124.26 31.07
Water and Wastewater 52.61 52.61
Construction Amortized Over 30 Years 30.85 30.85
Subtotal 2,141.44 1,002.29
Mobile Source5 2,273.79 1,883.31
Total 4,415.23 2,885.60
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 122
Project Threshold 3,000 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? Yes No
Note:
1 Energy emissions includes MTCO2e from both natural gas and electricity generation.
2 MM GHG-1 requires the Project to meet or exceed CALGreen tier 2 standards.
3 MM GHG-2 requires 100 percent electricity to come from renewable sources, electricity generation for the Project will not generate
GHG emissions.
4 MM GHG-4 requires the Project to divert 75 percent of waste from landfills.
5 MM GHG-3 requires the Project to implement a TDM Program.
Source: CalEEMod version 2020.4.0. Refer to Appendix A for model outputs.
With the implementation of MM GHG-1 through GHG-4, Project emissions are reduced to
2,885.60 MTCO2e which is below the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold. However, these
emissions are based on the original Project assumptions. As stated previously, the Project
has been revised to decrease the total development size by 23,530 SF and decrease the
number of daily trips vehicle trips by 180. Therefore, total GHG emissions for the Project
will be lower than those presented in Table 15. Therefore, Project impacts with regard to
GHG will be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures:
MM GHG-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall provide
documentation to the City of Fontana demonstrating that the Project will meet or
exceed 2019 CALGreen Tier 2 standards.
MM GHG-2 The project shall install solar photovoltaic (PV) panels or other source of
renewable energy generation on-site, or otherwise acquire energy from the local
utility that has been generated by renewable sources (for example, Southern
California Edison Green Rate), that would provide 100 percent of the expected
building load. The building shall include an electrical system and other
infrastructure sufficiently sized to accommodate the PV arrays. The electrical
system and infrastructure must be clearly labeled with noticeable and permanent
signage.
MM GHG-3 Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Project operator shall prepare and
submit a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program detailing
strategies that would reduce the use of single occupant vehicles by employees by
increasing the number of trips by walking, bicycle, carpool, vanpool, and transit.
The TDM shall include, but is not limited to the following:
▪ Carpooling encouragement
▪ Ride-matching assistance
▪ Preferential carpool parking
▪ Flexible work schedules for carpools
▪ Half time transportation coordinator
▪ Vanpool assistance
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 123
▪ Promote bicycling and walking through design features such as secure bicycle
storage, showers for employees, lockers, etc. around the project site.
MM GHG-4 The development shall divert a minimum of 75 percent of landfill waste. The
Project Applicant or its successor in interest shall only contract for waste disposal
services within a company that recycles waste in compliance with AB 341. Provide
interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and adequate recycling
containers located in public areas. Recycling bins in the storage areas shall be
included to promote recycling of paper, metal, glass, and other recyclable
material. These bins shall be emptied and recycled accordingly as part of the
proposed Project’s regular solid waste disposal program. This measure shall be
implemented prior to issuance of occupancy permit.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigations incorporated.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated.
SCAG 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS Consistency
On September 3, 2020, SCAG’s Regional Council adopted Connect SoCal (2020 – 2045
Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy [2020 RTP/SCS]). The
RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs
with economic, environmental, and public health goals. The RTP/SCS embodies a collective
vision for the region’s future and is developed with input from local governments, county
transportation commissions, tribal governments, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and
local stakeholders in the counties of Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and Ventura. SCAG’s RTP/SCS establishes GHG emissions goals for
automobiles and light-duty trucks for 2020 and 2035 as well as an overall GHG target for
the Project region consistent with both the target date of AB 32 and the post-2020 GHG
reduction goals of Executive Orders 5-03-05 and B-30-15.
The RTP/SCS contains over 4,000 transportation projects, ranging from highway
improvements, railroad grade separations, bicycle lanes, new transit hubs and
replacement bridges. These future investments were included in county plans developed
by the six county transportation commissions and seek to reduce traffic bottlenecks,
improve the efficiency of the region’s network, and expand mobility choices for everyone.
The RTP/SCS is an important planning document for the region, allowing project sponsors
to qualify for federal funding.
The plan accounts for operations and maintenance costs to ensure reliability, longevity,
and cost effectiveness. The RTP/SCS is also supported by a combination of transportation
and land use strategies that help the region achieve state GHG emissions reduction goals
and Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) requirements, preserve open space areas, improve public
health and roadway safety, support our vital goods movement industry, and utilize
resources more efficiently. GHG emissions resulting from development-related mobile
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 124
sources are the most potent source of emissions, and therefore Project comparison to the
RTP/SCS is an appropriate indicator of whether the Project would inhibit the post-2020
GHG reduction goals promulgated by the state. The Project’s consistency with the RTP/SCS
goals is analyzed in detail in Table 16, Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy Consistency.
Table 16: Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Consistency
SCAG Goals Compliance
GOAL
1
:
Encourage regional economic prosperity
and global competitiveness.
N/A: This is not a project-specific policy and is therefore
not applicable. However, the Project is located on a
vacant site and development of the site would
contribute to regional economic prosperity.
GOAL
2
:
Improve mobility, accessibility, reliability,
and travel safety for people and goods.
N/A: This is not a transportation improvement project and
is therefore not applicable.
GOAL
3
:
Enhance the preservation, security, and
resilience of the regional transportation
system.
N/A: This is not a transportation improvement project and
is therefore not applicable.
GOAL
4
:
Increase person and goods movement and
travel choices within the transportation
system.
N/A: This is not a transportation improvement project and
is therefore not applicable.
GOAL
5
:
Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
improve air quality.
Consiste
nt:
The Project is located within an urban area in
proximity to existing transportation routes and
freeways. Location of the project within a developed
area would reduce trip lengths, which would reduce
GHG and air quality emissions.
GOAL
6
:
Support healthy and equitable
communities
Consiste
nt:
The Project does not exceed localized thresholds.
Projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD’s LSTs
would not violate any air quality standards or
contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation and result in no criteria pollutant
health impacts.
GOAL
7
:
Adapt to a changing climate and support
an integrated regional development
pattern and transportation network.
N/A: This is not a project-specific policy and is therefore
not applicable.
GOAL
8
:
Leverage new transportation technologies
and data-driven solutions that result in
more efficient travel.
N/A: This is not a project-specific policy and is therefore
not applicable.
GOAL
9:
Encourage development of diverse
housing types in areas that are supported
by multiple transportation options.
N/A: The Project involves development of restaurants and
hotels but does not include housing. The Project is
located within a relatively short walking distance to
local bus routes.
Goal
10:
Promote conservation of natural and
agricultural lands and restoration of
habitats.
N/A: This the Project is located on a previously developed
site and is not located on agricultural lands.
Source: Southern California Association of Governments, Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Connect
SoCal), 2020.
The goals stated in the RTP/SCS were used to determine consistency with the planning
efforts previously stated. As shown in Table 16 above, the proposed Project would be
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 125
consistent with the stated goals of the RTP/SCS. Therefore, the proposed Project would
not result in any significant impacts or interfere with SCAG’s ability to achieve the region’s
post-2020 mobile source GHG reduction targets.
Consistency with the CARB Scoping Plan
The California State Legislature adopted AB 32 in 2006. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHGs
(CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) to 1990 levels by the year 2020. Pursuant to the
requirements in AB 32, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) in
2008, which outlines actions recommended to obtain that goal. The Scoping Plan provides
a range of GHG reduction actions that include direct regulations, alternative compliance
mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based
mechanisms such as the cap-and-trade program, and an AB 32 implementation fee to fund
the program. The 2017 Scoping Plan Update identifies additional GHG reduction measures
necessary to achieve the 2030 target. These measures build upon those identified in the
first update to the Scoping Plan in 2013. Although a number of these measures are
currently established as policies and measures, some measures have not yet been formally
proposed or adopted. It is expected that these actions to reduce GHG emissions will be
adopted as required to achieve statewide GHG emissions targets.
As shown in Table 17, Project Consistency with Applicable CARB Scoping Plan Measures,
the Project is consistent with most of the strategies, while others are not applicable to the
Project. As such, impacts related to consistency with the Scoping Plan would be less than
significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 126
Table 17: Project Consistency with Applicable CARB Scoping Plan Measures
Scoping Plan
Sector
Scoping Plan
Measure
Implementing
Regulations Project Consistency
Transportation
California Cap-and-
Trade Program
Linked to Western
Climate Initiative
Regulation for the
California Cap on GHG
Emissions and Market-
Based Compliance
Mechanism October 20,
2015 (CCR 95800)
Not applicable The Cap-and-Trade Program applies to
large industrial sources such as power plants,
refineries, and cement manufacturers. However, the
regulation indirectly affects people who use the
products and services produced by these industrial
sources when increased cost of products or services
(such as electricity and fuel) are transferred to the
consumers. The Cap-and-Trade Program covers the
GHG emissions associated with electricity consumed
in California, generated in-state, or imported.
Accordingly, GHG emissions associated with CEQA
projects’ electricity usage are covered by the Cap-
and-Trade Program. The Cap-and-Trade Program also
covers fuel suppliers (natural gas and propane fuel
providers and transportation fuel providers) to
address emissions from such fuels and combustion of
other fossil fuels not directly covered at large sources
in the Program’s first compliance period.
California Light-Duty
Vehicle GHG
Standards
Pavley I 2005
Regulations to Control
GHG Emissions from
Motor Vehicles
Pavley I 2005 Regulations
to Control GHG Emissions
from Motor Vehicles
Consistent. This measure applies to all new vehicles
starting with model year 2012. The Project would not
conflict with its implementation as it would apply to
all new passenger vehicles purchased in California.
Passenger vehicles, model year 2012 and later,
associated with construction and operation of the
Project would benefit from implementation of the
Pavley emissions standards.
2012 LEV III California
GHG and Criteria
Pollutant Exhaust and
Evaporative Emission
Standards
Consistent. The LEV III amendments provide
reductions from new vehicles sold in California
between 2017 and 2025. Passenger vehicles
associated with the site would comply with LEV III
standards.
Low Carbon Fuel
Standard
2009 readopted in 2015.
Regulations to Achieve
GHG Emission Reductions
Subarticle 7. Low Carbon
Fuel Standard CCR 95480
Consistent. This measure applies to transportation
fuels utilized by vehicles in California. The Project
would not conflict with implementation of this
measure. Motor vehicles associated with construction
and operation of the Project would utilize low carbon
transportation fuels as required under this measure.
Regional
Transportation-
Related GHG
Targets.
SB 375. Cal. Public
Resources Code §§
21155, 21155.1, 21155.2,
21159.28
Consistent. The Project would provide development
in the region that is consistent with the growth
projections in the RTP/SCS.
Goods Movement Goods Movement Action
Plan January 2007
Not applicable. The Project does not propose any
changes to maritime, rail, or intermodal facilities or
forms of transportation.
Medium/Heavy-Duty
Vehicle
2010 Amendments to
the Truck and Bus
Regulation, the Drayage
Truck Regulation, and
the Tractor-Trailer GHG
Regulation
Consistent. This measure applies to medium and
heavy-duty vehicles that operate in the state. The
Project would not conflict with implementation of this
measure.
High Speed Rail Funded under SB 862
Not applicable. This is a statewide measure that
cannot be implemented by a project applicant or Lead
Agency.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 127
Scoping Plan
Sector
Scoping Plan
Measure
Implementing
Regulations Project Consistency
Electricity and
Natural Gas
Energy Efficiency
Title 20 Appliance
Efficiency Regulation
Consistent. The Project would not conflict with
implementation of this measure. The Project would
comply with the latest energy efficiency standards.
Title 24 Part 6 Energy
Efficiency Standards for
Residential and Non-
Residential Building
Title 24 Part 11
California Green
Building Code
Standards
Renewable Portfolio
Standard/Renewable
Electricity Standard.
2010 Regulation to
Implement the
Renewable Electricity
Standard (33% 2020)
Consistent. The Project would obtain electricity from
PV panels or purchase it from Southern California
Edison (SCE) which will be generated by 100 percent
renewable sources.
Million Solar Roofs
Program
SB 350 Clean Energy
and Pollution Reduction
Act of 2015 (50% 2030)
Million Solar Roofs
Program Tax Incentive Program
Consistent. This measure is to increase solar
throughout California, which is being done by various
electricity providers and existing solar programs. The
program provides incentives that are in place at the
time of construction.
Water Water
Title 24 Part 11
California Green
Building Code
Standards
Consistent. The Project would comply with the
CalGreen standards, which requires a 20 percent
reduction in indoor water use. The Project would also
comply with the City’s Water-Efficient Landscaping
Regulations (Chapter 28, Article IV of the Fontana
Municipal Code).
SBX 7-7—The Water
Conservation Act of
2009
Model Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance
Green Buildings Green Building
Strategy
Title 24 Part 11
California Green
Building Code
Standards
Consistent. The State is to increase the use of green
building practices. The Project would implement
required green building strategies through existing
regulation that requires the Project to comply with
various CalGreen requirements. The Project includes
sustainability design features that support the Green
Building Strategy.
Industry Industrial Emissions 2010 CARB Mandatory
Reporting Regulation
Not applicable. The Mandatory Reporting Regulation
requires facilities and entities with more than 10,000
MTCO2e of combustion and process emissions, all
facilities belonging to certain industries, and all
electric power entities to submit an annual GHG
emissions data report directly to CARB. As shown
above, total Project GHG emissions would not exceed
10,000 MTCO2e. Therefore, this regulation would not
apply.
Recycling and
Waste
Management
Recycling and Waste
Title 24 Part 11
California Green
Building Code
Standards
Consistent. The Project would not conflict with
implementation of these measures. The Project is
required to achieve the recycling mandates via
compliance with the CALGreen code. The city has
consistently achieved its state recycling mandates.
AB 341 Statewide 75
Percent Diversion Goal
Forests Sustainable Forests Cap and Trade Offset
Projects
Not applicable. The Project is not located in a forested
area.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 128
Scoping Plan
Sector
Scoping Plan
Measure
Implementing
Regulations Project Consistency
High Global
Warming
Potential
High Global
Warming Potential
Gases
CARB Refrigerant
Management Program
CCR 95380
Not applicable. The regulations are applicable to
refrigerants used by large air conditioning systems
and large commercial and industrial refrigerators and
cold storage system. The Project would not conflict
with the refrigerant management regulations
adopted by CARB.
Agriculture Agriculture
Cap and Trade Offset
Projects for Livestock
and Rice Cultivation
Not applicable. No grazing, feedlot, or other
agricultural activities that generate manure occur
currently exist on-site or are proposed to be
implemented by the Project.
Source: California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, November 2017 and CARB, Climate Change Scoping
Plan, December 2008.
As seen in Table 16 and Table 17, the Project would be consistent with all applicable plan
goals. As shown in Table 15, the Project’s long-term unmitigated operational emissions
would exceed the City’s GHG threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e. Therefore, the Project shall be
required to implement MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4 which will reduce annual GHG
emissions below the City’s GHG threshold. With mitigation, the Project’s GHG emissions
would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Regarding goals for 2050 under Executive Order S-3-05, at this time it is not possible to
quantify the emissions savings from future regulatory measures, as they have not yet been
developed; nevertheless, it can be anticipated that operation of the proposed Project
would benefit from the implementation of current and potential future regulations (e.g.,
improvements in vehicle emissions, SB 100/renewable electricity portfolio improvements,
etc.) enacted to meet an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050.
The majority of the GHG reductions from the Scoping Plan would result from continuation
of the Cap-and-Trade regulation. Assembly Bill 398 (2017) extends the state’s Cap-and-
Trade program through 2030 and the Scoping Plan provide a comprehensive plan for the
state to achieve its GHG targets through a variety of regulations enacted at the state level.
Additional reductions are achieved from electricity sector standards (i.e., utility providers
to supply 60 percent renewable electricity by 2030 and 100 percent renewable by 2045),
doubling the energy efficiency savings at end uses, additional reductions from the LCFS,
implementing the short-lived GHG strategy (e.g., hydrofluorocarbons), and implementing
the Mobile Source Strategy and Sustainable Freight Action Plan.
Several of the State’s plans and policies would contribute to a reduction in mobile source
emissions from the Project. These include CARB’s Advanced Clean Truck Regulation,
Executive Order N-79-20, CARB’s Mobile Source Strategy, CARB’s Sustainable Freight
Action Plan, and CARB’s Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement. CARB’s
Advanced Clean Truck Regulation requires truck manufacturers to transition from diesel
trucks and vans to electric zero-emission trucks beginning in 2024. By 2045, every new
truck sold in California is required to be zero-emission. The Advanced Clean Truck
Regulation accelerates the transition of zero-emission medium-and heavy-duty vehicles
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 129
from Class 2b to Class 8. Executive Order N-79-20 establishes the goal for all new passenger
cars and trucks, as well as all drayage/cargo trucks and off-road vehicles and equipment,
sold in California, will be zero-emission by 2035 and all medium and heavy-duty vehicles
will be zero-emission by 2045. It also directs CARB to develop and propose rulemaking for
passenger vehicles and trucks, medium-and heavy-duty fleets where feasible, drayage
trucks, and off-road vehicles and equipment “requiring increasing volumes” of new ZEVs
“towards the target of 100 percent.”
CARB’s Mobile Source Strategy includes increasing ZEV buses and trucks, and their
Sustainable Freight Action Plan improves freight system efficiency, utilizes near-zero
emissions technology, and deployment of ZEV trucks. This Plan applies to all trucks
accessing the Project site and may include existing trucks or new trucks that are part of
the statewide goods movement sector. CARB’s Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and
Goods Movement identifies measures to improve goods movement efficiencies such as
advanced combustion strategies, friction reduction, waste heat recovery, and
electrification of accessories. While these measures are not directly applicable to the
Project, any commercial activity associated with goods movement would be required to
comply with these measures as adopted.
The Project would not obstruct or interfere with efforts to increase ZEVs or state efforts
to improve system efficiency. As discussed above, with the implementation of MM GHG-1
through MM GHG-4, the Project’s long-term operational and short-term construction GHG
emissions would not exceed the City’s threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Additionally,
the Project would be consistent with applicable regulations and goals. Therefore, the
Project would have a less than significant impact.
Mitigation Measures: MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigations incorporated.
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative Setting
Climate change is a global problem. GHGs are global pollutants, unlike criteria air pollutants and
TACs, which are pollutants of regional and local concern. Whereas pollutants with localized air
quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (about one day), GHGs have much
longer atmospheric lifetimes of one year to several thousand years that allow them to be
dispersed around the globe.
Cumulative Impacts
An individual project of this size and nature is of insufficient magnitude by itself to influence
climate. GHG impacts are recognized as exclusively cumulative impacts; there are no non-
cumulative GHG emission impacts from a climate change perspective. The additive effect of
Project-related GHGs would not result in a reasonably foreseeable cumulatively considerable
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 130
contribution to global climate change. As discussed above, with MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4,
the Project-related GHG emissions would not exceed the City’s threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e.
Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant cumulative GHG impact.
Mitigation Measures: MM GHG-1 through MM GHG-4.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 131
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the Project:
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
X
b) Would the project 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?
X
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
X
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant
to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
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?
X
f) Would the project impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
a, b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? And create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 132
Construction
Potentially hazardous materials would be handled on-site during Project construction
activities which generally include the handling gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricants, and other
petroleum-based products used to operate and maintain construction equipment.
Handling of these potentially hazardous materials would be temporary and limited to the
Project’s construction phase. Although these materials could be temporally stored on-site,
storage would of any of these materials would comply with the guidelines established by
the County’s SWPPP and the Project’s WQMP (refer to Hydrology and Water Quality
threshold discussion below). The transport, removal, and disposal of hazardous materials
during construction would be conducted by a permitted and licensed service provider
consistent with federal, state, and local requirements including the EPA, the California
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the California Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (Cal/OSHA), Caltrans, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
and the San Bernardino County Fire Department (the Certified Unified Program Agency for
San Bernardino County) or through the Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator
(CESQG) Program. In addition, the Project would also comply with federal, state, and local
requirements involving the transport, handling, removal, and disposal of hazardous
materials from the Project site which would be conducted by a permitted and licensed
service provider. Construction impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Operations
Potentially hazardous materials associated with Project operations would include
stormwater pollutants caused by runoff created by landscaping maintenance and
stormwater runoff from the parking areas. Landscaping maintenance best management
practices (BMPs) would be implemented according to the SWPPP’s Stormwater BMPs
which would reduce pesticides and fertilizers from running off off-site. Stormwater
pollutants of concern from the parking lot area would be mitigated using water
reclamation systems, and/or storm drain covers. Other stormwater hazardous materials
such as sediment, metals, oils and grease, trash/debris and other organic compounds
would be captured by the Project’s proposed infiltration basin system to avoid stormwater
runoff from seeping off-site.
Some examples of BMPs that the Project would implement include but are not limited to
the following:
• Discharge of fertilizers, pesticides, or animal wastes to public Right‐of‐Way (ROW) or
storm drains are prohibited.
• Blowing sweeping of debris (leaf litter, grass clippings, litter, etc.) into public ROW or
storm drains is prohibited.
• Trash receptacles shall have a watertight lid and be covered or sheltered by a roof.
• Discharge of paint or masonry wastes to public ROW or storm drains are prohibited.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 133
• Discharges of grease waste to public ROW or storm drains is prohibited.
• Do not use detergents or other chemical additives when washing concrete sidewalks
or building exteriors.
The Project will comply with applicable federal, state, and local agencies and regulations
regarding the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. Furthermore, as
mandated by the OSHA, a Material Safety Data Sheet would be prepared, documenting
any hazardous materials in the Project that would inform employees and first responders
as to the necessary remediation procedures in the case of accidental release.
Therefore, construction and operational impacts associated with hazardous materials
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less than Significant. The proposed Project is not located within a one-quarter mile from
an existing or proposed school. The closest school is A.B. Miller High School, located
approximately 0.8-miles southeast from the Project site. Additionally, the proposed
Project would not contain any uses that are known to emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous material, substances, or waste.
As discussed above, direct, and indirect release of hazardous materials would be contained
on-site through the use of BMPs and compliance with any applicable local, state, and
federal laws pertaining to hazardous waste handling. Lastly, the Project would adhere to
the SWPPP and the CESQG program that would further reduce exposure to hazardous
materials. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. Consistent with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
International E1527-13, environmental databases and records were reviewed to
determine whether the Project site or surrounding properties are included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 134
(“Cortese” list).28 Review indicated that the Project site is not included on the Cortese list,
and no surrounding properties are identified on this list of hazardous materials sites. These
findings are reinforced in the City’s General Plan which notes that “there are no Superfund
sites within the City of Fontana.”29 Therefore, no impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
e) Would the project 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?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within an airport land use plan nor is located
within two miles of a private or public airport, or within the vicinity of a private airstrip.
The Project is consistent with the City’s land use and zoning designations. The closest
airport is the Ontario International Airport, located approximately 11.0-miles southwest.
No impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant. The City identifies factors contributing to the high, widespread
wildfire risk in the City; these include: Narrow and often one-lane and/or dead-end roads
complicating evacuation and emergency response, nature and frequency of ignitions and
increasing population density leading to more ignitions; slope of the foothills; and
residential development along the foothills.30 Additionally, the County of San Bernardino
has adopted an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) to identify evacuation routes,
emergency facilities, and City personnel and equipment available to effectively deal with
emergency situations. No revisions to the adopted EOP would be required as a result of
the proposed Project. The nearest fire station is the San Bernardino County Fire Station
78, located approximately 0.8-miles south of the site and would not be impacted because
primary access to all major roads would be maintained during construction.
The proposed Project would not be located on a one-lane or dead-end road, is not near a
hillside, and does not involve residential development along foothills. Additionally, the
28 DTSC. 2021. Cortese List. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&site_type=CSITES,FUDS&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&rep
orttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29. Accessed March 16, 2021.
29 City of Fontana. 2015 – 2035 General Plan Update. Chapter 11, Noise and Safety - Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 11.7.
30 City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Available at https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/27141/HMP-Fontana-
2017-Final, accessed on March 16, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 135
Project would be located on Citrus Avenue, a designated local truck route31 which can carry
a lot of traffic and is beneficial in the event of an emergency. Because the Project would
not introduce hazardous conditions or development near the foothills, because the Project
is served by a nearby County Fire Station, and because the Project would be located along
a major corridor able to accommodate a large amount of traffic in case an emergency
would occur, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less Than Significant Impact. As noted above, the city is prone to wildland fires in the
foothills. According to CalFire, the Project site is not located in either a Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ), High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (HFHSZ), or Moderate Fire
Hazard Severity Zone (MFHSZ) as designated in the VHFHSZ Map.32 As such, a less than
significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The incremental effects of the proposed Project related to hazards and hazardous materials, if
any, are anticipated to be minimal, and any effects would be site-specific. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in incremental effects to hazards or
hazardous materials that could be compounded or increased when considered together with
similar effects from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects.
The proposed Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to or from hazards
or hazardous materials.
31 City of Fontana. 2015 – 2035 General Plan Update. Exhibit 9.7 - Truck Routes. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/28271/Complete-Document---Approved-General-Plan-Documents-11-13-2018. Accessed
on March 16, 2021.
32 CalFire. 2021. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414. Accessed March 16, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 136
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the Project:
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the Project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
X
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
X
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding
on- or off-site?
X
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?
X
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) Would the project be located in flood hazard, tsunami,
or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
X
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan?
X
A Water Quality Management Plan were prepared by Ace Design and Construction on
July 13, 2021. Additionally, a Drainage Study was also prepared by Ace Design and Construction
on August 7, 2021. The studies are included in this Initial Study as Appendices E and F
respectively, and the results are summarized herein.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 137
Surface Water Hydrology
The city is located within the Lower Lytle Creek Watershed, which forms the northwest portion
of the Santa Ana River Watershed and drains the eastern portion of the San Gabriel Mountains.
Daytime temperatures in the summer months frequently exceed 100 degrees in the lower
watershed and are about 10 to 15 degrees cooler in the upper watershed. Winter temperatures
can fall below freezing throughout the entire watershed. The lower watershed averages 15 to 20
inches of rain annually while the upper watershed averages 35 inches annually. The Lower Lytle
Creek Watershed covers an area of approximately 186 square miles with a mean annual runoff
of roughly 31,720-acre-feet (af). Lytle Creek is a tributary of Warm Creek, which in turn is a
tributary to the Santa Ana River (SAR), joining the main stem of the river in the vicinity of Prado
Dam.33
Water Supply and Wastewater
Fontana’s drinking water supply comes from a combination of surface water, subsurface aquifers,
and imported water from Northern California. Drinking water is provided to Fontana and its
Sphere of Influence primarily by three agencies: the Fontana Water Company (FWC), Cucamonga
Valley Water District (CVWD), and the West Valley Water District (WVWD). Two other water
agencies, the Crawford Canyon Water District, and the Marygold Mutual Water company,
provide water for small portions of the northern and eastern parts of Fontana. Wastewater
services are supplied by a regional authority, the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, which also
provides other services.
Ground Water
Fontana Water Company’s (FWC) water supplies are reliant on groundwater from the
Chino Basin, Rialto-Colton Basin, and No Man’s Land Basin. FWC also purchases imported water
supplies from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) and San Bernardino Valley Municipal
Water District (SBVMWD). According to the FWC 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP),
FWC’s groundwater wells have a total pumping capacity of approximately 50,000 gallons per
minute (gpm) and booster pumping facilities have a total design pumping capacity of +115,000
gpm.34
Potential Recycled Water
Recycled water is municipal wastewater that has been treated to a specified quality to enable it
to be used again. Since recycled water demand is highly dependent on its level of treatment,
recycled water demand is more selective than potable or raw water demand. FWC currently does
not receive recycled water from IEUA but utilizes their recycled water distribution system to
service their customers with recycled water.
33 City of Fontana. General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. 2015-2035. Hydrology and Water Quality. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26720/58-Hydrology-and-Water-Quality. Accessed March 16, 2021.
34 Fontana Water Company. (2015). Urban Water Management Plan; Page 3-2. Available at https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/San-Gabriel-Fontana_Amended-Final-December-2017-1.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 138
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation. The California Porter‐Cologne Water Quality
Control Act (Section 13000 (“Water Quality”) et seq., of the California Water Code), and
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972 (also referred to as the Clean
Water Act (CWA)) require comprehensive water quality control plans be developed for all
waters within the State of California. The Project’s WQMP was created to comply with the
requirements of the City of Fontana and the NPDES Areawide Stormwater Program. The
Project owner is responsible for the implementation of the provisions of this plan and will
ensure that this plan is amended as appropriate to reflect up‐to‐date conditions on the
site consistent with the County’s SWPPP and the intent of the NPDES Permit for
San Bernardino County and the incorporated cities of San Bernardino County within the
Santa Ana Region until the WQMP is transferred to the Project’s new owner.
Construction of the proposed Project and offsite improvements would involve clearing,
soil stockpiling, grading, paving, utility installation, building construction, and landscaping
activities, which would result in the generation of potential water quality pollutants such
as silt, debris, chemicals, paints, and other solvents with the potential to adversely affect
water quality. As such, short‐term water quality impacts have the potential to occur during
construction of the Project in the absence of any protective or avoidance measures.
Proposed site improvements include impervious paving areas, storm drain system and
with an underground infiltration area, two new hotels, two restaurants, and other
commercial uses, including covered trash enclosures and other associated amenities. An
underground infiltration system with two hydrodynamic separators for pre‐treatment are
proposed for water quality treatment. Landscaping areas will be provided throughout the
development. All landscape areas shall be equipped with efficient irrigation improvements
and consists of landscaping consistent with the City’s Landscape Ordinance. Outdoor
activities for the Project are expected to include driving vehicles, parking, walking, trash
pickup, typical maintenance activities.
To minimize water quality impacts, both construction and operational activities are
required to comply with the BMPs included in the WQMP. The BMPs identified in the
WQMP are derived from the San Bernardino County’s Municipal SWMP and are consistent
with the General Permit for Stormwater Discharge Associated with Construction Activity
(Construction Activity General Permit). The WQMP identifies structural and programmatic
BMPs and controls to minimize, prevent, and/or otherwise appropriately treat stormwater
runoff flows before they are discharged from the site. Mandatory compliance with the
WQMP BMPs would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements during long‐term operation.
Mitigation Measures:
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 139
The City of Fontana’s Public Works Department (PWD) has requested that the following
MMs are completed prior to receiving Certificate of Occupancy or Permit Approval:
MM HYD-1 All commercial facilities conducting the following activities: (restaurant, food
processing facilities, facilities maintained for the processing, filtering, softening, or
conditioning of water) shall submit an Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit,
Environmental Control (FMC 23-218).
Additionally, prior to issuance of construction permits, the Project is subject to the following
MM HYD-2 Any facility proposing the discharge of non-domestic wastewater to the sanitary
sewer shall demonstrate in the plan check process, through the submittal of
detailed plans showing pretreatment facilities and operating procedures, that the
user will pretreat wastewater to a level required to comply with FMC 23-136 -
Concentration Limitations and/or FMC 23-138 – Applicability of Federal
Categorical Pretreatment Standards, and/or any other applicable standard as
established (FMC 23-186).
MM HYD-3 All commercial or industrial facilities within the following categories: (restaurants
or other food processing facilities) must install a gravity separation interceptor to
comply with the requirements of the Fontana Municipal Code (FMC Section 23-
190) unless the requirement is modified by a variance issued by the Public Works
Manager.
▪ For all restaurants or other food processing facilities (FMC 23-163).
Conditional waivers for the grease interceptor requirement may be granted by
the Public Works Manager in accordance with section 23-52 for those
restaurants or food processing facilities determined not to have adverse
effects on the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW).
Water quality impacts associated with the Project would be less than significant with
implementation of Mitigation Measures HYD-1 through HYD-4.
Mitigation Measures: MMsHYD-1 through HYD-4.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with Mitigations incorporated.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would be served with potable water
by FWC which receives ground water resources from Chino Basin, Rialto-Colton Basin, and
No Man’s Land Basin and imported water supplies from external sources. These sources
would be used to service the proposed Project. The Project would implement a storm drain
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 140
system with an underground infiltration area that would utilize five basins along Highland
Avenue and one at the northeast corner of Citrus Avenue.
Therefore, the Project’s demand for domestic water service would not substantially
deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. Please refer to the following
threshold for more information about the proposed storm drainage system.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition
of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. In the existing conditions, the site is undeveloped and
majority of the site drains in south direction and there is an average fall of around 8-10
feet through the width of the site towards South Highland Avenue. South Highland Avenue
slopes from east to west. In the proposed condition, the site is divided into six drainage
areas (DA's). The majority of overflow would run from the retention basins to the existing
public storm drainage facility on southeast corner of the site. The grading for the Project
site and Bio Retention basins is planned in such a way that overflow from Bio Retention
basins from two thirds of the site area is routed to the existing storm drain manhole,
located in the South-East corner of the site on Citrus Avenue via a network of onsite storm
drains.
Implementation of the Project would include improvements to the existing the storm drain
system with underground infiltration area which includes five basins along Highland
Avenue and one at the northeast corner of Citrus Avenue. The DAs functions are noted
below:
1. DA No. 1 – This 29,852-sf area consists of western half of the Banquet Hall building,
Parking, and landscaped area in West part of the Project site. This area is proposed to
drain into the landscape area along the Southern West corner. A bio retention area No.
1 of 1,490 sf flat area without under drains is proposed in the landscaped area to
provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm runoff. The overflow from
this bio retention area is proposed to drain to South-West corner of site to S Highland
Avenue.
2. DA No. 2 – This 84,552-sf area consists of eastern half of Banquet Hall building, western
half of Holiday Inn Express Hotel & Suites building, Parking and landscaped area of the
Project site. This area is proposed to drain into the landscape area along the S Highland
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 141
Avenue. A bio retention area #2 of 2,992 sf flat area without under drains is proposed
in the landscaped area to provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm
runoff. The overflow from this bio-retention area is proposed to drain to S Highland
Avenue.
3. DA No. 3 – This 53,325-sf area consists of eastern half of Holiday Inn Express Hotel &
Suites building, Parking and landscaped area of the Project site. This area is proposed
to drain into the landscape area along the S Highland Avenue. A bio retention area No.
3 of 2,085 sf flat area without under drains is proposed in the landscaped area to
provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm runoff. The overflow from
this bio-retention area is proposed to drain to S Highland Avenue.
4. DA No. 4 – This 124,235-sf area consists of Staybridge Suites building, western portion
of Restaurant building, Parking, and landscaped area in the center of the Project site.
This area is proposed to drain into the landscape area along the S Highland Avenue. A
bio-retention area No. 4 of 4,790 sf flat area without under drains is proposed in the
landscaped area to provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm runoff.
The overflow from this bio retention area will flow to on-site storm drain network
connected to the existing drainage manhole in the Southeast corner of project site in
Citrus Avenue.
5. DA No. 5 – This 14,652-sf area consists of northern portion of In-N-Out Burger Store
building and landscaped area in North-East corner of the Project site. This area is
proposed to drain into the landscape area along the corner of Citrus Avenue. A bio
retention area No. 5 of 940 sf flat area without under drains is proposed in the
landscaped area to provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm runoff.
The overflow from this bio retention area will flow to onsite storm drain network
connected to the existing drainage manhole in the Southeast corner of Project site in
Citrus Avenue.
6. DA No. 6 – This 71,924-sf area consists of southern portion of In-N-Out Burger Store
building, eastern portion of Restaurant building, Parking, and landscaped area in
eastern corner of the Project site. This area is proposed to drain into the landscape
area along the intersection of S Highland Avenue and Citrus Avenue. A bio retention
area No. 6 of 3,790 sf flat area without under drains is proposed in the landscaped area
to provide the necessary water quality treatment to the storm runoff. The overflow
from this bio retention area will flow to on-site storm drain network connected to the
existing drainage manhole in the Southeast corner of Project site in Citrus Avenue.
Applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs) on Form 4.1-1 Non-Structural Sources
Control BMPs provided in the WQMP and landscape maintenance protocols also provided
and recommended in the WQMP report that would help minimize soil erosion.
Therefore, any existing downstream channel and conveyance system will not be at risk of
increased erosion due to project site developments. Due to the Project’s improvements to
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 142
the existing storm drain system and with the implementation of the BMPs, impacts would
be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
ii) Would the project substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed above, surface runoff in both construction and
operation phases would not runoff in a manner which would result in flooding. Project
design features pursuant to the BMPs within the WQMP, which includes a new drainage
system, would reduce the rate of runoff from project activities. Furthermore, the site does
not include any streams or rivers, that would be altered by the proposed Project.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
iii) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity
of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less than Significant Impact. On‐site stormwater runoff associated with the Project would
be engineered to be conveyed through the proposed drainage system and to the bio-
detention basins located throughout the site. Additionally, runoff minimizing landscape
would be implanted. The water quality management plan concludes that the project would
not adequately treat and retain the runoff, consistent with the San Bernardino County
Hydrology Manual requirements. Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
iv) Would the project impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. Runoff from this area ultimately sheet flows towards the
south and southeastern property corner. According to the WQMP, soils are adequate for
infiltration and can be amended to improve infiltration capacity. Site slope is less than 15
percent. According to the WQMP, the Project will provide enough landscape area and as
such enough natural infiltration capacity in the soil, and there would be no impact from
runoff. Additionally, the Project would not change existing flow patterns. The Project
would not exceed runoff as the Project provides sufficient infiltration capacity as discussed
above in Response 10 (C, i).
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 143
Considering the Project and improvements to the underground infiltration system, on-site
flooding would not occur nor redirect flood flows. In addition, stormwater management
practices as required under City of Fontana Municipal Code, Section 28-111.5 would
further reduce any impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant without mitigation incorporated.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project be located in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. The Project site is located over 40 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean.
Additionally, the Project is not located in a designated flood hazard area and is not located
near a large body of water prone to flood hazards that could produce seiche events. Given
the distance from the coast, the potential for the Project site to be inundated by a tsunami
is negligible. therefore, the risk of mudflow is also negligible. No associated impacts are
anticipated to occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan
or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management
plan. The Project would be subject to create WQMP via the County’s SWPPP, as part of the
NPDES permitting requirements. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The potential impacts related to hydrology and stormwater runoff are generally site-specific. As
explained above, the proposed Project will take the required steps to reduce hydrologic and
runoff impacts, and implementation of the proposed Project would not result in significant
impacts. As a result, no cumulative impacts are anticipated.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 144
Land Use and Planning
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the Project:
a) Would the project physically divide an established
community?
X
b) Would the project 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?
X
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The Project area is vacant with scattered vegetation. The Project proposes the
development of a multi-tenant commercial development consistent with the existing land
use designation and zoning district. The Project site would serve the community as a
gathering area for shopping, dining, and lodging. The Project would not divide an
established community. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
b) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project has a land use designation of General
Commercial (C-G) and is within the General Commercial (C-2) Zoning District. The proposed
Project is consistent with the zoning, but it will require the approval of CUP No. 20-025 and
CUP No. 20-026 to allow the development of the hotels. Therefore, development of the
proposed Project would not conflict with the City’s land use plan, policy, or regulation and
therefore, would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
Implementation of the Project would not create a significant impact to the surrounding region
since the proposed Project components would be consistent with current land use and zoning
designations. As a result, no cumulative impacts related to land use and planning would occur.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 145
MINERAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
12. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the Project:
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
X
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
Mineral Resources Existing Conditions
A mineral resource is any naturally occurring rock material with commercial value. The most
valuable mineral resource in the area would be sand and gravel deposits extending southward
from the San Gabriel Mountains. The General Plan does not contain policies that conflict with the
recovery of future mineral resources. Therefore, significant mineral resource deposits would be
protected if discovered in the foreseeable future.
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Data Basin Map for California Mineral Resources does not designate the
Project site as containing mineral resources. In addition, while some amount of sand and
gravel may exist in the city limits, none are expected in the Project site. Therefore, since
the Project is not designated for mineral resource recovery and does not contain any
known mineral resources, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact. There are no locally important mineral resource recovery sites delineated in
the City’s General Plan. Consequently, the proposed Project would not have an effect on
locally important mineral resources recovery site and therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 146
Cumulative Impacts
The analysis of potential impacts indicates that no significant impacts would result from the
proposed Project. As a result, no cumulative impacts related to mineral resources would occur.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 147
NOISE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
13. NOISE. Would the Project result in:
a) Would the 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?
X
b) Would the project generate excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
X
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?
X
A Noise Assessment was prepared by Kimley-Horn in December 2021. The Noise calculations are
included in this Initial Study as Appendix G, and the results are summarized herein.
The original Project assumptions for the preparation of the Noise Study assumed the
development of approximately 195,906 square feet of commercial space, inclusive of 235
combined hotel rooms between two hotels (Holiday Inn and Staybridge Suites). Additionally, the
model assumed 450 vehicle parking spaces. The model output with the original assumptions
resulted in a less than significant impact on all aspects regarding potential impacts to Noise. The
proposed Project has been revised to include the consolidation of the two hotels into a single
shared building totaling 184 hotel rooms, the 4,973 of banquet hall square feet increase, and the
increase in parking spaces to 455. Overall, the revised Project would decrease the total
development area by 23,530 SF and decrease the number of daily vehicle trips by 180.
As a result of the Project update, it was determined that no updates to the original analysis is
necessary because the original analysis conducted is more conservative than the revised Project.
As such, a Noise Consistency Analysis Memorandum noting the lesser impacts from
implementation of the proposed Project due to the overall Project reduction during construction
activities, operations, and vibration would continue to be less than significant and analysis is
documented and presented along with the original Noise Study as Appendix G.
Sound and Environmental Noise
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 148
Acoustics is the science of sound. Sound can be described as the mechanical energy of a vibrating
object transmitted by pressure waves through a medium (e.g., air) to human (or animal) ear. If
the pressure variations occur frequently enough (at least 20 times per second), they can be heard
and are called sound. The number of pressure variations per second is called the frequency of
sound and is expressed as cycles per second, or hertz (Hz).
Noise is defined as loud, unexpected, or annoying sound. In acoustics, the fundamental model
consists of a noise source, a receptor, and the propagation path between the two. The loudness
of the noise source, obstructions, or atmospheric factors affecting the propagation path,
determine the perceived sound level and noise characteristics at the receptor. Acoustics deal
primarily with the propagation and control of sound. A typical noise environment consists of a
base of steady background noise that is the sum of many distant and indistinguishable noise
sources. Superimposed on this background noise is the sound from individual local sources. These
sources can vary from an occasional aircraft or train passing by to continuous noise from traffic
on a major highway. Perceptions of sound and noise are highly subjective from person to person.
Measuring sound directly in terms of pressure would require a large range of numbers. To avoid
this, the decibel (dB) scale was devised. The dB scale uses the hearing threshold of 20 micro-
pascals (µPa) as a point of reference, defined as 0 db. Other sound pressures are then compared
to this reference pressure, and the logarithm is taken to keep the numbers in a practical range.
The dB scale allows a million-fold increase in pressure to be expressed as 120 dB, and changes in
levels correspond closely to human perception of relative loudness.
Noise Descriptors
The dB scale alone does not adequately characterize how humans perceive noise. The dominant
frequencies of a sound have a substantial effect on the human response to that sound. Several
rating scales have been developed to analyze the adverse effect of community noise on people.
Because environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise
on people is largely dependent on the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the
time of day when the noise occurs. The equivalent noise level (Leq) represents the continuous
sound pressure level over the measurement period, while the day-night noise level (Ldn) and
Community Equivalent Noise Level (CNEL) are measures of energy average during a 24-hour
period, with dB weighted sound levels from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Most commonly,
environmental sounds are described in terms of Leq that has the same acoustical energy as the
summation of all the time-varying events.
The A weighted decibel (dBA) sound level scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound
to which the human ear is most sensitive. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short
period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical
behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described
in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-
varying events.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 149
The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can
accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various
computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways
and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends on the distance between the
receptor and the noise source.
Mobile Sources
The Acoustical Assessment examined existing roadway noise levels for the roadway segments in
the proposed Project vicinity, which are displayed in the following Table 18, Existing Traffic Noise
Levels.
Table 18: Existing Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment ADT dBA CNEL 100 Feet
from Roadway Centerline
Highland Avenue
Beech Avenue to Citrus Avenue 7,014 62.7
Citrus Avenue to Oleander Avenue 11,327 64.9
Citrus Avenue
SR-210 to Highland Avenue 36,783 70.0
Highland Avenue to Walnut Avenue 28,628 68.9
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., October 2021. Refer to Appendix B for traffic noise modeling
results of the noise analysis.
As depicted in Table 18 above, the existing traffic-generated noise level on Project-vicinity
roadways currently ranges from 62.7 dBA CNEL to 70.0 dBA CNEL 100 feet from the centerline.
As previously described, CNEL is 24-hour average noise level with a 5 dBA “weighting” during the
hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a 10 dBA “weighting” added to noise during the hours of
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively.
Stationary Sources
The primary sources of stationary noise in the Project vicinity are those associated with the liquor
store to the west and residential properties to the south of the Project. The noise associated with
these sources may represent a single-event noise occurrence or short-term noise. Other noises
include mechanical equipment (e.g., heating ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment),
dogs barking, idling vehicles, and residents talking.
Groundborne Vibration
Sources of groundborne vibrations include natural phenomena (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions,
sea waves, landslides, etc.) or man-made causes (explosions, machinery, traffic, trains,
construction equipment, etc.). Vibration sources may be continuous (e.g., factory machinery) or
transient (e.g., explosions). Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 150
with an average motion of zero. Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration
amplitude. One is the peak particle velocity (PPV); another is the root mean square (RMS)
velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the
vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal.
The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to
vibration.
Table 19, Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent
Vibrations, displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings produced by continuous
vibration levels. The annoyance levels shown in the table should be interpreted with care since
vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those listed, depending on the
level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching
the threshold of perception can be annoying. Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating
secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling
sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of
actual structural damage. In high noise environments, which are more prevalent where
groundborne vibration approaches perceptible levels, this rattling phenomenon may also be
produced by loud airborne environmental noise-causing induced vibration in exterior doors and
windows.
Table 19: Human Reaction and Damage to Buildings for Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibrations
Maximum PPV
(in/sec)
Vibration Annoyance
Potential Criteria
Vibration Damage Potential
Threshold Criteria FTA Vibration Damage Criteria
0.008 -- Extremely fragile historic buildings,
ruins, ancient monuments
--
0.01 Barely Perceptible -- --
0.04 Distinctly Perceptible -- --
0.1 Strongly Perceptible Fragile buildings --
0.12 -- -- Buildings extremely susceptible to
vibration damage
0.12 -- -- Non-engineered timber and masonry
buildings
0.2 -- Historic and some old buildings --
0.25 -- Older residential structures Engineered concrete and masonry (no
plaster)
0.3 Severe -- --
0.4 -- New residential structures, Modern
industrial/commercial buildings
Reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber (no
plaster)
0.5 -- Extremely fragile historic buildings,
ruins, ancient monuments
--
PPV = peak particle velocity; in/sec = inches per second; FTA = Federal Transit Administration
Source: California Department of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, 2020 and Federal Transit
administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Assessment Manual, 2018.
Ground vibration can be a concern in instances where buildings shake, and substantial rumblings
occur. However, it is unusual for vibration from typical urban sources such as buses and heavy
trucks to be perceptible. Common sources for groundborne vibration are planes, trains, and
construction activities such as earthmoving which requires the use of heavy-duty earth moving
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 151
equipment. For the purposes of this analysis, a PPV descriptor with units of inches per second
(in/sec) is used to evaluate construction-generated vibration for building damage and human
complaints.
Noise-Sensitive Receptors
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities
associated with those uses. Noise sensitive uses typically include residences, hospitals, schools,
childcare facilities, and places of assembly. Vibration sensitive receivers are generally like noise
sensitive receivers but may also include businesses, such as research facilities and laboratories
that use vibration-sensitive equipment. Sensitive land uses near the Project include single-family
residential homes, approximately 105 feet to the south on the opposite side of S. Highland
Avenue, single-family residential homes approximately 270 feet to the west on Highland Avenue,
and a school, A.B. Miller High School, located approximately 1,600 feet to the southeast of the
Project. Sensitive land uses nearest to the Project are shown in Table 20, Sensitive Receptors.
Table 20: Sensitive Receptors
Receptor Description Distance and Direction from the Project
Single-Family Residences 105 feet to the south
Single-Family Residences 270 feet to the west
Fontana A.B. Miller High School 1,600 feet to the southeast
Source: Google Earth, 2021.
Regulatory Setting
California Government Code. California Government Code Section 65302(f) mandates that the
legislative body of each county and city adopt a noise element as part of its comprehensive
general plan. The local noise element must recognize the land use compatibility guidelines
established by the State Department of Health Services. The guidelines rank noise land use
compatibility in terms of “normally acceptable,” “conditionally acceptable,” “normally
unacceptable,” and “clearly unacceptable” noise levels for various land use types. Single-family
homes are “normally acceptable” in exterior noise environments up to 60 CNEL and
“conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. Multiple-family residential uses are “normally
acceptable” up to 65 CNEL and “conditionally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL. Schools, libraries, and
churches are “normally acceptable” up to 70 CNEL, as are office buildings and business,
commercial, and professional uses.
California Code of Regulations, Title 24. The State’s noise insulation standards are codified in the
CCR, Title 24: Part 1, Building Standards Administrative Code, and Part 2, California Building Code.
These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for the purpose of interior
noise compatibility from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies
must be prepared when noise-sensitive structures, such as residential buildings, schools, or
hospitals, are located near major transportation noise sources, and where such noise sources
create an exterior noise level of 65 dBA CNEL or higher. Acoustical studies that accompany
building plans must demonstrate that the structure has been designed to limit interior noise in
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 152
habitable rooms to acceptable noise levels. For new residential buildings, schools, and hospitals,
the acceptable interior noise limit for new construction is 45 dBA CNEL.
City of Fontana General Plan. Adopted on November 13, 2018, the Fontana General Plan
identifies noise standards that are used as guidelines to evaluate transportation noise level
impacts35. These standards are also used to assess the long-term traffic noise impacts on specific
land uses. According to the General Plan, land uses such as residences have acceptable exterior
noise levels of up to 65 dBA CNEL. Based on the guidelines in the General Plan, an exterior noise
level of 65 dBA CNEL is generally considered the maximum exterior noise level for sensitive
receptors.
Land uses near these significant noise-producers can incorporate buffers and noise control
techniques including setbacks, landscaping, building transitions, site design, and building
construction techniques to reduce the impact of excessive noise. Selection of the appropriate
noise control technique would vary depending on the level of noise that needs to be reduced as
well as the location and intended land use. The city has adopted the Noise and Safety section as
a part of the General Plan Update 2015-2035. The Noise and Safety section specifies the
maximum allowable unmitigated exterior noise levels for new developments impacted by
transportation noise sources. Additionally, the Noise and Safety section identifies transportation
noise policies designed to protect, create, and maintain an environment free of harmful noise
that could impact the health and welfare of sensitive receptors. The following Fontana General
Plan goals, policies, and actions for addressing noise are applicable to the Project:
Goal 8: The City of Fontana protects sensitive land uses from excessive noise by diligent
planning through 2035.
Policy 8.2: Noise-tolerant land uses shall be guided into areas irrevocably committed to land
uses that are noise-producing, such as transportation corridors.
Policy 8.4: Noise spillover or encroachment from commercial, industrial, and educational
land uses shall be minimized into adjoining residential neighborhoods or noise-
sensitive uses.
Action C: The State of California Office of Planning and Research General Plan Guidelines
shall be followed with respect to acoustical study requirements.
Goal 9: The City of Fontana provides a diverse and efficiently operated ground
transportation system that generates the minimum feasible noise on its
residents through 2035.
Policy 9.1: All noise sections of the State Motor Vehicle Code shall be enforced.
35 City of Fontana, General Plan, 2018.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 153
Policy 9.2: Roads shall be maintained such that the paving is in good condition and free of
cracks, bumps, and potholes.
Action A: On-road trucking activities shall continue to be regulated in the City to ensure
noise impacts are minimized, including the implementation of truck-routes based
on traffic studies.
Action B: Development that generates increased traffic and subsequent increases in the
ambient noise level adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses shall provide appropriate
mitigation measures.
Action D: Explore the use of “quiet pavement” materials for street improvements.
Goal 10: Fontana’s residents are protected from the negative effects of “spillover” noise.
Policy 10.1: Residential land uses, and areas identified as noise-sensitive shall be protected
from excessive noise from non-transportation sources including industrial,
commercial, and residential activities and equipment.
Action A: Projects located in commercial areas shall not exceed stationary-source noise
standards at the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses.
Action B: Industrial uses shall not exceed commercial or residential stationary source noise
standards at the most proximate land uses.
Action C: Non-transportation noise shall be considered in land use planning decisions.
Action D: Construction shall be performed as quietly as feasible when performed in
proximity to residential or other noise-sensitive land uses.
City of Fontana Municipal Code. Standards established under the City of Fontana Municipal Code
(Municipal Code) are used to analyze noise impacts originating from the Project. Operational
noise impacts are typically governed by Fontana Municipal Code Sections 18-61 through 18-67.
However, the city currently relies on delineated general industrial areas. According to the General
Plan Noise and Safety section, these areas are buffered from residential uses through land use
zoning that places either light industrial or commercial uses between the major manufacturers
involved in heavy industrial uses and local residents. This separation of land uses means noise
intrusion on conforming land uses is not a problem at this time.
Guidelines for non-transportation and stationary noise source impacts from operations at private
properties are found in the Zoning and Development Code in Chapter 30 of the Fontana
Municipal Code. Applicable guidelines indicate that no person shall create or cause any sound
exceeding the City’s stated noise performance standards measured at the property line of any
residentially zoned property. Per Fontana Municipal Code Section 30-543(A), the performance
standards for exterior noise emanating from any property are 70 dBA between the hours of 7:00
a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 65 dBA during the noise-sensitive hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. at
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 154
residential uses. For this analysis, a 65-dBA nighttime noise level standard is conservatively used
to analyze potential noise impacts at off-site residential receptors within the City of Fontana.
The City has also set restrictions to control noise impacts from construction activities.
Section 18-63(b)(7) states that the erection (including excavation), demolition, alteration, or
repair of any structure shall only occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on
weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, except in the case of
urgent necessity or as otherwise approved by the City of Fontana. Although the Fontana
Municipal Code limits the hours of construction, it does not provide specific noise level
performance standards for construction.
Methodology
Construction
Construction noise levels are based on typical noise levels generated by construction equipment
published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and FHWA. Construction noise was
assessed in dBA Leq. This unit was appropriate because Leq can be used to describe noise level
from operation of each piece of equipment separately, and levels can be combined to represent
the noise level from all equipment operating during a given period.
FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) was used to estimate construction noise at
nearby sensitive receptors. For modeling purposes, construction equipment has been distributed
evenly between the center of the construction site and the nearest receptor. To be conservative,
the loudest and most used equipment was placed nearest the sensitive receptor. Noise level
estimates do not account for the presence of intervening structures or topography, which may
reduce noise levels at receptor locations. Therefore, the noise levels presented herein represent
a conservative, reasonable worst-case estimate of actual temporary construction noise.
Operations
The analysis of the Without Project and With Project noise environments is based on noise
prediction modeling and empirical observations. Reference noise level data are used to estimate
the Project operational noise impacts from stationary sources. Noise levels are collected from
field noise measurements and other published sources from similar types of activities are used
to estimate noise levels expected with the Project’s stationary sources. The reference noise levels
are used to represent a worst-case noise environment as noise level from stationary sources can
vary throughout the day. Operational noise is evaluated based on the standards within the City’s
Noise Ordinance and General Plan. The Without Project and With Project traffic noise levels in
the Project vicinity were calculated using the FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model
(FHWA-RD-77-108).
Vibration
Ground-borne vibration levels associated with construction-related activities for the Project were
evaluated utilizing typical ground-borne vibration levels associated with construction equipment,
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 155
obtained from FTA published data for construction equipment. Potential ground-borne vibration
impacts related to building/structure damage and interference with sensitive existing operations
were evaluated, considering the distance from construction activities to nearby land uses and
typically applied criteria for structural damage and human annoyance.
a) Would the project 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?
Less Than Significant Impact.
Construction
Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or
phase of construction (e.g., land clearing, grading, excavation, paving). Noise generated by
construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable
generators, can reach high levels. During construction, exterior noise levels could affect
the residential neighborhoods surrounding the construction site, including the single-
family residential homes located approximately 105 feet to the south on the opposite side
of S. Highland Avenue. However, it is acknowledged that construction activities would
occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at a single point near
sensitive receptors.
Construction activities would include site preparation, grading, building construction,
paving, and architectural coating. Such activities would require concrete/industrial saws,
excavators, and dozers during demolition; dozers and tractors during site preparation;
excavators, graders, and dozers during grading; cranes, forklifts, generators, tractors, and
welders during building construction; pavers, rollers, mixers, and paving equipment during
paving; and air compressors during architectural coating. Typical operating cycles for these
types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation
followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical
disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as
dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). Noise
generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and
portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical noise levels associated with individual
construction equipment are listed in Table 21, Typical Construction Noise Levels. Noise
levels at 105 feet, the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor from the construction
area, are included in Table 21.
Table 21: Typical Construction Noise Levels
Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) at
50 feet from Source
Typical Noise Level (dBA) at
105 feet from Source1
Air Compressor 81 75
Backhoe 80 74
Compactor 82 76
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 156
Table 21: Typical Construction Noise Levels
Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) at
50 feet from Source
Typical Noise Level (dBA) at
105 feet from Source1
Concrete Mixer 85 79
Concrete Pump 82 76
Concrete Vibrator 76 70
Crane, Derrick 88 82
Crane, Mobile 83 77
Dozer 85 79
Generator 81 76
Grader 85 79
Impact Wrench 85 79
Jack Hammer 88 82
Loader 85 74
Paver 89 79
Pneumatic Tool 85 79
Pump 76 70
Roller 85 79
Saw 76 70
Scraper 85 79
Shovel 82 76
Truck 84 78
1. Calculated using the inverse square law formula for sound attenuation: dBA2 = dBA1+20Log(d1/d2)
Where: dBA2 = estimated noise level at receptor; dBA1 = reference noise level; d1 = reference distance; d2 = receptor location distance
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
The noise levels calculated in Table 22, Project Construction Noise Levels at Nearest
Receptor, show estimated exterior construction noise without accounting for attenuation
from physical barriers or topography. Table 22 depicts a worst-case scenario for each
phase of construction. Construction equipment has been distributed evenly between the
center of the construction site and the nearest receptor. To be conservative, the loudest
equipment was placed nearest the sensitive receptor. However, during construction,
equipment would operate throughout the Project site and the associated noise levels
would not occur at a fixed location for extended periods of time.
The City’s Municipal Code does not establish quantitative construction noise standards.
Instead, the Municipal Code establishes limited hours of construction activities. Municipal
Code Section 18-63 states that construction activities may only take place between the
hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, except in the case of urgent necessity or as otherwise approved
by the City of Fontana. However, this analysis conservatively uses the FTA’s threshold of
80 dBA (8-hour Leq) for residential uses and 85 dBA (8-hour Leq) for non-residential uses to
evaluate construction noise impacts.36
36 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Table 7-2, Page 179, September 2018.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 157
Table 22: Project Construction Noise Levels at Nearest Receptor
Construction Phase
Modeled Exterior
Construction Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Noise Threshold
(dBA Leq) Exceed Threshold?
Demolition 76.8 80 No
Site Preparation 74.7 80 No
Grading 75.1 80 No
Building Construction/
Paving/Architectural Coating 73.3 80 No
Note: Equipment distributed evenly between the center of the construction site and the nearest sensitive receptor.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006. Refer to Appendix G for noise modeling results.
Compliance with the Municipal Code would minimize impacts from construction noise, as
construction would be limited to daytime hours on weekdays and Saturdays. By following
Municipal Code standards, Project construction activities would result in a less than
significant noise impact.
Operations
Implementation of the proposed Project would create new sources of noise in the project
vicinity. The major noise sources associated with the Project that would potentially impact
existing nearby residences include stationary noise equipment (i.e., trash compactors, air
conditioners, etc.); parking areas (i.e., car door slamming, car radios, engine start-up, and
car pass-by); and off-site traffic noise.
Mechanical Equipment
The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are the residences 105 feet south of the
Project site. Potential stationary noise sources related to long-term operation of the
Project would include mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment (e.g., heating
ventilation and air conditioning [HVAC] equipment) typically generates noise levels of
approximately 52 dBA at 50 feet.37 Based on Project site plans, the nearest potential
location for a HVAC unit would be located approximately 175 feet from the nearest
residential property. At that distance, HVAC noise levels would attenuate to
approximately 41.1 dBA, which is well below the City’s 65 dBA noise standard for
residential uses. Operation of mechanical equipment would not increase ambient noise
levels beyond the acceptable compatible land use noise levels. Further, it is noted that
noise from stationary sources at the Project site would primarily occur during the daytime
activity hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a
less than significant impact related to stationary noise levels.
Parking Noise
The Project would provide 452 parking stalls, with most of the vehicle parking located on
south end of the site, along S. Highland Avenue and Citrus Avenue. Parking is also provided
throughout the site and between the various establishments. Traffic associated with
parking lots is typically not of sufficient volume to exceed community noise standards,
37 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, 2015.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 158
which are based on a time-averaged scale such as the CNEL scale. The instantaneous
maximum sound levels generated by a car door slamming, engine starting up, and car pass-
bys range from 53 to 61 dBA.38 Conversations in parking areas may also be an annoyance
to adjacent sensitive receptors. Sound levels of speech typically range from 33 dBA at 50
feet for normal speech to 50 dBA at 50 feet for very loud speech.39 It should be noted that
parking lot noises are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise standards in the hourly
Leq metric, which are averaged over the entire duration of a time period. As a result, actual
noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower than the
reference levels identified above.
For the purpose of providing a conservative, quantitative estimate of the noise levels that
would be generated from the vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot, the
methodology recommended by FTA for the general assessment of stationary transit noise
sources is used. Using the methodology, the Project’s peak hourly noise level that would
be generated by the on-site parking levels was estimated using the following FTA equation
for a parking lot:
Leq(h) = SELref + 10 log (NA/1,000) – 35.6
Where:
Leq(h) = hourly Leq noise level at 50 feet
SELref = reference noise level for stationary noise source represented in sound exposure
level (SEL) at 50 feet
NA = number of automobiles per hour
35.6 is a constant in the formula, calculated as 10 times the logarithm of the number of
seconds in an hour
Based on the peak hour trip generation rates in the Traffic Study, approximately 364 trips
during peak hours would be made to the Project site each day. Using the FTA’s reference
noise level of 92 dBA SEL40 at 50 feet from the noise source, the Project’s highest peak
hour vehicle trips would generate noise levels of approximately 52.0 dBA Leq at 50 feet
from the parking lot. The nearest sensitive receptor is 125 feet from a parking area. Based
strictly on distance attenuation, parking lot noise at the nearest receptor would be 44 dBA
which is below the City’s residential noise standard. Therefore, noise impacts from parking
lots would be less than significant.
Off-Site Traffic Noise
Implementation of the Project would generate increased traffic volumes along nearby
roadway segments. According to the Traffic Impact Study, the proposed Project would
generate 4,573 daily trips which would result in noise increases on Project area roadways.
In general, a traffic noise increase of less than 3 dBA is barely perceptible to people, while
38 Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
39 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values,
July 6, 2010.
40 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 159
a 5-dBA increase is readily noticeable.41 Generally, traffic volumes on Project area
roadways would have to approximately double for the resulting traffic noise levels to
increase by 3 dBA. Therefore, permanent increases in ambient noise levels of less than 3
dBA are considered to be less than significant.
Traffic noise levels for roadways primarily affected by the Project were calculated using
the FHWA’s Highway Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108). Traffic noise modeling
was conducted for conditions with and without the Project, based on traffic volumes from
the Traffic Impact Analysis. As indicated in Table 23, Opening Year and Opening Year Plus
Project Traffic Noise Levels, Opening Year Plus Project traffic-generated noise levels on
Project area roadways would range between 65.0 dBA CNEL and 70.8 dBA CNEL at 100 feet
from the centerline, and the Project would result in a maximum increase of 1.4 dBA CNEL
along Highland Avenue. Noise impacts from off-site traffic would be less than significant.
Table 23: Existing and Project Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment Opening Year Opening Year Plus
Project Project Change from
Existing Conditions
Significant
Impact? ADT dBA CNEL1 ADT dBA CNEL1
Highland Avenue
Citrus Avenue to Cypress Avenue 8,495 63.6 11,926 65.0 1.4 No
Cypress Avenue to Sierra Avenue 14,280 65.9 14,738 66.0 0.1 No
Citrus Avenue
SR-210 to Highland Avenue 42,254 70.6 44,541 70.8 0.2 No
Highland Avenue to Walnut Avenue 32,473 69.4 33,159 69.5 0.1 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., October 2021. Refer to Appendix G for traffic noise modeling
results.
The Horizon Year “2040 Without Project” and “2040 Plus Project” scenarios were also
compared. As shown in Table 24, Horizon Year and Horizon Year Plus Project Traffic Noise
Levels, roadway noise levels would range between 67.2 dBA CNEL and 70.8 dBA CNEL at
100 feet from the centerline, and the Project would result in a maximum increase of
0.8 dBA CNEL. As such, the Project would result in an increase of less than 3.0 dBA CNEL
for the roadway segments analyzed and traffic noise. Noise impacts from off-site traffic
would be less than significant in this regard.
Table 24: Horizon Year and Horizon Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Horizon Year
(2040)
Horizon Year (2040)
Plus Project Project Change from
No Build Conditions
Significant
Impact? ADT dBA CNEL1 ADT dBA CNEL1
Slover Avenue
Citrus Avenue to Cypress Avenue 16,200 66.4 19,631 67.2 0.8 No
41 Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, Noise Fundamentals,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm, accessed March 11, 2020.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 160
Table 24: Horizon Year and Horizon Year Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Horizon Year
(2040)
Horizon Year (2040)
Plus Project Project Change from
No Build Conditions
Significant
Impact? ADT dBA CNEL1 ADT dBA CNEL1
Cypress Avenue to Sierra Avenue 21,700 67.7 22,158 67.8 0.1 No
Citrus Avenue
SR-210 to Highland Avenue 42,254 70.6 44,541 70.8 0.2 No
Highland Avenue to Walnut Avenue 32,473 69.4 33,159 69.5 0.1 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level
1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline.
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., October 2021. Refer to Appendix G for traffic noise modeling
results.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact.
Increases in ground-borne vibration levels attributable to the proposed Project would be
primarily associated with short‐term construction‐related activities. The Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction
equipment operations in their 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
Manual. The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and
building damage.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for
construction equipment operations. In general, the FTA architectural damage criterion for
continuous vibrations (i.e., 0.2 in/sec) appears to be conservative. The types of
construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage. Human
annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of
human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or
structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any
cosmetic damage (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This distance can vary
substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer
between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to
vibration generated by construction equipment. For example, for a building that is
constructed with reinforced concrete with no plaster, the FTA guidelines show that a
vibration level of up to 0.20 in/sec is considered safe and would not result in any
construction vibration damage.
Table 25, Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels, lists vibration levels at 25 feet
and 30 feet for typical construction equipment. Ground-borne vibration generated by
construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 161
increases in distance. As indicated in Table 25, based on FTA data, vibration velocities from
typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during Project
construction range from 0.003 to 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity.
Table 25: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels
Equipment Peak Particle Velocity
at 25 Feet (in/sec)
Peak Particle Velocity
at 15 Feet (in/sec)1
Peak Particle Velocity
at 35 Feet (in/sec)1
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.1915 0.0537
Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.1915 0.0537
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.1635 0.0459
Jackhammer 0.035 0.0753 0.0211
Small Bulldozer/Tractors 0.003 0.0065 0.0018
1. Calculated using the following formula: PPVequip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5, where: PPVequip = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the
equipment adjusted for the distance; PPVref = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the Federal Transit
Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018; D = the distance from the equipment to the
receiver.
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.
The nearest structure is a small storage building associated with the liquor store located
approximately 15 feet to the west of the active construction zone. Using the calculation
shown in Table 25, at 15 feet the vibration velocities from construction equipment would
not exceed 0.1915 in/sec PPV, which is below the FTA’s 0.20 in/sec PPV threshold for
building damage. The nearest occupied building is the liquor store located approximately
35 feet from the active construction zone. At 35 feet, the vibration velocities from
construction equipment would not exceed 0.0537 in/sec PPV, which is below the FTA’s
0.10 in/sec PPV annoyance threshold. It is also acknowledged that construction activities
would occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at the point
closest to the nearest structure. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with the
proposed Project would be less than significant.
Once operational, the Project would not be a significant source of groundborne vibration.
Groundborne vibration surrounding the Project currently result from heavy-duty vehicular
travel (e.g., refuse trucks, heavy duty trucks, delivery trucks, and transit buses) on the
nearby local roadways. Due to the rapid drop-off rate of ground-borne vibration and the
short duration of the associated events, vehicular traffic-induced ground-borne vibration
is rarely perceptible beyond the roadway right-of-way, and rarely results in vibration levels
that cause damage to buildings in the vicinity. Impacts would be less than significant in this
regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
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?
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 162
Less than Significant Impact.
The nearest airport to the Project site is the Ontario International Airport located
approximately 10 miles to the southwest. The Project is not within 2.0 miles of a public
airport or within an airport land use plan. Additionally, there are no private airstrips
located within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing
or working in the Project area to excessive airport- or airstrip-related noise levels and no
mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative Construction Noise
The Project’s construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary increase in
ambient noise levels. Construction noise would be periodic and temporary noise impacts that
would cease upon completion of construction activities. The Project would contribute to other
proximate construction project noise impacts if construction activities were conducted
concurrently. However, based on the noise analysis above, the Project’s construction-related
noise impacts would be less than significant following the City of Fontana Municipal Code.
Construction activities at other planned and approved projects near the Project site would be
required to comply with applicable City rules related to noise and would take place during
daytime hours on the days permitted by the applicable Municipal Code, and projects requiring
discretionary City approvals would be required to evaluate construction noise impacts, comply
with the City’s standard conditions of approval, and implement mitigation, if necessary, to
minimize noise impacts. Construction noise impacts are by nature localized. Based on the fact
that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts would be limited to the
Project site and vicinity. Therefore, Project construction would not result in a cumulatively
considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts, assuming such a cumulative impact
existed, and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative Operational Noise
Cumulative Off-Site Traffic Noise
Cumulative noise impacts describe how much noise levels are projected to increase over existing
conditions with the development of the proposed Project and other foreseeable projects.
Cumulative noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on local roadways
due to buildout of the proposed Project and other projects in the vicinity. Cumulative increases
in traffic noise levels were estimated by comparing the Existing and Opening Year Without Project
scenarios to the Opening Year Plus Project scenario. The traffic analysis considers cumulative
traffic from future growth assumed in the transportation model, as well as cumulative projects.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 163
A project’s contribution to a cumulative traffic noise increase would be considered significant
when the combined effect exceeds perception level (i.e., auditory level increase) threshold. The
following criteria is used to evaluate the combined and incremental effects of the cumulative
noise increase.
• Combined Effect. The cumulative with Project noise level (“Opening Year With Project”)
would cause a significant cumulative impact if a 3.0 dB increase over “Existing” conditions
occurs and the resulting noise level exceeds the applicable exterior standard at a sensitive
use. Although there may be a significant noise increase due to the proposed Project in
combination with other related projects (combined effects), it must also be demonstrated
that the Project has a cumulatively considerable incremental effect. In other words, a
significant portion of the noise increase must be due to the proposed Project.
• Incremental Effects. The “Opening Year With Project” causes a 1.0 dBA increase in noise
over the “Opening Year Without Project” noise level.
A significant impact would result only if both the combined and incremental effects criteria have
been exceeded. Noise, by definition, is a localized phenomenon and reduces as distance from the
source increases. Consequently, only the proposed Project and growth due to occur in the
general area would contribute to cumulative noise impacts.
Table 26, Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels identifies the traffic noise effects along roadway
segments in the Project vicinity for “Existing,” “Opening Year Without Project,” and “Opening
Year With Project,” conditions, including incremental and net cumulative impacts.
Table 26: Cumulative Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing
(dBA
CNEL)
Opening
Year
Without
Project
(dBA
CNEL)
Opening
Year With
Project
(dBA CNEL)
Combined
Effects
Incremental
Effects
Cumulatively
Significant
Impact?
Difference In
dBA Between
Existing and
Opening Year
With Project
Difference In dBA
Between
Opening Year
Without Project
and Opening
Year With Project
Slover Avenue
Citrus Avenue to Cypress Avenue 62.7 63.6 65.0 2.3 1.4 No
Cypress Avenue to Sierra Avenue 64.9 65.9 66.0 1.1 0.1 No
Citrus Avenue
SR-210 to Highland Avenue 70.0 70.6 70.8 0.8 0.2 No
Highland Avenue to Walnut Avenue 68.9 69.4 69.5 0.6 0.1 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL= Community Equivalent Noise Level
Source: Based on traffic data provided by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., October 2021. Refer to Appendix B for traffic noise modeling
results.
Table 26 identifies the traffic noise effects along roadway segments in the Project vicinity for
“Existing,” “Opening Year Without Project,” and “Opening Year With Project,” conditions,
including incremental and net cumulative impacts. Table 26 shows the increase for combined
effects and incremental effects and none of the segments meet the criteria for cumulative noise
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 164
increase. The proposed Project would not result in long-term mobile noise impacts based on
project-generated traffic as well as cumulative and incremental noise levels. Therefore, the
proposed Project, in combination with cumulative background traffic noise levels, would result
in a less than significant cumulative impact. The proposed Project’s contribution would not be
cumulatively considerable.
Cumulative Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources of the proposed Project would result in an incremental increase in non-
transportation noise sources in the Project vicinity. However, as discussed above, operational
noise caused by the proposed Project would be less than significant. Similar to the proposed
Project, other planned and approved projects would be required to mitigate for stationary noise
impacts at nearby sensitive receptors, if necessary. As stationary noise sources are generally
localized, there is a limited potential for other projects to contribute to cumulative noise impacts.
No known past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects would combine with the operational
noise levels generated by the Project to increase noise levels above acceptable standards
because each project must comply with applicable City regulations that limit operational noise.
Therefore, the Project, together with other projects, would not create a significant cumulative
impact, and even if there was such a significant cumulative impact, the Project would not make
a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative operational noises.
Given that noise attenuates as it travels away from its source, operational noise impacts from
on-site activities and other stationary sources would be limited to the Project site and vicinity.
Thus, cumulative operational noise impacts from related projects, in conjunction with Project
specific noise impacts, would not be cumulatively significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 165
POPULATION AND HOUSING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the Project:
a) Would the project 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)?
X
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
X
Demographic Setting
According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 2019 Local Profiles
Report, the City had a total population of 212,000 residents and approximately 52,251 homes
with annual growth rate of 1.12%.42 The housing vacancy rate is estimated at 5.3 percent which
is the percentage of all available units (e.g., houses or apartment complexes, that are vacant or
unoccupied at a particular time).43 A low vacancy rate indicates that residents may have difficulty
finding housing within their price range and/or a high supply of vacant units may indicate either
the demand of desired or oversupplied units. A healthy vacancy rate is generally accepted at
seven or eight percent while a low vacancy rate is about two percent. SCAG projects the city to
grow in population to approximately 280,900 persons by 2040, that is a growth of 80,700
persons.44
a) Would the project 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)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Project would require short-term
construction workforce and a permanent operational workforce which could potentially
induce population in the Project area.
Total jobs in the city were 55,448 in 2017 (with largest job sector being the Education
Sector at 28.4 percent). Jobs in the City are anticipated to grow to 70,800 by 2040.45 The
42 Southern California Association of Governments. (2019). Profile of the City of Fontana. Available at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/fontana_localprofile.pdf?1606014851. Accessed March 17, 2021.
43 State of California Department of Finance. (2020). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates – Organized by Geography. Excel document
available at http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/. Accessed March 17, 2021.
44 Southern California Association of Governments. 2016. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS). Available at http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx, accessed on March 17, 2021.
45 Southern California Association of Governments. 2016. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS). Available at http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 166
Project-related increase in employment would be minimal in comparison to the
anticipated increase in the SCAG Demographics and Growth Forecast for the region.
According to January 2021 data from the California Employment Development
Department (EDD), the City of Fontana has an 8.2 percent unemployment rate, which is
slightly lower than the County’s 8.6 percent unemployment rate46, and higher than the 6.8
percent National unemployment rate47. Therefore, the Project’s temporary and
permanent employment requirements could likely be met by the City’s and County existing
employment needs without people needing to relocate into the region due to the City’s
high unemployment rate. The Project would not stimulate an unplanned population
growth above what is assumed in local and regional land use plans. Therefore, impacts
associated with population growth would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Project site is vacant land and therefore, would not displace substantial
numbers of existing people or housing. No impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
46 EDD. January 2021. Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Placed (CDP) January 2021 – Preliminary Data Not Seasonally
Adjusted. Available at https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-cities-and-census-areas.html.
Accessed March 17, 2021.
47 EDD. January 2021. California and Los Angeles County and United States CPS Labor Force Data 2020 Benchmark. Available at
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/calpr.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 167
PUBLIC SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the Project:
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
a) Would the Project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Buildout of the Project would consequently increase the
demand for fire protection services in Fontana. However, the Project would be developed
in accordance with applicable city, county, and state regulations, codes, and policies
pertaining to fire hazard reduction and protection. More specifically, the Project would be
developed in accordance with the latest California 2019 Fire Code and 2019 Building
Standards Code. All associated Project buildings would be equipped with emergency
sprinkler systems and fire detectors. Water lines with fire-sufficient flows supplied by FWC
would be connected to fire hydrants placed in accordance with Fontana Fire Protection
District (FFPD) standards. The applicant is also required to pay Development Impact Fees
(DIF) pursuant to Section 11-2 of the City’s Municipal Code which would help offset any
additional fire protection demands.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 168
Fire protection and emergency response services would be provided for the Project site by
the FFPD. The FFPD operates seven fire stations. Fire Station 78 at 7110 Citrus Avenue,
Fontana is within a 0.8-mile south of the Project site.
According to the Fontana Fire District Strategic Plan 201848, Action Item #9, would
construct Station 81 in the Vicinity of Casa Grande Avenue and Sierra Avenue, which would
be located approximately 1.8-miles northeast. The FFPD is currently working with a
developer to acquire a finished lot for the construction of Station 81. The FFPD will
continue to gather funds through its Fire Facilities Fees until such a future time as more
development in the area warrants the acquisition of property and construction of Station
81. Development of Fire Station 81 would decrease the response time since it would
provide additional fire suppression support to the general area. With compliance of the
applicable City, and state regulations and codes, potential impacts on fire services from
implementation of the Project would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
ii) Police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project buildout would consequently increase the demand
for police protection services in the city and would be served by the City of Fontana Police
Department (FPD) at 17005 Upland Avenue, Fontana, located approximately 2.7 miles
southeast of the Project site. The FPD currently has 188 sworn officers providing law
enforcement services 24 hours a day, 365 days a year with a “one officer to 1,000
residents” ratio.
The Project would provide safety features and main emergency access Interstate 210
(I-210 via Citrus Avenue to the north. The Project would also comply with the FPD’s
Standard Building Security Specifications and Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design principles (C.P.T.E.D) which include natural surveillance, natural access control,
territorial reinforcements and maintenance and management. The applicant is also
required to pay Development Impact Fees toward police services per the City’s Municipal
Code.
With compliance of the applicable specifications and design principles pursuant to the
FPD’s C.P.T.E.D, continued maintenance of an approximately one officer to 1,000 resident
ratio, and the payment of associated DIF, additional police services are not necessary and
potential impacts on police protection due to implementation of the Project would be less
than significant.
48 City of Fontana. 2018. Fontana Fire Protection District Strategic Plan 2018. Accessible at
file:///C:/Users/ruben.salas/Downloads/Fontana_Fire_Protection_District_Strategic_Plan_2018%20(1).pdf. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 169
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
iii) Schools?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is in the Fontana Unified School District. A.B
Miller High School is located 0.8-mile south from the Project site. As shown in Threshold,
Population and Housing above, the City’s population is anticipated to grow to 280,900
residents by 2040 as anticipated at a regional level. Although the Project could draw new
residents due to short-term construction and long-term operation, population growth is
accounted for in the City’s General Plan and the Project would be consistent with the land
use and zoning designations. Furthermore, because the Project is not proposing housing,
no new school facilities would be anticipated to be required.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
iv) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would not significantly induce population growth
that would require the need to develop additional parks. Therefore, a less than significant
would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
v) Other public facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. Other public facilities in the area would not be adversely
impacted because the Project would not produce a substantial increase in population that
would require additional public facilities.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project combined with other future projects planned in the area would collectively
increase demand for government services including police, fire, schools, and parks. Each
reasonably foreseeable action approved by the City would be consistent with the goals, policies,
and objectives of the GP and of each respective jurisdiction. Similarly, all cumulative projects are
required to demonstrate the availability of services or mitigate accordingly. Therefore, the
present, and future projects in the City would not result in a cumulative impact related to the
provision of public services with implementation of any project specific mitigation measures and
payment of associated DIF.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 170
RECREATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
16. RECREATION. Would the Project:
a) Would the Project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
X
a) Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
No Impact. The Project would not significantly induce population growth that would
require the need to develop additional parks. Therefore, a less than significant would
occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
b) Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact. The proposed Project does not include, nor does it require the construction of
recreational areas. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The Project would not result in an increased use of recreational facilities nor requires
construction or expansion of existing recreational facilities. Therefore, no cumulative impacts on
recreational facilities would result from Project implementation.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 171
TRANSPORTATION
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
17. TRANSPORTATION. Would the Project:
a) Would the project conflict with a program plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency
access?
X
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared for this Project in October 2021 by Kimley-Horn and
Associates. The traffic analysis is included in this document as Appendix H. Additionally, a Shared
Parking Assessment Memorandum was also prepared by Kimley-Horn and it is provided as
Appendix I, and the results are summarized herein.
a) Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and
zoning designations, and as such, the Project is consistent with the goals and policies for
the type of development proposed by the Project.
There is nothing about the design of the proposed Project that would conflict with the
circulation system, bicycle, mass transit, or pedestrian facilities. Additionally, the Project
would be required to comply with any applicable traffic and circulation regulation set forth
by the City. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)?
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 172
Less Than Significant Impact. Section 15064.3, Determining the Significance of
Transportation Impacts, of the CEQA Guidelines describes specific considerations for
evaluating a project’s transportation impacts. Section 15064.3(b) includes criteria for
analyzing transportation impacts. The VMT, which focuses on the overall miles traveled by
vehicles within a region, is the new metric for transportation analysis and has replaced
automobile delay (Level of Service -LOS), which is no longer used as a criterion for
determining a significant environmental effect under CEQA (City of Fontana, 2020). For
land use projects, “Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) exceeding an applicable threshold of
significance may indicate a significant impact.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3). On June 9,
2020, the City of Fontana adopted VMT Thresholds for determining transportation impacts
pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines. This adoption was required by Senate Bill (SB) 743 and
the recent changes to Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines. For the purpose of CEQA
analysis of VMT and traffic impacts associated with projects proposed in the City of
Fontana, the city also adopted Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for VMT and Level of
Service Assessment (City of Fontana, October 2020). The City’s Traffic Impact Analysis
Guidelines for VMT Assessment provides project screening criteria and guidance for
analysis of VMT assessments. The following VMT screening criterion was utilized for the
proposed project.
Vehicle Miles Traveled Screening
This analysis was prepared to document the VMT analysis for the Fontana Square Project
following the OPR Technical Advisory (December 2018) and the San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority (SBCTA) Recommended VMT Guidelines.
Section 15064.3(b) Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts states the following:
Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance
may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an
existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should
be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease
vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be
presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact. Screening thresholds are
broken into the following steps:
1. Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
2. Low VMT Area Screening
3. Low Project Type Screening
4. Project Net Daily Trip Less Than 500 ADT Screening
A land use project needs only meet one of the above screening thresholds to be presumed
to result in not a significant impact under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 173
OPR provides details on appropriate screening thresholds that can be used to identify
when a proposed land use project is anticipated to result in a less-than-significant impact
without conducting a more detailed level analysis.
Transit Priority Area (TPA) Screening
As described in the OPR Guidelines, projects located within half mile from an existing major
transit stop or within half of a mile from an existing stop along a high-quality transit
corridor can be screened out. Based on San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
(SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool, the Project is not located in a Transit Priority Area (TPA). As
such, the TPA screening threshold is not met.
Low VMT Area Screening
The Project is in a Low VMT zone. Based on the SBCTA VMT Screening tool, a project is
considered to be below the County VMT threshold if it is at least 15% below the County
VMT threshold, which as shown in Table 27, SBCTA VMT Screening Tool Results, it is 33.2.
As such, 15% below the County VMT threshold would be 28.2, as shown below
Table 27 – SBCTA VMT Screening Tool Results
Threshold Option Jurisdiction
VMT
(15%) VMT
Threshold
Project
VMT
Potentially
Significant?
OD VMT per Service
Population 33.2 28.2 25.7 No
As noted in Table 27 above, the project’s VMT is 25.7, which is below the VMT threshold
of 28.2 which would satisfy the City’s requirement of the project being in a low VMT area,
as the project traffic analysis zone (TAZ) VMT is at least 15% below the County’s VMT
average.
Land Use Type Screening
The OPR and SBCTA VMT Guidelines identify that Project types falling under the screening
criteria include the following:
• K-12 Schools
• Local-serving retail less than 50,000 square feet
• Local parks
• Daycare centers
• Local serving gas stations
• Local serving banks
• Local serving hotels (e.g., non-destination hotels)
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 174
• Student housing Projects on or adjacent college campuses
• Local-serving assembly uses, Community Institutions
• Local serving community colleges
• Affordable or supportive housing, Assisted living facilities, Senior housing
• Projects generating less than 110 daily vehicle trips
Based on the Project types above, all Project land uses have been identified as having the
presumption of a less-than-significant impact. The proposed Holiday Inn Express Hotel and
Staybridge Suites are expected to operate as local serving hotels. The proposed banquet
hall is expected to operate as local serving assembly use. The proposed 5,000 SF sit-down
restaurant and 3,885 SF In-N-Out Burger are less than 50,000 SF and are expected to
operate as local-serving retail. They are not anticipated to lead to longer trips, thus
reducing or maintaining regional VMT. As such, the Low Project Type Screening threshold
is met.
Based on the Low VMT Area and Low Project Type Screening criteria, the Project may be
presumed to create a less-than-significant transportation impact.
Project Net Daily Trips Less Than 500 ADT Screening
Projects that generate fewer than 500 average daily trips (ADT) would not cause a
substantial increase in the total citywide or regional VMT and are therefore presumed to
have a less-than significant impact on VMT. The Project is estimated to generate more than
500 average daily trips. As such, the Project Net Daily Trip Less Than 500 ADT screening
threshold is not met.
However, based on the Low VMT Area and Low Project Type Screening criteria, the Project
may be presumed to create a less-than-significant transportation impact.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
No Impact. The design features of the proposed Project do not incorporate any hazardous
or incompatible features. Vehicular access for the Project site would be via three driveways
on Highland Avenue and one full-movement driveway on Catawba Avenue. The driveways
on Highland Avenue would consist of one unsignalized full-movement driveway (across
from Jacaranda Avenue), one full-movement signalized driveway (across from Tokay
Avenue), and one unsignalized right-in-right-out (RIRO) driveway (across from Cherimoya
Avenue).
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 175
The drive aisles/fire lanes within the Project site have been designed to be both efficient
and safe for vehicular traffic. Additionally, the Project would not be an incompatible use,
nor would it be hazardous due to its design. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: No impact.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Response (c), above. Project design features and
ingress and egress are developed to comply with all relevant emergency regulations.
Additionally, construction of the Project is not expected to require road closures or
otherwise adversely affect emergency access around the site perimeter.
As a standard practice, if road closures (complete or partial) were necessary, the Police
and Fire Departments would be notified of the construction schedule and any required
detours would allow emergency vehicles to use alternate routes for emergency response.
Additionally, as noted in the Shared Parking Assessment, the shared parking synergies, and
fluctuations in peak parking patterns on a monthly, daily, and hourly basis, the parking
demand for the combination of land uses would be accommodated with the proposed
parking supply and emergency access would not be affected. The impact on emergency
access would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project would not result in a significant VMT impact because the project is
anticipated to generate VMT levels 15 percent below the Jurisdiction VMT Threshold, and thus,
would also not result in a cumulative VMT impact.
Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to transportation would result from Project
implementation.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 176
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the Project:
a) 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:
i) 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)?
X
ii) 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 Resource Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe?
X
a) 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:
i) 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)?
ii) 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 Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 177
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The city completed the Assembly Bill (AB)
52 tribal consultation for the proposed Project. In March 2021, the city initiated tribal
consultation with interested California Native American tribes consistent with AB52. The
city requested consultation from the following tribes: the Gabrieleño Band of Mission
Indians – Kizh Nation (Gabrieleño), San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (San Manuel),
Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, and the San
Gabriel Band of Mission Indians.
As part of the cultural resources research conducted, records search results conducted by
SCCIC staff using data on file at California State University, Fullerton indicate that 24
previous cultural resources assessments have been conducted within a 0.5-mile radius of
the Project site, resulting in the recordation of 24 historic-period cultural resources. Of
these, one cultural resources assessment (SB-2621) has assessed the Project site and no
cultural resources have been previously identified within the Project site. The records
search results are summarized in Table 13.
A utility alignment (KIM2104-H-1) was identified by the Cultural Resources Assessment.
However, based on the significance criteria discussed in Section 5, Cultural Resources, the
alignment does not meet any of the significance criteria and does not qualify as a historical
resource. As such, the Project site is not 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).
As part of the Tribal Consultation process, Gabrieleño requested further consultation with
the city to discuss the site’s potential to host tribal cultural resources. Consultation
occurred on March 15, 2021. At the conclusion of the consultation, the Gabrieleño Band
of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation provided information supporting the need for the
implementation of MMs due to the potential for tribal cultural resources to be discovered
during site’s soil excavation. With implementation of MMs TCR-1 through TCR-3, impacts
to tribal cultural resources would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM TCR-1 Retain a Native American Monitor to Commencement of Ground-Disturbing
Activities
A. The project applicant/lead agency shall retain a Native American Monitor from or
approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation. The monitor
shall be retained prior to the commencement of any “ground-disturbing activity”
for the subject project at all project locations (i.e., both on-site and any off-site
locations that are included in the project description/definition and/or required in
connection with the project, such as public improvement work). “Ground-
disturbing activity” shall include, but is not limited to, demolition, pavement
removal, potholing, auguring, grubbing, tree removal, boring, grading, excavation,
drilling, and trenching.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 178
B. A copy of the executed monitoring agreement shall be submitted to the lead
agency prior to the earlier of the commencement of any ground-disturbing activity,
or the issuance of any permit necessary to commence a ground-disturbing activity.
C. The monitor will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of
the relevant ground-disturbing activities, the type of construction activities
performed, locations of ground-disturbing activities, soil types, cultural-related
materials, and any other facts, conditions, materials, or discoveries of significance
to the Tribe. Monitor logs will identify and describe any discovered TCRs, including
but not limited to, Native American cultural and historical artifacts, remains, places
of significance, etc., (collectively, tribal cultural resources, or “TCR”), as well as any
discovered Native American (ancestral) human remains and burial goods. Copies of
monitor logs will be provided to the project applicant/lead agency upon written
request to the Tribe.
D. On-site tribal monitoring shall conclude upon the latter of the following (1) written
confirmation to the Kizh from a designated point of contact for the project
applicant/lead agency that all ground-disturbing activities and phases that may
involve ground-disturbing activities on the project site or in connection with the
project are complete; or (2) a determination and written notification by the Kizh to
the project applicant/lead agency that no future, planned construction activity
and/or development/construction phase at the project site possesses the potential
to impact Kizh TCRs.
E. Upon discovery of any TCRs, all construction activities in the immediate vicinity of
the discovery shall cease (i.e., not less than the surrounding 50 feet) and shall not
resume until the discovered TCR has been fully assessed by the Kizh monitor and/or
Kizh archaeologist. The Kizh will recover and retain all discovered TCRs in the form
and/or manner the Tribe deems appropriate, in the Tribe’s sole discretion, and for
any purpose the Tribe deems appropriate, including for educational, cultural
and/or historic purposes.
MM TCR-2 Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects
A. Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an
inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal
completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in Public Resources
Code Section 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute.
B. If Native American human remains and/or grave goods discovered or recognized
on the project site, then all construction activities shall immediately cease. Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal
material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and all ground-
disturbing activities shall immediately halt and shall remain halted until the coroner
has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 179
remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe they are Native
American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native
American Heritage Commission, and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 shall
be followed.
C. Human remains and grave/burial goods shall be treated alike per California Public
Resources Code section 5097.98(d)(1) and (2).
D. Construction activities may resume in other parts of the project site at a minimum
of 200 feet away from discovered human remains and/or burial goods, if the Kizh
determines in its sole discretion that resuming construction activities at that
distance is acceptable and provides the project manager express consent of that
determination (along with any other mitigation measures the Kizh monitor and/or
archaeologist deems necessary). (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f).)
E. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment for
discovered human remains and/or burial goods. Any historic archaeological
material that is not Native American in origin (non-TCR) shall be curated at a public,
non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural
History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an
institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the
archaeological material, it shall be offered to a local school or historical society in
the area for educational purposes.
F. Any discovery of human remains/burial goods shall be kept confidential to prevent
further disturbance.
MM TCR-3 Procedures for Burials and Funerary Remains:
A. As the Most Likely Descendant (“MLD”), the Koo-nas-gna Burial Policy shall be
implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than
human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but
were not limited to, the preparation of the soil for burial, the burial of funerary
objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains.
B. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the discovery
location shall be treated as a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be
created.
C. The prepared soil and cremation soils are to be treated in the same manner as bone
fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part
of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been
placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other
items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also
be considered as associated funerary objects. Cremations will either be removed
in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure complete recovery of all sacred
materials.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 180
D. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and
recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a
steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation
opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour
guard shall be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to
recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If
the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed.
E. In the event preservation in place is not possible despite good faith efforts by the
project applicant/developer and/or landowner, before ground-disturbing activities
may resume on the project site, the landowner shall arrange a designated site
location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human
remains and/or ceremonial objects.
F. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored
using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and
objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if
possible. These items shall be retained and reburied within six months of recovery.
The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed
upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a stie to be protected in perpetuity.
There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered.
G. The Tribe will work closely with the project’s qualified archaeologist to ensure that
the excavation is treated carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is
approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be prepared and shall include (at a
minimum) detailed descriptive notes and sketches. All data recovery-related forms
of documentation shall be approved in advance by the Tribe. If any data recovery
is performed, once complete, a final report shall be submitted to the Tribe and the
NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any
invasive and/or destructive diagnostics on human remains.
Mitigation Measures: MMs TCR-1, TCR-2, and TCR-3.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigation.
Cumulative Impacts
The proposed Project would not result in tribal cultural resources impacts beyond what was
contemplated for the Project site. Therefore, no cumulative impacts related to tribal cultural
resources would result from Project implementation.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 181
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
19. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the Project:
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
x
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry
years?
x
c) Would the project 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?
x
d) Would the project 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 waste reduction goals?
x
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
x
A Water Supply Assessment Letter was provided in support of the Project by the San Gabriel
Valley Water Company, dated November 8, 2021, and provided as Appendix J. Additionally, a
Sewer Availability Letter was provided by the City of Fontana in support of the Project dated
November 24, 2021, and provided as Appendix K.
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact.
Utilities necessary for the Project site are as follows:
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 182
• Electricity –Southern California Edison (SCE)
• Water – Fontana Water Company (FWC)
• Sewer – Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) via City of Fontana
• Storm Drain – City of Fontana and San Bernardino Flood Control District
• Solid Waste – Burrtec Waste Industries
• Telecommunications – AT&T and Time Warner Cable
• Gas – Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas)
Wastewater
The Project would receive wastewater services from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency
(IEUA). IEUA provides wastewater treatment service throughout the city. The IEUA
currently operates five regional wastewater treatment facilities: Regional Plant (RP-) No. 1,
RP-2, RP-4, RP-5, and Carbon Canyon Wastewater Reclamation Facility. IEUA’s four RPs
have a total combined design treatment capacity of approximately 86 million gallons per
day (MGD). Currently, all four reclamation facilities treat a total combine average daily
flow of about 60 MGD of wastewater that travel through a system of regional trunk and
interceptor sewers that are owned and operated by IEUA. Wastewater is generally
diverted from one RP to another to avoid overflowing at one RP. Local sewer systems are
owned and operated by local agencies.
RP-4 treats local wastewater generated by the Cities of Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga
and the County of San Bernardino. IEUA’s RP-4 is responsible for treating local wastewater
generated by the city and is located near the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and 6th
Street in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. RP-4 treats an average flow of five MGD of
wastewater and is operated in conjunction with RP-1 to provide recycled water to users.
RP-4 has recently undergone an expansion to increase the design hydraulic domestic
sewage (wastewater) treatment capacity to 14 MGD.
Water
Water services will be provided by the Fontana Water Company (FWC) and would be
subject to FWC’s 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). FWC’s supply sources
come from local groundwater, and local and imported surface water. Water demand will
vary depending on the number of customers, but FWC’s 2015 has taken future
development (including the Project) in account to year 2040 and indicates that no
additional or new water facilities will be needed. FWC also purchases water from other
Water Service providers if needed.
The Project applicant is also required to pay a water service connection fee and deposit,
monthly water service charge, water commodity consumption charge, and any surcharge,
penalty or reconnection fee as established and adopted by the city council pursuant to
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 183
Fontana Municipal Code Chapter 31, Section 31-3. In addition, the Project applicant is
required to complete a water-efficient landscape plan pursuant to Chapter 28, Article IV,
to reduce water consumption and run-off impacts. Therefore, the Project’s use of water
services would be less than significant.
Electricity, Natural Gas, Telecommunications
Southern California Edison will provide electricity services to the Project; SoCal Gas will
provide natural gas services to the Project; and AT&T or Time Warner will provide
telecommunication services to the Project. Implementation of the Project would not
require the relocation existing utility facilities nor create the need to construct additional
electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities to meet the Projects utility
demand.
Overall impacts regarding wastewater, water, electricity, natural gas, and
telecommunications would be less than significant without mitigation.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project would be served with potable water
by FWC, which is anticipated to be 15.87 million gallons of water per year (m/gal/yr).
Domestic water supplies from this service provider are reliant on groundwater Domestic
water supplies from this service provider are reliant on groundwater from the Chino Basin,
Rialto-Colton Basin, and No Man’s Land Basin. FWC also relies on surface water sourced
from Lytle Creek and imported surface water from IEUA and San Bernardino Valley
Municipal Water District. Based on available information, FWC is projected to have a water
production potential of 29,998 to 42,271 AFY (acre-feet) in a projected single dry year, and
37,757 to 53,204 AFY in projected multiple dry years, while only utilizing approximately 62
to 72 percent of groundwater supplies.49 FWC also receives surface water supplies,
imported water supplies, and recycled water supplies that could be used if necessary.
Therefore, the Project would have sufficient water supplies during the foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years due to FWC’s excess water supply.
Additionally, the San Gabriel Water Company provided a Water Supply Assessment Letter
(dated November 8, 2021) noting that there are sufficient water resources to supply the
proposed Project. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
49 FWC. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan, (Amended December 2017). Available at https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/San-Gabriel-Fontana_Amended-Final-December-2017-1.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 184
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c) Would the project 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The original Project would consume 15.87 m/gal/yr. As
discussed above, the IEUA would have sufficient wastewater treatment facilities and
capacity to service the Project. The Project would also be required to develop
appropriately sized water and wastewater conveyance facilities to and from the Project
site. Additionally, the City of Fontana provided a sewer availability letter noting that the
Project site would have sewer facilities availability. Thus, less than significant impacts
would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project 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 waste
reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate solid waste
during the temporary, short-term construction phase, as well as the operational phase,
but it is not anticipated to result in inadequate landfill capacity. According to CalRecycles’s
Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates for the proposed Project are shown below:
Hotel: 2lb/room/day
• Holiday Inn and Staybridge Suites = 2 lb/184/day
= 368 lbs./day
Fast food Restaurant: 17 lb./employee/day
• Inn-N-Out = 17 lb./30/day
= 510 lbs./day
Restaurant: 0.005 lb./sq.ft./day
• Restaurant (Not Determined) = 0.005 lb./3,750 sq.ft./day
= 18.75 lbs./day
Other Services: 3.12 lb./100 sq.ft./day
• Banquet Hall = 3.12 lb./ (28,000 sq.ft./100 sq.ft.)/day
= 3.12 lb./ 280sq.ft./day
= 874 lb./day
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 185
Total anticipated solid waste is approximately 1,771 lbs. per day.50 This equates to
approximately (0.8 tons) of waste per day from the Project operations. Solid waste service
for the city is provided by the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill located in the northern portion
of the city. This facility handles solid waste from mixed municipal,
construction/demolition, industrial, and tires. According to CalRecycle, the landfill has a
maximum throughput of 7,500 tons per day. This landfill has a maximum permitted
capacity of approximately 101.3 million cubic yards, and the landfill has a remaining
capacity of approximately 67.52 million cubic yards. For these reasons, the proposed
Project’s solid waste disposal needs can be met by the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed Project is required to adhere to City
ordinances and the County of San Bernardino, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan with
respect to waste reduction and recycling. This will be done through the Project design
features and improvements and implementation of source control best management
practices (BMPs) that aim to reduce solid waste generation and run-off via stormwater.
Since the Project would adhere with all applicable regional and local ordinances and would
reduce waste production through Project design features and BMPs, impacts would be less
than significant without mitigation.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
The context for assessing cumulative impacts to utilities and service systems varies depending on
the service area and capacity of the utility which may vary from the City, San Bernardino County,
or (in terms of water) even statewide. Long-term maintenance and potential expansion of water,
wastewater, flood control, and solid waste disposal facilities will be required as the region
continues to grow and existing infrastructure ages. Development of public utility infrastructure
is part of an extensive planning process involving utility providers and jurisdictions with
discretionary review authority. The coordination process associated with the preparation of
development and infrastructure plans is intended to ensure that adequate resources are
available to serve both individual projects and cumulative demand for resources and
infrastructure as a result of cumulative growth and development in the area. Each individual
project is subject to review for utility capacity to avoid unanticipated interruptions in service or
50 CalRecycle. 1992. Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Accessed November 18, 2020. Available at
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/WasteCharacterization/General/Rates,
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 186
inadequate supplies. Coordination with the utility companies would allow for the provision of
utility service to the proposed Project and other developments. The Project and other planned
projects are subject to connection and service fees to assist in facility expansion and service
improvements triggered by an increase in demand. Utility providers currently impose
development impact fees, connection fees, and service fees designed to maintain and
incrementally expand infrastructure to meet existing and growing demand. Future development
in the Project vicinity and throughout the region would be subject to such fees in accordance
with applicable ordinances and service master plans.51
The analysis provided above indicated that proposed Project would have a less than significant
impact with respect to utilities/service systems. The Project would require water and wastewater
infrastructure, as well as solid waste disposal for building facility construction and operation.
Since the Project would not create a significant impact on utilities and services, and all future
projects require utility planning and coordination activities described above, no significant
cumulative utility impacts are anticipated.
51 City of Fontana. (2015). Fontana Forward General Plan 2015-2035; Draft EIR; Page 7-7. Accessed September 9, 2020. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact-Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 187
WILDFIRE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
20. WILDFIRE. If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, would the Project:
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
b) Would the project, 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?
X
c) Would the project 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 or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
X
d) Would the project 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?
X
Wildfire Hazard
CAL FIRE’s Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) in Local Responsibility Areas Map shows
that a small portion of southern Fontana, and northern portions of the city near the base of the
San Bernardino Mountains are listed as a VHFHSZ area. These areas where human development
meets undeveloped wildland also known as Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas have high
potential for both natural and human-caused fires to occur that can result in loss of life and
property. These factors, combined with natural weather conditions common to the area,
including periods of drought, high temperatures, low relative humidity, and periodic winds, can
result in frequent and sometimes catastrophic fires. The remainder of the city is urbanized and
generally built out with established commercial and residential development.52
a) Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
52 City of Fontana. (2018). Local Hazard Mitigation Plan – Wildfire Hazards Profile. Available at https://fontana.org/3196/Local-Hazard-
Mitigation-Plan-LHMP. Accessed March .
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 188
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
Threshold (f). As noted in Response (f), the Project would not impact an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. In case of a fire emergency, the
San Bernardino County Fire Station No. 78, located approximately 0.8-miles south of the
site would be the first responder to the site. As previously noted, the Project would not
impact roadways and no closures that could obstruct traffic are anticipated to occur. As
such, it is not anticipated that the Project would impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan. A less than significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
b) Would the project, 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are seven fire station in the city, a Hazardous Materials
response team, and firefighters with special expertise in wildfires. According to the
General Plan, most of the wildfires in Fontana have historically occurred in northwest
Fontana, with occasional fires in the Jurupa Hills. Northwest Fontana has high chaparral
vegetation, steep slopes, and is subject to hot Santana winds blowing down the Cajon Pass.
The Jurupa Hills have high grasses and steep slopes. Since 1986, the City has established a
Fire Hazard Overlay District in sections of North Fontana and open space areas in South
Fontana to reduce risk from wildfire. In case of a fire, the Project site would be adequately
served by the fire department.
Finally, as noted in Response (g), Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, the Project
site is not located in either a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ), High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone (HFHSZ), or Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone (MFHSZ) as
designated in the VHFHSZ Map.53 As such, a less than significant impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
c) Would the project 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 or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would be in an area that is developed with
similar commercial uses to the north, and with residential uses to the west and south.
Electricity, water, and other utilities necessary have been contacted to service the Project
53 CalFire. 2021. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414. Accessed March 16, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 189
site. All proposed Project components would be located within the boundaries of the
Project site underground, and impacts associated with the development of the Project
within are analyzed throughout this document. The Project does not propose off-site
improvements and the city is responsible for implementing the mitigation goals and
actions as listed in Section 1.0 above. The City of Fontana Fire Department will review all
plans for adequate fire suppression (California Fire Code Chapter 9), fire access (California
Fire Code Chapter 5), and emergency evacuation (California Fire Code Chapter 4) as part
of the City’s review process to ensure compliance with the California Fire Code, as adopted
by the City of Fontana.
The Project would also adhere to Section 30-243. - Public safety: (a) Emergency access,
which states that emergency vehicles shall be incorporated into Project design in
accordance with the Uniform Fire Code and (b) Fire hazards. The Project would also adhere
to the City’s Utilities Municipal Code which states that (1) Temporary overhead power and
telephone facilities are permitted only during construction and (2) All utilities including,
but not limited to drainage systems, sewers, gas lines, water lines, and electrical,
telephone, and communications wires and equipment shall be installed and maintained
underground. Refer to Exhibit 4, Project Site Plan. Placement, location, and screening of
utilities of any kind which cannot be installed underground and must be placed above
ground for function and safety reasons require written approval by the Director of
Community Development prior to any administrative or discretionary approval as stated
in the City’s Municipal Code. Adherence to standard City Municipal Code and California
Fire Code would reduce potential impacts to a level of less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
d) Would the project 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above in threshold b), the Project site is not in
a VHFHSZ, as identified by CAL FIRE and not located near steep slopes or hillsides. The
Project would implement retaining walls and a storm water storage/management system
to decrease the release of stormwater running off the site; therefore, the proposed Project
site would not expose people to downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is required.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact.
Cumulative Impacts
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 190
The proposed Project and surrounding area are not subject to natural wildfires, as identified by
CAL FIRE. Therefore, the project would not cumulatively result in the incremental effects to
wildfire that could be compounded or increased when considered together with similar effects
from other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative
impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 191
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. Does the Project:
a) Would the project 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?
X
b) Does the project 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)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X
a) Would the project 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?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. All impacts to the environment,
including impacts to habitat for fish and wildlife species, fish and wildlife populations, plant
and animal communities, rare and endangered plants and animals, and historical and pre‐
historical resources were evaluated as part of this IS/MND in their respective sections.
Where impacts were determined to be potentially significant, mitigation measures have
been imposed to reduce those impacts to less‐than‐significant levels. As such, with
incorporation of MM BIO-1, potential impacts to migratory birds would be reduced to less
than significant, incorporation of MM CUL-1 would reduce impacts to historical and
archaeological resources, and incorporation of MM GEO-1 would reduce impacts to
paleontological resources. With implementation of the previously noted MMs, the Project
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 192
would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment and impacts would be less
than significant.
Mitigation Measures: MM BIO-1, CUL-1, and GEO-1.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigations incorporated.
b) Does the project 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)?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed throughout this IS/MND,
implementation of the proposed Project is not anticipated to cause a cumulative impact in
the immediate and surrounding area. In all instances where the proposed project has the
potential to contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to the environment, MMs
have been imposed to reduce potential effects to less than significant levels. As such, with
incorporation of the MMs GHG-1, GHG-2, GHG-3, and GHG-4, the project would reduce
potential significant greenhouse gas effects. Additionally, the project would MMs HYD-1,
HYD-2, and HYD-3 to reduce water quality impacts.
Mitigation Measures: MM GHG-1 through GHG-4 and HYD-1 through HYD-3.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigations incorporated.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project’s potential to result in
environmental effects that could adversely affect human beings, either directly or
indirectly, has been discussed throughout this IS/MND in each respective section. No
portion of the proposed Project is anticipated to have or cause a cumulative environmental
effect that would cause substantial effects on human beings. A less than significant impact
is anticipated to occur.
Mitigation Measures: MM GHG-1 through GHG-4.
Level of Significance: Less than significant impact with mitigations incorporated.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 193
5.0 REFERENCES
BCR Consulting LLC. (2020). Cultural Resources Assessment; Results. Accessed
September 9, 2020. Refer to Appendix C for more information.
BCR Consulting LLC. (2021). Cultural Resources Assessment; Methodology. Accessed
October 2021. Refer to Appendix C for more information.
CalFire. 2021. California Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/789d5286736248f69c4515c04f58f414. Accessed
March 16, 2021.
California Air Resources Board, California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed
December 9, 2021. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
California Air Resources Board, Climate Change Scoping Plan, 2008.
California Department of Conservation. (2020). Important Farmland Finder. Retrieved from:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed March 14, 2021.
California Energy Commission, 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Frequently Asked
Questions, Available at:
https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/title24/2019standards/documents/Title_24_2019_Building_
Standards_FAQ_ada.pdf, Accessed March 4, 2021.
California Energy Commission, 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency, Accessed March 4, 2021.
California Energy Commission, California Energy Demand 2018-2030 Revised Forecast, Figure 49
Historical and Projected Baseline Consumption SCE Planning Area, Available at:
https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=223244, Accessed
November 29, 2021.
California Gas and Electric Utilities, 2020 California Gas Report, Southern California Gas
Company Annual Gas Supply 2020-2035 Table 1-SCG, Available at:
https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/2020-
10/2020_California_Gas_Report_Joint_Utility_Biennial_Comprehensive_Filing.pdf,
Accessed November 29, 2021.
California Geological Survey (CGS). (2020). Data Viewer. Available at
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/ Accessed March 14, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 194
California Geological Survey (CGS). (2020). Data Viewer. Available at
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/DataViewer/ Accessed March 14, 2021.
Caltrans. (2011) District 3 – Scenic Highway Program. Accessed March 11, 2021. Available at
https://dot.ca.gov/caltrans-near-me/district-3/d3-programs/d3-maintenance/d3-scenic-
hwy-
program#:~:text=California%27s%20Scenic%20Highway%20Program%20was%20create
d%20by%20the,Streets%20and%20Highway%20Code%2C%20Section%20260%20et%20
seq.
City of Fontana, General Plan, 2018.
City of Fontana. (2018). Fontana Forward General Plan - Draft Environmental Impact Report;
LHMP page 61. Accessed September 14, 2020. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact-
Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update
City of Fontana. (2018). General Plan Land Use Map. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26777/Land-Use-Map---Exhibit-158.
Accessed on July 15, 2020.
City of Fontana. (2019). City of Fontana Municipal Code; Section 30-494. Accessed March 12,
2021. Available at
https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/zoning_and_development_code?nodeI
d=CH30ZODECO_ARTVICOMIEZODI
City of Fontana. (2019). Zoning District Map. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/30623/Zoning-District-Map. Accessed
on July 15, 2020.
City of Fontana. 2015 – 2035 General Plan Update. Chapter 11, Noise and Safety - Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, page 11.7.
City of Fontana. 2015 – 2035 General Plan Update. Exhibit 9.7 - Truck Routes. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/28271/Complete-Document---
Approved-General-Plan-Documents-11-13-2018. Accessed on March 16, 2021.
City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/27141/HMP-Fontana-2017-Final,
accessed on March 16, 2021.
City of Fontana. 2019. Chapter 30 – Zoning and Development Code. Available at
https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH3
0ZODECO, accessed on March 13, 2021.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 195
City of Fontana. 2019. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 – Draft Environmental
Impact Report.
City of Fontana. 2019. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 – Draft Environmental
Impact Report.
City of Fontana. General Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. 2015-2035.
Hydrology and Water Quality. Available at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26720/58-Hydrology-and-Water-
Quality. Accessed March 16, 2021.
County of San Bernardino. 2010. Geologic Hazards Overlays. Available at
http://www.sbcounty.gov/Uploads/lus/GeoHazMaps/FH21C_20100309.pdf, accessed
on March 15, 2021.
DOC. 2021. Available at Data Viewer (ca.gov), accessed October 18, 2021.
DTSC. 2021. Cortese List. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&
site_type=CSITES,FUDS&status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND
+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29. Accessed March 16, 2021.
EDD. January 2021. California and Los Angeles County and United States CPS Labor Force Data
2020 Benchmark. Available at
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/file/lfmonth/calpr.pdf. Accessed
March 17, 2021.
EDD. January 2021. Monthly Labor Force Data for Cities and Census Designated Placed (CDP)
January 2021 – Preliminary Data Not Seasonally Adjusted. Available at
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/labor-force-and-unemployment-for-
cities-and-census-areas.html. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden, Noise Navigator Sound Level Database
with Over 1700 Measurement Values, 2015.
Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database
with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010.
Federal Highway Administration, Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and
Guidance, Noise Fundamentals,
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/pol
guide02.cfm, accessed March 11, 2020.
Fontana Square Project
City of Fontana Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
December 2022 Page 196
Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual,
Table 7-2, Page 179, September 2018.
Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual,
September 2018.
Fontana Water Company. (2015). Urban Water Management Plan; Page 3-2. Available at
https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/San-Gabriel-
Fontana_Amended-Final-December-2017-1.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2021.
Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991.
Southern California Association of Governments. (2019). Profile of the City of Fontana. Available
at https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/fontana_localprofile.pdf?1606014851. Accessed March 17, 2021.
Southern California Association of Governments. 2016. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). Available at
http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx, accessed on March 17, 2021.
Southern California Association of Governments. 2016. 2016-2040 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). Available at
http://scagrtpscs.net/Pages/FINAL2016RTPSCS.aspx. Accessed March 17, 2021.
State of California Department of Finance. (2020). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates –
Organized by Geography. Excel document available at
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/. Accessed
March 17, 2021.
State of California. (1994). CHAPTER 7.5. Earthquake Fault Zoning [2621 - 2630]. Available at
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?division=2.&chapter=7
.5.&lawCode=PRC. Accessed March 14, 2021.
U.S. Department of Transportation (2014). Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards,
Available at: https://www.transportation.gov/mission/sustainability/corporate-average-
fuel-economy-cafe-standards, Accessed August 24, 2021.