HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 Civic Center Renovation Project Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
CIVIC CENTER RENOVATION PROJECT
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)
CEQA Analysis Prepared for:
Christopher Smethurst, Senior Engineer
City of Fontana, Engineering Department
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
Prepared by:
UltraSystems Environmental Inc.
16431 Scientific Way
Irvine, CA 92618-4355
Telephone: 949-788-4900
FAX: 949-788-4901
December 2023
Project No. 7230
This page left intentionally blank.
❖ PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page i
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET
1.Project Title Civic Center Renovation Project
2.CEQA Lead Agency City of Fontana
Rina Leung, Senior Planner
8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335
E: rleung@fontanaca.gov | T: (909) 350-6566
3.Project Applicant City of Fontana (Engineering Department)
Christopher Smethurst, Senior Engineer
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
E: csmethurst@fontanaca.gov | T: (909) 350-6649
4.Project Location City Hall: 8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335
East Annex/Fire Admin.: 17001 Upland Ave.,
Fontana, CA 92335
5.Assessor’s Parcel Numbers City Hall: APN 0192-031-23, 0192-031-024
East Annex/Fire Admin.: APN 0192-031-26
6.Project Site General Plan
Designation(s)
Pubic Facilities (P-PF)
7.Project Site Zoning Designation(s)Downtown Core - Civic
8.Surrounding Land Uses and
Setting North – Commercial businesses and single- and
multi-family homes
South – Library, park, and Pacific Electric Trail
East – Single-family homes
West – Fontana Women’s Club and churches
(across Sierra Avenue)
9.Description of Project The project proposes to demolish and replace the
existing City Hall and Annex buildings, add/remove
driveways, and add landscaping. The project will be
implemented in two phases, with Phase I involving
the Annex Building, and Phase II involving the City
Hall component.
Refer to Section 3.0 of this document for additional
information.
❖ PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page ii
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
10. Selected Agencies whose Approval
is Required
None
11. Have California Native American
tribes traditionally and culturally
affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant
to Public Resources Code §
21080.3.1? If so, has consultation
begun?
For the proposed project, those tribe(s) with a
standing request for consultation were contacted
by the City of Fontana (the Lead Agency) per Public
Resources Code § 21074. Letters were sent by the
City to local Native American Tribes asking if they
wished to participate in AB 52 consultation
concerning the proposed project.
The AB 52 notice period for the Tribes is 30 days in
which they have an opportunity to respond to
notification of this proposed project.
The City sent letters to six local tribal contacts on
November 28, 2023. The Gabrieleno Band of
Mission Indians – Kizh Nation and the San Manuel
Band of Mission Indians (Yuhaaviatam of San
Manuel) responded. The Gabrielino – Kizh Nation
requested consultation, which is currently
underway.
12. Other Public Agencies None
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page iii
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 Proposed Project .................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Lead Agencies – Environmental Review Implementation .................................................. 1-2
1.3 CEQA Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Purpose of Initial Study ..................................................................................................................... 1-3
1.5 Review and Comment by Other Agencies .................................................................................. 1-4
1.6 Impact Terminology ........................................................................................................................... 1-4
1.7 Organization of Initial Study ........................................................................................................... 1-4
1.8 Findings from the Initial Study ....................................................................................................... 1-5
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Project Setting ....................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.3 Existing Characteristics of the Site ............................................................................................... 2-6
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 Project Background ............................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.2 Project Overview .................................................................................................................................. 3-1
3.3 Proposed Project Features ............................................................................................................... 3-4
3.4 Offsite Improvements ........................................................................................................................ 3-0
3.5 Construction Activities ...................................................................................................................... 3-0
4.0 Environmental Checklist .................................................................................................................. 4-1
4.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................. 4.1-1
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ......................................................................................... 4.2-1
4.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................ 4.3-1
4.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................ 4.4-1
4.5 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 4.5-1
4.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................... 4.6-1
4.7 Geology and Soils .............................................................................................................................. 4.7-1
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................... 4.8-1
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................................. 4.9-1
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................... 4.10-1
4.11 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................................ 4.11-1
4.12 Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................... 4.12-1
4.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 4.13-1
4.14 Population and Housing .............................................................................................................. 4.14-1
4.15 Public Services ................................................................................................................................ 4.15-1
4.16 Recreation ......................................................................................................................................... 4.16-1
4.17 Transportation ................................................................................................................................ 4.17-1
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 4.18-1
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................................... 4.19-1
4.20 Wildfire .............................................................................................................................................. 4.20-1
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ....................................................................................... 4.21-1
5.0 References ............................................................................................................................................. 5-1
6.0 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 6-1
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page iv
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
6.1 CEQA Lead Agency ............................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Project Applicant .................................................................................................................................. 6-1
6.3 UltraSystems Environmental, Inc. ................................................................................................. 6-1
7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ..................................................... 7-1
TABLES
Table 2.2-1 - Summary of Existing Land Use, Zoning and Specific Plan Designations .......................... 2-1
Table 3.2-1 - Project Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 3-1
Table 3.5-1 - Start and Finish Dates by Construction Activity (Phase I) ..................................................... 3-1
Table 3.5-2 - Construction Equipment by Activity (Phase I) ........................................................................... 3-1
Table 4.1-1 - Project Compliance with City of Fontana General Plan Policies Regarding Scenic Quality
and Aesthetics .................................................................................................................................................................... 4.1-4
Table 4.3-1 - Federal and State Attainment Status ........................................................................................... 4.3-2
Table 4.3-2 - Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data ......................................................................................... 4.3-5
Table 4.3-3 - SCAQMD Thresholds of Significance ............................................................................................ 4.3-1
Table 4.3-4 - Construction Schedule- Phase I...................................................................................................... 4.3-1
Table 4.3-5 - Construction Schedule- Phase II .................................................................................................... 4.3-1
Table 4.3-6 - Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions- Phase I ............................................... 4.3-1
Table 4.3-7 - Maximum Daily Regional Construction Emissions- Phase II ............................................. 4.3-2
Table 4.3-8 - Maximum Daily Net Project Operational Emissions ............................................................. 4.3-2
Table 4.3-10 - Results of Localized Significance Analysis- Phase I ............................................................ 4.3-4
Table 4.3-11 – Results of Unmitigated Localized Significance Analysis=Phase II ............................... 4.3-4
Table 4.6-1 - Estimated Project Operational Energy Use - Phase I ............................................................ 4.6-3
Figure 4.7-2 - Regional Faults .................................................................................................................................... 4.7-5
Table 4.8-1 - San Bernadino County GHG Reduction Targets for Countywide Emissions ............... 4.8-6
Table 4.8-3 - Project Construction-Related GHG Emissions-Phase I ......................................................... 4.8-8
Table 4.8-4 - Project Construction-Related GHG Emissions- Phase II ...................................................... 4.8-8
Table 4.8-5 - Net Project Operational GHG Emissions .................................................................................... 4.8-9
Table 4.11-1 - Consistency Analysis: Proposed Project Compared to Relevant City of Fontana General
Plan Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design Element Goals and Policies ................................................... 4.11-2
Table 4.13-1 - Sensitive Receivers in Project Area ........................................................................................ 4.13-2
Table 4.13-2 - Ambient Noise Measurement Results ................................................................................... 4.13-4
Table 4.13-2 - California Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Sources ............................ 4.13-7
Table 4.13-3 Construction Equipment Noise Characteristics ................................................................ 4.13-13
Table 4.13-4 - Phase II Construction Equipment Noise Characteristics ............................................ 4.13-14
Table 4.13-5 - Estimated Phase I Construction Noise Exposures at Nearest Sensitive Receivers 4.13-
15
Table 4.13-6 - Estimated Phase II Construction Noise Exposures at Nearest Sensitive Receiver 4.13-
15
Table 4.13-7 - Vibration Levels of Typical Construction Equipment for Phase I ........................... 4.13-18
Table 4.13-8 - Vibration Levels of Typical Construction Equipment for Phase II ......................... 4.13-18
Table 4.17-1 - Project Trip Generation Rates & Forecast ........................................................................... 4.17-3
Table 4.19-1 - 2020 Actual Water Supplies ...................................................................................................... 4.19-4
Table 4.19-2 - Projected Water Supplies ........................................................................................................... 4.19-5
Table 4.19-3 - Landfills Serving Fontana ........................................................................................................... 4.19-6
Table 4.19-3 - Landfills Serving Fontana ........................................................................................................... 4.19-6
Table 7.0-1 - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ......................................................................... 7-2
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page v
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
FIGURES
Figure 2.1-1 - Regional Location .................................................................................................................................. 2-2
Figure 2.2-1 - Project Location ..................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Figure 2.2-1 - Topographic Map .................................................................................................................................. 2-4
Figure 2.2-2 - Project Site Photographs .................................................................................................................... 2-5
Figure 3.2-1 - Civic Center Site Plan .......................................................................................................................... 3-2
Figure 3.2-2 - Civic Center Site Plan - Proposed ................................................................................................... 3-3
Figure 3.3-1a - Proposed Annex Building Rendering (Phase I) ...................................................................... 3-5
Figure 3.3-1b - Proposed Annex Building Rendering (Phase I) ..................................................................... 3-6
Figure 3.3-1c - Proposed Annex Building Rendering (Phase I) ...................................................................... 3-7
Figure 3.3-1d - Proposed Annex Building Rendering (Phase I) ..................................................................... 3-8
Figure 3.3-2 - Proposed City Hall Building Rendering (Phase II) .................................................................. 3-9
Figure 4.1-1 - State Scenic Highways ...................................................................................................................... 4.1-3
Figure 4.2-1 - Important Farmland Categories .................................................................................................. 4.2-2
Figure 4.4-1 – Project Location and Biological Study Area (BSA) .............................................................. 4.4-4
Figure 4.4-2 – CNDDB Known Occurrences: Plant Species and Habitats ................................................ 4.4-5
Figure 4.4-3 – CNDDB Known Occurrences Wildlife Species ....................................................................... 4.4-7
Figure 4.4-4 – Land Cover Types ........................................................................................................................... 4.4-10
Figure 4.4-5 – CDFW Wildlife Corridors ............................................................................................................ 4.4-12
Figure 4.5-1 - Topographic Map ............................................................................................................................... 4.5-2
Figure 4.7-1 – Alquist Priolo Fault Zones ............................................................................................................. 4.7-3
Figure 4.9-1 – Airports in the Project Region ..................................................................................................... 4.9-2
Figure 4.9-2 - Fire Hazard Severity Zones - State Responsibility Area..................................................... 4.9-4
Figure 4.9-3 - Fire Hazard Severity Zones - Local Responsibility Area .................................................... 4.9-5
Figure 4.10-1 - USGS Surface Waters and Watersheds ................................................................................ 4.10-3
Figure 4.11-1 - General Plan Land Use Designation ...................................................................................... 4.11-3
Figure 4.11-2 - Zoning Designation ...................................................................................................................... 4.11-4
Figure 4.12-1 - Designated Mineral Resource Zone ...................................................................................... 4.12-2
Figure 4.12-2 – Oil and Gas Wells and Fields .................................................................................................. 4.12-3
Figure 4.12-3 - Geothermal Wells ......................................................................................................................... 4.12-0
Figure 4.13-1 - Sensitive Receivers Near the Project Site ........................................................................... 4.13-3
Figure 4.13-2 - Ambient Noise Measurement Locations ............................................................................. 4.13-5
Figure 4.20-1 - Fire Hazard Severity Zone - State Responsibility Area ................................................. 4.20-2
Figure 4.20-2 - Fire Hazard Severity Zone - Local Responsibility Area ................................................ 4.20-3
❖ TABLE OF CONTENTS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page vi
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
APPENDICES
A Project Plans and Drawings
B Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
C Biological Resources Assessment
D1 Cultural Resources Report
D2 Paleontological Resources Records Search
E Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
F1 Phase I ESA – Fire Annex
F2 Hazardous Building Material Survey
G Noise Assessment
H Trip Generation and VMT Screening Analysis
I City Ordinance 1906
❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page vii
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Term
°F Degrees Fahrenheit
AB Assembly Bill
AB 32 California Global Warming Solutions Act Of 2006
AB 939 California Integrated Waste Management Act
AB 1327 California Solid Waste Reuse And Recycling Access Act Of 1991
ADA Americans With Disabilities Act
ADT Average Daily Traffic
AF Acre-Feet
AMSL Above Mean Sea Level
APE Area of Potential Effect
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
ARB California Air Resources Board
ATP Active Transportation Plan
BMPs Best Management Practices
BRE Biological Resources Evaluation Report
BSA Biological Study Area
Cal/OSHA California Division of Occupational Safety and Health
CalEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
CALGreen California Green Building Standards
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
CBC California Building Code
CCAA California Clean Air Act
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish & Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGS California Geologic Society
CH4 methane
CHRIS California Historic Resources Inventory System
CIWMA State of California Integrated Waste Management Act
CMP Congestion Management Program
CNDDB California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CNRA California Natural Resources Agency
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
COHA Cooper’s hawk
CRC California Residential Code
CRHR California Register of Historic Resources
❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page viii
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Acronym/Abbreviation Term
CWA Clean Water Act
dB decibel
dBA A-weighted decibel scale
DEIR Draft Environmental Impact Report
DIF Development Impact Fees
DMA drainage management area
DOC California Department of Conservation
DOSH California Division of Safety and Health
DPM Diesel Particulate Matter
DRP Design Review Project
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EG Electric Generation
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EMS Emergency Medical Service
ESA Endangered Species Act
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FAR floor area ratio
FEMA Federal Emergency Management agency
FFPD Fontana Fire Protection District
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FPD Fontana Police Department
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FUSD Fontana Unified School District
GHG greenhouse gas
GPAD Gallons Per Net Acre Per Day
GPCD Gallons Per Capita Per Day
GWP Global Warming Potential
H2S Hydrogen Sulfide
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
HFCs hydrofluorocarbons
HRA Health Risk Assessment
Hz hertz
IEUA Inland Empire Utilities Agency
IPaC Information, Planning, and Conservation
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IS Initial Study
IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
kWh kilowatt hours
L90 noise level that is exceeded 90% of the time
Leq equivalent noise level
LACM Los Angeles County Natural History Museum
LED light-emitting diode
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
LID Low Impact Development
Lmax root mean square maximum noise level
❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page ix
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Acronym/Abbreviation Term
LOS Level of Service
LRA Local Responsibility Area
LRP Legally Responsible Person
LSTs Localized Significance Thresholds
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MCN Master Case Number
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MM(s) Mitigation Measure(s)
MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MMT Million Metric Tons
MMTCO2e Million Metric Tons of CO2e
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
MWD Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
ND Negative Declaration
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act
NO Nitric Oxide
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NOI Notice of Intent
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPPA Native Plant Protection Act
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
O3 Ozone
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Pb Lead
PM Particulate Matter
PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter
PM10 Respirable Particulate Matter
Porter-Cologne Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
PPM Parts Per Million
PPV Peak Particle Velocity
PRDs Permit Registration Documents
PRP Potential Responsible Party
RAFSS Restorable Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
REC(s) Recognized Environmental Condition(s)
REL(s) Reference Exposure Level(s)
RMS Root Mean Square
❖ ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page x
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Acronym/Abbreviation Term
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
ROW Right-Of-Way
RP Regional Plant
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB Senate Bill
SBCIWMP San Bernardino Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan
SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCCIC South Central Coastal Information Center
SCE Southern California Edison
SDPM San Diego Pocket Mouse
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SIP State Implementation Plan
SLF Sacred Lands File
SMARTS Stormwater Multi-Application and Report Tracking System
SO2 sulfur dioxide
SOx Sulfur Oxides
SoCalGas Southern California Gas Company
SOPs Standard Operating Procedures
SR State Route
SRA State Responsibility Area
SRAs Source Receptor Areas
STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
SUSMP Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan
SWIS Solid Waste Information System
SWP California State Water Project
SWRCB California State Water Resources Control Board
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TCRs Tribal Cultural Resources
TMP Traffic Management Plan
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USGS United States Geological Survey
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VdB Vibration Decibels
VHFHSZs Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
WEAP Worker Environmental Awareness Program
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
WOUS Water(s) Of The United States
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROPOSED PROJECT
The Civic Center Campus is comprised of four buildings and is initiated by the City of Fontana: City
Hall, Administration, East Annex (Fire Administration), and the Police Station. The proposed project
entails replacing the existing City Hall building located at 8353 Sierra Avenue (APNs 0192-031-23
and 0192-031-24), and the East Annex building located at 17001 Upland Avenue (APN 0192-031-26)
in the City of Fontana. The Administration and Police buildings are not subject to any alterations. The
demolition of the existing City Hall building (which encompasses an area of 31,500 square feet) and
the Annex building (13,500 square feet) is required to facilitate the Civic Center Renovation project
as proposed.
1.1.1 PROJECT COMPONENTS
The proposed project would consist of:
Proposed Buildings
The construction of two new buildings:
• Phase I will be the proposed East Annex building, which will be a two-story municipal
building with a first-tier parking structure and second-tier office space. The new structure
will be constructed in the same location as the existing East Annex building located at 17001
Upland Avenue. Each tier will have a footprint of approximately 30,000 square feet with one
vehicle entrance and exit located on Upland Avenue just west of Wheeler Avenue. The
building will provide office space for City staff as well as both public and employee parking
for the Civic Campus.
• Phase II will be the proposed City Hall building, a two-story municipal building with a first-
tier parking structure and second-tier office spaces intended to be the cornerstone of the
renovated Civic Campus. The new structure will be constructed in the same location as the
existing City Hall building located at 8353 Sierra Avenue. Each level of the proposed structure
will have approximately 25,000 to 30,000 square feet, with vehicle entrance(s) and exit(s) to
be determined. The building will house City administrative functions, as well as office space
for City staff, and both public and employee parking for the Civic Campus.
Parking
• The City Hall building will provide approximately 65 parking spaces to be located on the first
floor.
• The Annex Building will provide 56 parking spaces to be located on the first floor.
• The existing surface parking area will be reconfigured to accommodate the new footprints of
the two buildings.
• The project may modify some current driveway approaches to work with the proposed
parking garages.
Utilities
• The proposed project does not include utility improvements, utilizing existing connections.
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• The existing solar panel canopies are to remain in place.
Landscaping
• The project site will also include landscaping improvements along Sierra Avenue and Upland
Avenue.
1.1.2 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Project construction for Phase I is expected to begin around December 2023 and will last
approximately 19 months, ending about June 2025. Dates for Phase II construction, which will follow
completion of Phase I, are undetermined at this time. Refer to Section 3.0 for details.
1.2 LEAD AGENCIES – ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION
The City of Fontana is the Lead Agency for the proposed project. Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its implementing regulations,1 the Lead Agency has the
principal responsibility for implementing and approving a project that may have a significant effect
on the environment.
1.3 CEQA OVERVIEW
1.3.1 PURPOSE OF CEQA
All discretionary projects within California are required to undergo environmental review under
CEQA. A Project is defined in CEQA Guidelines § 15378 as the whole of the action having the potential
to result in a direct physical change or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change to the environment
and is any of the following:
• An activity directly undertaken by any public agency including but not limited to public works
construction and related activities, clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing
public structures, enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and
amendment of local General Plans or elements.
• An activity undertaken by a person that is supported in whole or in part through public
agency contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more
public agencies.
• An activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other
entitlement for use by one or more public agencies.
• CEQA Guidelines § 15002 lists the basic purposes of CEQA as follows:
• Inform governmental decision makers and the public about the potential, significant
environmental effects of proposed activities.
• Identify the ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.
• Prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects
through the use of alternatives or mitigation measures (MMs) when the governmental agency
finds the changes to be feasible.
1 Public Resources Code §§ 21000 - 21177 and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3.
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• Disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the project in the
manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved.
1.3.2 AUTHORITY TO MITIGATE UNDER CEQA
CEQA establishes a duty for public agencies to avoid or minimize environmental damage where
feasible. Under CEQA Guidelines § 15041 a Lead Agency for a project has 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 constitutional requirements such
as the “nexus”2 and “rough proportionality”3 standards.
CEQA allows a Lead Agency to approve a project even though the project will cause a significant effect
on the environment if the agency makes a fully informed and publicly disclosed decision that there is
no feasible way to lessen or avoid the significant effect. In such cases, the Lead Agency must
specifically identify expected benefits and other overriding considerations from the project that
outweigh the policy of reducing or avoiding significant environmental impacts of the project.
1.4 PURPOSE OF INITIAL STUDY
The CEQA process begins with a public agency determining whether the project is subject to CEQA at
all. If the project is exempt, the process does not need to proceed any further. If the project is not
exempt, the Lead Agency takes the second step and conducts an Initial Study to determine whether
the project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The purposes of an Initial Study as listed in § 15063(c) of the CEQA Guidelines are to:
• Provide the Lead Agency with information necessary to decide if an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), Negative Declaration (ND), or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) should be
prepared.
• Enable a Lead Agency to modify a project to mitigate adverse impacts before an EIR is
prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for an ND or MND.
• Assist in the preparation of an EIR, if required, by focusing the EIR on adverse effects
determined to be significant, identifying the adverse effects determined not to be significant,
explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant adverse effects would not
be significant and identifying whether a program EIR or other process, can be used to analyze
adverse environmental effects of the project.
• Facilitate an environmental assessment early during project design.
• Provide documentation in the ND or MND that a project would not have a significant effect
on the environment.
• Eliminate unnecessary EIRs.
• Determine if a previously prepared EIR could be used for the Project.
In cases where no potentially significant impacts are identified, the Lead Agency may issue an ND,
and no MMs would be needed. Where potentially significant impacts are identified, the Lead Agency
may determine that MMs would adequately reduce these impacts to less than significant levels. The
Lead Agency would then prepare an MND for the proposed project. If the Lead Agency determines
2 A nexus (i.e., connection) must be established between the mitigation measure and a legitimate governmental
interest.
3 The mitigation measure must be “roughly proportional” to the impacts of the Project.
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
that individual or cumulative effects of the proposed project would cause a significant adverse
environmental effect that cannot be mitigated to less than significant levels, then the Lead Agency
would require an EIR to further analyze these impacts.
1.5 REVIEW AND COMMENT BY OTHER AGENCIES
Other public agencies are provided with the opportunity to review and comment on the IS/MND.
Each of these agencies is described briefly below.
• A Responsible Agency (14 CCR § 15381) is a public agency, other than the Lead Agency, that
has discretionary approval power over the Project, such as permit issuance or plan approval
authority.
• A Trustee Agency4 (14 CCR § 15386) is a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural
resources affected by a project that is held in trust for the people of the State of California.
• Agencies with Jurisdiction by Law (14 CCR § 15366) are any public agencies who have the
authority (1) to grant a permit or other entitlement for use; (2) to provide funding for the
project in question; or (3) to exercise authority over resources which may be affected by the
project. Furthermore, a city or county will have jurisdiction by law with respect to a project
when the city or county having primary jurisdiction over the area involved is: (1) the site of
the project; (2) the area in which the major environmental effects will occur; and/or (3) the
area in which reside those citizens most directly concerned by any such environmental
effects.
1.6 IMPACT TERMINOLOGY
The following terminology is used to describe the level of significance of potential impacts:
• A finding of no impact is appropriate if the analysis concludes that the project would not
affect the particular environmental threshold in any way.
• An impact is considered less than significant if the analysis concludes that the project would
cause no substantial adverse change to the environment and requires no mitigation.
• An impact is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated if the analysis
concludes that the project would cause no substantial adverse change to the environment
with the inclusion of environmental commitments, or other enforceable measures, that
would be adopted by the lead agency.
• An impact is considered potentially significant if the analysis concludes that the project could
have a substantial adverse effect on the environment.
An EIR is required if an impact is identified as potentially significant.
1.7 ORGANIZATION OF INITIAL STUDY
This document is organized to satisfy CEQA Guidelines § 15063(d), and includes the following
sections:
• Section 1.0 - Introduction, which identifies the purpose and scope of the IS/MND.
4 The four Trustee Agencies in California listed in CEQA Guidelines § 15386 are California Department of Fish and
Wildlife, State Lands Commission, State Department of Parks and Recreation, and University of California.
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• Section 2.0 - Environmental Setting, which describes the location, existing site conditions,
land uses, zoning designations, topography, and vegetation associated with the project site
and surroundings.
• Section 3.0 - Project Description, which provides an overview of the project, a description
of the proposed development, project phasing during construction, and discretionary actions
for project approval.
• Section 4.0 - Environmental Checklist, which presents checklist responses for each
resource topic to identify and assess impacts associated with the proposed project, and
proposes MMs, as needed, to reduce potential environmental impacts to less than significant.
• Section 5.0 - References, which includes a list of documents cited in the IS/MND.
• Section 6.0 - List of Preparers, which identifies the primary authors and technical experts
that prepared the IS/MND.
Technical studies and other documents, which include supporting information or analyses used to
prepare the IS/MND, are included in the following appendices:
• Appendix A Project Plans and Drawings
• Appendix B Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assessment
• Appendix C Biological Resources Evaluation
• Appendix D1 Cultural Resources Report
• Appendix D2 Paleontological Resources Records Search
• Appendix E Geotechnical Evaluation
• Appendix F1 Phase I ESA
• Appendix F2 Hazardous Building Material Survey
• Appendix G Noise Assessment
• Appendix H VMT Analysis
• Appendix I City Ordinance 1906
1.8 FINDINGS FROM THE INITIAL STUDY
1.8.1 NO IMPACT OR IMPACTS CONSIDERED LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Based on IS findings, the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on the
following environmental categories listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Energy
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
❖ SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 1-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
1.8.2 IMPACTS CONSIDERED LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
Based on IS findings, the project would have a less than significant impact on the following
environmental categories listed in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines when proposed Mitigation
Measures are implemented.
• Cultural Resources
• Geology and Soils
• Transportation and Traffic
• Tribal Cultural Resources
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Project is located 8353 Sierra Avenue (APNs
0192-031-23, -24) and 17001 and 17013 Upland Avenue (APN 0192-031-26) in the City of Fontana,
California. Refer to Figure 2.1-1, which shows the project’s location in a regional context. Local
surface streets adjacent to the site include Upland Avenue to the north, Emerald Avenue to the east,
Seville Avenue to the south, and Sierra Avenue to the west. Figure 2.1-2 depicts an aerial photo of
the Civic Center, including the project site, and the surrounding land.
2.2 PROJECT SETTING
The Civic Center contains the existing Fontana Civic Center comprised of the City Hall,
Administration, Annex, and Police buildings and associated surface parking lot; City Hall and the
Annex Building comprise the project site. The project proposes to demolish and replace the existing
City Hall and Annex buildings, add/remove driveways, and add landscaping. The Administration and
Police buildings would remain as they are. See Figure 2.2-1, which depicts the topography of the site,
and surrounding area. Topography within the project site and surroundings is relatively flat, as
shown on Figure 2.2-1 (Google Earth, 2023). Site photographs are provided in Figure 2.2-2.
2.2.1 LAND USE AND ZONING
The land use, zoning, and existing developments of the project site and its immediate vicinity are
listed in Table 2.2-1. The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Public Facilities (P-
PF) and a zoning designation of Form-Based Code (FBC) (City of Fontana, 2023a).
Table 2.2-1
SUMMARY OF EXISTING LAND USE, ZONING AND SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS
Location General Plan
Designation Zoning Designation Existing Development
Project Site Public Facilities (P-PF) Downtown Core - Civic Fontana Civic Center
North
Downtown Core (WMXU-
3)
Downtown Core – Gateway
Core and Multi-Family Core
Commercial businesses,
and single- and multi-
family homes
South
Public Facilities (P-PF)
and Recreational
Facilities (P-R)
Downtown Core - Civic Library, park, and Pacific
Electric Trail
East Downtown Core (WMXU-
3)
Downtown Core –
Neighborhood Core Single-family homes
West
Public Facilities (P-PF)
and Downtown Core
(WMXU-3)
Downtown Core - Civic Fontana’s Women’s Club
and churches (across
Sierra Avenue)
Source: City of Fontana, 2023a; Google Earth Pro, 2023
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 2.1-1
REGIONAL LOCATION
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 2.2-1
PROJECT LOCATION
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 2.2-1
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 2.2-2
PROJECT SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
2.3 EXISTING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE
2.3.1 CLIMATE AND AIR QUALITY
The City of Fontana is characterized by a semi-arid Mediterranean climate that is the result of its
location in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB). (Stantec, 2018b p. 5.2-1). The SCAB is a
6,600-square-mile area basin that is usually quite moist near the land surface due to the influence of
the marine layer. Other factors that influence the area’s climate and meteorology are the terrain and
altitude. Fontana is positioned approximately 1,700 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in its northern
half and 1,000 feet AMSL in its southern half. Due to the City being in a valley, heavy early morning
fog and low stratus clouds are often persistent. Yearly climate patterns are characterized by warm
summers, mild winters, low levels of precipitation, and moderate humidity.
Air quality in Fontana generally fluctuates without a consistent seasonal pattern. Neighboring,
high-polluting coastal cities largely influence the air quality in the city, and that fact coupled along
with the climate trap air pollution in the valley. The SCAB is bounded by the San Gabriel, San
Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains that trap air pollution at their bases. The SCAB fails to meet
national ambient air quality standards for ozone and fine particulate matter, and is classified as a
“nonattainment area” for those pollutants (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.2-10).
2.3.2 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The City of Fontana generally lies at the northwest margin of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic
Province of Southern California, which is characterized by northwest-southeast trending faults, folds,
and mountain ranges. Much of the Fontana region is underlain by loose soils such as sand and silt
(Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.5-1).
Although there are no major active faults within the City boundaries, there are a number of faults
that border the Lytle Creek alluvial basin, including the Chino, Cucamonga, San Andreas, and
San Jacinto faults (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.5-3).
Soils in the area are characteristic of the Southern California interior alluvial basins and consist of
alluvial deposits and floodplain soils (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.5-4).
2.3.3 HYDROLOGY
As detailed in the City of Fontana General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental Impact
Report (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.8-1), the City is located within the lower Lytle Creek watershed, which
drains the eastern portion of the San Gabriel Mountains and forms the northwest portion of the Santa
Ana River Watershed. . The lower portion of Lytle Creek flows through the cities of Fontana, Rialto,
San Bernardino, and Colton, as well as a portion of unincorporated San Bernardino County. The upper
reaches of Lytle Creek are generally perennial; the lower section of Lytle Creek changes into an
intermittent stream with a dry wash south of Interstate 15 (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.8-1).
2.3.4 BIOLOGY
The project site is located in an urbanized area, which provides low habitat value for special-status
plant and wildlife species. The existing vegetation is ornamental landscaping. A detailed description
of existing biological environmental setting for the project site and the surrounding area is provided
❖ SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 2-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
in Section 4.4 of this Initial Study.
2.3.5 PUBLIC SERVICES
The City is served by a full range of public services and utilities. Fire prevention, fire protection and
emergency medical service (EMS) for the City of Fontana are provided by the Fontana Fire Protection
Department (FFPD) through a contract with the San Bernardino County Fire Department (Stantec,
2018b, p. 5-12-4). The City of Fontana Police Department (FPD) provides services in the project area
(Stantec, 2018b, p. 5-12-1). Library services within the City are provided by the San Bernardino
County Library System, which has a total of 32 branch libraries. Within the City of Fontana, there are
three libraries, including Fontana Lewis Library and Technology Center, the Summit Branch Library
and the Kaiser Branch Library (San Bernardino County, 2023).
2.3.6 UTILITIES
The project site lies within the service area of the Fontana Water Company (FWC). Water supplies
consist of imported water from Lytle Creek surface flow, and from wells in the Lytle Basin, Rialto
Basin, Chino Basin, and another groundwater basin known as No Man's Land (FWC, 2018).
Regional wastewater treatment services are provided under the Regional Sewer Service Contract in
which seven agencies – including the City of Fontana – contract with the Inland Empire Utilities
Agency (IEUA) (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.12-17).
Solid waste disposal services in the City of Fontana are provided by Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., a
private company under contract with the City (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.12-20).
Electrical service to the site is provided by Southern California Edison through a grid of transmission
lines and related facilities. Natural gas is supplied to the project site by Southern California Gas
Company (SoCal Gas), which provides natural gas to the City of Fontana (City of Fontana Utilities,
2023).
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City of Fontana (City) has initiated the process for renovation and Renovation of the existing City
of Fontana Civic Center (referred to hereafter as Civic Center). Currently, the Civic Center is
comprised of four buildings (City Hall, Development Services Organization, Annex, and Police). The
project proposes to demolish and replace the existing City Hall and Annex buildings, add/remove
driveways, and add landscaping; City Hall and Annex are located at 8353 Sierra Avenue (APNs 0192-
031-23, -24) and 17001 Upland Avenue (APN 0192-031-26), respectively. The Administration and
Police buildings would remain in place as they are.
The City’s General Plan land use designation for the project site is Public Facilities (P-PF) with a
zoning designation of Downtown Core - Civic (City of Fontana, 2023a). The project is within the Civic
Core portion of the Downtown Core area of the City. The Civic Core district involves a mix of existing
and new public uses, including the existing City Hall, Library, and Park spaces.
3.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
In its entirety, the project would consist of: (1) demolition of Annex and City Hall buildings; (2) utility
improvements; (3) construct Annex (Phase I) and City Hall (Phase II) buildings (including adding
parking garages on the first level of each new building); (4) reconfiguration of surface parking
adjacent to the two buildings and (5) landscaping.
Figure 3.2-1 is a site plan depicting the current layout of the Civic Center and Figure 3.2-2 shows
the layout of the proposed project, including the replacement of two existing buildings. Table 3.2-1
summarizes the primary proposed project features. Available project plans (only for Phase I) are
included in Appendix A. The project will develop a two-story city hall building (first floor parking
and offices, second floor offices only) and a two-story annex building (first floor parking level and
offices, second floor offices only).
Table 3.2-1
PROJECT SUMMARY
Demolition New
Construction
Proposed Uses/Features Square
Feet
No. of
Stories
Approximate
Building
Height (feet)
Annex
Building
(13,500 SF)
Annex Building/
Parking Garage
Two stories with the first
floor being a garage to
accommodate 56 parking
spaces and the second story
an office area.
30,000
(excluding
parking
level)
2 30
City Hall
Building
(31,500 SF)
City Hall
Building/Parking
Garage
Two stories with the first
floor being a mix of garage
and office space, as well as
City Council chambers.
Second floor would be
offices. Approximately 65
parking spaces would be
provided.
25,000 to
30,000
per floor,
including
parking
area
2 + 3rd
story
vaulted
ceiling for
Council
Chambers
40
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.2-1
CIVIC CENTER SITE PLAN - EXISTING
Source: City of Fontana, March 2023
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.2-2
CIVIC CENTER SITE PLAN – PROPOSED
Source: City of Fontana, March 2023
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
3.3 Proposed Project Features
3.3.1 ANNEX BUILDING (PHASE I)
The project proposes to develop a two-story Annex building that would replace the existing 17,000
square foot, single-story annex building within the Civic Center. The proposed Annex building would
be two stories tall with a 56-car parking garage and approximately 1,500 square feet of office space
on the first floor and approximately 30,000 square feet of office space on the second floor. The
disturbed area for the Annex Building (Phase I) is approximately 82,750 square feet (Ninyo & Moore,
2023). Renderings of the proposed two-story Annex building are shown in Figures 3.3-1a through
3.3-1d.
Upon completion, the building will house 118 employees (an increase over the 50 employees housed
in the current building), including the following departments: Community Services, Human
Resources, Information Technology, KFON, Code Compliance, Fire, and Coast.
The Annex building will be open to the public from the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday-
Thursday and would be expected to see approximately 10-15 members of the public per day. The
building will have hours of operation for employees from the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday-
Friday.
3.3.2 CITY HALL BUILDING (PHASE II)
The project proposes to develop a City Hall building that would replace the existing City Hall building
within the Civic Center. The proposed City Hall building would feature a 3-story high vaulted ceiling
above City Council chambers; only the vaulted ceiling above Council chambers would reach the third
level. The first floor of the remainder of the building would house a mix of parking garage
(approximately 65 spaces) and office space, and the second floor would be exclusively for offices.
The building will have an approximate 30,000 square foot footprint. It will be up to 40 feet in
maximum height. It will include about 35,000+/- square feet of office space (inclusive of a 3,000-
5,000 square foot City Council chambers). It will likely include a ground level parking area under a
portion of the new building; parking would be at current grade with the new building built partially
on a podium above the parking. The disturbed area for the new City Hall building and site work
(Phase II) will likely include everything from the rear parking lot to Sierra Avenue, from the parking
lot on Upland Avenue to the existing southern end of the City Hall building (about 56,000 square
feet). A rendering of the proposed City Hall building appears in Figure 3.3-2.
Administrative offices in the City Hall Building will house 100 employees from the following
departments:
• Finance
• City Clerk
• Housing and homeless services
• Economic Development
• City Manager / Deputy City Manager
• Media / Public Relations / Public Affairs
• City Council
• Admin support for the above
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.3-1a
PROPOSED ANNEX BUILDING RENDERING (PHASE I)
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.3-1b
PROPOSED ANNEX BUILDING RENDERING (PHASE I)
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.3-1c
PROPOSED ANNEX BUILDING RENDERING (PHASE I)
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.3-1d
PROPOSED ANNEX BUILDING RENDERING (PHASE I)
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 3.3-2
PROPOSED CITY HALL BUILDING RENDERING (PHASE II)
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
3.3.3 PARKING
As noted, the first floor of the Annex Building (Phase I) will accommodate 56 parking spaces on the
first level. In the City Hall Building (Phase II), a portion of the first level will accommodate
approximately 65 parking spaces.
Surface parking will remain in its current capacity and configuration. There will be no changes.
3.3.4 LANDSCAPING
The proposed site plan includes several landscaped areas totaling 23,250 square feet (accounting for
approximately 25 percent of the project site). At project completion the site would be approximately
75 percent impervious (consisting of building footprints and hardscape, including paved surface
parking areas).
3.3.5 SITE ACCESS, CIRCULATION AND PARKING
Site ingress and egress would be provided by driveways along the northern portion of the site along
Upland Avenue, eastern side along Emerald Avenue, and along Seville Avenue; there would be no
vehicle access from Sierra Avenue, which borders the western side of the Phase II project boundary.
As noted earlier, the proposed City Hall and Annex buildings would have first floor parking garages
that would accommodate 65 and 56 parking spots, respectively, or a total of 121 garage spaces.
Phase I includes 44 public stalls and 12 secured stalls. Of the 44 public stalls, three will be Disabled
(ADA) and two will be Electric Vehicle (EV) spaces.
3.3.6 EXTERIOR LIGHTING
There will be no lights installed during construction as construction operations will be confined from
7:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays
and Holidays unless it is approved by the building inspector for cases that are considered urgently
necessary as defined in Section 18-63(7) of the Municipal Code. The remaining lights will match
existing conditions.
The project proposes area lighting throughout the project site for visibility and safety purposes.
Lighting for the project would comply with the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code.
Specifically, the project would be required to comply with City of Fontana Municipal Code § 30 508,
Lighting and Glare, which states, “all lights shall be directed and/or shielded to prevent the light from
adversely affecting adjacent residential or commercial properties. No structure or feature shall be
permitted which creates adverse glare effects.”
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-0
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
3.3.7 UTILITIES
The project would require sewer, domestic water, fire water, irrigation and dry utilities connections
to existing utility infrastructure in Sierra Avenue.
Sanitary Sewer - The project proposes a network of sewer mains connecting to an existing sewer in
Sierra Avenue.
Domestic Water - Water would be provided by Fontana Water Company, which serves part of the
city of Fontana. Construction would need to occur in the public right-of-way during installation of
domestic water lines from the existing main in Sierra Avenue to the project site.
Fire Water - The project proposes continued use of existing fire water lines from Sierra Avenue to
the project site.
Dry Utilities - The existing solar will be removed from the roof top. The new structure will include
infrastructure for future solar installation, but this will not be part of this project. Southern California
Edison (SCE) would provide electricity to the project site. Electrical utilities are undergrounded.
Stormwater - Stormwater runoff would be collected by downspouts and area drains and discharged
to the existing drainage system. Stormwater mitigation and water quality management system will
be installed.
Trash Service - Trash service would be provided by Burrtec Waste Industries, which has a contract
with the City of Fontana to provide an array of trash, recycling and special waste handling services
to residents and businesses (Fontana, 2022).
Communications and Data – There is an existing cellular tower that will be relocated and improved.
3.4 OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS
Offsite improvements would include landscaping, sidewalk, vehicular access and roadway
restorations.
3.5 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
The project would be completed in two major phases, with Phase I consisting of the Annex Building
and Phase II consisting of the City Hall Building. For each major phase, once demolition commences,
all of the construction activities would follow in sequence. There would be no cut or fill of soil during
site grading. After site preparation is completed, infrastructure such as sewer laterals and storm
drains would be installed and/or connected to existing facilities. The building foundations would be
poured and framing of the buildings would begin. The final steps of construction would involve
interior furnishings, detail work, and completion of common areas and outside landscaping.
Construction staging areas would be provided within the boundaries of the project site. Construction
workers would park vehicles onsite and construction trucks and equipment would also be parked
and stored onsite. Additional parking for the construction crew may be located along Upland Avenue.
It is anticipated that approximately 20 workers would be onsite during the peak construction
activities of each phase.
For safety reasons, temporary barricades would be used to limit access to the site during project
construction and maintain safe access for construction workers. Construction would occur during
daylight and during regular business hours. Lighting for the construction site would be limited to the
minimum amount of light needed for safety and security.
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
3.5.1 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Project construction of Phase I (Annex Building) is expected to begin in December 2023 and end in
January 2025 (approximately 25 months). Phase II (City Hall) is expected to commence in January
2025, with completion expected in December 2027 (approximately 23 months). Table 3.5-1 shows
start and finish dates for each construction phase.
Table 3.5-1
START AND FINISH DATES BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (PHASE I)
Construction Phase Start Date Finish Date
Mobilization December 13, 2023 December 27, 2023
Site Demolition and Grading December 28, 2023 January 31, 2024
Underground Building Utilities
(wet and dry)
January 26, 2024 February 14, 2024
Foundation February 14, 2024 May 24, 2024
Building Shell and Core June 6, 2024 September 26, 2024
Building Interior August 29, 2024 January 6, 2025
Site Work February 24, 2024 January 10, 2025
Source: PENTA Building Group, FIRE ANNEX 11 01 2023 – Contract Schedule
Construction Equipment by Activity
Table 3.5-2 shows construction equipment to be utilized and other pertinent data for indicated
activities during the construction of Phase I.
Table 3.5-2
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT BY ACTIVITY (PHASE I)
DEMOLITION
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1
Crane 1
Crushing/Processing Equipment 1
Excavators 1
Rubber Tired Loaders 1
Skid Steer Loaders 2
GRADING1
1 month duration
Bore/Drill Rigs 1
Excavators 1
Graders 2
Off-Highway Tractors 1
Other Equipment 1
Rubber Tired Loaders 2
Skid Steer Loaders 2
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
❖ SECTION 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 3-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
CONSTRUCTION
8 months duration
Bore/Drill Rigs 1
Concrete/Industrial Saws 2
Crane 1
Excavators 1
Graders 1
Other Equipment 1
Paving Equipment 1
Rollers 1
Rough Terrain Forklifts 2
Rubber Tired Loaders 1
Skid Steer Loaders 3
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
PAVING2
<1 month duration
Graders 1
Pavers 1
Rollers 1
Rubber Tired Loaders 1
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1
NOTES: (1) 1 day of grading, 0 export/0 import (2) 0.1 acres paved area
Sources: PENTA Building Group, City of Fontana Engineering
Department
3.6 Permits and Approvals
The proposed project would be reviewed in detail by applicable City of Fontana departments and
divisions that have the responsibility to review land use application compliance with City codes and
regulations. City staff is also responsible for reviewing this IS/MND to ensure that it is technically
accurate and is in full compliance with CEQA. The departments and divisions at the City of Fontana
responsible for technical review include:
• City of Fontana Development Services Department;
• City of Fontana Public Works Department;
• City of Fontana Fire Protection District;
• City of Fontana Engineering Department.
Ordinance No. 19065, adopted in October 2022 by the City Council, exempted the City from certain
zoning regulations for City owned, controlled or leased properties or facilities. In that the City is the
project applicant and owner of the subject project properties, the only permits or approvals required
would be a Design Review and building permits.
5 See Appendix I for a complete text and signed copy of Ordinance No. 1906.
❖ SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors, as well as general standards
(e.g., the project would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
(2) All answers must take into account the whole action involved, including offsite as well as
onsite, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as
well as operational impacts.
(3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one
or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
(4) “Negative Declaration: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially
Significant Impact” to a “Less than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the
mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to less than significant
level.
(5) Earlier analyses may be use where, pursuant to the tiering, Program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an affect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
(See Section 15063(c)(3)(D) of the CEQA Guidelines. In this case, a brief discussion should
identify the following:
(a) Earlier Analyses Used. Identify and state where the earlier analysis available for
review.
(b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
(c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
(6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference
❖ SECTION 4.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached
and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
(7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used
or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
(8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant
to a project’s environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
(9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
(a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
(b) The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.1-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.1 AESTHETICS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic
highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially
degrade the existing visual character
or quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings? (Public views
are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point). If
the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X
A “visual environment” includes the built environment (development patterns, buildings, parking
areas, and circulation elements) and natural environment (such as hills, vegetation, rock
outcroppings, drainage pathways, and soils) features. Visual quality, viewer groups and sensitivity,
duration, and visual resources characterize views.
• Visual quality refers to the general aesthetic quality of a view, such as vividness, intactness,
and unity.
• Viewer groups identify who is most likely to experience the view. High-sensitivity land uses
include residences, schools, playgrounds, religious institutions, and passive outdoor spaces
such as parks, playgrounds, and recreation areas.
• Duration of a view is the amount of time that a particular view can be seen by a specific viewer
group.
• Visual resources refer to unique views, and views identified in local plans, from scenic
highways, or of specific unique structures or landscape features.
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❖ SECTION 4.1 – AESTHETICS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.1-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Less than Significant Impact
Scenic vistas generally include extensive panoramic views of natural features, unusual terrain, or
unique urban or historic features, for which the field of view can be wide and extend into the distance,
and focal views that focus on a particular object, scene or feature of interest.
The project site is located in an area of Fontana that is characterized by flat topography and urban
development. The City’s General Plan does not specify any scenic vistas that occur within the City.
However, the San Gabriel Mountains and the Jurupa Hills that lie north and south of the City,
respectively, are considered scenic resources (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.1-1).
In general, existing views in the project vicinity include views of the distant Jurupa Hills to the south
and distant views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north. The Jurupa Hills are approximately four
miles south of the project site and the San Gabriel Mountains are located approximately five miles
north of the project site (Google Earth Pro, 2023). However, views of the Jurupa Hills and San
Bernardino Mountains would not be significantly impacted because of the far distance from the
project site and the intervening buildings and trees surrounding the project site that partially block
views of the mountains.
The project proposes to demolish and replace the existing three-story City Hall and two-story Annex
buildings. The Administration and Police buildings would remain as they are. The replacement City
Hall and Annex buildings would be three- and two-stories, respectively. The proposed new buildings
would be consistent with the general character of the surrounding neighborhood in terms of
architectural style, density, height, bulk, and setback. As mentioned above, there are intervening
buildings and trees that block the view of the mountains. The proposed development would not
obstruct views of distant mountains and hills for motorists traveling along nearby roadways.
Therefore, the project would have less than significant impact on scenic vistas.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) provides information regarding officially
designated or eligible state scenic highways identified as part of the California Scenic Highway
Program. The nearest designated state scenic highway to the project site is State Route 2 (SR-2) in
Los Angeles County, approximately 22 miles northwest of the project site (Caltrans, 2023) (see
Figure 4.1-1). Due to the large distance between the project site and SR-2, construction and
implementation of the project would have no impact on state scenic highways. Therefore, the project
would have no impacts on trees, rock outcroppings and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway.
❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.1-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.1-1
STATE SCENIC HIGHWAYS
❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.1-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project 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 located within a highly urbanized portion of the City characterized by public and
commercial facilities. Therefore, project analysis shall determine if the project conflicts with
applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. As further detailed in Section 4.11,
the project would not conflict with policies under the Public Facilities (P-PF) General Plan land use
or Downtown Core - Civic zoning designation. Table 4.1-1 below provides the applicable policies
from the City of Fontana General Plan that pertain to aesthetics, along with a description of how the
proposed project would comply.
Table 4.1-1
PROJECT COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF FONTANA GENERAL PLAN POLICIES REGARDING
SCENIC QUALITY AND AESTHETICS
General Plan Element Project Compliance
Land Use Element. Goal 7: Public and private development meets high design standards.
Policies:
• Support high-quality development in
design standards and in land use
decisions.
The proposed project would construct a high-quality
development including ornamental landscaping that
would complement the surrounding public and
commercial land uses. Therefore, the proposed project
would not conflict with this policy.
Source: Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.1-8 and 5.1-14
As analyzed above, the proposed project would adhere to applicable aesthetic and scenic quality
regulations and policies mandated by the City of Fontana General Plan. The proposed project would
add well-designed aesthetically pleasing buildings and landscaping on the site and therefore have a
positive effect on the visual character of the site when compared to existing conditions. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact
The project site is located in an urban area, which is characterized by low to medium nighttime
ambient light levels. Street lights, traffic on local streets and exterior lighting in nearby
developments are the primary sources of light that contribute to the ambient light levels in the
project area. The project is generally surrounded by public and commercial land uses.
The project proposes new exterior lighting throughout the site, including the installation of exterior
lighting on the building exteriors, as well as proposed parking lot lighting that would be necessary
for safety and nighttime visibility throughout the project site. The new project lighting would be
❖ SECTION 4.1 - AESTHETICS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.1-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
visible from the surrounding area. Therefore, the project’s proposed exterior lighting is expected to
contribute to ambient nighttime illumination in the project vicinity. However, the proposed project
would comply with the City of Fontana Municipal Code § 30-260, Lighting and Glare, which states,
“all lights shall be directed and/or shielded to prevent the light from adversely affecting adjacent
residential or commercial properties. No structure or feature shall be permitted which creates
adverse glare effects” (City of Fontana Municipal Code, 2023). Additionally, none of the materials
proposed would have a mirror finish or would be highly reflective. Refer to Appendix A of this
document, which provides the proposed project plans.
Adherence to applicable City Municipal Codes would ensure that new sources of light or glare would
not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Therefore, impacts from a new source of
substantial light or glare would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.2 – AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.2-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on
the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
§ 12220(g)), timberland (as defined
by Public Resources Codes § 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by
Government Code § 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
X
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
No Impact
The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) was established in 1982 by the California
Department of Conservation (DOC) in order to analyze critical agricultural farmlands and observe
land conversion change over time. The project site and surrounding uses are deemed as “Urban and
Built-Up Land” (see Figure 4.2-1 below), which means that the land has a building density of at least
one building to 1.5 acres of land and is mainly utilized for residential, industrial or other non-
agricultural business (DOC, 2023). As shown in Figure 4.2-1, the project site is about five miles from
the nearest Prime Farmland. Hence, the project would not convert farmland for non-agricultural use.
No impacts would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.2 – AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.2-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.2-1
IMPORTANT FARMLAND CATEGORIES
❖ SECTION 4.2 – AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.2-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract?
No Impact
The Williamson Act, also known as the California Conservation Act of 1965, authorizes local
governments to work with private landowners by negotiating an agreement to tax these landowners
at lower rates if they restrict specific pieces of land to agricultural or open space use. According to
San Bernardino County’s Williamson Act Contract Map, the proposed project is shown as being on
land identified as “Urban and Built-Up Land” and does not contain any land under the specific
jurisdiction of the Williamson Act (Department of Conservation, 2020a). The City of Fontana’s
General Plan for 2015-2035 identifies the proposed project area as “P-PF,” which means it is for
Public Facilities with a zoning designation of Downtown Core - Civic (City of Fontana, 2023a).
Currently, no agricultural operations are near the site. Therefore, the project would not conflict with
existing zoning for agriculture uses or any Williamson Act contracts. No impacts would occur.
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land
(as defined in Public Resources Code § 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Codes § 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code § 51104(g))?
No Impact
The City’s General Plan land use designation for the project site is Public Facilities (P-PF) with a
zoning designation of Downtown Core - Civic; the site is not zoned for forest, timberland, or
timberland production use. Therefore, project development would not conflict with zoning for forest
land or timberland, and no impact would occur.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
No Impact
The project site and surroundings are not cultivated for forest resources. Therefore, project
development would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use,
and no impact would occur.
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?
No Impact
The project would not 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. No impacts would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is
nonattainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X
4.3.1 POLLUTANTS OF CONCERN
Criteria pollutants are air pollutants for which acceptable levels of exposure can be determined and
an ambient air quality standard has been established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) and/or the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The criteria air pollutants of concern are
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), lead (Pb), and ozone, and their precursors, such as reactive organic gases (ROG) (which are
ozone precursors). Since the proposed Fontana Civic Center Renovation project (proposed project or
Project) would not generate appreciable SO2 or Pb emissions,6 the analysis doesn't need to include
those two pollutants. Below is a description of the remaining air pollutants of concern and their
known health effects.
The project is in the San Bernardino County portion of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), for whose
air pollution control the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is substantially
responsible.
Table 4.3-1 shows the attainment status of the SCAB for each criteria pollutant for both the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS).
6 Sulfur dioxide emissions will be below 0.071 pound per day during construction and below 0.032 pound per day during
operations.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-1
FEDERAL AND STATE ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutants Federal Classification State Classification
Ozone (O3) – 1-hour standard Nonattainment (Extreme) Nonattainment Ozone (O3) – 8-hour standard Nonattainment (Extreme)
Particulate Matter (PM10) Maintenance (Serious) Nonattainment
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Nonattainment (Serious) Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance (Serious) Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Maintenance (Primary) Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Unclassified Attainment
Sulfates No Federal Standards Attainment
Lead (Pb) Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) Unclassified Visibility Reducing Particles
Sources: ARB, 2020, USEPA, 2022a.
Nitrogen oxides (NOX) serve as integral participants in the process of photochemical smog
production and are precursors for certain particulate compounds that are formed in the atmosphere
and for ozone. A precursor is a directly emitted air contaminant that, when released into the
atmosphere, forms, causes to be formed, or contributes to the formation of a secondary air
contaminant for which an ambient air quality standard (AAQS) has been adopted, or whose presence
in the atmosphere will contribute to the violation of one or more AAQSs. When NOX and ROG are
released in the atmosphere, they can chemically react with one another in the presence of sunlight to
form ozone. The two major forms of NOX are nitric oxide (NO) and NO2. NO is a colorless, odorless gas
formed from atmospheric nitrogen and oxygen when combustion takes place under high
temperature and/or high pressure. NO2 is a reddish-brown pungent gas formed by the combination
of NO and oxygen. NO2 acts as an acute respiratory irritant and eye irritant and increases
susceptibility to respiratory pathogens (USEPA, 2011).
Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless non-reactive pollutant produced by incomplete
combustion of fossil fuels. CO is emitted almost exclusively from motor vehicles, power plants,
refineries, industrial boilers, ships, aircraft and trains. In urban areas, such as the project location,
automobile exhaust accounts for most CO emissions. CO is a non-reactive air pollutant that dissipates
relatively quickly; therefore, ambient CO concentrations generally follow the spatial and temporal
distributions of vehicular traffic. CO concentrations are influenced by local meteorological
conditions, primarily wind speed, topography, and atmospheric stability. CO from motor vehicle
exhaust can become locally concentrated when surface-based temperature inversions are combined
with calm atmospheric conditions, a typical situation at dusk in urban areas between November and
February. The highest levels of CO typically occur during the colder months of the year when
inversion conditions are more frequent. In terms of health, CO competes with oxygen, often replacing
it in the blood, thus reducing the blood’s ability to transport oxygen to vital organs. The results of
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
excess CO exposure can be dizziness, fatigue, and impairment of central nervous system functions.
High concentrations are lethal (USEPA, 2010).
Particulate matter (PM) consists of finely divided solids or liquids, such as soot, dust, aerosols,
fumes and mists. Primary PM is emitted directly into the atmosphere from activities such as
agricultural operations, industrial processes, construction and demolition activities, and
entrainment of road dust into the air. Secondary PM is formed in the atmosphere from predominantly
gaseous combustion by-product precursors, such as sulfur oxides, NOX, and ROGs.
Particle size is a critical characteristic of PM that primarily determines the location of PM deposition
along the respiratory system (and associated health effects) as well as the degradation of visibility
through light scattering. In the United States, federal and state agencies have focused on two types of
PM. PM10 corresponds to the fraction of PM no greater than 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter
and is commonly called respirable particulate matter, while PM2.5 refers to the subset of PM10 of
aerodynamic diameter smaller than 2.5 micrometers, which is commonly called fine particulate
matter.
PM10 and PM2.5 deposition in the lungs results in irritation that triggers a range of inflammation
responses, such as mucus secretion and bronchoconstriction, and exacerbates pulmonary
dysfunctions, such as asthma, emphysema, and chronic bronchitis. Sufficiently small particles may
penetrate the bloodstream and impact functions such as blood coagulation, cardiac autonomic
control, and mobilization of inflammatory cells from the bone marrow. Individuals susceptible to
higher health risks from exposure to airborne PM10 pollution include children, the elderly, smokers,
and people of all ages with low pulmonary/cardiovascular function. For these individuals, adverse
health effects of PM10 pollution include coughing, wheezing, shortness of breath, phlegm, bronchitis,
and aggravation of lung or heart disease, leading, for example, to increased risks of hospitalization
and mortality from asthma attacks and heart attacks (USEPA, 2022b).
Reactive organic gases (ROG) are defined as any compound of carbon, excluding CO, carbon dioxide,
carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in
atmospheric photochemical reactions. It should be noted that there are no state or national ambient
air quality standards for ROG because ROGs are not classified as criteria pollutants. They are
regulated, however, because a reduction in ROG emissions reduces certain chemical reactions that
contribute to the formation of ozone. ROGs are also transformed into organic aerosols in the
atmosphere, which contribute to higher PM10 and lower visibility. The term “ROG” is used by the ARB
for this air quality analysis and is defined the same as the federal term “volatile organic compound”
(VOC).
Ozone is a secondary pollutant produced through a series of photochemical reactions involving ROG
and NOX. Ozone creation requires ROG and NOX to be available for approximately three hours in a
stable atmosphere with strong sunlight. Because of the long reaction time, peak ozone concentrations
frequently occur downwind of the sites where the precursor pollutants are emitted. Thus, ozone is
considered a regional, rather than a local, pollutant. The health effects of ozone include eye and
respiratory irritation, reduction of resistance to lung infection and possible aggravation of
pulmonary conditions in persons with lung disease. Ozone is also damaging to vegetation and
untreated rubber (USEPA, 2022c).
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.3.2 CLIMATE/METEOROLOGY
Air quality is affected by both the rate and location of pollutant emissions, and by meteorological
conditions that influence movement and dispersal of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions such as
wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local topography, provide the
link between air pollutant emissions and air quality.
The project site is located wholly within the SCAB, which includes all of Orange County, as well as the
non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. The distinctive climate
of the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The SCAB is in a coastal plain with
connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with
high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. The general region lies in the semi-
permanent high-pressure zone of the eastern Pacific. Thus, the climate is mild, tempered by cool sea
breezes. This usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of extremely
hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds (SCAQMD, 1993).
The average annual maximum and minimum temperatures in the project area, as determined from
the nearest meteorological station, Fontana Kaiser (#043120; latitude 34.08333°; longitude -
117.5167°) (WRCC, 2023), which is approximately 1.95 miles northwest of the project site, are 73.6
degrees Fahrenheit (°F) and 48.5°F, respectively. Average winter (December, January, and February)
high and low temperatures are approximately 68.2°F and 44.5°F, respectively, and average summer
(June, July, and August) high and low temperatures are approximately 92.0°F and 60.6°F,
respectively. The annual average of total precipitation is approximately 15.32 inches, which occurs
mostly during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer. Monthly precipitation
averages approximately 2.9 inches during the winter (December, January, and February),
approximately 1.4 inches during the spring (March, April, and May), approximately 0.8 inch during
the fall (September, October, and November), and approximately 0.05 inch during the summer (June,
July, and August).
4.3.3 LOCAL AIR QUALITY
The SCAQMD has divided the SCAB into source receptor areas (SRAs), based on similar
meteorological and topographical features. The project site is in SCAQMD’s Central San Bernardino
Valley air monitoring area (SRA 34), which is served by the SCAQMD’s Fontana-Arrow Monitoring
Station, located about 2.02 miles south of the proposed project site, at 14360 Arrow Highway in
Fontana (SCAQMD, 2022a). Criteria pollutants monitored at the Fontana-Arrow Monitoring Station
include ozone, PM10, PM2.5, and NO2. CO has not been monitored in the SCAB since 2012. The ambient
air quality data in the project vicinity as recorded from 2020 through 2022, along with applicable
standards, are shown in Table 4.3-2.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-2
AMBIENT AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA
Air
Pollutant Standard/Exceedance 2020 2021 2022
Ozone (O3)
Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppm)
Max. 8-hour Concentration (ppm)
# Days > Federal 8-hour Std. of 0.070 ppm
# Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.09 ppm
# Days > California 8-hour Std. of 0.070 ppm
0.151
0.112
89
56
91
0.124
0.104
89
44
83
0.144
0.108
68
44
70
Respirable Particulate
Matter (PM10)
Max. 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3)
Est. # Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 150 µg/m3
Federal Annual Average (12 µg/m3)
76.8
ND
37.9
73.8
ND
30.1
62.4
0
32.0
Fine Particulate
Matter
(PM2.5)
Max. 24-hour Concentration (µg/m3)
# Days > Fed. 24-hour Std. of 35 µg/m3
State Annual Average (12 µg/m3)
57.6
12.3
12.7
55.1
5.9
12.0
38.1
3.0
10.8
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
Max. 1-hour Concentration (ppm)
State Annual Average (0.030 ppm)
# Days > California 1-hour Std. of 0.18 ppm
0.057
0.018
0
0.060
0.018
0
0.050
0.017
0
Source: ARB, 2023
ND - There was insufficient (or no) data available to determine the value.
4.3.4 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (AQMP)
The SCAQMD is required to produce plans to show how air quality will be improved in the region.
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requires that these plans be updated triennially to incorporate
the most recent available technical information.7 A multi-level partnership of governmental agencies
at the federal, state, regional, and local levels implements the programs contained in these plans.
Agencies involved include the USEPA, ARB, local governments, Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG), and SCAQMD. The SCAQMD and SCAG are responsible for formulating and
implementing the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) for the SCAB. The SCAQMD updates its
AQMP every three years.
The 2022 AQMP (SCAQMD, 2022b) was adopted by the SCAQMD Board on December 2, 2022. It
focuses on reducing ozone by limiting the emissions of NOx, which is a key reactant in ozone
formation. The NOx reductions are through extensive use of zero emission technologies across all
stationary and mobile sources categories. The majority of NOx emissions are from heavy-duty trucks,
ships and other state and federally regulated mobile sources that are mostly beyond the SCAQMD’s
control. The SCAQMD’s primary authority is over stationary sources, which account for
approximately 20 percent of the SCAB’s NOx emissions.
The AQMP incorporates updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories
and incorporates the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) prepared by SCAG (2020). The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS was determined to conform to the
federally mandated State Implementation Plan for the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
county and city general plans.
7 CCAA of 1988.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.3.5 SENSITIVE RECEPTORS
Some people, such as individuals with respiratory illnesses or impaired lung function because of
other illnesses, persons over 65 years of age, and children under 14, are particularly sensitive to
certain pollutants. Facilities and structures where these sensitive people live or spend considerable
amounts of time are known as sensitive receptors. For the purposes of a CEQA analysis, the SCAQMD
considers a sensitive receptor to be a receptor such as a residence, hospital, or convalescent facility
where it is possible that an individual could remain for 24 hours (Chico and Koizumi, 2008, p. 3-2).
Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition of sensitive receptor, because
employees typically are present for shorter periods of time, such as eight hours. Therefore, applying
a 24-hour standard for PM10 is appropriate not only because the averaging period for the state
standard is 24 hours, but because the sensitive receptor would be present at the location for the full
24 hours.
The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are single-family residences north of the project
site along Upland Avenue, and to the east along Emerald Avenue. Additionally, Weekday Nursery
School (within Fontana Community Church) is directly west of the project site, across Sierra Avenue.
4.3.6 APPLICABLE SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT RULES
Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust Rule)
During construction, the project would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403 (fugitive dust). SCAQMD
Rule 403 does not require a permit for construction activities, per se; rather, it sets forth general and
specific requirements for all construction sites (as well as other fugitive dust sources) in the SCAB.
The general requirement prohibits a person from causing or allowing emissions of fugitive dust from
construction (or other fugitive dust source) such that the presence of such dust remains visible in the
atmosphere beyond the property line of the emissions source. SCAQMD Rule 403 also prohibits
construction activity from causing an incremental PM10 concentration impact, as the difference
between upwind and downwind samples, at the property line of more than 50 micrograms per cubic
meter as determined through PM10 high-volume sampling. The concentration standard and
associated PM10 sampling do not apply if specific measures identified in the rules are implemented
and appropriately documented.
Other requirements of Rule 403 include not causing or allowing emissions of fugitive dust that would
remain visible beyond the property line; no track-out extending 25 feet or more in cumulative length
and all track-out to be removed at conclusion of each workday; and using the applicable best available
control measures included in Table 1 of Rule 403.
Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings)
Construction of this project will include the application of architectural coatings and be subject to
SCAQMD Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings). Rule 1113 requires who applies, stores at a worksite,
or solicits the application of architectural coatings use coatings that contain VOC less than or equal
to the VOC limits specified in Table 1 of the rule.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.3.7 IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
Less than significant Impact
The South Coast 2022 AQMP, discussed above, incorporates land use assumptions from local general
plans and regional growth projections developed by the SCAG to estimate stationary and mobile air
emissions associated with projected population and planned land uses. If the proposed land use is
consistent with the local general plan, then the impact of the project is presumed to have been
accounted for in the AQMP. This is because the land use and transportation control sections of the
AQMP are based on the SCAG regional growth forecasts, which incorporate projections from local
general plans. The proposed project is in compliance with the City’s General Plan and Zoning
designations and with the Fontana General Plan. Therefore, no General Plan amendment or Zone
Change is required. The land use would continue to be consistent with the local plans and the impacts
of the project are still accounted for in the AQMP.
Another measurement tool in evaluating consistency with the AQMP is to determine whether a
project would generate population and employment growth and, if so, whether that growth would
exceed the growth rates forecasted in the AQMP and how the project would accommodate the
expected increase in population or employment. The project would not create increase in population
and overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) (RK Engineering Group, 2023), which would be included in
the growth rates forecasted in the AQMP.
According to a trip generation and VMT screening analysis performed for this project (RK
Engineering Group, 2023), the project has been screened out from a full VMT analysis based on the
Project Net Daily Trips Less Than 500 ADT criterion and may be presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT under CEQA (City of Fontana, 2020b).
Additionally, to assist the implementation of the AQMP, projects must not create regionally
significant emissions of regulated pollutants from either short-term construction or long-term
operations. The SCAQMD has developed criteria in the form of emissions thresholds for determining
whether emissions from a project are regionally significant (SCAQMD, 2019). They are useful for
estimating whether a project is likely to result in a violation of the NAAQS and/or whether the project
is in conformity with plans to achieve attainment. SCAQMD’s significance thresholds for criteria
pollutant emissions during construction activities and project operation are summarized in
Table 4.3-3. A project is considered to have a regional air quality impact if emissions from its
construction and/or operational activities exceed the corresponding SCAQMD significance
thresholds.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-3
SCAQMD THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Pollutant Construction
Thresholds (lbs/day)
Operational
Thresholds (lbs/day)
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 75 55
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 100 55
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 550
Sulfur Oxides (SOx) 150 150
Particulate Matter (PM10) 150 150
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 55 55
Note: lbs = pounds.
Source: SCAQMD, 2023.
Regional Construction Emissions
Project construction for Phase I is expected to begin around December 2023 and would last
approximately 13 months, ending about January 2025. Project construction for Phase II is expected
to begin around January 2025 and would last approximately 23 months, ending about December
2026.
Table 4.3-4 and Table 4.3-5 shows the project schedules for Phase I and Phase II that were used for
the air quality, GHG emissions, and noise analyses.
Table 4.3-4
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE – PHASE I
Construction Phase Start End
Demolition December 28, 2023 January 11, 2024
Grading January 12, 2024 January 31, 2024
Underground Building Utilities
(Trenching) January 26, 2024 February 14, 2024
Building Site Construction February 14, 2024 January 10, 2025
Paving September 29, 2024 December 9, 2024
Architectural Coating (Painting) December 10, 2024 January 10, 2025
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-5
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE – PHASE II
Construction Phase Start End
Demolition January 1, 2025 March 31, 2025
Site Preparation April 1, 2025 May 31, 2025
Grading May 1, 2025 July 31, 2025
Building Construction August 1, 2025 August 31, 2026
Paving September 1, 2026 October 31, 2026
Architectural Coating November 1, 2026 December 31, 2026
These construction activities would temporarily create emissions of dusts, fumes, equipment
exhaust, and other air contaminants. Mobile sources (such as diesel-fueled equipment onsite and
traveling to and from the project site) would primarily generate NOX emissions. The quantity of
emissions generated daily would vary, depending on the amount and types of construction activities
occurring at the same time.
Estimated criteria pollutant emissions from the project’s onsite and offsite project construction
activities were calculated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version
2022.1.1.20 (CAPCOA, 2022). CalEEMod is a planning tool for estimating emissions related to land
use projects. Model-predicted project emissions are compared with applicable thresholds to assess
regional air quality impacts. Offroad construction equipment information was supplied by the client
but CalEEMod defaults were used for onroad construction traffic inputs.
As shown in Table 4.3-6 and Table 4.3-7, construction emissions would not exceed SCAQMD
regional thresholds. Therefore, the project’s short-term regional air quality impacts would be less
than significant. Refer to Appendix B of this document for air quality calculations.
Table 4.3-6
MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS – PHASE I
Construction Activity Maximum Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Emissions, 2023 1.82 18.4 18.5 1.99 0.94
Maximum Emissions, 2024 2.43 21.7 26.5 4.03 2.30
Maximum Emissions, 2025 1.99 12.7 17.0 0.60 0.42
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 55
Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022). SCAQMD, 2019
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-7
MAXIMUM DAILY REGIONAL CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS – PHASE II
Construction Activity Maximum Emissions (lbs/day)
ROG NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Emissions, 2025 2.90 26.2 27.7 6.58 3.65
Maximum Emissions, 2026 3.82 8.75 10.6 0.42 0.30
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 55
Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022). SCAQMD, 2019
Regional Operational Emissions
The proposed renovation of the Civic Center project would involve the construction of a new City Hall
and annex building, which would result in operational emissions from area sources, motor vehicles,
and energy demand. The significance evaluation was based upon the difference between project-
related operational emissions and those from the replaced sources. The resulting net emissions levels
were subsequently compared with the SCAQMD thresholds to determine compliance. The findings of
the emissions calculations are presented in Table 4.3-8.
As seen in the table, for each criteria pollutant, net operational emissions would be below the
pollutant’s SCAQMD significance threshold. Therefore, regional operational emissions would be less
than significant.
Table 4.3-8
MAXIMUM DAILY NET PROJECT OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Scenario Emission Source Pollutant (lbs/day)
ROG NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Project,
Phase I & II
Combined
Area Sources 1.76 0.02 2.6 0.01 0.01
Energy Sources 0.02 0.44 0.38 0.04 0.04
Mobile Sources 12.27 12.37 110.1 23.69 6.13
Total Operational Emissions 14.05 12.83 112.08 23.73 6.17
Existing
buildings
Area Sources 1.4 0.02 1.96 <0.005 < 0.005
Energy Sources 0.02 0.33 0.28 0.03 0.03
Mobile Sources 4.65 4.92 42.9 7.72 2.01
Total Operational Emissions 6.07 5.27 45.14 7.75 2.04
Net Increase in Operational Emissions 7.98 7.56 66.94 15.98 4.13
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 55
Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022). SCAQMD, 2019.
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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
Since the SCAB is currently in nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5, related projects may exceed an air
quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality exceedance. The SCAQMD
neither recommends quantified analyses of construction and/or operational emissions from multiple
development projects nor provides methodologies or thresholds of significance to be used to assess
the cumulative emissions generated by multiple cumulative projects. Instead, the District
recommends that a project’s potential contribution to cumulative impacts be assessed by utilizing
the same significance criteria as those for project-specific impacts. Furthermore, the SCAQMD states
that if an individual development project generates less-than-significant construction or operational
emissions impacts, then the development project would not contribute to a cumulatively
considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment.
As discussed above, the mass daily construction and operational emissions generated by the project
would not exceed any of the SCAQMD’s significance thresholds. Also, as discussed below, localized
emissions generated by the Project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s Localized Significance
Thresholds (LSTs). Therefore, the project would not contribute a cumulatively considerable increase
in emissions for the pollutants that the SCAB is in nonattainment. Thus, cumulative air quality
impacts associated with the project would be less than significant.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction of the project would generate short-term and intermittent emissions. Following the
SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (Chico and Koizumi, 2008), only onsite
construction emissions were considered in the localized significance analysis. The residence at
17000 Upland Avenue is the nearest sensitive receptor to the Phase I project site (about 23 meters
away).8 The Fontana Community Church and attached Nursery School west of the project site is the
nearest sensitive receiver to Phase II of the project (about 50 meters away). Localized significance
thresholds for projects in SRA 34 were obtained from tables in Appendix C of the SCAQMD’s Final
Localized Significance Threshold Methodology (Chico and Koizumi, 2008). Table 4.3-10 and Table
4.3-11 shows the results of the localized significance analysis for the project for Phase I and for Phase
II. Localized short-term air quality impacts from construction of the project would be less than
significant.
8 According to SCAQMD guidance, a receptor closer than 25 meters to the source may be assumed to be 25 meters away
(Chico and Koizumi, 2008, p. 3-3).
❖ SECTION 4.3 – AIR QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.3-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.3-10
RESULTS OF UNMITIGATED LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS – PHASE I
Nearest Sensitive Receptor
Maximum Onsite Construction
Emissions (pounds/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum daily unmitigated emissions 19.3 20.7 3.6 2.1
SCAQMD LST for 1.9 acres (82,750-square-foot
disturbed area) @ 25 meters 164.8 941.5 6.7 3.9
Significant (Yes or No) No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022).
Table 4.3-11
RESULTS OF UNMITIGATED LOCALIZED SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS – PHASE II
Nearest Sensitive Receptor
Maximum Onsite Construction
Emissions (pounds/day)
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Maximum daily unmitigated emissions 14.1 15.1 3.4 1.9
SCAQMD LST for 1.3 acres (56,000-square-foot.
disturbed area) @ 50 meters 163.6 1180.2 15.7 5.3
Significant (Yes or No) No No No No
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022).
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
A project-related significant adverse effect could occur if construction or operation of the proposed
project would result in generation of odors that would be perceptible in adjacent sensitive areas.
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SCAQMD, 1993), land uses and industrial
operations that are associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment
plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and
fiberglass molding. Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include
equipment exhaust. Odors from these sources would be localized and generally confined to the
immediate area surrounding the project. The project would use typical construction techniques, and
the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature.
The project would not create substantial objectionable odors and this impact would be less than
significant.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors,
or impede the use of native nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X
Methodology
UltraSystems biologists researched readily available information, including relevant literature,
databases, agency websites, various previously completed reports and management plans, GIS data,
maps, aerial imagery from public domain sources, and in-house records to identify the following: 1)
habitats, special-status plant and wildlife species, jurisdictional waters, critical habitats, and wildlife
corridors that may occur in and near the project site; and 2) local or regional plans, policies, and
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
regulations that may apply to the project. Sources accessed by UltraSystems for analysis of potential
impacts within this Initial Study include:
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer (CDFW,
2023a).
• California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), provided by the CDFW (CNDDB, 2023a).
• Information, Planning and Conservation (IPaC), provided by the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS; USFWS, 2023a).
• National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), provided by the USFWS (USFWS, 2023c).
• California Invasive Plant Inventory, provided by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-
IPC, 2006)
• Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens, 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second
Edition, provided by California Native Plant Society Press.
Additional sources used are cited in the text.
Aerial imagery was overlaid with geospatial data by utilizing Geographic Information System (GIS)
software to identify documented observations of the following biological or environmental
components within the project vicinity:
1) Previously recorded observations within the project vicinity and geographic range of special
status species and potentially suitable habitats;
2) special-status vegetation communities;
3) protected management lands;
4) proposed and final critical habitats;
5) waters of the State and waters of the U.S., including wetlands; and
6) wildlife corridors.
4.4.1 DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS
The project site plus a 500-foot buffer are collectively referred to as the Biological Study Area (BSA)
in this section (see Figure 4.4-1). Plant and wildlife species listed under the federal Endangered
Species Act (ESA) or under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) are referred to collectively
as listed species in this section. Plant and wildlife species not listed under ESA or CESA but still
protected by federal agencies, state agencies, local or regional plans and/or nonprofit resource
organizations, such as the California Native Plant Society (CNPS), are collectively referred to as
sensitive species in this section. The term special-status species is used when collectively referring
to both listed and sensitive species.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact
Literature Review Results and Discussion
The project site is currently developed and is located in an urbanized area, providing low-value
habitat for most of the special status plant and wildlife species that have been recorded within ten
miles of the project site (CNDDB 2023a). Elevations in the BSA range from 1,284 to 1,306 feet above
mean sea level (amsl; Google Earth Pro, 2023).
Plants and Vegetation Communities
Based on a literature review and query from publicly available databases (hereafter, plant inventory;
CNDDB, 2022a; USFWS, 2023a; CNPS, 2023a) for reported occurrences within a ten-mile radius of
the project site, there were eight listed and 24 sensitive plant species identified by one of the
following means: reported in the plant inventory; recognized as occurring based on knowledge of the
area; or observed during other surveys. Figure 4.4-2 displays the only special-status plant species,
mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. puberula), that was recorded by the CNDDB within a two-mile
radius of the BSA (CNDDB, 2023a). ; however, this population was recorded in 1885 and, due to the
urbanization of this area, is considered by the CNDDB to be “possibly extirpated”. All species
evaluated in the plant inventory are listed in Appendix C, Special-Status Species Inventory and
Occurrence Potential Determination.
All 32 special-status plant species evaluated in the plant inventory, including mesa horkelia, were
determined to be not expected to occur in the BSA. The BSA lacks suitable habitat or is outside the
elevation or geographic range of the majority of the special-status plant species documented in the
plant inventory. The project site contains a high coverage of impermeable surfaces, deterring the
establishment of special-status plants. No impacts on special-status plant species or sensitive natural
communities are anticipated as a result of the project. No mitigation is required.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.4–1
PROJECT LOCATION AND BIOLOGICAL STUDY AREA (BSA)
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.4–2
CNDDB KNOWN OCCURRENCES: PLANT SPECIES AND HABITATS
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Wildlife
Based on a literature review and query from publicly available databases (hereafter, wildlife
inventory; CNDDB, 2023a; USFWS, 2023a) for reported occurrences within a ten-mile radius of the
project site, there were 19 listed and 39 sensitive wildlife species identified by one of the following
means: reported in the wildlife inventory; recognized as occurring based on knowledge of the area;
or observed during other surveys. Of those 48 species, only three sensitive species (Cooper’s hawk
[Accipiter cooperii], western yellow bat [Lasiurus xanthinus], and western mastiff bat [Eumops perotis
californicus]), were determined to have a low potential to occur in the BSA. Cooper’s hawk is
generally adaptive to urbanized environments, but the BSA does not provide woodland forest habitat
which would be considered optimal to support Cooper’s hawk. There is suitable habitat (large trees
including palms) in the BSA to potentially support western yellow bat; however, western yellow bat
has not been recorded in the area since 1996, and the exact location of that recorded observation is
unknown9. .
Figure 4.4-3 displays the five species recorded by the CNDDB within a two-mile radius of the BSA
(CNDDB, 2023a). These five species are Crotch’s bumble bee (Bombus crotchii), Delhi sands flower-
loving fly (Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis), southern California legless lizard (Anniella
stebbinsi), western yellow bat, and white cuckoo bee (Neolarra alba). As discussed above, western
yellow bat was determined to have a low potential to occur in the BSA. The remaining four species
identified within a two-mile radius (CNDDB, 2023) were determined to be not expected to occur due
to the developed condition of the BSA and resulting lack of suitable habitat to support them.
The majority of the special-status wildlife species evaluated in the wildlife inventory were
determined to be not expected to occur in the BSA. The BSA lacks suitable habitat or is outside the
geographic range of the majority of the special-status wildlife species documented in the wildlife
inventory. The BSA primarily contains residential and commercial developments with associated
paved areas, infrastructure, and areas landscaped with ornamental (non-native) vegetation. The
majority of the species evaluated in the wildlife inventory require sufficient coverage of native
vegetation for nesting and foraging. Additionally, there is a significant level of human activity, traffic,
and traffic noise which may render the BSA less desirable for many special-status wildlife species to
occupy. The wildlife species evaluated in the wildlife inventory and their respective status rankings
are included in Appendix C Special-Status Species Inventory and Occurrence Potential Determination.
Impacts to special-status wildlife species resulting from the project are anticipated to be less than
significant. No mitigation is proposed.
9 CNDDB states that the exact location unknown. This record has been mapped by the CNDDB as “in the vicinity of
Fontana” and the location uncertainty is 2 miles.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.4-3
CNDDB KNOWN OCCURRENCES WILDLIFE SPECIES
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Migratory Birds
Migratory birds are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), which renders it unlawful
to take migratory birds, and their nests, eggs, and young. California Fish and Game Code makes it
unlawful to take native birds, their nests, eggs, and young; California courts have held that take
includes incidental take and is not limited to hunting and fishing and other activities that are
specifically intended to kill protected fish and wildlife.
Trees within the BSA could provide suitable future or current bird nesting sites. If construction
occurs during the breeding/nesting season (typically from February 15 through September 15, but
can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending on weather conditions), direct impacts could
occur through loss (take) of nests, eggs, and young resulting from tree trimming and removal.
Indirect impacts to migratory birds could occur from increased noise, vibration, and dust generated
during construction. This could adversely affect the breeding behavior of some birds, and lead to the
loss (take) of eggs and chicks, or nest abandonment. To maintain compliance with the MBTA and Fish
and Game Code, and to avoid potential for take of migratory non-game breeding birds and of native
birds, their nests, young, and eggs, PDF BIO-1 would be implemented to minimize or avoid potential
impacts. Implementation of PDF BIO-1, described below, would minimize or avoid significant
impacts to breeding and nesting birds. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not
required.
Project Design Features (PDFs)
PDF BIO-1: Pre-Construction Breeding Bird Survey
To maintain compliance with the MBTA and Fish and Game Code, and to minimize or avoid direct and
indirect impacts or take of migratory non-game breeding birds, their nests, young, and eggs, the
following measures will be implemented.
1. Project activities that will remove or disturb potential nest sites, such as open ground, trees,
shrubs, grasses, or burrows, during the breeding season would be a potential significant
impact if migratory non-game breeding birds are present. Project activities that will remove
or disturb potential nest sites will be scheduled outside the breeding bird season to avoid
potential direct impacts to migratory non-game breeding birds protected by the MBTA and
Fish and Game Code. The breeding bird nesting season is typically from February 15 through
September 15, but can vary slightly from year to year, usually depending on weather
conditions. Removing all physical features that could potentially serve as nest sites will also
help to prevent birds from nesting within the project site during the breeding season and
during construction activities.
2. If project activities cannot be avoided during February 15 through September 15, a qualified
biologist will conduct a pre-construction breeding bird survey for breeding birds and active
nests or potential nesting sites within the limits of project disturbance. The survey will be
conducted at least seven days prior to the onset of scheduled activities, such as mobilization
and staging. It will end no more than three days prior to vegetation, substrate, and structure
removal and/or disturbance.
3. If no breeding birds or active nests are observed during the pre-construction survey or they
are observed and will not be impacted, project activities may begin and no further mitigation
will be required.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4. If a breeding bird territory or an active bird nest is located during the pre-construction survey
and will potentially be impacted, the site will be mapped on engineering drawings and a no
activity buffer zone will be marked (fencing, stakes, flagging, orange snow fencing, etc.) a
minimum of 100 feet in all directions or 500 feet in all directions for listed bird species and
all raptors. The biologist will determine the appropriate buffer size based on the type of
activities planned near the nest and the type of bird that created the nest. Some bird species
are more tolerant than others of noise and activities occurring near their nest. This no-activity
buffer zone will not be disturbed until a qualified biologist has determined that the nest is
inactive, the young have fledged, the young are no longer being fed by the parents, the young
have left the area, or the young will no longer be impacted by project activities. Periodic
monitoring by a biologist will be performed to determine when nesting is complete. Once the
nesting cycle has finished, project activities may begin within the buffer zone.
5. If listed bird species are observed within the project site during the pre-construction survey,
the biologist will immediately map the area and notify the appropriate resource agency to
determine suitable protection measures and/or mitigation measures and to determine if
additional surveys or focused protocol surveys are necessary. Project activities may begin
within the area only when concurrence is received from the appropriate resource agency.
Breeding birds or their active nests will not be disturbed, captured, handled or moved. Active nests
cannot be removed or disturbed. However, nests may be removed or disturbed if determined inactive
by a qualified biologist.
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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
No Impact
Land Cover Types
The BSA contains one land cover type, Developed/Ornamental, which is described below. This land
cover type is not classified as a sensitive natural community in the CDFW California Natural
Community List (CDFW, 2023b).
Developed/Ornamental:
Developed/ornamental land cover includes areas that often support man-made structures such as
houses, sidewalks, buildings, parks, water tanks, flood control channels, transportation
infrastructure (bridges and culverts), and ornamental landscaping, consisting of exotic, or non-
native, plant species, that occurs in parks, gardens and yards. The BSA is comprised entirely of
developed/ornamental land cover.
The BSA is fully developed and does not support riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
communities (see Figure 4.4-4). Results of the literature review indicate that riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural communities do not occur in the BSA. Construction of the project would not
result in impacts to any riparian habitat, or sensitive natural communities identified in local, regional
state, or federal plans, policies, or regulations. No impact would occur and no mitigation is proposed.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.4-4
LAND COVER TYPES
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact
Drainages, depressions, and other topographic features that would be conducive to wetlands
formation were not observed within the BSA. The results of the literature study (USEPA, 2023a;
USFWS, 2023c;) determined that the BSA does not contain wetlands and other waters of the U.S. or
State, including drainages with a definable bed, bank, channel, or evidence of an ordinary high-water
mark. Wetland hydrology, wetland soils, or wetland plants were not observed on the project site. It
was determined that state or federal protected wetlands and other waters do not occur on the project
site. No impact would occur and mitigation is not required.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant Impact
There is a CDFW Small Natural Area (Miller Park on Arrow Boulevard) approximately 550 feet south
of the project. The project site does not overlap with CDFW Essential Connectivity Areas or Natural
Landscape Blocks (CDFW, 2023a; see Figure 4.4-5). Access to the Small Natural Areas site near the
project site is already heavily impeded by the presence of major roadways and developed areas, so
project development would not further impede wildlife access to these areas.
Due to the urbanized state of the area, it is unlikely that mammals unacclimated to human activities
or that require dense vegetative cover would utilize the BSA for passage. Species that are less
restricted in movement pathway requirements require larger home range areas and dispersal
distances; those that are adapted to urban areas (raccoon, skunk, coyote, birds) are likely to use the
BSA as a wildlife movement corridor for hunting and foraging. Construction of the project may
temporarily affect potential wildlife use of the project site during the construction phases; however,
operation of the project would not significantly impact wildlife movement. The urban-adaptive
species that already utilize the BSA for passage and foraging, as described above, would likely
continue to utilize the BSA after completion of the project. Impacts to wildlife corridors are
anticipated to be less than significant as a result of the project.
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.4-5
CDFW WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
❖ SECTION 4.4 – BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.4-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Impacts to native wildlife nursery sites are not anticipated as a result of the project. Western yellow
bat and western mastiff bat were determined to have a low potential to occur in the BSA, and bat
maternity roosts were not observed during the field survey. The BSA is developed and contains paved
and landscaped areas. The majority of the BSA is covered with impermeable surfaces and does not
provide suitable habitat to support native wildlife nursery sites, with the exception of breeding birds.
Impacts to breeding birds are previously discussed in Section 4.4 a). Impacts to native wildlife
nursery sites resulting from the project are not anticipated to occur. No mitigation is proposed.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant
Fontana Code of Ordinances, Chapter 28, Article III, Section 28-64 (City Tree Ordinance; City of
Fontana, 1993) requires that Except as provided in section 28-65, no person shall remove or cause the
removal of any heritage, significant or specimen tree unless a tree removal permit is first obtained. One
of the exemptions in Section 68-65 states that No permit or replacement shall be required for…
Removal of trees which are determined to be diseased and/or dead by a certified arborist and approved
by the staff (§ 28-65[4]).
As designed, the project would remove only those trees that have been determined to be diseased by
a certified arborist, as approved by City staff. The project would not conflict with local policies and
ordinances protecting biological resources such as the City Tree Ordinance. Impacts would be less
than significant, and mitigation is not required.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact
The project site is not located within an area addressed by an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan (CDFW, 2023a), and therefore no conflicts would occur. No mitigation is required.
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
X
Information from UltraSystems’ Draft Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory report, dated December
14, 2023 (see Appendix D), prepared for the Fontana Civic Center Renovation Project, City of
Fontana has been included within this section.
4.5.1 METHODOLOGY
A cultural resources records search was conducted on October 3, 2023 for the Fontana Civic Center
Renovation Project site (Figure 4.5-1,). The study included a California Historic Resources Inventory
System (CHRIS) records and literature search at the South Central Coastal Information Center
(SCCIC) at California State University, Fullerton for cultural resources in the project boundary and
the 0.5-mile radius around the site. Additionally, a request was made to the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) to conduct a search of their Sacred Lands File (SLF) for potential traditional
cultural properties as well as to provide a list of local Native American tribal organizations to contact.
The NAHC request was made on September 28, 2023. The NAHC’s response received November 21,
2023 indicated the SLF search was negative. Letters were sent the same day to the 41 individual
contacts representing 21 tribes noted by the NAHC, requesting a reply if they have knowledge of
cultural resources in the area that they wished to share and asking if they had any questions or
concerns regarding the project, with follow up calls made December 6, 2023. A pedestrian field
survey of the project site was conducted on November 10, 2023.
4.5.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
Based on the cultural resources records search, it was determined that no historic cultural resources
or prehistoric archeological sites have been previously recorded within the project site boundary.
Within the 0.5-mile buffer zone, there are 13 recorded historic era cultural resources. One prior
survey included the project parcel (SB-1065640) which, while indicated on the SCCIC’s Fontana, Calif.
7.5’ Project Locations map, was not available at the SCCIC, and a copy could not be obtained (see
Section 4.1 and Tables 4.1-1 and Table 4.1-2 in Appendix D). The pedestrian field survey
undertaken for this project did not observe any indications of human activities dating to the
prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years or older). (see Section 4.3 in Appendix D).
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.5-1
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.5.3 IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
No Impact
A historical resource is defined in § 15064.5(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines as any object, building,
structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript determined to be historically significant or
significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social,
political, military, or cultural annals of California. Historical resources are further defined as: being
associated with significant events, important persons, or distinctive characteristics of a type, period
or method of construction; representing the work of an important creative individual; or possessing
high artistic values. Resources listed in or determined eligible for the California Register, included in
a local register, or identified as significant in a historic resource survey are also considered as
historical resources under CEQA.
Similarly, the National Register criteria (contained in Code of Federal Regulations Title 36 § 60.4) are
used to evaluate resources when complying with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act. Specifically, the National Register criteria state that eligible resources comprise districts, sites,
buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association, and that (a) are associated with events that have made a
significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or (b) that are associated with the lives
of persons significant in our past; or (c) that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period,
or method of construction, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant
distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or (d) that have yielded or
may be likely to yield, information important to history or prehistory.
A substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, as a result of a project or
development, is considered a significant impact on the environment. Substantial adverse change is
defined as physical demolition, relocation, or alteration of a resource or its immediate surroundings
such that the significance of the historical resource would be materially impaired. Direct impacts are
those that cause substantial adverse physical change to a historic property. Indirect impacts are those
that cause substantial adverse change to the immediate surroundings of a historic property, such that
the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired.
Based on the SCCIC cultural resources records search, it was determined that there are no historic
cultural resources previously recorded within the project site boundary. Within the 0.5-mile buffer
zone, there have been 13 historic era resources recorded. Table 4.1-1 in Appendix D summarizes
these resources. There are two historic-era resources located adjacent to the Civic Center project site.
These are the Fontana Woman’s Club House at 16880 Seville Avenue, and the Fontana Mercantile
Company located at the corner of Sierra Avenue and Spring Street, both across Sierra Avenue to the
west of the Civic Center, and both identified as a Point of Historic Interest. The Woman’s Club (P-36-
15375) building was built in 1924. It was designed by Hugh Kirk, a local Fontana architect, in the
Spanish Mission style. It was still in use as the Woman’s Club when the form was prepared in 1982.
The Fontana Mercantile Company (P-36-31935) is described as the “oldest business structure in the
townsite of Fontana.” Constructed in 1921 by the owner, H.C. Spring, it was used as a community
meeting place, chamber of commerce office, U.S. post office, and as the W.P.A headquarter in the
1930s. The building was remodeled in 1937.
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
John Charles Anicic, Jr., as Researcher for the Fontana Historical Society, recorded a number of
historic buildings throughout downtown Fontana in 1982 which have been listed as Points of Historic
Interest by the California Department of Parks and Recreation (CDPR). Within the 0.5-mile buffer of
the project site, these included the Sinclair Commercial Building (P-36-15285), the A.B. Miller
Community Park and Plunge (P-36-15287), which is located directly south of the Civic Center
complex on the south side of Sevilla Avenue but is not visible from the project site, the Fontana
Community Church Complex (P-36-15377), the Fontana Company Tract buildings which included the
local library and chamber of commerce (P-36-15399), the Fontana Catholic Church (St. Boniface) (P-
36-319345); and the American Legion Hall, formerly the Boy Scout Lodge (P-36-31936),which was
not accepted as an Historic Point of Interest by the CDPR. These buildings are located along Sierra
Avenue and Arrow Boulevard to the west.
Other historic sites within the 0.5-mile zone of the project include historic State Route 66 (CA-SBR-
2910) which is now Foothill Boulevard, 0.25 mile to the north of the project site; the stretch that
passes through Fontana was recorded as P-36-2910. The Fontana Junior High School, located a block
to the southeast of the project site, was recorded in 1988 as P-36-0203377. There was also an
isolated historic artifact consisting of a glass electrical insulator found along Foothill
Boulevard/Route 66 (P-37-29865). These historic-era structures are not visible from the project
site.
A search of the Built Environmental Resource Directory (BERD) provided by the Office of Historic
Preservation (2022) was conducted for this project. It was determined that the Project boundary
does not have any resources present that have been evaluated under the National Register of Historic
Places. The 0.5-mile radius has 61 resources noted in the BERD, 58 of which have been determined
ineligible for National Register by consensus through the Section 106 process but not been evaluated
for the California Register or local listing (6Y) and three have been designated as a State Point of
Historical Interest but do not meet the California Register criteria and have not been evaluated for
the National Register (7P). The list of resources can be found on Table 4.1 1 in Appendix D.
Proposed project development would not adversely impact historical resources.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
An archaeological resource is defined in § 15064.5(c) of the CEQA Guidelines as a site, area or place
determined to be historically significant as defined in § 15064(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, or as a
unique archaeological resource defined in § 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code as an artifact,
object, or site that contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions of
public interest or that has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best example of
its type, or that is directly associated with a scientifically-recognized important prehistoric or historic
event or person.
The past apparent use of the project site for agriculture suggests that ground on the project site has
been disturbed, with the native surface soil remaining. The cultural resources investigation
conducted by UltraSystems included a CHRIS records search of the project site and buffer zone, a
search of the SLF by the NAHC, and a pedestrian field survey. The results of these investigations
suggest that a low potential for undisturbed unique archeological resources exists on the project site.
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Based on the SCCIC cultural resources records search, it was determined that there are no prehistoric
or historic cultural resources previously recorded within the project site boundary. Within the
0.5-mile buffer zone, there have been 13 historic era resources recorded. Table 4.1-1 in Appendix D
summarizes these resources.
There have been 14 previous cultural resource studies within the 0.5-mile buffer of the project
(Table 4.1-2 in Appendix D of this IS/MND). One survey is located inside the project area (SB-
1065640). The survey, while indicated on the SCCIC’s Fontana, Calif. 7.5’ Project Locations map, was
not available at the SCCIC and a copy could not be obtained (Michelle Galaz, personal communication;
October 3, 2023). Therefore, the extent and nature of the study is unknown. (See Section 4.1 and
Table 4.1-2 in Appendix D of this IS/MND.)
A NAHC SLF search was requested on September 28, 2023. The NAHC’s response November 21, 2023
indicated the SLF search was negative. Letters were sent the same day to the 41 individual contacts
representing 21 tribes noted by the NAHC, requesting a reply if they have knowledge of cultural
resources in the area that they wished to share and asking if they had any questions or concerns
regarding the project, with follow up calls to be made 30 days after these letters were sent. These
tribes included:
• Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission
Indians
• Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
• Cahuilla Band of Indians
• Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians -
Kizh Nation
• Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of
Mission Indians
• Gabrielino/Tongva Nation
• Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California
Tribal Council
• Gabrielino-Tongva Tribe
• Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians
• Morongo Band of Mission Indians
• Pala Band of Mission Indians
• Pechanga Band of Indians
• Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation
• Ramona Band of Cahuilla
• Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians
• San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
• Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Indians
• Serrano Nation of Mission Indians
• Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
• Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Nine email responses were received. Ana Rios, Administrative Assistant and Geramy Martin, Tribal
Secretary for the Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians responded by email on November 22, 2023 and
November 30, 2023 indicated that the tribe is unaware of specific cultural resources that may be
affected, but in the event any cultural resources are discovered during development to contact the
tribe. Lorrie Gregory, Cultural Resources Coordinator for the Cahuilla Band of Indians indicated that
the tribe is unaware of any cultural resources in the project vicinity, but that since the project area is
within the Cahuilla traditional land use, they request any cultural materials for review; Ms. Doukakis
responded indicating that the City of Fontana will engage in AB 52 consultation for this project and
the tribe can request a copy of the cultural resources report at that time. Brandy Salas, Admin
Specialist for the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation asked for the lead agencies
contact information; this was provided November 22, 2023. Dorothy Willis with the Los Coyotes
Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians indicated that the tribe would defer to local tribes due to the
project location. Deneen Pelton, Cultural Resources Department Coordinator for the Ramona Band
of Cahuilla Indians indicated that the project location is not within the Band’s Area of Historic Interest
and they recommend UEI contact a Tribe that is closer to the project. Eunice Ambriz, Cultural
Resources Technician for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians indicated that the proposed project
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
area is not sensitive for cultural resources but it is located within Serrano Ancestral Territory and
the tribe wishes to engage in AB 52 consultation. Cheryl Madrigal Cultural Resources Manager /
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer for the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians indicated that the tribe
will review our request and get back to us. Gary Resvaloso, Most Likely Descendent for the Torres-
Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians responded asking Mr. Becerra to follow up with us. Mary Belardo,
Cultural Committee Vice-Chair of the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians responded indicating
that she was forwarding our letter to Mr. Becerra.
Following up on letter and email contacts, telephone calls were conducted by Mrs. Doukakis on
December 6, 2023, to complete the outreach process. These calls were to the 28 tribal contacts
(representing 16 tribes) who had not already responded. Fourteen telephone calls were placed with
no answer and messages were left describing the project and requesting a response. These were to
Doug Welmas, Chairperson of the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians; Anthony Morales, Chairperson
of the Gabrieleno / Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians; Sandonne Goad, Chairperson of the
Gabrielino-Tongva Nation; Christina Conley, Cultural Resources Administrator for the Gabrielino
Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council; Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resource Director of the
Gabrieleno- Tongva Tribe; Lovina Redner, Tribal Chair of the Santa Rosa Band of Mission Indians;
John Gomez, Environmental Coordinator of the Ramona Band of Cahuilla; Jordan Joaquin, President,
Quechan Tribal Council for the Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation; Gary Resvaloso, Most
Likely Descendent for the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians; Ann Brierty, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians; Shasta Gaughen, THPO of the Pala Band
of Mission Indians; Alexis Wallick, Assistant Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Pala Band of
Mission Indians; Tuba Ebru Ozdul, Pechanga Cultural Analyst of the Pechanga Band of Indians; and
to Wayne Walker, Co-Chairperson of the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians. In a call to Jill McCormick,
Historic Preservation Officer for the Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation there was no
answer and no ability to leave a message. In a call to Steve Bodmer, General Counsel for the Pechanga
Band of Indians the tribal receptionist indicated that Mr. Bodmer is unavailable and a message was
left with the receptionist. In a call to Charles Alvarez, Chairperson for the Gabrieleno- Tongva Tribe
the phone line was disconnected so no message could be left. In a call to Robert Martin, Chairperson
for the Morongo Band of Mission Indians the call would not go through and no message could be left.
In a call to Alesia Reed, Cultural Committee Chairwoman for the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla
Indians (TMDCI) the tribal receptionist stated the Chairwoman does not work in the office and the
way to contact her is through email, which had been done. In a call to Thomas Tortez, Chairperson
for the TMDCI the tribal receptionist indicated that the Chairperson was away. In a call to Abraham
Becerra, Cultural Coordinator for the TMDCI the tribal receptionist forwarded our call to Mr.
Becerra’s phone line. The line rang with no ability to leave a message. In a call back to the tribal
receptionist, she checked and indicated that Mr. Becerra was not in the office. In a call to Mary
Belardo, Cultural Committee Vice-Chair of the TMDCI the receptionist indicated that the Vice -Chair
was not in the office.
During the call to Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Department for the Soboba Band of Luiseño
Indians, Mr Ontiveros indicated that the tribe would defer to San Manuel. Patricia Garcia-Plotkin,
Director of Historic Preservation of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians indicated that the tribe
has no concerns with the project. Christina Conley, Cultural Resources Administrator for the
Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council returned the phone call and indicated that the
tribe would defer comments to the Gabrieleno / Tongva Nation, Sandonne Goad’s group. Manfred
Scott, Acting Chairman – Kw’ts’an Cultural Committee for the Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma
Reservation indicated that the tribe has no concern or comment on the project and defers to closer
tribes. Mark Cochrane, Co- Chairperson for the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians indicated that the
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
tribe would like to be notified if resources were found during ground disturbance activities. Denise
Turner Walsh, Attorney General for the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians indicated that she would
contact the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer and get back to us. Ms. Doukakis was copied on an
email from Ms. Walsh on the same day to Ms. Madrigal describing UEI’s phone call and asked her to
advise. An email response was received the same day from Deneen Pelton, Cultural Resources
Department Coordinator indicating that the project location is not within the Band’s Area of Historic
Interest and they recommend UEI contact a Tribe that is closer to the project. Gary Resvaloso, Most
Likely Descendent for the Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians returned our call on the same day
indicating that the Cultural Committee meets on Thursday and we should receive a response after
that. He also indicated that Fontana is outside of the prehistoric settlement patterns of the tribe and
they may defer to San Manuel or Soboba tribes. (See Appendix D, Attachment C.) There have been
no further responses from these tribes to date.
A pedestrian field survey of the project site was conducted on November 10, 2023. The survey
consisted of walking over, visually inspecting, and photographing the exposed ground surface of the
project site using standard archaeological procedures and techniques. Survey of grounds
surrounding the northwest annex (which includes the city council chambers) observed the several
landscape beds on the west (Sierra Avenue), north (Upland Avenue) and west (facing the interior
parking spaces) sides of the building, as well as the grass lawn on the west side. Several of the planter
beds on the west and northwest side were raised and so would have contained non-native fill soil.
The grass lawn was well maintained and no soil was visible. The beds contained both ornamental
annual flowering plants and shrubs; most of the ground surface was covered with heavy mulch and,
in some places, with decorative rocks. As a result, there was only approximately 25 percent ground
surface visibility.
Survey of grounds along Upland Avenue bordering the parking lot and surrounding the northeast
annex (the local fire authority offices) observed the several landscape beds along Upland Avenue and
the driveways into the parking lots, along the front of the annex and parking area to the east, as well
as the large grass lawn on the north side of the annex and a smaller lawn on the south side. All of the
planter beds here were level with the street and native soil was visible within them. The grass lawn
was well maintained and no soil was visible. The beds contained a variety of ornamental shrubs;
much of the ground surface was covered with heavy mulch. As a result, there was only approximately
25 percent surface visibility.
The remaining landscaped grounds surveyed consisted of small landscape beds in the parking area
along the border between parking spaces and driveways. There are 16 of these, all containing
ornamental shrubs. All of the planter beds here were level with the street and native soil was visible
within them, consisting of sandy soil with small and medium size pebbles consistent with the Qyf1
Lytle Creek alluvium designation for the surface geology throughout much of Fontana. The beds
contained a variety of ornamental shrubs; some of the ground surface was covered with heavy mulch.
As a result, there was approximately 50 percent surface visibility.
During the survey, the project site was carefully inspected for any indication of human activities
dating to the prehistoric or historic periods (i.e., 50 years or older). The result of the pedestrian
survey was negative for prehistoric cultural resources, features or isolates in the parcel. (See Section
4.3 in Appendix D)
The project site as a whole appears to be disturbed due to development of the project site and
surrounding area dating back to at least the 1920s. Therefore it is not recommended that an
archaeological monitor be present during ground disturbing activities throughout the project site.
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
However, if prehistoric and/or historic items are observed during subsurface activities, work should
be stopped in that area and a qualified archaeologist and Native American monitor be retained to
assess the finding(s) and retrieve the material. This recommendation is subject to change following
responses from local tribes to the cultural resources study outreach.
However, construction related subsurface disturbance such as grading and trenching activities could
cause new subsurface disturbance and may result in the unanticipated discovery of prehistoric
and/or historic archeological resources. Thus, mitigation measure MM CUL-1 is recommended.
Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-1 If archaeological resources are discovered during construction activities, the
contractor shall halt construction activities in the immediate area and notify the City
of Fontana. The project applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology, who
will be notified and afforded the necessary time to recover, analyze, and curate the
find(s). The qualified archaeologist shall recommend the extent of archaeological
monitoring necessary to ensure the protection of any other resources that may be in
the area. Any identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the appropriate DPR
523 (A-L) form and filed with the South Central Coastal Information Center.
Construction activities may continue on other parts of the project site while
evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological resources takes place.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of mitigation measure MM CUL-1 above, the project would result in less than
significant impacts to archeological resources.
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
As previously discussed (in Section 4.5.b) above, the project would be built on disturbed land that
has been previously graded. No human remains have been previously identified or recorded onsite.
The project proposes demolition and grading activities for the installation of infrastructure including
utility improvements and the construction of adding parking garages. Grading would involve new
subsurface disturbance and could result in the unanticipated discovery of unknown human remains,
including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. In the unlikely event of an unexpected
discovery, implementation of mitigation measure MM CUL-2 would ensure that impacts related to
the accidental discovery of human remains would be less than significant.
California Health and Safety Code § 7050.5 specifies the procedures to follow during the unlikely
discovery of human remains. CEQA § 15064.5 describes determining the significance of impacts on
archeological and historical resources. California Public Resources Code § 5097.98 stipulates the
notification process during the discovery of Native American human remains, descendants,
disposition of human remains, and associated grave goods.
❖ SECTION 4.5 – CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.5-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Mitigation Measure
MM CUL-2 If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with this project,
all work shall stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery and the San Bernardino
County Coroner will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The
Coroner shall determine whether the remains are recent human origin or older
Native American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of the supervising
archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, they shall contact the
NAHC. The NAHC shall be responsible for designating the Most Likely Descendant
(MLD). The MLD (either an individual or sometimes a committee) shall be responsible
for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of the California
Health and Safety Code. The MLD shall make recommendations within 24 hours of
their notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may include scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with
Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With adherence to applicable codes and regulations protecting cultural resources and with
implementation of mitigation measure MM CUL-2 above, the proposed project would result in less
than significant impacts to human remains.
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X
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
Impact Analysis
CEQA Guidelines § 15126.2(d)) states that “uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and
continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources
makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts
(such as highway improvement that provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally
commit future generations to similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental
accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated
to assure that such current consumption is justified.” Therefore, the purpose of this analysis is to
identify significant irreversible environmental effects of project implementation that cannot be
avoided.
Electricity
Electricity will be supplied through existing lines to the project site by Southern California Edison
Company (SCE), which provides electricity to the City of Fontana (Stantec, 2018a). Lighting used
during project construction would comply with California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24
standards/requirements (such as wattage limitations). This compliance would ensure that electricity
use during project construction would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of
energy. Lighting would be used in compliance with applicable City of Fontana Municipal Code
requirements to create enough light for safety.
Construction Use
During project construction, energy would be consumed in the form of electricity associated with the
conveyance and treatment of water used for dust control and, on a limited basis, powering lights,
electronic equipment, or other construction activities needing electrical power.
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Due to the fact that electricity usage associated with lighting and construction equipment that utilizes
electricity is not easily quantifiable, the estimated electricity usage during project construction is
speculative. The amount of electricity used during construction would be minimal, as demand would
primarily stem from use of electrically powered hand tools. The electricity used for construction
activities would be temporary and minimal; therefore, project construction would not result in
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of electricity. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
Operational Use
Project operation would require electricity for multiple purposes including, but not limited to,
building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Additionally, the supply,
conveyance, treatment, and distribution of water used by the project would indirectly result in
electricity usage. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), as part of the air quality and
greenhouse gas emissions analyses (refer to Section 4.3 and Section 4.8), was used to estimate the
electricity demand for the proposed project, which is shown in Table 4.6-1
Natural Gas
Construction Use
Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas) will provide natural gas for the proposed project (City
of Fontana Utilities, 2023). Construction activities, including the construction of new buildings and
facilities, typically do not involve the consumption of natural gas. Any minor amounts of natural gas
that may be consumed as a result of project construction would be temporary and negligible and
would not have an adverse effect; therefore, construction would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of natural gas. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Operational Use
Natural gas consumption during operation would be required for various purposes, including
building heating and cooling. The California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), as part of the
air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analyses (refer to Section 4.3 and Section 4.8), was used
to estimate natural gas demand for the proposed project, which is presented in Table 4.6-1.
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.6-1
ESTIMATED PROJECT AND EXISTING BUILDING OPERATIONAL ENERGY USE
Energy Type Units
Phase I & Phase II Existing Buildings Net Change
Value Per
Capitaa Value Per
Capitaa Value Per Capitaa
Onroad Motor
Vehicle Travel
(Fuel)b
Gallons
gasoline/year 316,994 1,454 109,885 709 207,109 745
Gallons diesel/year 49,326 226 15,945 103 33,381 123
Natural Gas Use MBTU per year 1,646 8 1,234 8 412 0
Electricity Use Kilowatt-hours per
year 1,047,114 4,803 785,335 5067 261,779 -263
a Based upon estimate of 218 employees; Existing employees were interpolated using the information provided by the client as
105 employees (Phase I-50 employees and Phase II-105 employees). see Table 3.3-1.
b On-road Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption calculated by UltraSystems using EMFAC2021(v1.0.2) emissions inventory web
platform tool (ARB, 2022) and CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2023); see Appendix B.
Electricity Use calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2023).
Petroleum
Construction Use
Petroleum-based fuel consumed by construction equipment would be the primary energy resource
expended over the course of construction. Transportation of construction materials and construction
workers would also result in petroleum consumption. Heavy-duty construction equipment, vendor
trucks, and haul trucks would use diesel fuel. Construction workers would likely travel to and from
the project area in gasoline-powered vehicles. Phase I construction for the proposed project is
anticipated to take 13 months, from December 2023 to January 2025, while Phase II construction
would take 24 months, from January 2025 to December 2026. Because of the short-term nature of
construction and relatively small scale of the project, the project’s petroleum consumption would be
negligible when compared to California’s daily total use of approximately 1.8 million barrels of
petroleum.
During project construction, trucks and construction equipment would be required to comply with
the ARB's anti-idling regulations. ARB's In-Use Off-Road Diesel Fueled Fleets regulation would also
apply (ARB, 2016). Vehicles driven to or from the project site (delivery trucks, construction employee
vehicles, etc.) are subject to fuel efficiency standards established by the federal government.
Therefore, project construction activities regarding fuel use would not result in wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary consumption, and impacts would be less than significant.
Operational Use
During operations, the majority of fuel consumption resulting from the project would involve the use
of motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site, as well as fuels used for alternative modes of
transportation that may be used by employees and visitors to the project site. Estimated annual
project operation natural gas and electricity usage, which was estimated by CalEEMod, is shown in
Table 4.6-1, which also shows annual gasoline and diesel fuel use,
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
The project would comply with all applicable regulations and codes that require achievement of
various levels of energy efficiency in building operation. These include (1) the 2022 California Energy
Efficiency Standards for Nonresidential Buildings (California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 6),
and (2) the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen; California Code of Regulations
Title 24 Part 11).
As shown in Table 4.6-1, the net change in the project would consume approximately 240,490
gallons of petroleum-based fuel per year during operation. In comparison, approximately 13.82
billion gallons of finished gasoline were consumed by Californians in 2021 (CEC, 2022b). The
anticipated increase in consumption associated with one year of project operation is 0.0017 percent
of the statewide use. Although implementation of the project would result in an increase in petroleum
use during operation, over time, vehicles would use less petroleum due to advances in fuel economy.
The net change between the existing buildings and proposed project (Phase I and Phase II) would
consume approximately 261,779 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per year and 412 million British
thermal units (MMBTU) of natural gas per year. By comparison, in 2022, the latest year for which
data are available, approximately 10,327 gigawatt hours of electricity were consumed by SCE non-
residential sector in San Bernardino County (CEC, 2023a). SoCalGas supplied approximately
29,479,231 million British thermal units (MMBtu) in 2022 for the non-residential sector in that same
year (CEC, 2023b). The increase in electricity and natural gas demand at the project site would be
negligible relative to the use in SCE’s and SoCalGas’s service areas.
Continued use of energy resources is consistent with the anticipated growth within the city and the
general vicinity and would not result in energy consumption that would require a significant increase
in energy production for the energy provider. Based on the information provided above, the
proposed project would have a less than significant impact regarding wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.
As shown in Table 4.6-1, the net project's operational energy was calculated by subtracting the
operational energy of existing buildings from the combined operational energy of Phase I and Phase
II. On-road motor vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for Phase I and Phase II were calculated using the
ARB’s EMFAC2021 model for 2025 and 2027, respectively. On-road motor vehicle travel for the
existing buildings was calculated by using EMFAC2021 for 2023.
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy
or energy efficiency?
Less than Significant Impact
Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards
The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (Title 24, Part 6, of the
California Code of Regulations) were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to
reduce California's energy consumption. The standards are updated periodically to allow
consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.
Compliance with Title 24 will result in a decrease in GHG emissions.
The Title 24 standards are updated on a three-year schedule, with the most current 2022 standards
adopted on August 11, 2021. In December 2021, the 2022 standards were approved by the California
Building Standards Commission for inclusion into the California Building Standards Code. The
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code) apply to newly constructed buildings, additions,
and alterations. They are a vital pillar of California’s climate action plan. The 2022 Energy Code will
produce benefits to support the state’s public health, climate, and clean energy goals. The 2022
Energy Code encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric-ready requirements for
new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation
standards, and more. Buildings with permit applications applied for on or after January 1, 2023 must
comply with the 2022 Energy Code. Public Resources Code §§ 25402 subdivisions (a)-(b) and §
25402.1 emphasize the importance of building design and construction flexibility by requiring the
California Energy Commission (CEC) to establish performance standards, in the form of an “energy
budget” in terms of the energy consumption per square foot of floor space (CEC, 2022b).
The provisions of Title 24, Part 6 apply to all buildings for which an application for a building permit
or renewal of an existing permit is required by law. They regulate design and construction of the
building envelope, space-conditioning and water-heating systems, indoor and outdoor lighting
systems of buildings, and signs located either indoors or outdoors. Title 24, Part 6 specifies
mandatory, prescriptive and performance measures, all designed to optimize energy use in buildings
and decrease overall consumption of energy to construct and operate residential and nonresidential
buildings. Mandatory measures establish requirements for manufacturing, construction, and
installation of certain systems, equipment, and building components that are installed in buildings.
Title 24 California Green Building Standards Code
The California Green Building Standards Code (Title 24, Part 11 code) commonly referred to as the
CALGreen Code, is a statewide mandatory construction code developed and adopted by the California
Building Standards Commission and the Department of Housing and Community Development. The
CALGreen standards require new residential and commercial buildings to comply with mandatory
measures under the topics of planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency/conservation,
material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. CALGreen also provides
voluntary tiers and measures that local governments may adopt that encourage or require additional
measures in the five green building topics.
The proposed project would be designed with energy-efficient features, including insulated and
glazed windows and low-E coating on windows, and will be built in compliance with the California
Green Building Standards (CAL Green) Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11).
City of Fontana General Plan
Chapter 12, Sustainability and Resilience, of the City of Fontana General Plan focuses on sustainability
and resilience in resource efficiency and planning for climate change. It includes policies for new
development promoting energy-efficient development in Fontana, meeting state energy efficiency
goals for new construction, promoting green building through guidelines, awards and nonfinancial
incentives, and continuing to promote and implement best practices to conserve water (Stantec, et
al., 2018b).
The proposed project design would comply with the following:
• Chapter 25 – Streets, Sidewalks and other Public Ways, City of Fontana Code of Ordinances
(Fontana, 2023c).
• City of Fontana Standards Design Guidelines.
❖ SECTION 4.6 – ENERGY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.6-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• San Bernardino County Department of Public Works and Flood Control Standards and
Specifications.
• Caltrans Standard Plans and Specifications.
• Standard Plans and Specifications for Public Works Construction.
The proposed project 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
(Gridscape, 2021). 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.
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer
to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1 B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
This section is based on the following technical report and records search:
• Geotechnical Evaluation for the City Hall Renovation Project, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers
(APNs): 019-203-123-0000, 019-203-124-0000, 019-203-126-0000, 8353 Sierra Avenue,
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California 92335. Prepared by Ninyo and Moore
Geotechnical and Environmental Science Consultants (Ninyo and Moore). May 25, 2023. A
complete copy of this report (Ninyo and Moore, 2023) is included as Appendix E1 to this
IS/MND.
• Paleontological Records Search for the City Hall Renovation Project in Fontana, San
Bernardino County. Prepared by Dr. Brittany Stoneburg, Western Science Center, dated
October 31, 2023. A complete copy of this report is included as Appendix E to this IS/MND.
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 Alquist-Priolo Zones (AP Zones) Special Studies Act defines active faults as those that have
experienced surface displacement or movement during the last 11,000 years. As shown in Figure
4.7-1, the project site is not in an AP Zone. The nearest mapped AP Zones are the Cucamonga and San
Jacinto Faults, which are located approximately 5.0 and 5.4 miles northwest and northeast of the site,
respectively (CGS, 2022). No known active or potentially active faults transect the site. The potential
for surface fault rupture at the site is considered low (Ninyo and Moore, 2023; pp. 5-6). Project
development would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial impacts, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving surface rupture of a known active fault, and impacts would be less
than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.7-1
ALQUIST PRIOLO FAULT ZONES
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact
The proximity of the site to active faults capable of producing a maximum moment magnitude of 6.0
or more indicated that the project area has a high potential for experiencing strong ground motion
(Ninyo & Moore 2023, p. 6). As shown in Figure 4.7-1 and 4.7-2, the project is located within a
seismically active region of Southern California. All structures in the region are susceptible to
collapse, buckling of walls, and damage to foundations from strong seismic ground shaking. The
nearest mapped active fault to the site is the unnamed fault near Fontana, which is approximately 0.9
mile from the project site. Additionally, the Cucamonga and San Jacinto Faults are located
approximately 5.0 and 5.4 miles northwest and northeast of the site, respectively (USGS, 2018;see
Figure 4.7-2. Structures for human occupancy must be designed to meet or exceed 2022 California
Building Code (CBC) standards for earthquake resistance. The CBC contains provisions for
earthquake safety based on factors including occupancy type, the types of soil and rock onsite, and
the strength of ground motion with a specified probability of occurring at the site.
The Geotechnical Evaluation of the project site (Ninyo & Moore, 2023; see Appendix F of this
document) provides recommended geotechnical criteria regarding the design and construction of
the proposed site improvements (Ninyo & Moore, 2023; p. 9).
With implementation of the recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Evaluation, adherence
to project specifications, and requirements of applicable agencies, the project would not directly or
indirectly cause potential substantial impacts, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving
strong seismic shaking. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required.
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant Impact
Liquefaction typically occurs when saturated or partially saturated soils behave like a liquid, as a
result of losses in strength and stiffness in response to an applied stress caused by ground shaking
or other sudden change in stress conditions.
The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the
earthquake, distance from the faults, topography, subsoils and relatively shallow groundwater tables
(approximately 50 feet or less below ground surface), in addition to other factors. Groundwater
depth is mapped on the Department of Water Resources SGMA Viewer at 884 feet below ground
surface (bgs). This groundwater depth is measured approximately 1.2 miles north from the project
site (DWR, 2023b).
According to the geologic hazard map for San Bernardino County, the site is not located within a
mapped area subject to seismically induced liquefaction hazards. Groundwater was not encountered
in the exploratory borings conducted as part of the geotechnical evaluation. Based on historical
groundwater data, depth to groundwater is expected to be 400 feet or more below the ground
surface. Based on the depth to groundwater and results of the geotechnical evaluation, liquefaction
and lateral spreading are not design considerations for the project (Ninyo and Moore, 2023; pg. 8).
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.7-2
REGIONAL FAULTS
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Compliance with federal, state, and local regulations, including the CBC and the City’s Municipal Code,
would minimize hazards from potential seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. The
project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial impacts, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Impacts would be
less than significant, and mitigation is not proposed.
i) Landslides?
Less Than Significant
Landslides occur when the stability of the slope changes from a stable to an unstable condition. A
change in the stability of a slope can be caused by a number of factors, acting together or alone.
Natural causes of landslides include groundwater (pore water) pressure acting to destabilize the
slope, loss of vegetative structure, erosion of the toe of a slope by rivers or ocean waves, weakening
of a slope through saturation by snow melt or heavy rains, earthquakes adding loads to a barely stable
slope, earthquake-caused liquefaction destabilizing slopes, and volcanic eruptions.
The project site is relatively flat, with elevation ranging from approximately 1,290 to 1,295 feet above
mean sea level (Google Earth Pro, 2023). There are no mapped landslides on the project site or in the
vicinity. Additionally, the project is does not overlap with areas of Landslide Confidence indicated on
the USGS Landslide Inventory (Ninyo and Moore, 2023; pg. 8). Landslides are not considered to be a
potential hazard at the site. The project would not directly or indirectly cause potentially significant
impacts, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides. Impacts would be less than
significant, and mitigation is not required.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
Construction projects of one acre or more are regulated under the Statewide General Construction
Permit, Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ, issued by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) in
2009. Projects obtain coverage by developing and implementing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) estimating sediment risk from construction activities to receiving waters and
specifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would be used by the project to minimize
pollution of stormwater.
Operation
During operation, the project would be developed with a mix of impervious surfaces such as
structures, concrete, pavement and landscaped areas. This combination of impervious surfaces and
landscaped areas would reduce the potential of the project for soil erosion to a negligible level.
With the implementation of soil erosion and sedimentation BMPs during the construction phase and
the proposed combination of generally impervious surfaces during the operational phase, the project
would have less than significant impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil and mitigation is not
proposed.
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact
The project site is underlain by young alluvial-fan deposits of Lytle Creek (Holocene and late
Pleistocene) – Unconsolidated, gray, cobbly and bouldery alluvium of Lytle Creek fan. Relatively fine-
grained (pebbly and cobbly) in southern extent; becomes coarser grained (cobbly and bouldery)
northward (Morton, 2003).
Impacts related to liquefaction and landslides are discussed in Section 4.7 a). Additionally, the
project would be constructed in accordance with recommendations of the project geotechnical
evaluation and the City of Fontana Building Code (i.e., the California Building code adopted as the City
of Fontana Building Code, §§ 5-61, et seq., of the City of Fontana Municipal Code), .
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is the downslope movement of surface sediment due to liquefaction in a subsurface
layer due to gravity and earthquake shaking combined. Lateral spreading of the ground surface
during an earthquake usually occurs along the weak shear zones within a liquefiable soil layer and
has been observed to generally take place toward a free face (i.e., retaining wall, slope, or channel)
and to lesser extent on ground surfaces with a very gentle slope. The geotechnical investigation
assessed liquefaction potential in subsurface site soils and determined that liquefaction and lateral
spreading are not design considerations for the project. Impacts resulting from lateral spreading are
not anticipated (Ninyo and Moore, 2023; pg. 8). Impacts arising from lateral spreading would be less
than significant. Mitigation is not required.
Collapsible Soils
The geotechnical evaluation determined that undocumented fill soil—present to a depth of four feet
below ground surface (bgs) in boring B-3 in the east-central part of the project site—is unsuitable
for supporting the proposed structures. The geotechnical evaluation recommends removing existing
soils to a depth of two feet below the bottom of proposed footings, or to the depth of the
undocumented fill, whichever is greater; and that removed soils are expected to be suitable for
engineering and replacement on the site as fill (Ninyo & Moore, 2023, pp. 12-13). Project
development would not exacerbate hazards arising from collapsible soils after the implementation
of the recommendations provided in Section 10 the Geotechnical Evaluation, and with adherence to
the 2022 or current CBC. Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
Subsidence
The major cause of ground subsidence is the excessive withdrawal of groundwater. Soils with high
silt or clay content are particularly susceptible to subsidence. The project site is not in an area of
subsidence mapped by the USGS (USGS, 2023c). The project site is over the Chino Subbasin of the
Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin (DWR, 2019). Project development would not exacerbate
hazards related to ground subsidence and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation is not
required.
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1 B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property?
Less than Significant Impact
Expansive soils shrink and swell with changes in soil moisture. Soil moisture may change from
landscape irrigation, rainfall, and utility leakage.
The project geotechnical investigation assessed subsurface site soils for Renovation potential, and
provides recommendations to minimize hazards from expansive soils. The Standard Specifications
for Public Works Construction (Greenbook) requires structure backfill materials to be composed of
granular, non-expansive soils that conform to Greenbook standards. With adherence to 2021 or
current Greenbook Specifications for Public Works Construction, impacts arising from expansive
soils would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
No Impact
The project site would connect to the City of Fontana’s existing sewer system; therefore, the project
would not use septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. For this reason, no impacts
associated with septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems would occur.
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
The project site is underlain by Holocene alluvial deposits (Morton and Miller 2006). In the past they
have been mapped as including Pleistocene sediments (Morton 2003). Holocene alluvial units are
considered to be of high preservation value, but material found is unlikely to be fossil material due
to the relatively young deposits, and Pleistocene alluvial units are considered to be of high
preservation value and are likely to contain fossils (Stoneburg, 2023). The Western Science Center
completed a search of its paleontology records for the project region on October 31, 2023; a copy of
the records search letter is included as Appendix E to this Initial Study. The Western Science Center
does not have localities within the project area or within a one-mile radius, although this may be due
in part to the project area’s distance from the museum and may not be indicative of the area’s
paleontological sensitivity (Stoneburg, 2023).
Excavations or grading may encounter fossil remains. Any substantial excavations below the
uppermost layers should be closely monitored to quickly and professionally collect any specimens.
This impact would be potentially significant and mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measure
MM GEO-1 If paleontological resources are uncovered during project construction, the
contractor shall halt construction activities in the immediate area and notify the City.
❖ SECTION 4.7 – GEOLOGY AND SOILS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.7-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
The on-call paleontologist shall be notified and afforded the necessary time and funds
to recover, analyze, and curate the find(s). Subsequently, the monitor shall remain
onsite for the duration of the ground disturbance to ensure the protection of any
other resources that are found during construction on the project site.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of MM GEO-1, potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced
to a less than significant level.
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X
4.8.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Life on earth depends on energy coming from the sun. About half the light reaching Earth's
atmosphere passes through the air and clouds to the surface, where it is absorbed and then radiated
upward in the form of infrared heat. About 90 percent of this heat is then absorbed by carbon dioxide
(CO2) and other greenhouse gases (GHG) and radiated back toward the surface, which is warmed to
a life-supporting average of 59 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (NASA, 2023).
Human activities are changing the natural greenhouse. Over the last century, the burning of fossil
fuels such as coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2. This happens because
the coal or oil burning process combines carbon in the fuel with oxygen in the air to make CO2. To a
lesser extent, the clearing of land for agriculture, industry, and other human activities has increased
concentrations of GHGs (NASA, 2023).
GHGs are defined under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) as CO2, methane
(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6). Associated with each GHG species is a "global warming potential" (GWP), which
is a value used to compare the abilities of different GHGs to trap heat in the atmosphere. GWPs are
based on the heat absorbing ability of each gas relative to that of CO2, as well as the decay rate of each
gas (the amount removed from the atmosphere over a given number of years). The GWPs of CH4 and
N2O are 25 and 298, respectively (GMI, 2023). "Carbon dioxide equivalent" (CO2e) emissions are
calculated by weighting each GHG compound's emissions by its GWP and then summing the products.
HFCs, PFCs, and SF6 would not be emitted in significant amounts by the Fontana Civic Center
Renovation Project sources, so they are not discussed further.
Carbon Dioxide (CO2). Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas consisting of molecules made up
of two oxygen atoms and one carbon atom. It is produced when an organic carbon compound (such
as wood) or fossilized organic matter (such as coal, oil, or natural gas) is burned in the presence of
oxygen. Since the industrial revolution began in the mid-1700s, industrial activities have increased
in scale and distribution. Prior to the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations were stable at a range
of 275 to 285 ppm (IPCC, 2007). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Earth
System Research Laboratory indicates that global concentration of CO2 was 416.59 parts per million
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
(ppm) in August 2023 (ESRL, 2023). These concentrations of CO2 exceed by far the natural range
over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores.
Methane (CH4). Methane is a colorless, odorless non-toxic gas consisting of molecules made up of
four hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom. CH4 is combustible, and is the main constituent of natural
gas, a fossil fuel. It is released when organic matter decomposes in low oxygen environments. Natural
sources include wetlands, swamps and marshes, termites, and oceans. Anthropogenic sources
include the mining of fossil fuels and transportation of natural gas, digestive processes in ruminant
animals such as cattle, rice paddies, and the buried waste in landfills. Over the last 50 years, human
activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the
atmospheric concentration of CH4. Other anthropogenic sources include fossil-fuel combustion and
biomass burning.
Nitrous Oxide (N2O). Nitrous oxide is a colorless, non-flammable gas with a sweetish odor,
commonly known as “laughing gas,” and sometimes used as an anesthetic. N2O is naturally produced
in the oceans and in rainforests (USEPA, 2011). Manmade sources of N2O include the use of fertilizers
in agriculture, nylon and nitric acid production, cars with catalytic converters and the burning of
organic matter. Concentrations of N2O also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution.
4.8.2 REGULATORY SETTING
GHGs are regulated at the national, state, and air basin level; each agency has a different degree of
control. The USEPA regulates at the national level; the ARB regulates at the state level; and the
SCAQMD regulates at the air basin level in the Fontana Civic Center project area.
4.8.2.1 Federal Regulations
The USEPA collects several types of GHG emissions data. These data help policy makers, businesses,
and the USEPA track GHG emissions trends and identify opportunities for reducing emissions and
increasing efficiency. The USEPA has been maintaining a national inventory of GHG emissions since
1990 and in 2009 established mandatory reporting of GHG emissions from large GHG emissions
sources.
The EPA is also achieving GHG reductions through partnerships and initiatives, evaluating policy
options, costs, and benefits, advancing the science, partnering internationally and with states,
localities, and tribe, and helping communities adapt.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
In May 2010, the USEPA finalized the first-ever national GHG emissions standards under the Clean
Air Act, and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized Corporate
Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. The 2010
CAFE standards were for model year 2012 through 2016 light-duty vehicles (USEPA, 2022). In April
2020, NHTSA and USEPA amended the CAFE and GHG emissions standards for passenger cars and
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
light trucks and established new less stringent standards, covering model years 2021 through 2026
(NHTSA, 2021).
Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule
On September 27, 2019, the USEPA and the NHTSA published the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
(SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National Program (NHTSA, 2020), which revoked California’s
authority to set its own GHG emissions standards and set zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates in
California. The loss of the ZEV sales requirements would likely result in additional gasoline-fueled
vehicles being sold in the State and criteria emissions increasing. On April 30, 2020, USEPA and
NHTSA issued the Final SAFE Rule, (USEPA, 2023b) which relaxed the federal GHG emissions and
CAFE standards resulting in the probable increase of CO2 emissions. However, this regulation was
repealed on December 21, 2021 by the Biden administration (NHTSA, 2021).
State Regulations
Executive Order (EO) S 3-05
On June 1, 2005, the governor issued EO S 3-05, which set the following GHG emission reduction
targets:
• By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
• By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels;
• By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
To meet these targets, the Climate Action Team (CAT)10 prepared a report to the Governor in 2006
that contained recommendations and strategies to help ensure that the targets in EO S-3-05 are met.
Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32)
In 2006, the California State Legislature enacted the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,
also known as AB 32. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHG emissions in California. AB 32 required that
GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. The ARB is the state agency
charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of GHGs that cause global warming.
AB 32 also required that by January 1, 2008, the ARB determine what the statewide GHG emissions
level was in 1990, and that it approve a statewide GHG emissions limit, so it may be applied to the
2020 benchmark. The ARB approved a 1990 GHG emissions level of 427 million metric tons of CO2e
(MMTCO2e), on December 6, 2007, in its Staff Report. Therefore, in 2020, emissions in California were
required to be at or below 427 MMTCO2e.
Under the “business as usual or (BAU)” scenario established in 2008, statewide emissions were
increasing at a rate of approximately one percent per year, as noted below. It was determined that
the 2020 estimated BAU of 596 MMTCO2e would have required a 28 percent reduction to reach the
1990 level of 427 MMTCO2e.
10 The Climate Action Team (CAT) members are state agency secretaries and the heads of agencies, boards, and
departments, led by the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA). They coordinate
statewide efforts to implement global warming emission reduction programs and the state's Climate Adaptation
Strategy.
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Climate Change Scoping Plan
The first AB 32 Scoping Plan (ARB, 2008) contained the main strategies to achieve the 2020
emissions cap. The plan was developed by the ARB with input from the CAT and proposed a
comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall carbon emissions in California, improve the
environment, reduce oil dependency, diversify energy sources, and enhance public health while
creating new jobs and improving the state's economy. The GHG reduction strategies contained in the
AB 32 Scoping Plan included direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and
non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade
system.
In May 2014, the ARB adopted the First Update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan (ARB, 2014). This update
identified the next steps for California's leadership on climate change. It described progress made to
meet the near-term objectives of AB 32 and defined California's climate change priorities and
activities for the next several years. It also framed activities and issues facing the state as it develops
an integrated framework for achieving both air quality and climate goals in California beyond 2020.
In the original AB 32 Scoping Plan, the ARB approved a total statewide GHG 1990 emissions level and
2020 emissions limit of 427 million metric tons (MT) of CO2e. As part of the update, the ARB revised
the 2020 Statewide limit to 431 million MT of CO2e, an approximately one percent increase from the
original estimate. The 2020 Business as Usual forecast in the update is 509 million MT of CO2e. The
state would have needed to reduce those emissions by 15.3 percent to meet the 431 million MT of
CO2e 2020 limit.
In November 2017, the ARB published the 2017 AB 32 Scoping Plan (ARB, 2017), which built upon
the former AB 32 Scoping Plan and updates by outlining priorities and recommendations for the state
to achieve its 2030 GHG target of a 40 percent reduction in GHGs by 2030, compared to 1990 levels.
The major elements of the framework proposed were: enhancement of the Renewables Portfolio
Standard (RPS) and the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS); a Mobile Source Strategy, Sustainable
Freight Action Plan, Short Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Strategy, Sustainable Communities
Strategies, and a Post 2020 Cap and Trade Program; a 20 percent reduction in GHG emissions from
the refinery sector; and an Integrated Natural and Working Lands Action Plan.
On November 16, 2022, the ARB circulated its Final 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon
Neutrality (ARB, 2022). It identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon
neutrality by 2045 or earlier. Through the lens of carbon neutrality, the plan expands the scope to
more meaningfully consider how our natural and working lands (NWL) contribute to our long-term
climate goal.
Renewables Portfolio Standard (Scoping Action E-3)
The California Energy Commission estimates that in 2000 about 12 percent of California’s retail
electric load was met with renewable resources. Renewable energy includes (but is not limited to)
wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas.
California’s current RPS is intended to increase that share to 44 percent by 2024. Increased use of
renewables will decrease California’s reliance on fossil fuels, thus reducing emissions of GHGs from
the electricity sector. Governor Brown signed into legislation Senate Bill (SB) 350 in October 2015,
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
which requires retail sellers and publicly-owned utilities to procure 50 percent of their electricity
from eligible renewable energy resources by 2030.
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375)
Senate Bill (SB) 375 passed the Senate on August 30, 2008, and was signed by the Governor on
September 30, 2008. Per SB 375, the transportation sector is the largest contributor of GHG emissions
and contributes approximately 45 percent of the GHG emissions in California, with automobiles and
light trucks alone contributing almost 30 percent. SB 375 indicates that GHGs from automobiles and
light trucks can be reduced by new vehicle technology. However, significant reductions from changed
land use patterns and improved transportation also are necessary. SB 375 states, “Without improved
land use and transportation policy, California will not be able to achieve the goals of AB 32.” SB 375
does the following: (1) requires metropolitan planning organizations to include sustainable
community strategies in their regional transportation plans for reducing GHG emissions; (2) aligns
planning for transportation and housing; and (3) creates specified incentives for the implementation
of the strategies.
Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, the governor issued Executive Order B-30-15, which added an interim target of
GHG emissions reductions to help ensure the State meets its 80 percent reduction by 2050, as set in
EO S-3-05. The interim target is reducing GHG emissions by 40 percent by 2030. It also directs state
agencies to update the Scoping Plan, update Adaptation Strategy every three years, and take climate
change into account in their planning and investment strategies. Additionally, it requires the state’s
Five-Year Infrastructure Plan will take current and future climate change impacts into account in all
infrastructure projects.
Title 24
California Code of Regulations Title 24 Part 6: California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards for
Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative
mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Although these standards were not originally
intended to reduce GHGs, energy efficient buildings require less electricity; therefore, increased
energy efficiency reduces fossil fuel consumption and decreases GHG emissions. The standards are
updated every three years, to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficient
technologies and methods. The 2019 standards were a major step towards meeting the Zero Net
Energy goal by the year 2030. The latest iteration is the 2022 Energy Code, adopted on August 11,
2021, that builds upon California’s goals towards building decarbonization and net carbon neutrality
by emphasizing energy efficient innovations (CEC, 2022). Its four areas of focus for the construction
of new buildings include encouraging electric heat pump technology, establishing electric-ready
requirements, expanding solar photovoltaic (PV) system and battery storage standards, and
strengthening ventilation standards.
San Bernardino Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan
The County of San Bernardino is committed to planning sustainably for the future while ensuring a
livable, equitable, and economically vibrant community. Planning sustainably includes
acknowledging the local role in climate change and how the County can mitigate its greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and prepare for (i.e., adapt to) anticipated climate-related changes. The County
adopted its first Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan (GHGRP) in September 2011 and updated
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
it in June 2021 (LSA Associates, 2021). The GHGRP provided the GHG emissions inventory for the
year 2007, and the target of reducing GHG emissions 15 percent below 2007 levels by 2020. The
County has implemented strategies to reduce its GHG emissions identified in the 2011 GHGRP, which
has helped the County meet its 2020 GHG reduction targets. Since the adoption of County’s GHGRP,
the State has enacted new climate change regulations, most notably Senate Bill (SB) 32, which
provides statewide targets to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 2007 levels by 2030 (LSA
Associates, 2021).
The State has set goals for reducing GHG emissions by 2020, 2030, and 2045 through AB 32, SB 32,
SB-100, EO-B-55-18. The State passed an executive order (EO-B-55-18), which mandates statewide
net carbon neutrality by 2045. In the interim, the State has also provided a target of 40 percent below
2020 levels by 2030. The County has identified this target as 40 percent below 2020 emission levels
by 2030. The 2030 target will put the County on a path toward the State’s long-term goal to achieve
zero net carbon emissions by 2045 (LSA Associates, 2021). As shown in Table 4.8-1, in 2030, San
Bernardino County would need to reduce its emissions to 1,754,098 MTCO2e to meet the GHG
reduction target of 40 percent below 2020 levels.
Table 4.8-1
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY GHG REDUCTION TARGETS FOR COUNTYWIDE EMISSIONS
Strategy Target
2020 Target 15 percent below 2007 baseline levels
2020 Emissions Goal (MTCO2e) 5,315,000
2030 Target 40 percent below 2020 BAU levels
2030 Emissions Goal (MTCO2e) 1,754,098
Source: San Bernardino County GHG Reduction Plan Update, (LSA Associates, Inc., 2021, p.22),
MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.
City of Fontana
The City of Fontana approved and adopted a General Plan on November 13, 2018 and issued an
updated general plan on July 23, 2023 through City Council Resolution 2023-088, Ordinance No.
1923. Chapter 12 of the plan on Sustainability and Resilience addresses policies for Fontana to meet
the greenhouse gas reduction goals for 2030 and subsequent goals set by the state. These policies
include continuing to collaborate with San Bernardino County Transportation Authority on
greenhouse gas inventories and climate action planning. The state goals focus on reducing
greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 by increasing renewable
electricity production to 50 percent. Major sources of greenhouse gases in Fontana include onroad
transportation making up 39 percent and building energy making up 51 percent (City of Fontana,
2023). To reduce GHG, Fontana is using LED lighting in new developments, energy savings in
wastewater treatments, and implementing Smart Bus technologies. Fontana is incorporating land use
strategies and transit-oriented development to reduce vehicle miles traveled which will also
decrease GHG emissions.
4.8.3 IMPACT THRESHOLDS
The following thresholds of significance are based on criteria in Appendix G of the State CEQA
Guidelines. A project has the potential to create a significant environmental impact if it would:
• Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment; or
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
emissions of GHG.
a) Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact
California has enacted several pieces of legislation that relate to GHG emissions and climate change,
much of which set aggressive goals for GHG reductions within the state. Per Senate Bill 97, the
California Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, which address
the specific obligations of public agencies when analyzing GHG emissions under CEQA to determine
a project’s effects on the environment. However, neither a threshold of significance nor any specific
mitigations are included or provided in these CEQA Guideline amendments.
GHG Significance Threshold
Neither the City of Fontana, the SCAQMD nor the State CEQA Guidelines Amendments provide
adopted quantitative thresholds of significance for addressing a roadway improvement project’s GHG
emissions. Nonetheless, § 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines serves to assist lead agencies in
determining the significance of the impacts of GHGs. As required in § 15064.4, this analysis includes
an impact determination based on: (1) an estimate of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions
resulting from the project; (2) a qualitative analysis or performance based standards; (3) a
quantification of the extent to which the project increases greenhouse gas emissions as compared to
the existing environmental setting; and (4) the extent to which the project complies with regulations
or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or
mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.
SCAQMD’s guidance uses a tiered approach rather than a single numerical emissions threshold. If a
project’s GHG emissions “fail” the non-significance of a given tier, then one goes to the next one.
The threshold selected for this analysis is Tier 3, which establishes a screening significance threshold
level to determine significance using a 90 percent emission capture rate. For Tier 3, the SCAQMD
estimated that at a threshold of approximately 3,000 metric tons (tonnes) CO2e per year, emissions
would capture 90 percent of the GHG emissions from new residential or commercial projects
(SCAQMD, 2008).
Construction GHG Emissions
Construction is an episodic, temporary source of GHG emissions. Emissions are generally associated
with the operation of construction equipment, import or export of soil, and the disposal of
construction waste. To be consistent with the guidance from the SCAQMD for calculating criteria
pollutants from construction activities, only GHG emissions from onsite construction activities and
offsite hauling and construction worker commuting are considered as project-generated. As
explained by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in its 2008 white
paper (CAPCOA, 2022), the information needed to characterize GHG emissions from manufacture,
transport, and end-of-life of construction materials would be speculative at the CEQA analysis level;
CEQA does not require an evaluation of speculative impacts (CEQA Guidelines § 15145). Therefore,
the construction analysis does not consider such GHG emissions but does consider non-speculative
ones.
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Estimated criteria pollutant emissions from the Fontana Civic Center project were calculated using
the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2022.1.1.20 (CAPCOA, 2022), which
was described in Section 4.3.7. The results of the project’s Phase I and Phase II analyses are
presented in Table 4.8-3 and Table 4.8-4. Phase I GHG construction emissions would be 419 metric
tons and Phase II GHG construction emissions would be 493 metric tons. Consistent with SCAQMD
recommendations and to ensure that construction emissions are assessed in a quantitative sense,
construction GHG emissions have been amortized over a 30-year period. The amortized value is
14.0 MTCO2e for Phase I and 16.4 MTCO2e for Phase II. Modeling results are in Appendix B. For
each construction year, annual GHG emissions would be far below the threshold of 3,000 MT of CO2e
per year and therefore would be less than significant. No mitigation is necessary.
Table 4.8-3
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS – PHASE I
Year/Phase Annual Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
2023 4.77 < 0.005 < 0.005 4.85
2024 401 0.02 0.01 404
2025 9.99 < 0.005 < 0.005 10.1
Total 415.76 0.02 0.01 419
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022).
Table 4.8-4
PROJECT CONSTRUCTION-RELATED GHG EMISSIONS – PHASE II
Year/Phase Annual Emissions (MT/yr)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
2025 306 0.01 0.01 308
2026 184 0.01 < 0.005 185
Total 490 0.02 0.01 493
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA,
2022).
Operational GHG Emissions
The proposed Renovation of the Civic Center project would involve the construction of a new City
Hall and annex building (both replacing existing buildings), which would result in operational
emissions from area sources, motor vehicles, and energy demand. As noted in Section 4.3.7, the
significance evaluation was based upon the difference between project-related operational
emissions and those from the replaced sources. The resulting net GHG emissions levels were
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
subsequently compared with the SCAQMD screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e to determine
compliance. The findings of the emissions calculations are presented in Table 4.8-4.11
The Fontana Civic Center Project (proposed project) would produce 2,172 MTCO2e per year for Phase
I and 1,490 MTCO2e per year for Phase II, resulting in a total of 3,662 MTCO2e per year of unmitigated
operational GHG emissions. On the other hand, the existing buildings would contribute 1,389 MTCO2e
per year to the operational GHG emissions. Therefore, the net increase in operational GHG emissions
due to the proposed project would be 2,273 MTCO2e per year.
Table 4.8-5
NET PROJECT OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
Emissions Source
Estimated Generated CO2e Emissions (Metric Tons per
Year)
Phase I & II Existing buildings
Area Sources 1.22 0.92
Energy Demand (Electricity & Natural
Gas) 342 256
Mobile (Motor Vehicles) 3,165 1,092
Solid Waste Generation 40.1 13.1
Water Demand 83 26.9
Construction Emissionsa 30.43 0
Total 3,662 1,389
Difference in Operational emissions 2,273
Source: Calculated by UltraSystems with CalEEMod (Version 2022.1.1.20) (CAPCOA, 2022).
a Total construction emissions were amortized over 30 years for the proposed project, while existing structures had no
amortized emissions.
Therefore, under the first significance criterion, GHG emissions would be less than significant, and
no mitigation is necessary.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG?
Less than Significant Impact
The City of Fontana does not have an adopted climate action plan. An approach to identifying
potential conflict with GHG reduction plans, policies, or regulations is to examine General Plan
provisions that prescribe or enable GHG emissions control. The Final EIR for the General Plan Update
(City of Fontana, 2018b) lists policies in the General Plan Update that reduce GHG emissions and help
to quantify emissions reductions. However, the policies prescribe actions to be taken by the City, and
11 Calculations are provided in Appendix B.
❖ SECTION 4.8 – GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.8-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
not measures to be implemented by a project proponent. Nevertheless, the proposed project would
not conflict with any of the GHG emission reduction policies. As was demonstrated in Section 4.11,
the proposed project would have less than significant impacts in relation to consistency with local
land use policies or regulations. Therefore, the project would not hinder the GHG emission reductions
of the General Plan Update.
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) 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) 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) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X
The analysis for this section is based partly on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) by
Ninyo & Moore dated August 2022, included as Appendix X. The findings of the Ninyo & Moore Phase
I ESA were based on evaluation of only the Annex site; a Phase I ESA will also be prepared in the
future for the City Hall site, but is not available at this time.
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The Phase I ESA concluded that there were no recognized environmental conditions (RECs) on or
adjacent to the project site (Ninyo & Moore, 2022, p. 17). Project construction would involve the use
of hazardous materials such as fuels, lubricants, solvents, paints and other architectural coatings,
fertilizers, and pesticides. Hazardous materials would be used, stored, transported, and disposed of
in compliance with existing regulations of several agencies including: US Environmental Protection
Agency; US Department of Transportation; Department of Toxic Substances Control; Occupational
Safety and Health Administration; and Division of Occupational Safety and Health. Construction
impacts involving hazardous materials would be less than significant after compliance with such
regulations.
Operation
Project operation would involve the transport, storage, use, and disposal of small amounts of
hazardous materials for cleaning and landscaping purposes, such as commercial cleansers, paints,
and lubricants for maintenance and upkeep of the proposed buildings and landscaping. These
materials would be stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. The
proposed project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of quantities of hazardous
materials that may create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Therefore, the project
would have a less than significant operational impact.
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?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The Phase I ESA concluded that there were no recognized environmental conditions (RECs) on or
adjacent to the project site (Ninyo & Moore, 2022, p. 17). Construction Contractor would maintain
supplies and equipment onsite for containing and cleaning up small spills of hazardous materials.
Construction contractor would train workers in such containment and cleanup. In the event of a
release of hazardous materials of toxicity and/or quantity that onsite personnel could not safely
contain and clean up, the construction contractor would immediately notify the San Bernardino
County Fire Department, which provides emergency responses to hazardous materials releases in
San Bernardino County.
Operation
Project operation would involve the handling and storage of materials such as commercial cleansers,
solvents and other janitorial or industrial-use materials, paints, and landscape fertilizers/pesticides
during project operations in small amounts. However, these materials would be stored, handled, and
disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and would not be stored in amounts that would
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through accidental release. Therefore,
the project would have a less than significant operational impacts.
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 Impact
Fontana Middle School is located approximately 0.15 mile southeast of the project site (Google Earth
Pro, 2023). No other schools are within a 0.25-mile radius of the project.
Construction
As stated above, the project does not contain any RECs and would adhere to all applicable regulations
in regards to transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. With adherence
to applicable regulations, impacts would be less than significant.
Operation
Project operations would involve the handling and storage of small amounts of hazardous materials
such as cleansers, solvents, paints, fertilizers, and pesticides. However, these materials would be
stored, handled, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and would not be used or
stored in amounts that would pose a hazard to persons at Fontana Middle School. Therefore, the
project would have less than significant impacts in this regard.
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?
Less than Significant Impact
Government Code § 65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to compile
and update, at least annually, lists of the following:
• Hazardous waste and substances sites from the DTSC EnviroStor database.
• Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites by county and fiscal year in the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database.
• Solid waste disposal sites identified by SWRCB with waste constituents above hazardous
waste levels outside waste management units.
• SWRCB Cease and Desist Orders (CDOs) and Cleanup and Abatement Orders (CAOs).
• Hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to § 25187.5 of the Health
and Safety Code, identified by DTSC.
These lists are collectively referred to as the “Cortese List.” The project site is not included on the
Cortese List (CalEPA, 2023). Impacts would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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?
No Impact
The nearest public-use airport to the project site is Ontario International Airport, approximately 8.5
miles to the southwest (see Figure 4.9-1). The project site is outside of zones at Ontario International
Airport where land uses are regulated to minimize aviation-related hazards to persons on the
ground, and outside of noise compatibility contours for the airport (City of Ontario, 2018). Project
development would not cause airport-related hazards, or excessive noise, to persons at the project
site. No impact would occur.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The City of Fontana Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) was adopted by the City Council in 2018.
As further detailed in Section 4.17, project construction in the right-of-way next to the project site
could temporarily impact street traffic by temporarily reducing the number of lanes or temporarily
closing a portion of surrounding streets. The city requires that projects conducting construction work
in City roadway rights-of-way get Traffic Control Permits approved by the City Department of
Engineering. Emergency access must be maintained. Compliance with City requirements for traffic
management during construction in the public right-of-way would ensure that the project would
have a less than significant impact.
Operation
Project operation would not block traffic on surrounding streets. The project would provide
emergency access to the proposed buildings compliant with California Fire Code § 503. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.9-1
AIRPORTS IN THE PROJECT REGION
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) developed Fire Hazard
Severity Zones (FHSZ) for State Responsibility Areas (SRA) and Local Responsibility Areas (LRA).
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) designation refers to either:
Wildland areas supporting high-to-extreme fire behavior resulting from climax fuels typified by
well-developed surface fuel profiles (e.g., mature chaparral) or forested systems where crown
fire is likely. Additional site elements include steep and mixed topography and climate/fire
weather patterns that include seasonal extreme weather conditions of strong winds and dry fuel
moistures. Burn frequency is typically high, and should be evidenced by numerous historical
large fires in the area. Firebrands from both short- (<200 yards) and long-range sources are
often abundant.
or
Developed/urban areas typically with high vegetation density (>70% cover) and associated
high fuel continuity, allowing for frontal flame spread over much of the area to progress
impeded by only isolated non-burnable fractions. Often where tree cover is abundant, these
areas look very similar to adjacent wildland areas. Developed areas may have less vegetation
cover and still be in this class when in the immediate vicinity (0.25 mile) of wildland areas zoned
as Very High (CAL FIRE, 2022).
The project site is not in or near a fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ) mapped by CAL FIRE within a
State Responsibility Area (SRA) or within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA, that is, where cities and
counties are responsible for the costs of wildfire prevention and suppression) (see Figures 4.9-2 and
4.9-3, respectively). Therefore, project development would not expose people or structures to
substantial hazards from wildfire, and there would be no impact.
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.9-2
FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES – STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREA
❖ SECTION 4.9 – HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.9-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.9-3
FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES – LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREA
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade surface or
ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
X
c) 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 offsite; X
ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite;
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; or
X
iv) impede or redirect flood flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation? X
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
X
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 Impact
The California State Water Resources Control Board requires its nine Regional Water Quality Control
Boards (RWQCBs) to develop water quality control plans (Basin Plans) designed to preserve and
enhance water quality and protect the beneficial uses of all Regional waters. Specifically, Basin Plans
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
designate beneficial uses for surface waters and groundwater, set narrative and numerical objectives
that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and conform to the
State antidegradation policy, and describe implementation programs to protect all waters in the
Regions (RWQCB, 2016). In addition, Basin Plans incorporate by reference all applicable State and
Regional Board plans and policies, and other pertinent water quality policies and regulations. The
proposed project is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana (Region 8) RWQCB.
As shown in Figure 4.10-1, USGS Surface Waters and Watersheds, the project site is located within
the USGS East Etiwanda Creek-Santa Ana River Hydrologic Unit (HUC 12; HU Code 180702030804).
The project is located within the Santa Ana River Watershed (USGS HUC 18070203). The Santa Ana
River Watershed spans approximately 2,650 square miles including the eastern portion of the San
Gabriel Mountains.. The Santa Ana River, which flows a distance exceeding 100 miles, discharges into
the Pacific Ocean at the City of Huntington Beach (USEPA, 2023a). Under existing conditions,
stormwater generated on the project site drains to the south toward Seville Avenue to the East
Fontana Channel, which is owned and maintained by the San Bernardino County Flood Control
District. The East Fontana Channel drains to the Rialto Channel in the City of Rialto and eventually to
the Santa Ana River to the Pacific Ocean (City of Fontana, 1992; CWE, 2016; USEPA, 2023a).
Development of the project has the potential to result in two types of water quality impacts:
(1) short-term impacts due to construction-related discharges; and (2) long-term impacts from
operation. Temporary soil disturbance would occur during project construction, due to earth-moving
activities such as excavation and trenching for foundations and utilities, soil compaction and moving,
cut and fill activities, and grading. Disturbed soils are susceptible to high rates of erosion from wind
and rain, resulting in sediment transport via stormwater runoff from the project area. Erosion and
sedimentation affect water quality of receiving waters through interference with photosynthesis,
oxygen exchange, and respiration, growth, and reproduction of aquatic species. Runoff from
construction sites may include sediments and contaminants such as oils, fuels, paints, and solvents.
Additionally, other pollutants such as nutrients, trace metals, and hydrocarbons can attach to
sediment and be carried by stormwater into storm drains which discharge eventually to the Pacific
Ocean.
Spills and mishandling of construction materials and waste may also potentially leave the project site
and negatively impact water quality. The use of construction equipment and machinery may
potentially result in contamination from petroleum products, hydraulic fluids, and heavy metals.
Contamination from building preparation materials such as paints and solvents, and landscaping
materials such as fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides may also potentially degrade water quality
during project construction. Trash and demolition debris may also be carried into storm drains and
discharged into receiving waters.
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.10-1
USGS SURFACE WATERS AND WATERSHEDS
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Construction Pollutants Control
The project proponent is required by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
to obtain coverage under a General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with
Construction Activity (Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ, as authorized by
§ 402 CWA, NPDES for projects which will disturb one or more acres of soil during construction). The
Construction General Permit requires potential dischargers of pollutants into WOUS to prepare a
site-specific Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which establishes enforceable limits on
discharges, requires effluent monitoring, designates reporting requirements, and requires
construction BMPs to reduce or eliminate point and non-point source discharges of pollutants.
Additionally, BMPs must be maintained, inspected before and after each precipitation event, and
repaired or replaced as necessary.
Construction BMPs are grouped in six categories: erosion control (prevents soil particles from being
detached from soil surface), sediment control (prevents soil particles from being transported offsite
by water and being deposited elsewhere), wind erosion control, tracking control (prevents soil from
being tracked offsite by vehicles), non-stormwater management controls (prohibits discharges other
than stormwater, such as those from cleaning, maintenance, and fueling of vehicles and equipment),
and waste management and controls (good housekeeping practices).
Because the project is required by the SWRCB to comply with all applicable conditions of
Construction General Permit Order 2009-0009-DWQ, potential violations of water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements during project construction would be less than significant.
Operational Pollutant Controls
The San Bernardino County NPDES Permit (NPDES No. CAS618036) and Waste Discharge
Requirements Area Wide Urban Storm Water Runoff Management Program regulates, through Order
No. R8 2010 0036, the discharge of pollutants into Waters of the US (WOUS) through stormwater and
urban runoff conveyance systems, including flood control facilities. These conveyance systems are
commonly referred to as municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), or storm drains. The
NPDES Permit is also referred to as an MS4 Permit.
Pursuant to the MS4 Permit, Principal Permittees (i.e., the San Bernardino County Flood Control
District) and Co-Permittees (Fontana is co-permittee) must regulate discharges of pollutants in urban
runoff from man-made sources into storm water conveyance systems within their jurisdiction.
New development and redevelopment can significantly increase pollutant loads in stormwater and
urban runoff, because increased population density results in proportionately higher levels of vehicle
emissions, vehicle maintenance wastes, municipal sewage wastes, household hazardous wastes,
fertilizers, pet waste, trash, and other pollutants (SWRCB, 2013). The San Bernardino County MS4
Permit requires new development and significant redevelopment projects to incorporate post
construction Low Impact Development (LID) BMPs into project design to comply with the local Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) or the Integrated Regional Urban Water Management Plan
(IRUWMP; WSC, 2021) to reduce or eliminate the quantity, and improve the quality of, stormwater
being discharged from the project site.
A WQMP will be prepared for the proposed project based on guidance provided in the City WQMP
Handbook (CWE, 2016). The MS4 and the associated WQMP will require the implementation of LID
features to ensure that most stormwater runoff is treated and retained onsite. The project WQMP
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
will include structural BMPs such as use of efficient irrigation systems and landscape design, water
conservation, source control, and additional LID features. LIDs may also include the minimization of
impervious areas, maximization of infiltration capacity, and preservation of the existing drainage
patterns to mitigate the impacts of runoff and stormwater pollution as close to the source as possible.
These features are highly effective at removing water pollutants such as sediment, nutrients, trash,
metals, bacteria, oil and grease, and organic compounds while reducing the volume and intensity of
stormwater flow leaving a site.
The WQMP may also include non-structural source control BMPs including BMP maintenance, local
water quality ordinances, spill contingency plan, litter/debris control program, employee training,
catch basin inspection program, vacuum sweeping of private streets and parking lots, and compliance
with applicable NPDES permits.
With implementation of construction and operational BMPs, potential impacts to water quality
would be less than significant and mitigation is not proposed.
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 project site is in the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin, within the Chino subbasin,
which spans about . 240 square miles; and in the northwest part of the Upper Santa Ana River Valley
(DWR, 2019, 2003; Google Earth Pro, 2023).
The proposed project is within the service area of the Fontana Water Company (FWC; FWC, 2023a).
The water supply for the FWC service area is from Lytle Creek surface flow, wells in the Lytle Basin,
Rialto Basin, Chino Basin, and another groundwater basin known as No Man’s Land. Water from the
California State Water Project is purchased from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency and San
Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District. A portion of the water supply can be purchased from
Cucamonga Valley Water District during water shortages or under emergency situations. (FWC,
2023b).
Projected future water demands have been estimated based on the anticipated growth, as defined by
population projections for FWC’s service area. FWC assumes per capita water use will remain
substantially lower than the historical baseline (1999-2008) water use, but will increase slightly from
current recorded usage due to recovery from the 2012-2016 drought conservation efforts. Based on
these factors, water demands in the FWC water service area are expected to increase approximately
42 percent from 2020 levels by 2045, which represents a more than 10 percent decrease in the 2040
projected water demand from the 2015 FWC UWMP (West Yost, 2017). The project would have a less
than significant impact and mitigation is not required.
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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 offsite;
Less Than Significant Impact
The project site is relatively flat, with elevations ranging from approximately 1,290 to 1,295 feet
above mean sea level (amsl; Google Earth Pro, 2023). There is no evidence of ephemeral, intermittent,
or perennial streams or rivers that occur on or adjacent to the project site (Google Earth Pro, 2023;
USEPA, 2023a).
Construction
As described in Section 4.10 a), temporary soil disturbance would occur during project construction,
due to earth-moving activities such as excavation and trenching for foundations and utilities, soil
compaction and moving, cut and fill activities, and grading. Disturbed soils are susceptible to high
rates of erosion from wind and rain, resulting in sediment transport via stormwater runoff from the
project area.
Implementation of the required SWPPP and required BMPs, including installation, maintenance, and
replacement of BMPs as discussed in Section 4.10 a), would minimize or avoid potential impacts
resulting from on- or offsite erosion and siltation to a level that is less than significant.
Operation
The LID BMPs proposed as part of project design would minimize or avoid on- or offsite erosion and
siltation by a combination of maintaining existing drainage patterns, installation of landscaping, and
installation of LID BMPs which would prevent erosion and prevent siltation-laden stormwater from
leaving the site. Applicable regulations (e.g., the MS4 permit, and installation of LID BMPs, including
site design, infiltration and pre-treatment BMPs, etc.), would limit pollutant discharges from
development of the project. The project’s adherence to existing requirements would reduce erosion
and siltation during operation, and therefore impacts resulting from operation of the project would
be less than significant.
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite;
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?
Less than Significant Impact
The proposed drainage design for this project will meet the applicable standards and requirements
of the Santa Ana Region. The LID BMPs, which will be described in the project WQMP, would mitigate
the post-construction increase in peak flow of runoff from the site for storm events.
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
The project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite, 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. Impacts would be less than significant.
The proposed project would incorporate operational LID BMPs in compliance with the San
Bernardino County NPDES Permit (NPDES No. CAS618036) and Waste Discharge Requirements Area
Wide Urban Storm Water Runoff Management Program requirements.
The MS4 would require the implementation of water quality features to ensure that runoff is treated
prior to discharge into native soils (infiltration), storm drains or other regional conveyance facilities,
as described above. Therefore, upon adherence to existing state water quality requirements,
including MS4 requirements, the proposed project would minimize or avoid causing a substantial
increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would: (1) result in flooding on-
or offsite; (2) would not 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; or (3) 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.
These water quality features to be implemented will be described further in the project WQMP.
Impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is proposed.
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact
The project site is located on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance
Rate Map (FIRM) for San Bernardino County, California and Incorporated Areas (Map Number
06071C8656H, effective August 28, 2008); the site is located in Flood Hazard Zone X, defined as
“areas of minimal flood hazard” (FEMA, 2023a, b). The areas of minimal flood hazard, such as Zone X
are outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and higher than the elevation of the 0.2-percent-
annual-chance flood areas. The floodplain (i.e., flood hazard zone) nearest to the project site is the
100-year floodplain associated with East Etiwanda Creek (FEMA, 2023a; USEPA, 2023a). The project
site is located outside the nearest floodplain and the proposed project would not impede or redirect
flood flows. No impact would occur, and mitigation is not required.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants
due to project inundation?
No Impact
Three dams or reservoirs are within a five-mile radius of the project site: San Sevaine Basin #5,
Cactus Basin #3, and Hickory Basin. The project is not located within the dam breach inundation
areas of these dams or reservoirs (DWR, 2023a) and would not be at risk of flood hazards due to dam
breaches. As discussed previously, the project site is located outside the 500-year floodplain and
therefore would not be at risk of inundation by flood hazards.
The tsunami inundation area nearest to the project site is the City of Huntington Beach, located
approximately 43-miles southwest of the project site (Google Earth Pro, 2023; CEMA, CGS, and USC,
2021), and therefore the project would not be at risk of inundation by tsunami.
❖ SECTION 4.10 – HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.10-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
A seiche is an oscillating wave, formed by earthquakes or winds, in an enclosed or partially enclosed
waterbody. The nearest waterbodies to the project site in which a seiche could form are Lake
Mathews, which is approximately 17.5 miles south from the project, and Lake Perris which is
approximately 22.5 miles southeast from the project (Google Earth Pro, 2023). The project site is not
within the dam breach inundation areas mapped for these waterbodies (DWR, 2023a), and the
project would not be at risk of inundation by seiche.
The proposed project would not be at risk of inundation by flood hazards, tsunami, or seiche, and
would therefore not be at risk of release of pollutants due to inundation. No impact would occur, and
mitigation is not required.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
No Impact
The nearest water well (State Well Number 01S05W06J001S) is located approximately 1.2 miles
north from the project. This active well is designated for residential use and is drilled to a depth of
884 feet (CASGEM 2023).
As discussed in Section 4.10 a), the proposed project would comply with the Construction General
Permit and the San Bernardino County NPDES Permit requirements by developing and implementing
a site-specific SWPPP and construction stormwater BMPs throughout the construction phase. The
proposed project would also comply with the MS4 Permit by incorporating LID BMPs into project
design, which would avoid or minimize the amount and type of pollutants leaving the project,
entering receiving waters, and impacting water quality and beneficial uses defined for these waters
by the Basin Plan (RWQCB, 2016). In addition, the LID BMPs would allow stormwater infiltration into
the local aquifer, similar to existing conditions, and minimize or avoid impacts to groundwater
quality. The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impact would occur, and mitigation
is not required.
❖ SECTION 4.11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.11-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact
The proposed project would renovate and expand the City Hall and Annex buildings, rearrange
driveways, and add landscaping within the Fontana Civic Center. The project footprint would not
permanently expand into existing rights-of-way (ROWs) and would stay within the existing Fontana
Civic Center. Therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community and there
would be no impacts.
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?
No Impact
The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Public Facilities (P-PF) and a zoning
designation of Downtown Core - Civic (City of Fontana, 2023a) (see Figures 4.11-1 and 4.11-2
below). The P-PF land use designation is for properties in public or quasi-public ownership, such as
existing schools; the facilities of agencies such as the City, County, water and sewer districts, and fire
protection districts; and hospitals and quasi-public institutions (Stantec, 2018a, p. 15.24). Downtown
Core - Civic zoning designations permit the development of the government facilities (City of Fontana
Municipal Code, 2023). The proposed project would replace the City of Fontana’s City Hall and Annex
buildings, which are the city’s government buildings. Therefore, the proposed project would conform
with General Plan and zoning designations for the project site.
A consistency analysis of the proposed project respecting relevant Fontana General Plan Land Use,
Zoning, and Urban Design Element goals and policies is provided below in Table 4.11-1. No adverse
impact would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.11-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.11-1
CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS: PROPOSED PROJECT COMPARED TO RELEVANT CITY OF FONTANA
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE, ZONING, AND URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT GOALS AND POLICIES
Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis
Goal 3: Downtown is a dynamic center of activity, with new housing options, walkable
environments, and a mixture of uses attracting residents and visitors.
Policy 3.1: Promote revitalization and
redevelopment of older neighborhoods.
Consistent: The proposed project would redevelop
outdated buildings with buildings of high-quality
design and function.
Policy 3.2: Encourage infill on vacant and
underutilized parcels.
Consistent: The proposed project would expand the
existing City Hall and Annex on the underutilized
parking lot.
Goal 7: Public and private development meets high standards of design.
Policy 7.1: Support high-quality development in
design standards and in land use decisions
Consistent: The project proposes high-quality
design standards and materials as shown in Section
3.0, Project Description.
Sources: Stantec, 2018a, p. 15.33 to 15.39
❖ SECTION 4.11 – LAND USE AND PLANNING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.11-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.11-1
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION
❖ SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.11-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.11-2
ZONING DESIGNATION
❖ SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.12-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X
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?
and
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
Less than Significant Impact
The proposed project site is located within Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ)-2 as shown in Figure 4.12
1. The MRZ-2 classification are areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral
deposits are present or where it is judged that there is a high likelihood for their presence.
The Land Use, Zoning, and Urban Design section of the City of Fontana General Plan states that the
city does not include mining in any of its zoning categories (Stantec, 2018a). It is unlikely that anyone
would propose establishing new surface mining operations within the city since mining is not
allowed within the city. In addition, the project site and surroundings are built out with urban uses
and are thus unavailable for mining. According to the ‘Well Finder’ tool generated by the California
Department of Conservation Division of Oil, Gas, & Geothermal Resources, the project site is not
located near (within one mile of) any oil or gas wells or geothermal wells; the nearest active oil or
gas well is located 15 miles to the north as shown in Figure 4.12-2, and the nearest active geothermal
well is located nine miles to the east of the project as shown in Figure 4.12-3. Although this project
is located within MRZ-2, the project cannot and will not interfere with the availability of these
resources since they cannot be accessed due to policies in the City of Fontana’s General Plan, which
does not allow active mining within the city limits. Therefore, the project site is not an important
local mineral resource recovery site and the project would have a less than significant impact on the
availability of known mineral and oil-based resources of value to the region or state residents, and
on any locally important mineral resource recovery sites.
❖ SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.12-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.12-1
DESIGNATED MINERAL RESOURCE ZONE
❖ SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.12-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.12-2
OIL AND GAS WELLS AND FIELDS
❖ SECTION 4.12 – MINERAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.12-0
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.12-3
GEOTHERMAL WELLS
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230 City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.13 NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of 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
4.13.1 CHARACTERISTICS OF SOUND
Sound is a pressure wave transmitted through the air. It is described in terms of loudness or
amplitude (measured in decibels), frequency or pitch (measured in hertz or cycles per second), and
duration (measured in seconds or minutes). The decibel (dB) scale is a logarithmic scale that
describes the physical intensity of the pressure vibrations that make up any sound. The pitch of the
sound is related to the frequency of the pressure vibration. Because the human ear is not equally
sensitive to all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to
human sensitivity. The A-weighted decibel scale (dBA) provides this compensation by discriminating
against upper and lower frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear. The
scale is based on a reference pressure level of 20 micro pascals (zero dBA). The scale ranges from
zero (for the average least perceptible sound) to about 130 (for the average human pain level).
4.13.2 NOISE MEASUREMENT SCALES
Several rating scales have been developed to analyze adverse effects of community noise on people.
Since environmental noise fluctuates over time, these scales consider that the effect of noise on
people depends largely upon the total acoustical energy content of the noise, as well as the time of
day when the noise occurs. Those that are applicable to this analysis are as follows:
• Leq, the equivalent noise level, is an average of sound level over a defined time period (such
as 1 minute, 15 minutes, 1 hour or 24 hours). Thus, the Leq of a time-varying noise and that of
a steady noise are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy to the ear during
exposure.
• L90 is a noise level that is exceeded 90 percent of the time at a given location; it is often used
as a measure of “background” noise.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230 City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
• Lmax is the root mean square (RMS) maximum noise level during the measurement interval.
This measurement is calculated by taking the RMS of all peak noise levels within the sampling
interval. Lmax is distinct from the peak noise level, which only includes the single highest
measurement within a measurement interval.
• CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is a 24-hour average Leq with a 4.77-dBA
“penalty” added to noise during the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m., and a 10-dBA penalty
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 (Hendriks, 2013). The logarithmic effect of these additions is that
a 60-dBA 24-hour Leq would result in a calculation of 66.7 dBA CNEL.
• Ldn, the day-night average noise, is a 24-hour average Leq with an additional 10-dBA “penalty”
added to noise that occurs between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The Ldn metric yields values
within 1 dBA of the CNEL metric. As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are considered
to be equivalent and are treated as such in this assessment.
4.13.3 EXISTING NOISE
The project site is in a predominantly residential area. The main source of ambient noise is traffic on
local roadways.
4.13.4 SENSITIVE LAND USES
The City of Fontana 2015-2035 General Plan Noise and Safety Element (Stantec, 2018a, p. 11-9)
defines “noise-sensitive” uses in areas of 24-hour-per-day of exposure as residential uses, hospitals,
rest homes, long-term care facilities, and mental care facilities. Sensitive receivers12 for shorter-term
exposures are defined as schools, libraries, places of worship and passive recreation uses.
The principal sensitive receivers in the project vicinity are Fontana Community Church, the Fontana
Lewis Library & Technology Center, single-family and multiple-family residential neighborhoods on
the north and east, St. Joseph Catholic Church, and Miller Park. Table 4.13-1 identifies sensitive
receivers in the project vicinity. Figure 4.13-1 shows the locations of the sensitive receivers.
Table 4-13-1
SENSITIVE RECEIVERS IN THE PROJECT AREA
ID Name Type Address
Feet From
Sitea (Phase
I; Phase II)
1 Fontana Community Church Religious 8316 Sierra Avenue 483; 144
2 Fontana Lewis Library &
Technology Center Institutional 8437 Sierra Avenue 367; 339
3 Single-family residence Residential 8333 Emerald Avenue 258; 665
4 St. Joseph Catholic Church Religious 17080 Arrow Boulevard 843; 1,102
5 Multi-family residence Residential 17000 Upland Avenue 74; 335
6 Miller Park Recreational 17004 Arrow Boulevard 376; 519
aThese distances are from the sensitive receiver to the nearest point on the project boundary; they were not used in
calculating noise exposures.
12 The targets of adverse noise impacts are called “sensitive receivers” in this document, while those of adverse air quality
impacts are termed “sensitive receptors.”
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230 City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.13-1
SENSITIVE RECEIVERS NEAR THE PROJECT SITE
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230 City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.13.5 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS
In order to characterize existing noise levels, UltraSystems conducted ambient noise sampling at five
locations near the project site, as shown in Figure 4.13-2. Table 4.13-2 lists the measurement
points, sampling locations, and measurement results. Details of the ambient sampling methods and
results are provided in Appendix H.
The samples were taken between 10:20 a.m. and 2:37 p.m. on Friday, November 3, 2023. The
15-minute Leq values ranged from 48.2 to 65.1 dBA. The lowest of these values was measured at Point
3, which is located in front of a single-family residence along Emerald Avenue, and east of both project
sites. The maximum ambient noise level was located at Point 1, which is located in front of Fontana
Community Church, and west of both project sites.
Table 4.13-2
AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
Point Data Set Sampling
Time Address
Measurement Results
(dBA) Notes
Leq Lmax L90
1 S006 1422-1437 8316 Sierra
Avenue 65.1 79.8 51.5
West of the project
sites, on the sidewalk
in front of Fontana
Community Church.
2 S002 1110-1125 8437 Sierra
Avenue 59.1 82.5 47.4
South of the western
project site on the
sidewalk north of the
Fontana Lewis Library
& Technology Center.
3 S004 1252-1307 8333 Emerald
Avenue 48.2 63.9 41.1
East of the eastern
project site, on the
sidewalk in front of a
single-family residence.
4 S003 1209-1224 17080 Arrow
Boulevard 56.9 72.3 50.3
Southeast of both
project sites, in the
parking lot of St. Joseph
Catholic Church
5 S005 1346-1400 1700 Upland
Avenue 60.4 73.8 44.0
North of the east
project site, on the
sidewalk at the
intersection in front of
a single-family
residence.
6 S001 1020-1035 17004 Arrow
Boulevard 49.9 69.2 44.7 South of both project
sites, in Miller Park.
Source: UltraSystems, with Google Earth, 2023.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230 City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.13-2
AMBIENT NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.13.6 REGULATORY SETTING
State of California
The most current guidelines prepared by the state noise officer are contained in Appendix D of the
General Plan Guidelines issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in 2017
(OPR, 2017). These guidelines establish four categories for judging the severity of noise intrusion on
specified land uses:
• Normally Acceptable: Is generally acceptable, with no mitigation necessary.
• Conditionally Acceptable: May require some mitigation, as established through a noise
study.
• Normally Unacceptable: Requires substantial mitigation.
• Clearly unacceptable: Probably cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level.
The OPR noise compatibility guidelines assign ranges of CNEL values to each of these categories. The
ranges differ for different types of sensitive receivers, and are shown in Table 4.13-2.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.13-2
CALIFORNIA LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FOR COMMUNITY NOISE SOURCES
Land Use Category Noise Exposure (dBA, CNEL)
55 60 65 70 75 80
Residential – Low-Density Single-Family, Duplex,
Mobile Homes
Residential – Multiple Family
Transient Lodging – Motel, Hotels
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture
Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction without any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply system or air conditioning will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: OPR, 2017.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
City of Fontana General Plan Noise and Safety Element
The City of Fontana General Plan EIR Noise and Safety Element (Stantec, 2018a) has the following
goals, policies and actions that apply to proposed project:
Goal 1: The City of Fontana protects sensitive land uses from excessive noise by diligent planning
through 2035 (Stantec, 2018a, p.11.12).
Policies
• New sensitive land uses shall be prohibited in incompatible areas.
• Where sensitive uses are to be placed along transportation routes, mitigation shall be
provided to ensure compliance with state-mandated noise levels.
• Noise spillover or encroachment from commercial, industrial and educational land uses shall
be minimized into adjoining residential neighborhoods or noise-sensitive uses.
Actions
A. The following uses shall be considered noise-sensitive and discouraged in areas in excess of
65 dBA CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level): Residential Uses; Hospitals; Rest Homes;
Long Term Care Facilities; and Mental Care Facilities.
B. The following uses shall be considered noise-sensitive and discouraged in areas in excess of
65 Leq(12) (Equivalent Continuous Sound Level): Schools; Libraries; Places of Worship; and
Passive Recreation Uses.
C. The State of California Office of Planning and Research General Plan Guidelines shall be
followed with respect to acoustical study requirements.
Goal 2: The City of Fontana provides a diverse and efficiently operated ground transportation
system that generates the minimum feasible noise on its residents through 2035 (Stantec, 2018a,
p.11.13).
Actions
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.
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.
Goal 3: The City of Fontana’s residents are protected from the negative effects of “spill over” noise
(Stantec, 2018a, p.11.13).
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Policy
• 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.
Actions
A. Projects located in commercial areas shall not exceed stationary-source noise standards at
the property line of proximate residential or commercial uses.
B. Industrial uses shall not exceed commercial or residential stationary source noise standards
at the most proximate land uses.
C. Non-transportation noise shall be considered in land use planning decisions.
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
The City of Fontana’s Municipal Code (City of Fontana, 2021a) contains several provisions potentially
related to construction and operation of the proposed project. Prohibited noises enumerated in
Chapter 18 (Nuisances), Article II. - Noise include:
• Construction or repairing of buildings or structures. The erection (including excavating),
demolition, alteration or repair of any building or structure other than 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 case of urgent necessity in the interest of public health and safety, and
then only with a permit from the building inspector, which permit may be granted for a period
not to exceed three days or less while the emergency continues and which permit may be
renewed for periods of three days or less while the emergency continues. If the building
inspector should determine that the public health and safety will not be impaired by the
erection, demolition, alteration or repair of any building or structure or the excavation of
streets and highways within the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., and if he shall further
determine that loss or inconvenience would result to any party in interest, he may grant
permission for such work to be done on weekdays within the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.,
upon application being made at the time the permit for the work is awarded or during the
progress of the work (City of Fontana, 2021a).
• Noise near schools, courts, place of worship or hospitals. The creation of any loud, excessive,
impulsive or intrusive noise on any street adjacent to any school, institution of learning,
places of worship or court while the premises are in use, or adjacent to any hospital which
unreasonably interferes with the workings of such institution or which disturbs or unduly
annoys patients in the hospital; provided conspicuous signs are displayed in such streets
indicating that the street is a school, hospital or court street (City of Fontana, 2021a).
• Blowers. The operation of any noise-creating blower or power fan or any internal combustion
engine other than from the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on a weekday and the hours of
8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on a Saturday, the operation of which causes noise due to the
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
explosion of operating gases or fluids, unless the noise from such blower or fan is muffled and
such engine is equipped with a muffler device sufficient to deaden such noise (City of Fontana,
2021a).
• Piledrivers, hammers, etc. The operation between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of any
piledriver, steam shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, steam or electric hoist or other
appliance, the use of which is attended by loud, excessive, impulsive or intrusive noise (City
of Fontana, 2021a).
City of Fontana Conditions of Approval
The construction contractor shall use the following source controls at all times:
a. Construction shall be limited to 7:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm on
Saturdays, and no construction on Sundays and Holidays unless it is approved by the building
inspector for cases that are considered urgently necessary as defined in Section 18-63(7) of
the Municipal Code.
b. For all noise-producing equipment, use types and models that have the lowest horsepower
and the lowest noise generating potential practical for their intended use.
c. The construction contractor will ensure that all construction equipment, fixed or mobile, is
properly operating (tuned-up) and lubricated, and that mufflers are working adequately.
d. Have only necessary equipment onsite.
e. Use manually-adjustable or ambient-sensitive backup alarms. When working adjacent to
residential use(s), the construction contractor will also use the following path controls,
except where not physically feasible, when necessary:
f. Install portable noise barriers, including solid structures and noise blankets, between the
active noise sources and the nearest noise receivers.
g. Temporarily enclose localized and stationary noise sources.
h. Store and maintain equipment, building materials, and waste materials as far as practical
from as many sensitive receivers as practical.
4.13.7 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
The City of Fontana has not published explicit thresholds for use in determining significance of noise
impacts under CEQA. In keeping with standard practice, two criteria were used for judging noise
impacts. First, noise levels generated by the proposed project must comply with all relevant federal,
state, and local standards and regulations. Noise impacts on the surrounding community are limited
by local noise ordinances, which are implemented through investigations in response to nuisance
complaints. It is assumed that all existing applicable regulations for the construction and operation
of the proposed project would be enforced. In addition, the proposed project should not produce
noise levels that are incompatible with adjacent noise-sensitive land uses.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-11
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
The second measure of impact used in this analysis is a significant increase in noise levels above
existing ambient noise levels as a result of the introduction of a new noise source. An increase in
noise level due to a new noise source has a potential to adversely impact people. The proposed
project would have a significant noise impact if it would do any of the following:
• Expose persons to or generate noise levels (as CNEL) in excess of standards recommended in
the state’s land use compatibility table.
• Include construction activities in or within 500 feet of residential areas between 6:00 p.m. of
one day and 7:00 a.m. of the next day, without a permit.
• Generate construction noise exceeding 80 dBA Leq (FTA, 2018, p. 170).
• Contribute, with other local construction projects, to a significant cumulative noise impact.
• Increase operational exposures at sensitive receivers (mainly because of an increase in traffic
flow) by 5 dBA Leq or more.
4.13.8 IMPACT ANALYSIS
a) Would the project result in 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 activities, especially with heavy equipment operation, would create noise effects on and
adjacent to the construction site. Long-term noise impacts include project-generated onsite and
offsite operational noise sources. Onsite noise sources from the operation of the civic center would
include the use of mechanical equipment such as air conditioners and landscaping and building
maintenance activities. Offsite noise would be attributable to project-induced traffic, which would
cause an incremental increase in noise levels within and near the project site. Each is described
below.
Short-Term Construction Noise
Noise impacts from construction activities are a function of the noise generated by the operation of
construction equipment and onroad delivery and worker commuter vehicles, the location of
equipment, and the timing and duration of the noise-generating activities. Using calculation methods
published by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA, 2018), UltraSystems estimated the average
hourly exposures at representative sensitive receivers near the project site. The distances used for
the calculations were measured from the sensitive receivers to the approximate center of activity of
each construction phase, since that would be the average location of construction equipment most of
the time. For the purpose of this analysis, it was estimated that the construction of the proposed
project would begin in December 2023 and end in January 2025.
The types and numbers of pieces of equipment anticipated in each phase and subphase of
construction and development were estimated by running the California Emissions Estimator Model
(CalEEMod), Version 2020.4.0, and having the model generate land use-based default values. The
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-12
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
CalEEMod equipment default values are based on a construction survey performed by the SCAQMD
(BREEZE Software, 2021). Table 4.13-3 and Table 4.13-4 list the equipment expected to be used.
For each equipment type, the table shows an average noise emission level (in dB at 50 feet, unless
otherwise specified) and a “usage factor,” which is an estimated fraction of operating time that the
equipment would be producing noise at the stated level.13,14 Equipment use was matched to phases
of the construction schedule.
13 Equipment noise emissions and usage factors are from Knauer, H. et al., 2006. FHWA Highway Construction Noise
Handbook. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology, Administration, Cambridge,
Massachusetts, FHWA-HEP-06-015 (August 2006), except where otherwise noted.
14 Scraper, crane, and cement and mortar mixer, and roller noise emissions data from County of Ventura, Construction
Noise Threshold Criteria and Control Plan. Amended July 2010. This document was also source of usage factors for
cranes, cement and mortar mixers, pavers, paving equipment and rollers. Rubber tired dozer noise emissions data
from measurements made by Anderson (2007, p. 47) at construction sites.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-13
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.13-3
PHASE I CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE CHARACTERISTICS
Construction
Subphase Equipment Type Number
of
Pieces
Maximum
Sound
Level
(dBA @
50 feet)
Usage
Factor
Composite
Noise
(dBA @ 50
feet)
Site Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 90 0.73
90.46 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 79 0.40
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 85 0.37
Grading
Graders 1 85 0.41
87.80
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 85 0.37
Rubber Tired Dozers 1 79 0.40
Bore/Drill Rig 1 84 0.20
Off-Highway Tractors 1 85 0.37
Skid Steer Loaders 1 80 0.40
Building Site
Construction
Cranes 1 83 0.08
83.42
Generator Sets 1 73 0.50
Welders 3 74 0.45
Bore/Drill Rig 1 84 0.20
Rubber Tired Loaders 2 79 0.40
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 1 85 0.37
Skid Steer Loaders 1 80 0.40
Rough Terrain Forklifts 2 67 0.30
Paving
Rubber Tired Loaders 1 79 0.40
86.64
Paving Equipment 1 85 0.50
Pavers 1 77 0.50
Rollers 1 74 0.10
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 85 0.37
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 85 0.40
Architectural
Coating Air Compressor 1 81 0.48 77.81
Underground
Building Utilities
Excavators 1 80 0.40 79.99 Trenchers 1 83 0.30
Source: FTA, 2018
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-14
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.13-4
PHASE II CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE CHARACTERISTICS
Construction
Subphase Equipment Type Number
of
Pieces
Maximum
Sound
Level
(dBA @
50 feet)
Usage
Factor
Composite
Noise
(dBA @ 50
feet)
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 90 0.73
90.46 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 79 0.40
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 3 85 0.37
Site Preparation
Graders 1 85 0.41
84.45 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 79 0.40
Rubber Tired Loaders 1 79 0.40
Grading
Graders 2 85 0.41
85.97 Rubber Tired Dozers 1 79 0.40
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 85 0.37
Building
Construction
Cranes 1 83 0.08
82.51
Welders 3 74 0.45
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 85 0.37
Generator Sets 1 73 0.50
Forklifts 1 67 0.30
Paving
Cement and Mortar Mixers 1 85 0.50
86.33
Paving Equipment 1 85 0.50
Pavers 1 77 0.50
Rollers 1 74 0.10
Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 85 0.37
Architectural
Coating Air Compressor 1 81 0.48 77.81
Source: FTA, 2018
Table 4.13-5 and Table 4.13-6 summarize the results of the construction noise analysis for both
phases of the project. For sensitive receivers 2, 3, 4, and 6, noise attenuation by intervening buildings
was taken into account. In Phase I, the greatest exposures would occur during the demolition phase
for all sensitive receivers. In Phase II, the greatest exposures would occur during demolition for all
sensitive receivers. The highest total short-term noise exposure (ambient plus construction-related)
would be 79.6 dBA Leq, at residences on Upland Avenue. We therefore look to the significance criteria
defined in Section 4.13.8. The relevant criterion is “Generate construction noise exceeding 80 dBA
Leq.” The criterion threshold of 80 dBA was not exceeded in this study. In addition, with
implementation of the City of Fontana standard conditions of approval, noise exposures will be even
less. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant.
Table 4.13-5
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-15
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
ESTIMATED PHASE I CONSTRUCTION NOISE EXPOSURES AT NEAREST SENSITIVE RECEIVERS
Phase Receivera Distance
(feet)
Ambient
(dBA
Leq)
Construction
(dBA Leq)b
New
Total
(dBA
Leq)
Increase
(dBA
Leq)
Demolition MF 177 60.4 79.5 79.6 19.2
Grading MF 177 60.4 76.8 76.9 16.5
Building Site
Construction MF 177 60.4 72.4 72.7 12.3
Paving MF 177 60.4 75.7 75.8 15.4
Architectural
Coating MF 177 60.4 66.8 67.7 7.3
Trenching MF 177 60.4 69.0 69.6 9.2
a Sensitive receiver type.
b Construction-generated noise.
Table 4.13-6
ESTIMATED PHASE II CONSTRUCTION NOISE EXPOSURES AT NEAREST SENSITIVE RECEIVER
Phase Receivera Distance
(feet)
Ambient
(dBA Leq)
Construction
(dBA Leq)b
New
Total
(dBA
Leq)
Increase
(dBA Leq)
Demolition Religious 319 65.1 74.4 74.9 9.8
Site Preparation Religious 319 65.1 68.4 70.1 5.0
Grading Religious 319 65.1 69.9 71.1 6.0
Building
Construction Religious 319 65.1 66.4 68.8 3.7
Paving Religious 319 65.1 70.2 71.4 6.3
Architectural
Coating Religious 319 65.1 61.7 66.7 1.6
a Sensitive receiver type.
b Construction-generated noise.
Operational Noise
Onsite
Onsite noise sources from the civic center would include operation of air conditioners, parking lot
activities, and landscaping. Noise levels from these sources are generally lower than from the traffic
on streets bordering the project site. Furthermore, § 18-63 of the City of Fontana Development Code
limits onsite noise impacts of the operation of any noise-creating blower or power fan or any internal
combustion engine other than from the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on a weekday and the hours
of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on a Saturday, the operation of which causes noise due to the explosion of
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-16
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
operating gases or fluids, unless the noise from such blower or fan is muffled and such engine is
equipped with a muffler device sufficient to deaden such noise. The operational noise levels would
be within both the City’s daytime and nighttime residential noise standards of 70 dBA and 65 dBA,
respectively. Therefore, operational noise would be less than significant.
Mobile Sources
The principal noise source in the project area is traffic on local streets. The project may contribute to
a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity due to project-generated vehicle
traffic on neighborhood roadways and at intersections. A noise impact would occur if the project
contributes to a permanent increase in ambient noise levels affecting sensitive receivers along
roadways that would carry project-generated traffic.
Access to the project site would be available via Upland Avenue. As a worst case, it is assumed that
all project traffic will travel on Upland Avenue immediately east of Sierra Avenue and west of
Emerald Avenue. According to the City of Fontana General Plan, the average daily traffic (ADT) on
Sierra Avenue between Arrow Boulevard and Baseline Boulevard is 19,900 (City of Fontana, 2018a,
Exhibit 9.5). The Project is forecast to generate a net total of 339 daily vehicle trips (actual vehicles)
(RK Engineering Group, Inc, 2023, p. 4). It would thus increase traffic by about 1.7%. Given the
logarithmic nature of the decibel, traffic volume needs to be doubled in order for the noise level to
increase by 3 dBA, the minimum level perceived by the average human ear (ICF Jones & Stokes,
2009). A doubling is equivalent to a 100% increase. Because the maximum increase in traffic at any
intersection is far below 100%, the increase in roadway noise experienced at sensitive receivers
would not be perceptible to the human ear. Therefore, roadway noise associated with project
operation would not expose a land use to noise levels that are considered incompatible with or in
excess of adopted standards, and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact
Vibration is sound radiated through the ground. Vibration can result from a source (e.g., subway
operations, vehicles, machinery equipment, etc.) that causes the adjacent ground to move, thereby
creating vibration waves that propagate through the soil to the foundations of nearby buildings. This
effect is referred to as groundborne vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root-mean-
square (RMS) velocity is usually used to describe vibration levels. PPV is defined as the maximum
instantaneous peak of the vibration level, while RMS is defined as the square root of the average of
the squared amplitude of the level. PPV is typically used for evaluating potential building damage,
while RMS velocity in decibels (VdB) is typically more suitable for evaluating human response (FTA,
2018, pp. 110-111).
The background vibration velocity level in residential areas is usually around 50 VdB. The vibration
velocity level threshold of perception for humans is approximately 65 VdB. A vibration velocity level
of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible
levels for most people. Most perceptible indoor vibration is caused by sources within buildings such
as operation of mechanical equipment, movement of people, or the slamming of doors. Typical
outdoor sources of perceptible groundborne vibration are construction equipment, steel-wheeled
trains, and traffic on rough roads. If a roadway is smooth, the groundborne vibration from traffic is
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-17
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
rarely perceptible. The range of interest is from approximately 50 VdB to 100 VdB, which is the
general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings (FTA, 2018, p. 120).
Construction Vibration
Construction activities for the project could generate low levels of groundborne vibration. The
operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that propagate though the ground and
diminishes in intensity with distance from the source. Vibration impacts can range from no
perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration
at moderate levels, to slight damage of buildings at the highest levels. The construction activities
associated with the project could have an adverse impact on both sensitive structures (i.e., building
damage) and populations (i.e., annoyance).
The construction vibration analysis used formulas published by the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) (FTA, 2018, p. 185). For a standard reference distance of 25 feet, peak particle velocity is found
from:
PPV = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
where
PPVref = Reference source vibration at 25 feet
D = Distance from source to receiver
The vibration level (VdB) for a standard reference distance of 25 feet is found from:
VdB = Lvref – 30 log(D/25)
where
Lvref = Reference source vibration level at 25 feet
D = Distance from source to receiver
The FTA has published standard vibration levels for construction equipment operations, at a distance
of 25 feet (FTA, 2018, p. 185). The construction-related vibration levels for the nearest sensitive
receivers for major construction phases are shown in Table 4.13-7 and Table 4.13-8. These
calculations were based on the distances from the construction activity to the closest sensitive
receivers.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-18
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.13-7
VIBRATION LEVELS OF TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT FOR PHASE I
Table 4.13-8
VIBRATION LEVELS OF TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT FOR PHASE II
As shown in Table 4.13-7, the vibration level of construction equipment at the nearest sensitive
receiver (56 feet) is at most 0.031 inch per second, which is less than the FTA damage threshold of
0.12 inch per second PPV for fragile historic buildings, and 75 VdB, which is less than the FTA
threshold for human annoyance of 80 VdB. Construction vibration impacts would therefore be less
than significant during Phase I. As shown in Table 4.13-8, the vibration level of construction
equipment at the nearest sensitive receiver (110 feet) is at most 0.015 inch per second, which is less
than the FTA damage threshold of 0.12 inch per second PPV for fragile historic buildings, and 67 VdB,
which is less than the FTA threshold for human annoyance of 80 VdB. Construction vibration impacts
would therefore be less than significant during Phase II.
Operational Vibration
Operation of the proposed project would not involve significant sources of ground-borne vibration
or ground-borne noise. Thus, operation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant
impact.
Equipment
PPV
at 25 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 25 feet
(VdB)
PPV
at 92 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 92 feet
(VdB)
PPV
at 56 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 56 feet
(VdB)
Loaded trucks 0.076 86 0.031 75
Jackhammer 0.035 79 0.0084 62
Small bulldozer 0.003 58 0.00072 41
Large bulldozer 0.089 87 0.021 70
Sources: Data at 25 feet from (FTA, 2006, p. 12-12); calculations by UltraSystems.
Equipment
PPV
at 25 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 25 feet
(VdB)
PPV
at 190 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 190 feet
(VdB)
PPV
at 110 feet
(in/sec)
Vibration
Decibels
at 110 feet
(VdB)
Loaded trucks 0.076 86 0.015 67
Jackhammer 0.035 79 0.0038 53
Small bulldozer 0.003 58 0.00032 32
Large bulldozer 0.089 87 0.0096 61
Sources: Data at 25 feet from (FTA, 2006, p. 12-12); calculations by UltraSystems.
❖ SECTION 4.13 – NOISE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.13-19
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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?
No Impact
The closest public airport to the project site is the Ontario International Airport, located
approximately 12.4 miles to the southwest. No portion of the project site lies within the 65-dBA CNEL
noise contours of that airport (City of Ontario, 2018). Therefore, the project would not expose people
residing or working in the project area to a safety hazard or excessive noise levels associated with
airports and no impact would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.14 – POPULATION AND HOUSING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.14-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned growth in an area either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
Less Than Significant Impact
The project does not propose the development of any residential uses that would cause direct
population growth. The proposed project would replace two existing municipal buildings in the City
of Fontana Civic Center with the intent to improve operational inadequacies that currently exist and
no increase in employment is anticipated. Should the project increase employment in the future, it is
expected to be from the local workforce. Project improvements would not be of the scale to induce
indirect unplanned population growth in the project area.
The project would create employment opportunities during construction but it is anticipated that
workers from the local workforce would be hired during the construction phase. Employment
generation from the project’s construction would not be of the scope or scale to induce migration
into the project region to work.
Employment during the operational phase would also be expected to be from the local workforce.
Employment in the City of Fontana in 2019 was estimated at 65,087 and is forecast to increase to
79,452 in 2050, an increase of 14,365 or 18 percent (SCAG, 2022, p. 26). Estimated project
employment is within the regional forecast for employment in the city and therefore, impacts on
population growth in the area would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.14 – POPULATION AND HOUSING ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.14-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact
No housing exists onsite, and no one currently resides on the project site. Therefore, the project
would not displace any housing or people and the project would not necessitate the construction of
replacement housing. No impact would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.15-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? X
b) Police protection? X
c) Schools? X
d) Parks? X
e) Other public facilities? X
a) Fire protection?
No Impact
Fire prevention, emergency response, and administrative services for the city of Fontana are
provided by the Fontana Fire Protection District (Fire Department) through a contract with the San
Bernardino County Fire Department. The Fire Department also provides emergency medical and
rescue services, investigation and mitigation of hazardous materials events, disasters, and other
responses. There are seven fire stations in Fontana, a Hazardous Materials Response Team, and
firefighters with special expertise in wildfires. (City of Fontana, 2018a, p. 8.6). The Fire Department
is staffed with 140 full-time personnel: 124 safety employees and 16 non-safety employees. The Fire
Department has a response time goal for all service calls to arrive on the scene in six minutes or less
(City of Fontana, 2021a, p. 407).
The nearest station to the project site is Fire Station 71, which serves the northern areas of the city
of Fontana, at 16980 Arrow Boulevard, approximately 750 south of the project site. Station 71’s daily
staffing includes two captains, two engineers, three firefighter medics, and one firefighter and is
equipped with one medic engine, one medic truck, and one squad vehicle (City of Fontana, 2023b).
The project proposes redevelopment of two buildings (City Hall and Annex Buildings) within the
Civic Center campus. Travel time to the project site from Station 71 is approximately one minute
(Google Maps, 2023). The Fire Department response time for the closest fire station to the project
site would be four minutes, which is under the Fire Department’s goal of having a six-minute
response time.
As detailed in Section 4.11, Land Use, the development of the project site would be consistent with
the project site’s General Plan land use of Public Facilities (P-PF) and a zoning designation of
Downtown Core - Civic, respectively. Additionally, the proposed project would consist of improving
and reconfiguring existing public facilities and improving existing conditions within and around the
project site. A development such as the proposed project would have similar circulation compared to
❖ SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.15-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
existing conditions, which would maintain the ability of the project to be adequately served by the
fire department. There would be no impact on Fire Protection.
b) Police protection?
No Impact
The City of Fontana Police Department (Police Department) provides police services in the project
area. The Police Department has 310 full-time employees (207 sworn and 103 non-sworn) and is
comprised of four separate divisions: Office of the Chief of Police, Administrative Services, Field
Services, and Special Operations (City of Fontana, 2021a, p. 381). The nearest police station to the
project is located on the Civic Center campus at 17005 Upland Avenue, directly adjacent to the project
locations. The city’s population was estimated on January 1, 2021, to be 213,944 (City of Fontana,
2021a, p. 30), and the Police Department has an approximate service-to-population ratio of 0.97
sworn officers per 1,000 residents. Project development would not add residents to the city, so the
service-to-population ratio would remain at 0.97 sworn officers per 1,000 residents, thus not
significantly affecting the existing service capacity of the Police Department.
The Police Department's target response time for Priority 1 (emergency calls like subject not
breathing, shots fired, and other immediate risk to life/safety) is 4:20 (4 minutes 20 seconds) (City
of Fontana, 2021a, p. 382). In May 2023, the Fontana Police Department had an average Priority 1
response time of 4:27 (City of Fontana, 2023c). As previously noted, the project proposes
redevelopment of two buildings within the Civic Center campus, where the Police Station is also
located. Travel and response time to the project site from the adjacent Police Station is approximately
one minute, well below the target response time of 4:20.
As detailed in Section 4.11, the development of the project site would be consistent with the project
site’s General Plan land use and zoning designation of Public Facilities (P-PF) and a zoning
designation of Downtown Core - Civic, respectively, and would improve existing conditions within
and around the project site. A development such as the proposed project would have similar
circulation compared to existing conditions, which would maintain the ability of the project to be
adequately served by the police department. Therefore, no impact would occur.
c) Schools?
No Impact
The project site is in the Fontana Unified School District (FUSD), which spans most of the City of
Fontana. The FUSD operates 30 elementary schools (K-5), seven middle schools (6-8), five high
schools, two alternative education schools, and one adult/community education program (FUSD, p.6
2022a).
The impact on school facilities is determined by the projected increase in the number of households
resulting from the proposed project. As outlined in Section 4.13, the project is a non-residential
development, as such, will not directly contribute to a rise in the number of households. Additionally,
it is expected to generate employment opportunities only for the local workforce so no indirect
increase in the number of households would be created. Therefore, there would be no impact on
schools.
❖ SECTION 4.15 – PUBLIC SERVICES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.15-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Parks?
No Impact
The City of Fontana Department of Community Services (Community Services) provides recreation
programs and maintains city parks. Community Services operates and maintains 34 parks totaling
approximately 1,572 acres of Open Space (1,195 acres of parks and approximately 377 acres of
additional open space and trails) (City of Fontana 2018c p. 7.6, 15.6).
Impacts on park facilities are based on the direct population increase the project would cause., The
proposed replacement of two civic buildings would not induce a direct population increase; and
would most likely create employment only for the local workforce, there would be no indirect
population increase. Therefore, there would be no impact on parks.
d) Other Public Facilities?
No Impact
Library
Library services in the city are provided by the San Bernardino County Library System, which is
comprised of 32 branch libraries. Within the city of Fontana, there are three libraries: the Fontana
Lewis Library and Technology Center (Lewis Library) located at 8437 Sierra Avenue; the Summit
Branch Library located at 15551 Summit Avenue; and the Kaiser High School Library located at
11155 Almond Avenue (SBCL, 2023). The nearest library to the project site is the Lewis Library
located approximately 500 feet to the south.
Impacts on library facilities are based on the direct population increase the project would cause. As
a non-residential development, the proposed project would not induce a direct population increase
and would most likely create employment only for the local workforce, so there would be no indirect
population increase. Therefore, there would be no impact on library facilities.
Hospitals
The nearest hospital to the project site is Kaiser Permanente at 9961 Sierra Ave, Fontana CA 92335
two miles south of the project site. The hospital is a 314-bed facility that includes a 51-bed emergency
department (Kaiser Permanente, 2023).
Impacts on hospital facilities are based on the direct population increase the project would cause. As
a non-residential development, the proposed project would not induce a direct population increase
and would most likely create employment only for the local workforce, so there would be no indirect
population increase. Therefore, there would be no impact on hospital facilities.
❖ SECTION 4.16 - RECREATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.16-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 Renovation 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
Recreational services in the city of Fontana are provided by the City’s Department of Facilities and
Parks, which maintains over 40 parks, sports facilities, and community centers (City of Fontana,
2020a). The City’s park acreage standard is five acres of public park land per 1,000 residents. The
City currently has approximately 1,359 acres total in parks and land for public use, enough to meet
this performance standard (Stantec, 2018a, p. 7.10).
The project proposes replacement of the City Hall and Annex Building. The residential population is
not expected to increase as a result of the proposed project. Project construction would create limited
employment opportunities; it is anticipated that employees from the regional workforce would be
hired. Project operation is not anticipated to generate a net increase in employment.
The parks within one mile of the project site, all in the City of Fontana, include Chaparral Park at
11415 Rancherias Drive, and Oak Park at 14180 Live Oak Avenue, to the south of the project site.
Also, Southridge Park at 14501 Live Oak Ave and Southridge Village Open Space Reserve are located
to the southeast from the project site. Further south, just over one mile distant, is the Rancho Mira
Loma Park at 3206 Wysocki Lane, Mira Loma. Project operation is not expected to increase
employment onsite compared to existing conditions, and is therefore not anticipated to cause an
increase in use of nearby parks. No impact would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.16 - RECREATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.16-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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
As described above, the project does not propose new or expanded recreational facilities that could
have adverse effects on the environment. Therefore, no impact would occur.
❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.17-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) 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) 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) Result in inadequate emergency
access? ☓
The following analysis is based in part on the findings of the Civic Center Renovation Project Trip
Generation & Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis (Screening Analysis) for the
Proposed Project, prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc., October 2, 2023. The trip generation
assessment estimates the combination of existing and future vehicle trips from the project site based
on the implementation of the proposed project. Trip generation estimates are based on the Institute
of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. The Screening Analysis is
available in Appendix I to this Initial Study.
a) Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact
The following plans and programs address the traffic circulation system in the City of Fontana.
City of Fontana Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
The City of Fontana Active Transportation Plan, adopted in 2017, is used to implement infrastructure
improvements to improve connectivity in Fontana and surrounding cities and the region by
providing safe and comfortable walking and bicycling links. The ATP addresses the City’s goal of
becoming a healthy, engaged, economically vibrant, family-oriented, and safe community. The
proposed project would not create pedestrian or bicycle linkages, and therefore the proposed project
would not conflict with the ATP.
City of Fontana Development Impact Fee (DIF) Program
The City of Fontana has adopted a Development Impact Fee (DIF) program in accordance with the
requirements of Government Code §66000 et al. The Department of Development Services oversees
❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.17-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
the use of the DIF fees. The DIF is used to fund various projects included in the City’s capital
improvement program, which is periodically updated. Generally, DIF eligible intersections are those
consisting of two intersecting Hierarchy of Streets Plan roadways. Fee credits and reimbursements
will be available as part of the DIF program and are given to projects that are identified as a DIF
program facility.
San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP)
The San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program was originally enacted in 1990 by
Proposition 111 to address the increasing public concern that traffic congestion affects the quality of
life and economic vitality of the State of California. However, since the City of Fontana has a standard
program (Circulation Development Fees) to fund regional improvements, SANBAG considers the City
exempt from CMP traffic impact analysis. Therefore, no CMP analysis is required for the modified
project and no impact is anticipated.
The project does not propose the addition of roadways or public rights-of-way that would conflict
with adopted transportation plans and policies. Access to the civic center campus is available through
existing driveways along Upland Avenue on the north side, Emerald Avenue on the east side, and
Seville Avenue on the south side, and additional proposed access to parking on the ground floor in
the proposed Annex building. The site’s primary connection to the nearest regional transportation
corridor, the I-210 freeway, is via Sierra Avenue, which abuts the western portion of the project site;
there is no direct access to the site from Sierra Avenue, which is classified as a Major Highway.
Upland, Emerald, and Seville Avenues are classified as Local Street(s) by the Community Mobility and
Circulation Element of the General Plan.
The project does not propose elements that would conflict with the adopted alternative
transportation policies. Transit services are currently provided to the City and the project area by
Omnitrans, a public transit agency serving the San Bernardino Valley. The closest transit access is
from the Sierra @ Civic Center bus stop on Sierra Avenue, located on the west side of the Civic Center
campus along Sierra Avenue. The Sierra @ Civic Center bus stop is served by Omnitrans bus routes
14, 67, and 82. Route 14 runs between the cities of Fontana and San Bernardino, Route 67 runs
between the cities of Fontana and Rancho Cucamonga, and Route 82 runs between north and south
Fontana. All routes provide direct access to the Fontana Metrolink Transit Center, located 0.5 miles
south (Omnitrans, 2023). The Fontana Metrolink Transit Center is served by the San Bernardino Line,
which runs between downtown Los Angeles through the San Gabriel Valley and the Inland
Empire to San Bernardino, with limited express service to Redlands (Metrolink, 2023).
Long-term, the project could result in an increase in public transportation demand from local
employment opportunities and the need for civic services provided by the project; however, such an
increase would be insignificant given the comparatively small employment growth potential of the
project.
Pedestrian circulation is provided through existing public sidewalks and walkways along Sierra and
Upland Avenues and through the civic center campus. The existing sidewalk system within the
project vicinity provides direct connectivity to surrounding commercial, industrial, and residential
developments.
The regional Pacific Electric Trail (PET) travels 6.4 miles east to west across the City of Fontana,
abutting the Civic Center campus on the south, running parallel to Seville Avenue. PET is a Class I
trail that spans a total of 21 miles between the cities of Rialto and Claremont. The PET is the only fully
❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.17-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
dedicated and buffered bicycle route in the City of Fontana. Additionally, a Class III shared bike lane
runs north to south along Sierra Avenue.
As mentioned above, the project would have access along Upland, Emerald, and Seville Avenues. Per
the General Plan’s DEIR, sections of Sierra Avenue operate at LOS E, but the Sierra Avenue segment
located directly west of the project site, between Upland Avenue and Seville Avenue, does not exceed
LOS C, the City’s standard for desirable LOS (City of Fontana, 2018b, pp. 5.13-8 to 5.13-9).
According to Table 4.17-1, the proposed project is expected to generate approximately 339
additional net daily trips, based on the ITE trip generation rates. This number falls below the 500
average daily trips (ADT) threshold set forth in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) and Level of Service Assessment (TIA Guidelines).
Table 4.17-1
PROJECT TRIP GENERATION RATES & FORECAST
Land Use ITE
Code Qty. Units2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
In Out Total In Out Total
ITE Trip Generation Rates1
Government Office
Building 730 -- STU 75% 25% 3.34 25% 75% 1.71 22.59
Existing Site Trip Generation Forecast
Annex Building (Phase I) 730 13,500 TSF 34 11 45 6 17 23 305
City Hall (Phase II) 730 31,500 TSF 79 26 105 14 40 54 712
Existing Site Trip Generation Subtotal [A] 113 37 150 20 57 77 1,017
Proposed Project Trip Generation Forecast
Annex Building (Phase I) 730 30,000 TSF 75 25 100 13 38 51 678
City Hall (Phase II) 730 30,000 TSF 75 25 100 13 38 51 678
Existing Site Trip Generation Subtotal [B] 150 50 200 26 76 102 1,356
Total Net Trip Generation Forecast [B] - [A] 37 13 50 6 19 25 339
1. Source: ITE Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition, 2021).
2. TSF = Thousand Square Feet.
Source: RK Engineering Group Inc., 2023
As specified in the TIA Guidelines, a detailed traffic impact analysis will be required if a project is
expected to generate 50 or more peak hour trips to any intersection. Review of project trip generation
indicates that the project is expected to generate net increases of 50 AM peak hour trips and 25 PM
peak hour trips. Although the project generates one greater trip than the city threshold during the
AM peak hour, this extra trip can be considered nominal. Furthermore, after project traffic is assigned
to the roadway network, it is not expected that a single project driveway and/or adjacent intersection
carry 50 or more project-generated trips during any peak hour. In accordance with the TIA
Guidelines, the proposed project is screened from a full VMT analysis.
Given that the proposed project would not conflict with any program plan, ordinance, or policy
addressing the circulation system, including the provisions of the General Plan Circulation Element,
ATP, or interfere with public transit or bicycle transportation, the impacts of the project would be
less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.17-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)
Less than Significant Impact
CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts, details the
criteria for evaluating the possible transportation impacts of a project. The accepted metric for the
analysis of transportation under CEQA is Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT is a measure of the
total number of miles traveled by all vehicles in a geographic region over a given period of time. The
U.S. Department of Transportation defines VMT as "the total annual miles of vehicle travel divided by
the total population in a state or in an urbanized area". The Level of Service (LOS) metric is no longer
used to evaluate the performance of transportation elements to determine significant impacts under
CEQA.
On June 9, 2020, the City of Fontana adopted the VMT thresholds to determine transportation
impacts according to the CEQA Guidelines. This adoption was mandated by Senate Bill (SB) 743 and
the recent changes to CEQA Guidelines §15064.3. For the purpose of CEQA analysis of VMT and traffic
impacts associated with projects proposed in the City of Fontana, the city also adopted the TIA
Guidelines to provide project screening criteria and guidance for the analysis of VMT assessments.
The VMT analysis presented above in Section 4.17a) satisfies the requirements of CEQA Guidelines
§15064.3(b) in that the city assumes that projects generating fewer than 500 ADT would not cause a
substantial increase in total VMT city-wide or regionally and therefore would have a less than
significant impact on VMT. The proposed project is estimated to generate a net total of 339 ADT,
which would not exceed the City’s screening threshold of 500 ADT; therefore, the project would not
conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3 and would result in a 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)?
Less than Significant Impact
The proposed project would not alter the surrounding roads. Vehicular access to the project would
be through existing driveways along Upland Avenue on the north side, Emerald Avenue on the east
side, and Seville Avenue on the south side. There is an additional proposed access to parking on the
ground floor of the proposed Annex building; however, the proposed driveway would be
perpendicular to existing roadways and would not cause hazards due to a geometric design feature.
The project’s circulation system, including driveways and parking areas, would be designed to meet
city development standards and would not result in uses or design features that create traffic
hazards. Therefore, the impacts regarding increases in hazards due to geometric design features or
incompatible uses would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.17 – TRANSPORTATION ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.17-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Construction
During the construction phase of the project, the lanes and sidewalks may be temporarily closed. To
ensure that circulation and emergency access during construction are adequate, the City requires the
preparation and implementation of a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for all projects that
require construction in the public right of way. Therefore, the proposed project would implement the
mitigation measure TRANS-1. With the implementation of the mitigation measure TRANS-1, the
impacts regarding emergency access during construction would be less than significant.
Operation
The project would comply with applicable city regulations, such as the requirement to comply with
the City’s Fire Code in providing adequate emergency access. Before issuance of building permits, the
Fontana Fire Protection District would review the project site plans, including the location of all
buildings, fences, access driveways, and other features that can affect emergency access. The project
site plan provides fire lanes for adequate emergency access. The accessibility and distance
requirements at the site would be in accordance with the city's design requirements. The City’s
review process and compliance with applicable regulations and standards would ensure adequate
emergency access at the project site at all times. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
inadequate emergency access and would have no impact in this regard.
Mitigation Measure
TRANS-1 The Transportation Management Plan (TMP) must be reviewed and approved by the
City Traffic Engineer before beginning construction activity on the public right of way.
The typical TMP requires items such as the installation of a K-rail between the
construction area and open traffic lanes, the use of flaggers and directional signage to
direct traffic where only one travel lane is available or when equipment movement
creates temporary hazards, and the installation of steel plates to cover trenches under
construction. The TMP shall stipulate that emergency access must be maintained at
all times.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
After the implementation of the mitigation measure TRANS-1 described above, the project would
have less than significant impacts in the construction phase on emergency access.
❖ SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.18-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource that is listed or eligible for
listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources or in a local
register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code
§ 5020.1(k)?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource that is determined to be a
significant resource to a California
Native American tribe pursuant to
the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resource Code
§ 5024.1(c)?
X
Information from UltraSystems’ Draft Phase I Cultural Resources Inventory, dated November 22,
2023 for the proposed project (refer to Appendix D) is included in the analysis below.
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of
Historical Resources or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public
Resources Code § 5020.1(k)?
No Impact
The Native American Heritage Commission’s (NAHC) Sacred Lands File (SLF) search dated November
20, 2023 was negative (see Section 4.2 and Attachment C in Appendix D to this IS/MND).
No prehistoric archaeological resources were observed during the archaeological field survey
conducted November 10, 2023, by Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA and Mr. Rodrigo Jacobo , M.A., as part of
the cultural resources investigation (Section 4.3, Appendix D). The results of the pedestrian
assessment indicate that it is unlikely that prehistoric resources will be adversely affected by
construction of the project. Cultural resource study findings at the South Central Coastal Information
Center (SCCIC) (the local California Historic Resources Information System facility) indicate there are
no prehistoric or historic resources within the project parcel’s boundary. (Refer to Appendix D).
No tribal cultural resources onsite are 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
§ 5020.1(k). Therefore, the project would have no impact in this regard.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource that is determined to be a significant resource to a California Native
❖ SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.18-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
American tribe pursuant to the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code § 5024.1(c)?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes
on potential impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), as defined in Public Resources Code
§ 21074. TCRs are sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe that are either eligible or listed in the California Register
of Historical Resources or local register of historical resources (CNRA, 2007).
As part of the AB 52 process, Native American tribes must submit a written request to the lead agency
to be notified of projects within their traditionally and culturally affiliated area. The lead agency must
provide written, formal notification to those tribes within 14 days of deciding to undertake a project.
The tribe must respond to the lead agency within 30 days of receiving this notification if they want
to engage in consultation on the project, and the lead agency must begin the consultation process
within 30 days of receiving the tribe’s request. Consultation concludes when either (1) the parties
agree to mitigation measures to avoid a significant effect on a tribal cultural resource, or (2) a party,
acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes mutual agreement cannot be reached.
The City of Fontana (the lead agency) initiated AB 52 outreach to local tribes for the Fontana Civic
Center Renovation Project and sent letters via certified mail on November 28, 2023 to the six tribal
contacts on their list for AB 52 contact, informing them of the project as indicated on the list below:
• Joseph Ontiveros, Cultural Resource Director/Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians
• Andrew Salas, Chairman/Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizh Nation
• Alexandra McCleary, Ph.D., Sr. Mgr. Cultural Resource Management/ San Manuel Band of
Mission Indians
• Alexandra McCleary, Ph.D., Cultural Resource Management Department/ San Manuel Band of
Mission Indians
• Michael Mirelez, Cultural Resource Coordinator/ Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
• Anthony Morales, Chief/Gabrieleno Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians
The letters convey that the recipient has 30 days from the receipt of the letter to request AB 52
consultation regarding the project.
The Gabrielino – Kizh Nation responded via email on December 5, 2023 requesting consultation; the
email and 13 attachments detailed the tribe’s association with the project area as well as provided
three proposed TCR mitigation measures. Further consultation will be conducted via email.
(Angelica Martinez, Assistant Planner, personal communication via email December 5, 2023 and
December 12, 2023; Rina Leung, Senior Planner, personal communication via mail December 12,
2023.)
The Yuhaaviatum of San Manuel Nation’s Kristen Tuosto, Tribal Archaeologist, replied via email on
December 5, 2023 stating that the project is situated within tribal ancestral territory but that they
have no concerns with the project and did not request consultation; the tribe did provide suggestions
for three cultural resource mitigation measures and two tribal cultural resource mitigation measures.
(A. Martinez, personal communication, via email December 5, 2023).
There has been no response from the other three tribes.
❖ SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.18-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
The City will provide its standard TCR mitigation measures to the tribes for review. Further results
of consultation shall be placed in an updated IS/MND.
No prehistoric or archaeological resources were observed during the field survey. No prehistoric or
archaeological resources were recorded within the project boundary or within the half-mile buffer
zone of the project.
Land at the project site has been highly disturbed by building activities as early as 1938. No human
remains have been previously identified or recorded onsite. Therefore, while the potential for
subsurface prehistoric cultural deposits is considered to be low, the disturbed nature of the land in a
region known to have been heavily used for habitation and natural resource gathering by the local
Gabrielino (Tongva) tribe (see Section 2.2.2 in Appendix D) suggests the potential for the presence
of cultural material.
The project proposes grading. Grading activities associated with development of the project would
involve new subsurface disturbance and could result in the unanticipated discovery of unknown
human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. In the unlikely event of an
unexpected discovery, implementation of mitigation measures TCR-2 dealing with associated
funerary objects and TCR-3 dealing with human remains are recommended to ensure that impacts
related to the accidental discovery of human remains would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
MM TCR-1: Upon discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, cease
construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can
be assessed. All tribal cultural and archaeological resources unearthed by
project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified
archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native
American in origin, interested Tribes (as a result of correspondence with area
Tribes) shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and
curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request preservation in
place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on other
parts of the project while evaluation takes place.
MM TCR-2: 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.
MM TCR-3: 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
❖ SECTION 4.18 – TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.18-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
With implementation of MM TCR-1 and TCR-2, potential project impacts on TCRs would be less than
significant. With implementation of Mitigation Measure MM TCR-3 above, the proposed project
would result in less than significant impacts to human remains and associated funerary objects.
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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 whi1ch could cause
significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in
addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of
State or local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local infrastructure,
or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid
waste?
X
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
As discussed in Section 3.0 of this document, the proposed project would utilize existing connections
to utility services that already service the Fontana Civic Center campus. The project, which involves
the replacement and upgrading of existing facilities rather than the addition of any new capacity or
facilities, will not increase off-campus usage or production of services or facilities for water,
wastewater, storm water, electricity, natural gas, or telecommunications, and thus the existing off-
campus utilities infrastructure should be sufficient to meet the project’s needs.
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Wastewater Treatment and Conveyance: The City of Fontana owns 437 miles of sewer lines and
pump stations for the conveyance of wastewater. The Fontana Department of Public Works is
responsible for the maintenance of the city’s sewer lines and lift stations, ensuring efficient
wastewater transportation throughout the city (City of Fontana, 2018a, p. 10.8).
Wastewater treatment for the City of Fontana is provided by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency
(IEUA) and the City of Rialto (FWC, 2021, p. 6-15). IEUA operates four Regional Water Recycling
Plants (RPs) which have a total combined design treatment capacity of approximately 86 million
gallons per day (MGD). Currently, all four reclamation facilities treat a total combined average daily
flow of about 48 MGD. A system of regional trunk and interceptor sewers, owned and operated by
IEUA, transports wastewater to the RPs. To avoid overloading at any one facility, wastewater can be
diverted from one RP to another (FWC, 2021, p. 6-15).
IEUA’s RP-4 is responsible for treating local wastewater generated by the City of Fontana 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 10 MGD of wastewater and is operated in conjunction with RP-1 to
provide recycled water to users. In 2009, RP-4 was expanded to a capacity of 14 MGD (FWC, 2021, p.
6-15).
The proposed project would not involve the installation of sewers and would connect to the existing
wastewater infrastructure on site. A less than significant impact on wastewater treatment facilities
would occur.
Domestic Water: As detailed in Threshold 4.19 b) below, the project site is in the Fontana Water
Company (FWC) service area. FWC receives local surface water supplies from Lytle Creek which are
treated at the Summit Plant. From 2016 to 2020, Lytle Creek supplies averaged approximately 3,480
acre-feet per year (afy). FWC received 5,965 acre-feet of surface water from Lytle Creek in 2020. FWC
has existing water supplies from surface water diverted from Lytle Creek, treated at the Summit
Plant; untreated State Water Project (SWP) surface water purchased from the IEUA and the San
Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District (SBVMWD), treated at the Summit Plant; recycled water
purchased from IEUA; groundwater pumped from FWC-owned and operated wells from the
underlying Chino Basin, Rialto-Colton/No Man’s Land Basins, and Lytle Basin.
The project would result in a nominal increase in water demand compared to existing conditions and
therefore the project would have a less than significant impact regarding domestic water supply as
analyzed under Threshold 4.19 b).
Fire Water: The project proposes construction using existing water mains on the project site. The
final design of the water facilities would be determined based on the approved fire department plan
to assess whether the existing mains are adequately sized to provide the needed fire flow. The project
would result in a nominal increase in water demand compared to existing conditions and therefore
the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to fire water supply.
Water Treatment: Surface water provided by FWC is treated at FWC’s Sandhill Water Treatment
Plant, a 29 MGD treatment plant that comprises a 12 MGD Conventional filtration treatment facility
and a 17 MGD Diatomaceous Earth filtration treatment facility. The source water for this treatment
plant is local Lytle Creek surface water and SWP supplies from Northern California (FWC, 2022).
Stormwater: The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) is responsible for
implementing and overseeing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
for the City of Fontana. To receive municipal permits, the City of Fontana has prepared a Municipal
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP) to regulate local storm sewer systems. These plans contain
information on structural and non-structural BMPs to manage stormwater runoff within the City of
Fontana. The City has met these requirements and has obtained all required permits from SARWQCB
to satisfy NPDES conditions (City of Fontana, 2018b. pp. 5.8-4 – 5.8-7). Project compliance with
regulatory requirements would reduce potential erosion/siltation impacts during the construction
phase of the project to a less than significant level. The proposed project would be designed in
compliance with all applicable City of Fontana regulations regarding stormwater runoff, and the
project would be reviewed by the City of Fontana Public Works Department to ensure that the
development would not create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing
or planned stormwater drainage systems. Refer to Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, for
additional information.
Electric Power: Electric power for the City of Fontana is provided by Southern California Edison
(SCE). The proposed project is situated within a well-developed civic center campus, benefiting from
an already established infrastructure for electricity distribution. Additionally, SCE implements
energy efficiency programs to reduce energy consumption and ensure a consistent and reliable
power supply throughout the year (SCE, 2023).
Natural Gas: Natural gas is supplied to the project site by the Southern California Gas Company
(SoCal Gas), which provides natural gas to the City of Fontana. Construction activities, including the
construction of new buildings and facilities, typically do not involve the consumption of natural gas.
The operation of the project would replace existing buildings with new, more efficient, similar or
marginally larger buildings constructed in compliance with Building Energy Efficiency Standards,
including requirements in the Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6) and voluntary energy efficiency
provisions in CALGreen (Title 24, Part 11). Buildings whose permit applications are applied for on or
after January 1, 2023, must comply with the 2022 Energy Code.
In the California Gas Report 2022 (CGR), SoCalGas analyzed a 15-year demand period from 2020-
2035 to determine its ability to meet projected demand. Statewide natural gas demand served by
utilities is projected to decrease at an average annual rate of 1.1 percent per year through 2035. The
decline is 0.1 percent faster than what was projected in the 2020 California Gas Report (CGR). More
aggressive energy efficiency and fuel substitution have accelerated the decline in forecast throughput
for the 2022 CGR relative to the 2020 findings (CGR, 2022, p. 6).
Therefore, the anticipated natural gas supply is adequate to meet demand in the SoCalGas region, and
the proposed project is not expected to impact this determination. Thus, no natural gas facilities
would have to be constructed or relocated, and a less than significant impact would occur.
Telecommunications Facilities: Telecommunication services, including internet, phone, and
television, for the City of Fontana are provided by AT&T, Verizon, and Frontier Communications
(internet only) (City of Fontana, 2023d). The City is coordinating with the cellular companies to
process a wireless application for the construction and relocation of a telecommunications facility
within the project area. However, the relocation of the facility would be reviewed as a separate
project for potential environmental effects. Therefore, the project would not directly interfere with
the operation of the telecommunications facilities and there would be a less than significant impact.
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
Less than Significant Impact
Water Supplies and Demands: The Fontana Water Company (FWC) supplies water for much of the
City of Fontana, including the project site. According to the FWC’s 2020 Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP), in 2020, there were 48,202 customer connections and supplied 39,782 acre-feet (af)
of water to its customers (FWC, 2021, p. 2-1). The demand for water within the FWC service area
decreased steadily from 2010 to 2015 due to permanent changes in customer water use
implemented during the 2012-2016 drought, including turf removal incentives, prohibiting wasteful
water practices, and other mandatory conservation practices. The actual water demand for 2020
remains lower than the pre-drought water use in 2010. The projected water demand through the
year 2045 reflects a decrease of greater than 10 percent from FWC’s 2015 UWMP 2040 projected
potable water demand (53,562 AF) (FWC, 2021, pp. 4-2 to 4-3).
Actual water supply in 2020 was 39,831 afy, 75 percent of which came from ground water, 24 percent
from Purchased or Imported Water, and one percent from Recycled Water (see Table 4.19-1). The
projected supply in 2025 will be 45,593 afy, increasing to 51,943 afy by 2045 (see Table 4.19-2).
Table 4.19-1
2020 ACTUAL WATER SUPPLIES
Water Supply Source Volume Water Quality
Purchased or Imported Water IEAU 10,027 Other Non-Potable Water
Purchased or Imported Water SBVMWD 0 Other Non-Potable Water
Groundwater (not desalinated) Chino Basin 11,859 Drinking Water
Groundwater (not desalinated) Rialto-Colton Basin 2,538 Drinking Water
Groundwater (not desalinated) Lytle Basin 6,422 Drinking Water
Groundwater (not desalinated) No Man's Land Basin 2,633 Drinking Water
Groundwater (not desalinated) Lytle Creek 5,965 Drinking Water
Recycled Water IEAU 387 Other Non-Potable Water
Total 39,831
Source: FWC, 2021, Table 6-8.
Note: Volumes are in Acre Feet.
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 4.19-2
PROJECTED WATER SUPPLIES
Water Supply Source 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Purchased or Imported Water IEAU 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000
Purchased or Imported Water SBVMWD 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200
Groundwater Chino Basin 9,278 9,983 11,128 12,293 13,183
Groundwater Rialto-Colton/
No Man’s Land 5,865 5,976 6,087 6,199 6,310
Groundwater Lytle Basin 6,390 6,390 6,390 6,390 6,390
Groundwater Lytle Creek 4,860 4,860 4,860 4,860 4,860
Recycled Water IEAU 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000
Total 45,593 46,909 48,665 50,442 51,943
Source: FWC, 2021, Table 6-9.
Note: Volumes are in Acre Feet.
On a normal year basis, FWC’s projected use of potable and non-potable water in 2025 is 44,593 afy,
growing to 48,943 afy in 2045. Each year there is a surplus of supply over demand. On a single dry
year basis, the total demand in 2025 is projected to be 34,006 afy, while the supply will be 34,006
afy. For each five-year interval through 2045, supplies are projected to be adequate to meet the
projected demands. Local groundwater supplies from the Chino Basin are assumed to provide 100
percent of FWC’s remaining demand (FWC, 2021, p. 7-7).
Fontana Water Company forecasts that it will have sufficient water supply for demand in its service
area through the 2025-2045 period during normal, dry and multiple dry years (FWC, 2021, p. 7-7).
Project operations would connect to existing on-site connections to the water mains and would not
require additional off-site improvements. Project construction would involve the temporary nominal
use of water for general construction purposes and dust control. Therefore, less than significant
impacts are anticipated.
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
As described under Threshold 4.19a above, the project will connect to the city sewer system and no
new treatment facilities, or expanded entitlements will be required. There would be sufficient
capacity available to meet the wastewater treatment demands of the project. The existing
wastewater treatment facility could accommodate the additional wastewater estimated to be
generated by the proposed project. Therefore, the project would have a less than significant impact
in this regard and no mitigation is necessary.
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
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
Solid Waste: The city contracts with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. for the collection and disposal of
city solid waste. The Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill serves the city. The Mid-Valley Landfill contains 498
acres with a maximum permit capacity of 101.3 million cubic yards, over 61 million of which remain
unfilled. As shown below in Table 4.19-3, the landfill has residual daily capacity of approximately
3,913 tons per day. (CalRecycle, 2023).
Table 4.19-3
LANDFILLS SERVING FONTANA
Facility and
Nearest
City/Community
Remaining
Capacity,
cubic yards
Daily
Permitted
Disposal
Capacity, tons
Actual Daily
Disposal,
tons1
Residual Daily
Disposal
Capacity, tons
Estimated
Closing Date
Mid-Valley
Sanitary Landfill 61,219,377 7,500 3,587 3,913 April 1, 2045
1 Daily disposal calculated based on annual disposal tonnage assuming 300 operating days per year: that is, six days per
week less certain holidays.
Source: CalRecycle, 2023. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details
Construction
Project construction would generate solid waste requiring disposal at local landfills. Fontana-
generated solid waste is disposed of at Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill, which has a remaining disposal
capacity of 3,913 tons per day. Materials generated during the construction of the project would
include paper, cardboard, metal, plastics, glass, concrete, scrap lumber, and other materials. Section
5.408 of the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; California Code of
Regulations, Title 24, Part 11) requires that at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and
demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse.
Project construction would include the recycling and/or salvaging of at least 65 percent of
construction and demolition waste according to the 2022 CALGreen. Sufficient disposal capacity
would remain at the Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill for solid waste generated by project construction.
The potential impacts from construction would be less than significant.
Operation
As discussed in Section 3.0 of this document, the proposed project involves the replacement and
upgrading of existing facilities rather than the addition of any new capacity or facilities and will not
increase project-generated solid waste, and thus the existing landfill should be sufficient to meet the
❖ SECTION 4.19 - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.19-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
project needs. The potential operational impacts of the project on the solid waste disposal capacity
would be less than significant.
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 San Bernardino Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan (SBCIWMP) outlines the goals,
policies, and programs that the County and its cities would implement to create an integrated and
cost-effective waste management system that complies with the provisions of AB 939 and its
diversion mandates. The Infrastructure and Green Systems Element of the City of Fontana General
Plan outlines programs to reduce, recycle, and properly divert solid waste from sanitary landfills
(Stantec, 2018a, p. 10.8).
The solid waste generated by the project would be collected by Burrtec Waste Industries, the
designated waste hauler, and transported off-site to transfer facilities and landfills for reuse,
recycling, and/or disposal, as appropriate (Stantec, 2018b, p. 5.12-20). Burrtec delivers solid waste
to Mid-Valley Landfill, which operates under a permit from San Bernardino County Department of
Public Health, Solid Waste Management Division which requires regular reporting and monitors
compliance.
Assembly Bill 341 (AB 341; Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011) increases the statewide waste diversion
goal to 75 percent by 2020 and mandates recycling for commercial and multifamily residential land
uses. The project would include storage areas for recyclable materials in accordance with AB 341.
Assembly Bill 1826 (AB 1826; California Public Resources Code § 42649.8 et seq.) requires recycling
of organic matter by businesses and multifamily residences of five of more units, generating such
wastes in amounts over certain thresholds. Organic waste means food waste, green waste, landscape
and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food-soiled paper waste that is mixed in with
food waste. The project would include the recycling of organic waste as required under AB 1826. The
proposed project would comply with applicable local, state, and federal solid waste disposal
standards; therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
❖ SECTION 4.20 - WILDFIRE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.20-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified
as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that
may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X
a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact
The project site is not located in a State Responsibility Area (SRA) (i.e., where the State is responsible
for the costs of wildfire prevention and suppression), nor is it located in a Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA, i.e., where cities or counties are
responsible for the costs of wildfire prevention and suppression) (see Figures 4.20-1 and 4.20-2).
The nearest VHFHSZ in LRA to the project site is about 2.5 miles to the northeast within the City of
Fontana. Therefore, the proposed project would not “substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan” and as such would have no impact.
❖ SECTION 4.20 - WILDFIRE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.20-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Figure 4.20-1
FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE - STATE RESPONSIBILITY AREA
Figure 4.20-2
❖ SECTION 4.20 - WILDFIRE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.20-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONE - LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AREA
❖ SECTION 4.20 - WILDFIRE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.20-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
b) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, 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?
No Impact
As indicated under item a), above the project site is not located in or near either an SRA or a VHFHSZ
within an LRA. Therefore, the proposed project would not "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” and thus would have no impact.
c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, 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?
No Impact
As indicated under item a), above the project site is not located in or near either a SRA or a VHFHSZ
within a LRA. Therefore, the proposed project would not "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” and, therefore, would have no impact.
d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, 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?
No Impact
As indicated under item a), above the project site is not located in or near either a SRA or a VHFHSZ
within a LRA. Therefore, the proposed project would not "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” and thus would have no impact.
❖ SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.21-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project have:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
Impact with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does 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 Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Section 4.4 of this document addresses the potential impact on biological resources of the proposed
project.
The project site is located in an urbanized setting and provides a low habitat value and low
occurrence potential for species of special status plants and wildlife identified in the BSA. Based on a
review of the literature and queries from publicly available databases for reported occurrences
❖ SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.21-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
within a 10-mile radius of the project site, 19 listed and 39 sensitive wildlife species, and eight listed
and 24 sensitive plant species were identified.
The majority of the special-status wildlife species evaluated in the wildlife inventory that were
determined to be in the BSA lack suitable habitat or are outside the geographic range of the special-
status wildlife species. The BSA primarily contains existing developments with associated paved
areas, infrastructure and areas landscaped with ornamental (non-native) vegetation. Most of the
evaluated species require sufficient coverage of native vegetation for nesting and foraging. Impacts
on special-status wildlife species resulting from the project are expected to be less than significant.
All evaluated special-status plant species were determined to not be expected to occur in the BSA.
The BSA lacks suitable habitat or is outside the elevation or geographic range of the majority of the
special-status plant species. The project site contains a high coverage of impermeable surfaces, which
deters the establishment of special-status plants. No impacts are anticipated on special-status plant
species or sensitive natural communities as a result of the project.
The project site and BSA lack suitable habitat for special-status wildlife and plant species, but trees
onsite could offer some low-quality potential nesting habitat. A potential direct impact could result
from the removal of trees on site, which may support species such as small birds. With the
implementation of Project Design Feature (PDF) BIO-1, the project would have a less than significant
impact on special-status plant and wildlife species.
Section 4.5 of this document addresses potential impacts on Cultural Resources. The project would
be built on already-developed land. Based on the SCCIC cultural resources records search, it was
determined that there are no prehistoric or historic cultural resources previously recorded within
the project site boundary. Within the 0.5-mile buffer zone, there have been three historic-era
structures and one historic water pump and distribution center. The pedestrian field survey
undertaken for this project noted the remains of two mid-20th century era structures with one being
built between 1959 and 1966. Because neither of the two observed demolished structures appears
to meet the criteria required to qualify as a significant historic resource, there would be no
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5, and
therefore the project would have no impact in this regard.
The result of the pedestrian survey was negative for both prehistoric and historic sites and isolates
on the project site. Based on the results of the record search and tribal consultation, it is unlikely that
cultural resources or tribal resources would be adversely affected by the construction of the project.
No human remains have been previously identified or recorded onsite. It is unlikely that there are
undisturbed unique archaeological resources on the project site. However, grading activities
associated with development of the project would cause new subsurface disturbance and could
potentially result in the unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources. Mitigation measures
CUL 1 and CUL 2 are recommended to reduce potential impacts on archeological resources and
human remains to a less than significant level.
Section 4.7 of this document addresses potential impacts on Paleontological Resources. The Western
Science Center completed a Paleontological Records Search of its archives for the project region on
October 31, 2023. The Paleontological Records Search did not identify any fossil sites on or within
one mile of the project site. Excavations or grading may encounter fossil remains. Any substantial
excavations below the uppermost layers should be closely monitored to collect any specimens
quickly and professionally. This impact would be potentially significant. However, with
❖ SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.21-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
implementation of mitigation measure GEO-1, the potential impacts to paleontological resources
would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Section 4.18 of this document addresses potential impacts on Tribal Cultural Resources. Tribal
cultural resources could be buried in site soils. Project site grading and project construction could
damage such resources. With the implementation of mitigation measure TCR-1, potential project
impacts on TCRs would be less than significant. With the implementation of mitigation measures
TCR-2 and TCR-3, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on human remains
and associated funerary objects.
As detailed above, the proposed project is not expected to harm the environment, diminish fish or
wildlife habitats, cause a reduction in wildlife populations, threaten plant or animal communities,
limit the range or number of endangered or rare species, or harm significant examples of California's
historical or prehistorical period. Therefore, the potential cumulative impacts of the project would
be less than significant with the mitigation measures implemented.
b) Would 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 Impact
The proposed project would be consistent with regional plans and programs that address
environmental factors such as air quality, water quality, and other applicable regulations that have
been adopted by public agencies with jurisdiction over the project to avoid or mitigate environmental
effects.
Sections 4.3 and 4.13 of this Initial Study address potential impacts related to Air Quality and Noise,
respectively. As detailed in Section 4.3, air quality impacts associated with the construction and
operation of the project would be less than significant and do not warrant mitigation. As detailed in
Section 4.13, potential construction and operational noise impacts associated with the project site
were found to be less than significant.
The project would create employment opportunities, but employees from the local workforce would
most likely be hired during both the construction and operational phases of the project. The project
is not of scope or scale to induce people to move from outside of the project area in order to work on
the proposed project. The proposed project would not induce direct population growth with
construction of a new City Hall and Fire Annex buildings, as it does not contain a residential element.
Therefore, the potential cumulative impacts of the project would be less than significant and do not
warrant mitigation.
c) Would the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated
Archaeological resources can be buried in site soils and could be damaged by ground disturbance
activities of the project. This impact would be significant without mitigation. Implementing the CUL-
1 mitigation measure would reduce this impact to less than significant. The impact on human remains
❖ SECTION 4.21 – MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 4.21-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
that can be buried in the soil of the site was determined to be significant without mitigation.
Implementing the CUL-2 and TCR-3 mitigation measures would reduce this impact to less than
significant.
Fossils could be buried in the soil of the site. Project ground-disturbing activities could damage
fossils. Implementing the mitigation measure GEO-1 would reduce this impact to less than
significant.
During the construction phase of the project, traffic lanes and sidewalks may be temporarily closed.
To ensure that circulation and emergency access during construction are adequate, the City requires
the preparation and implementation of a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for all projects
that require construction in the public right-of-way. Therefore, the proposed project would
implement mitigation measure TRANS-1. With the implementation of the TRANS-1 mitigation
measure, the impacts with regard to emergency access during construction would be less than
significant.
As discussed in Sections 4.1 through 4.20 of this document, after the implementation of mitigation
measures, potential adverse environmental effects are less than significant on human beings, either
directly or indirectly. Therefore, the potential cumulative impacts of the project would be less than
significant with the mitigation measures implemented.
.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
5.0 References
ARB, 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan: a framework for change. California Air Resources Board.
December 2008. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_scoping_pl
an.pdf, on December 15, 2022.
ARB, 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework. California
Air Resources Board. May 2014. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_update_clim
ate_change_scoping_plan.pdf, on December 15, 2022.
ARB, 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. California Air Resources Board. Accessed
online at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf, on September 12, 2022.
ARB, 2020. Maps of State and Federal Area Designations. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/maps-state-and-federal-area-designations, on
January 27, 2023.
ARB, 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan. Accessed online at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-
12/2022-sp.pdf, on December 15, 2022
ARB, 2023. iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics. Accessed online at https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/, on
January 18, 2023.
CARB, 2016. Commercial Vehicle Idling Requirements July 2016. California Air Resources Board.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
12/commercial_vehicle_idling_requirements_July%202016.pdf Accessed November 27,
2023.
CalEPA, 2023. Cortese List. Accessed online at https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/,
accessed on October 10, 2023.
CAL FIRE, 2022. Frequently Asked Questions. Accessed online at
https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/winfmowp/2022-fhsz-faqs-dec-2022-_final.pdf, accessed
on November 16, 2023.
Calflora, 2023. Information on California plants for education, research and conservation.
Observation Search. Available at https://www.calflora.org/entry/observ.html. Accessed on
September 29, 2023.
CARB (California Air Resources Board), 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan: a framework for change.
California Air Resources Board. December 2008. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/document/adopted_sc
oping_plan.pdf, on June 26, 2023.
CARB, 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, Building on the Framework. California
Air Resources Board. May 2014. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/2013_update/first_up
date_climate_change_scoping_plan.pdf, on June 26, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
CARB, 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. California Air Resources Board. Accessed
online at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf, on June 26,
2023.
CARB, 2022. 2022 Scoping Plan. Accessed online at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/2022-sp.pdf, on June 26, 2023.
CAPCOA, 2023. California Emissions Estimator Model®, Version 2022.1.1.20 California Air Pollution
Control Officers Association. Accessed online at www.caleemod.com, on June 30, 2023
CEC (California Energy Commissions), 2022a. What Drives California’s Gasoline Prices? Accessed
online at https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/what-drives-
californias-gasoline-
prices#:~:text=California%20Consumption,12.4%20billion%20gallons%20during%2020
21, on December 5, 2023.
CEC, 2022b. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed online at
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-
standards/2022-building-energy-efficiency, on December 5, 2023.
CEC, 2023a. Electricity Consumption by County. Accessed online at
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx, on December 5, 2023.
CEC, 2023b. Gas Consumption by County Accessed online at
https://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx, December 5, 2023.
CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife), 2023a. BIOS Habitat Connectivity Viewer.
Available at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/BIOS. Accessed on October 23, 2023.
CDFW (California Department of Fish and Game). 2023b. California Natural Community List.
Retrieved from https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities. Accessed on
October 23, 2023.
Cal-IPC (California Invasive Plant Council), 2006. California Invasive Plant Inventory. Cal-IPC
Publication 2006-02. California Invasive Plant Council, Berkeley, CA. Accessed online at:
https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/ Accessed on October 2, 2023.
CASGEM (California Statewide Groundwater Elevation Monitoring Program). 2023. Well Details for
State Well Number 01S05W06J001S. Available at https://www.casgem.water.ca.gov/.
Accessed on October 4, 2023.
Caltrans, 2023. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed online at
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057
116f1aacaa, accessed on October 9, 2023.
CEMA, CGS, and USC (California Emergency Management Agency, California Geological Survey, and
University of Southern California). 2021. Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning:
County of Los Angeles, California. Scale 1:24,000. Available at
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps. Accessed on October 13, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
CGS, 2022. Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zones Map. Available at:
https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/ee92a5f9f4ee4ec5aa731d3245ed9f53/about. Accessed on
October 13, 2023.
City of Fontana, 1992. Master Storm Drainage Plan. Available at
https://www.fontanaca.gov/3535/Master-Storm-Drainage-Plan. Accessed on October 13,
2023.
City of Fontana, 1993. Code of Ordinances. Chapter 28, Article III. Available at:
https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CO_CH28V
E_ARTIIIPRHESISPTR
CWE (CWE Engineering), 2016. City of Fontana Water Quality Management Plan Handbook. Available
at https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/19908/WQMP-Handbook?bidId=.
Accessed on October 13, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2018a. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035, Adopted November 13,
2018. Accessed online at https://www.fontanaca.gov/2632/General-Plan-Update-2015---
2035 on September 6, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2018b. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental
Impact Report, Adopted June 8, 2018. Accessed online at
https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact-
Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update on October 1, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2021a. Adopted Operating Budget Fiscal Years 2021/2022 – 2022/2023. Adopted
February 25,2021. Accessed online at
https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36014/20212022---20272028-
Adopted-Capital-Improvement-Program-PDF on September 6, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2023a. General Plan Land Use and Zoning Interactive Map. Accessed online at
https://fontanaca.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ecc67f90c51440
eca0d17fd5a6e59c92, accessed on August 8, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2020b. Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Travelled and Level of
Service Assessment. Dated October 21, 2020. Accessed online at
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/35928/TIA-Guidelines---VMT-Assessment, on
March 22, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2023b. Fontana Fire Stations, accessed online at
http://www.fontanaca.gov/639/Stations-Equipment on September 6, 2023.
City of Fontana, 2023c. Chapter 12 Sustainability and Resilience. Fontana General Plan. Approved
and Adopted by City Council November 13, 2018. Accessed online at
https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/26751/Chapter-12---Sustainability-
and-Resilience, on November 29, 2023.
City of Fontana Municipal Code, 2023c. Municipal Code. Available at
https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances, Accessed on October
9, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
City of Fontana Utilities, 2023d. Utilities. Accessed online at
https://www.fontanaca.gov/3032/Utilities, accessed on October 1, 2023.
City of Ontario, 2018. ALUCP for Ontario International Airport. Accessed online at: https://www.ont-
iac.com/airport-land-use-compatibility-plan/ont-alucp-chapter-2, on November 21, 2023.
CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database). 2023a. RareFind 5 (Internet). California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (5.2.14). Available at
https://map.dfg.ca.gov/rarefind/view/RareFind.aspx. Accessed on September 29, 2023.
CNDDB (California Natural Diversity Database), 2023b. Natural Diversity Database. April 2023.
Special Animals List. April 2022. California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sacramento, CA.
Available at https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109406&inline
Accessed on September 29, 2023.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society), 2023a. Rare Plant Program. Inventory of Rare and
Endangered Plants (online edition, v8-03 0.39). Retrieved from:
http://www.rareplants.cnps.org. Accessed on September 29, 2023.
CNPS (California Native Plant Society). 2023b, A Manual of California Vegetation Online Edition.
California Native Plant Society, CA. 1300 pp. Retrieved from:
http://www.cnps.org/cnps/vegetation/. Accessed on September 29, 2023.
County of San Bernardino, 2009. Land Use Services San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General
Plan, Geologic Hazard Overlays, Scale 1:115,200
DWR (California Department of Water Resources), 2019. DWR Groundwater Basin Boundary
Assessment Tool (BBAT). Available at https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bbat/. Accessed on
October 13, 2023.
DWR, 2003. Bulletin 118: California’s Groundwater, Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin
(Groundwater Basin Number 8-002). Available at: https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-
Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Groundwater-Management/Bulletin-118/Files/2003-
Basin-Descriptions/8_002_01_ChinoSubbasin.pdf, Accessed on October 12, 2023.
DWR (California Department of Water Resources). 2023a. Division of Safety of Dams, California Dam
Breach Inundation Maps. Accessed online at: https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/, on
October 4, 2023.
DWR, 2023b. Department of Water Resources SGMA Viewer. Available at
https://www.drought.gov/data-maps-tools/sustainable-groundwater-management-
sgma-data-viewer. Accessed on October 18, 2023.
DWR, 2023c, Water Data Library. Available at www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary. Accessed on
October 7, 2023.
eBird. 2023. Cornell Lab of Ornithology. All About Birds. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York.
Available at https://www.allaboutbirds.org. Accessed on October 11, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-5
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
ESRL, 2023. Recent Global Monthly Mean CO2. Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Earth System
Research Laboratory. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Accessed online
at https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/global.html, on June 29, 2023.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), 2008. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for San
Bernardino County, California and Incorporated Areas (Map Number 06071C8656H).
Effective August 28, 2008. Available at https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps. Accessed on
October 12, 2023.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) 2023a. National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL)
Viewer. Accessed online at: https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/national-flood-hazard-
layer, on October 12, 2023.
FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) 2023b. Glossary: Flood Zones Available at:
https://www.fema.gov/glossary/flood-zones. Accessed on October 12, 2023..
FWC (Fontana Water Company), 2023a. Fontana Water Company Service Map. Available at:
https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/Service_Area_FONTANA.pdf. Accessed on October 12, 2023.
FWC, 2023b. Fontana Water Company Water Sources. Available at:
https://www.fontanawater.com/water-quality-supply/water-sources/. Accessed on
October 12, 2023.
FUSD, 2021, Fontana Unified School District 2021-22 Long-Range Facilities Master Plan, Accessed
online at https://www.fusd.net/cms/lib/CA50000190/Centricity/Domain/188/2021-
22%20Long-Range%2Facilities%20Master%20Plan.pdf on September 6, 2023.
FWC (Fontana Water Company), 2018. Service Area Map. Accessed online at
https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/Service_Area_FONTANA.pdf, accessed on October 1, 2023.
GMI, 2023. What is a Global Warming Potential? And Which One Do I Use? GHG Management Institute.
Accessed online at https://ghginstitute.org/2010/06/28/what-is-a-global-warming-
potential/, on June 15, 2023.
Google Earth Pro V 7.3.6.9345 (December 29, 2022). City of Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California, U.S.A.
ICF International and LSA, 2021. San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan –
Appendices. Final. March. Accessed online at: https://www.gosbcta.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/09/San_Bernardino_Regional_GHG_Reduction_Plan_Appendices_
Mar_2021.pdf, on May 20, 2022.
IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2007.
Jepson (Jepson Flora Project [eds.]), 2023. The Jepson Herbarium, Jepson eFlora, Available at
http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/. Accessed on September 14, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-6
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Kaiser Permanente, 2023. Accessed online at https://thrive.kaiserpermanente.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/09/b943beb5c3c88d0cf3c6.pdf on September 6, 2023.
LSA Associates, Inc., 2021. San Bernardino County Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan Update. June
2021. LSA Project No. SBE2002. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on September 21,
2021. Accessed online at:
http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LUS/GreenhouseGas/GHG_2021/GHG%20Reduction
%20Plan%20Update-Greenhouse%20Gas%20Reduction%20Plan%20Update%20-
%20Adopted%209-21-2021.pdf, on May 20, 2022.
Morton, Douglas M. 2003. Preliminary Geologic Map of the Fontana 7.5’ Quadrangle, Riverside and
San Bernardino Counties, California. Prepared in cooperation with the California Geological
Survey. U.S. Geological Survey. Available at
https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/0418/pdf/README.pdf. Accessed on October 18, 2023.
Morton, Douglas M. and Fred K. Miller. 2006. Geologic Map of the San Bernardino and Santa Ana 30'
x 60' quadrangles, California. Prepared in cooperation with the California Geological Survey.
U.S. Geological Survey.
NASA, 2023. What is the greenhouse effect? Accessed online at
https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/19/what-is-the-greenhouse-effect/ on June 12, 2023.
Ninyo and Moore (Ninyo and Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants), 2023.
Geotechnical Evaluation for the City Hall Renovation Project. May 25, 2023. Project No.
212104001.
NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), 2020. The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient
'SAFE' Vehicles Rule. Accessed online at https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-
economy/safe, on May 15, 2023.
NHTSA, 2021. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Preemption. Accessed online at
https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2021-12/CAFE-Preemption-Final-Rule-
Web-Version-tag.pdf, on May 15, 2023.
RK Engineering Group, Inc., 2023. Civic Center Renovation Project Trip Generation & Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis, City of Fontana.
RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board), 2016. 1995 Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa
Ana River Basin (Region 8). updated in February 2008, June 2011, and February 2016.
Available at: Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/.
Accessed on October 12, 2023.
San Bernardino County, 2023. Locations. Accessed online at:
http://www.sbclib.org/LibraryLocations.aspx, on October 1, 2023.
Sawyer et al., J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition.
California Native Plant Society Press. Sacramento, CA. 1300 pp.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-7
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
SCAG, 2022. Data-Map Book for the City of Fontana, Dated May 2022. Accessed online at
https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/p0222-fontana.pdf?1655309796
on August 16, 2023.
SCAQMD, 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Diamond Bar, CA., Accessed online at
http://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ceqa-air-
quality-handbook-(1993), on June 26,2023.
SCAQMD, 2008. Draft Guidance Document – Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance
Threshold. Accessed online at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-
source/ceqa/handbook/greenhouse-gases-(ghg)-ceqa-significance-
thresholds/ghgattachmente.pdf?sfvrsn=2, on June 26,2023.
SCAQMD, 2022a. Site Survey Report for Fontana. May 19. Accessed online at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-monitoring-network-
plan/aaqmnp-fontana.pdf?sfvrsn=11, on January 17, 2023
SCAQMD, 2022b. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. Accessed online at
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-
air-quality-management-plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16, on March 31,
2023.
SCAQMD, 2023. SCAQMD Air Quality Significance Thresholds. South Coast Air Quality Management
District. Accessed online at https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-
coast-aqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25, on October 19, 2023
Shuford, W.D., and Gardali, T., editors. 2008. California Bird Species of Special Concern: A ranked
assessment of species, subspecies, and distinct populations of birds of immediate
conservation concern in California. Studies of Western Birds 1. Western Field
Ornithologists, Camarillo, California, and California Department of Fish and Game,
Sacramento.
Sibley, David Allen. 2000. National Audubon Society, The Sibley Guide to Birds. Alfred A. Knopf, New
York.
Soil Survey Staff (Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture),
2017. Soil Survey Manual Agriculture Handbook No. 18. Available at
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/2022-09/The-Soil-Survey-Manual.pdf.
Accessed on September 29, 2023.
Soil Survey Staff, 2023. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of
Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/.
Accessed on September 29, 2023.
Stantec et al, 2018a. Fontana Forward: General Plan Update 2015 – 2035. Adopted on November 13,
2018. Accessed online at: https://www.fontana.org/2632/General-Plan-Update-2015---
2035, on May 31, 2022.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-8
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Stantec, 2018b. Draft General Plan EIR. Accessed online at:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-Impact-
Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update on May 31, 2022.
Stoneburg, Brittany. 2023. Paleontological Records Search for the City Hall Renovation Project in
Fontana, San Bernardino County. Western Science Center. Conducted October 31, 2023.
SWRCB (California State Water Resources Control Board). 2013 Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-
DWQ NPDES General Permit NO. CAS000004 WDRs for Storm Water Discharges from Small
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems MS4s Available at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/phsii2012_
5th/order_final.pdf. Accessed on October 18, 2023.
SWRCB. 2019. State Wetland Definition and Procedures for Discharges of Dredged or Fill Material to
Waters of the State. Adopted April 2, 2019, revised April 6, 2021. Available at
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/cwa401/wrapp.html. Accessed
on October 18, 2023.
RK Engineering Group, 2023. Civic Center Renovation Project Trip Generation & Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) Screening Analysis, City of Fontana. Memorandum prepared by RK Engineering
Group, Newport Beach, California for the City of Fontana. December 12, 2023.
USCB (U.S. Census Bureau), 2023. U.S. Census Bureau Profile – Fontana city, California. Accessed
online at
https://data.census.gov/profile/Fontana_city,_California?g=160XX00US0624680#populat
ions-and-people on August 16, 2023.
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency), 2010. Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) for
Carbon Monoxide (Final Report, Jan 2010). Accessed online at
https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/isa/recordisplay.cfm?deid=218686, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2011 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) Control Regulations. Accessed online at
https://www3.epa.gov/region1/airquality/nox.html, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2021. Regulations for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Passenger Cars and Trucks. Accessed
online at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-
greenhouse-gas-emissions-passenger-cars-and, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2022a. Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants (Green Book). Accessed online at
https://www.epa.gov/green-book, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2022b. Particulate Matter (PM) Pollution. Accessed online at https://www.epa.gov/pm-
pollution, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2022c. What is Ozone? Accessed online at https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution-and-your-
patients-health/what-ozone, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2022d. Final Rule for Model Year 2012 - 2016 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission
Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Accessed online at
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-9
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-model-
year2012-2016-light-duty-vehicle, on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2022e. Regulations for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Passenger Cars and Trucks. Accessed
online at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-
greenhouse-gas-emissions-passenger-cars-and, on June 26, 2023
USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2023a. WATERS GeoViewer. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/waterdata/waters-geoviewer. Accessed on June 26, 2023.
USEPA, 2023b. The Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Final Rule for Model Years 2021-
2026. Accessed online at https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-
engines/safer-affordable-fuel-efficient-safe-vehicles-final-rule, on June 26, 2023.
USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office. 2023a. Official Species List:
Consultation Code: 2024-0002014. Carlsbad, California. October 5, 2023.
USFWS. 2023b. USFWS Critical Habitat Portal. Available at http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. Accessed on
October 9, 2023.
USFWS. 2023c. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) website, National Wetlands Mapper. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. Retrieved from
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/. Accessed on October 9, 2023.
USGS (United States Geological Survey), 2015. Fontana Quadrangle, California, 7.5-Minute Series.
Scale 1:24,000. Prepared for U.S. Topo: The National Map. Available at https://prd-
tnm.s3.amazonaws.com/StagedProducts/Maps/USTopo/PDF/CA/CA_Fontana_20150313
_TM_geo.pdf. Accessed on October 16, 2023.
USGS, 2018, National Seismic Hazard Maps. Available at
https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/hazards. Accessed on October 8,
2023.
USGS, 2023a. National Hydrography Dataset. Available at https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/.
Accessed on October 17, 2023.
USGS, 2023b. U.S. Landslide Inventory and Interactive Map. Available at
https://www.usgs.gov/programs/landslide-hazards/maps. Accessed on October 18, 2023.
USGS, 2023c, Areas of Land Subsidence in California. Available at
https://ca.water.usgs.gov/land_subsidence/california-subsidenceareas.html. Accessed on
September 27, 2023.
WBWG (Western Bat Working Group), 2023. Species Matrix. Available at
http://wbwg.org/matrices/species-matrix/. Accessed on October 14, 2023.
West Yost (West Yost Associates), 2017. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. San Gabriel Valley
Water Company – Fontana Division. Final Report, December 2017. Available at
https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/San-Gabriel-
Fontana_Amended-Final-December-2017-1.pdf. Accessed on October 13, 2023.
❖ SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 5-10
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
West Yost, 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. San Gabriel Valley Water Company – Fontana
Division. Final Report, June 2021. Available at: https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/10/FWC-2020-UWMP-June-2021-Final.pdf, Accessed on October
13, 2023.
WRCC (Western Regional Climate Center), 2023. 1981-2010 Monthly Climate Summary. Fontana
Kaiser, California (Coop Station 043120). Retrieved from: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-
bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca3120, Accessed on October 12, 2023.
Zeiner, D.C., W.F. Laudenslayer, Jr., K.E. Mayer, and M. White, eds. 1988-1990. California's Wildlife.
Vol. I-III. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. Updated
September, 2000. Available at https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CWHR/Life-History-and-
Range.
❖ SECTION 6.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 6-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
6.0 List of Preparers
6.1 CEQA LEAD AGENCY
City of Fontana
Rina Leung, Senior Planner
8353 Sierra Avenue, Fontana, CA 92335
T: (909) 350-6566
E: mailto: rleung@fontana.org
6.2 PROJECT APPLICANT
City of Fontana (Engineering Department)
Christopher Smethurst, Senior Engineer
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, CA 92335
T: (909) 350-6649
E: csmethurst@fontanaca.gov
6.3 ULTRASYSTEMS ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
6.3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING TEAM
Betsy Lindsay, MURP, ENV SP, President/CEO/Project Director
Robert Reicher, MBA, ENV SP, Senior Project Manager-Consultant/Project Manager
Steven Borjeson, B.A., Senior Planner/Deputy Project Manager
6.3.2 TECHNICAL TEAM
Amir Ayati, B.S., Staff Scientist
Andrew Soto, B.A., Word Processing/Technical Editing
Audrey McNamara, B.A., Biologist
Bhavik Shah, BEng, Intern
Erik Segura, B.S., ENV SP, Associate Planner
Gulben Kaplan, M.S., GIS Analyst
Isha Shah, M.S., Staff Engineer/Scientist
Marissa Kassisieh, B.A., Assistant Planner
Megan Black, M.A., Archaeological Technician
Michael Rogozen, D.Env., Senior Principal Engineer
Patricia Haigh, B.S., B.A., Staff Scientist
Stephen O’Neil, M.A., RPA, Cultural Resources Manager
Victor Paitimusa, B.A., ENV SP, Assistant Project Manager
6.3.3 SUBCONSULTANTS
RK Engineering Group, Inc. – VMT Screening
Justin Tucker, Principal Engineer
❖ SECTION 7.0 - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 7-1
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
7.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been prepared in conformance with
§ 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code and § 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires all state
and local agencies to establish monitoring or reporting programs whenever approval of a project
relies upon a MND or an EIR. The MMRP ensures the implementation of the measures imposed to
mitigate or avoid the significant adverse environmental impacts identified through the use of
monitoring and reporting. Monitoring is generally an ongoing or periodic process of project
oversight; reporting generally consists of a written compliance review that is presented to the
decision-making body or authorized staff person.
It is the intent of the MMRP to: (1) provide a framework for document implementation of the
required mitigation; (2) identify monitoring/reporting responsibility; (3) provide a record of the
monitoring/reporting; and (4) ensure compliance with those MM that are within the responsibility
of the City and/or Applicant to implement.
The following table lists impacts, mitigation measures adopted by the City of Fontana in connection
with approval of the proposed project, level of significance after mitigation, responsible and
monitoring parties, and the project phase in which the measures are to be implemented.
Only those environmental topics for which mitigation is required are listed in this Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
In addition to the mitigation measures detailed in Table 7.0-1, the project description includes a
project design feature (PDF) that addresses a potential environmental impact by imposing an
environmental commitment in the design of the project as part of the project description, as detailed
in §§ 15064(f)(2) and 15126.4(a)(1)(A) of the CEQA Statutes and Guidelines.
As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources of this report, trees within the project site could
provide suitable bird nesting sites. If construction takes place during the breeding/nesting season,
direct impacts could occur through loss of nests, eggs, and young resulting from tree trimming and
removal. To minimize the potential negative effect on special-status wildlife species, the project shall
implement PDF BIO-1. This feature would minimize or avoid significant impacts to breeding and
nesting birds, reducing potential impacts to a less than significant level.
❖ SECTION 7.0 - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 7-2
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
Table 7.0-1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
TOPICAL AREA
IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
ACTION
1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY
2. MONITORING
AGENCY
3. MONITORING
PHASE
4.5 Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.5 b)
Would the project
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
MM CUL 1
If archaeological resources are discovered during construction activities, the
contractor shall halt construction activities in the immediate area and notify the City
of Fontana. The project applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology
who will be notified and afforded the necessary time to recover, analyze, and curate
the find(s). The qualified archaeologist shall recommend the extent of
archaeological monitoring necessary to ensure the protection of any other
resources that may be in the area. Any identified cultural resources shall be
recorded on the appropriate DPR 523 (A L) form and filed with the South Central
Coastal Information Center. Construction activities may continue on other parts of
the project site while evaluation and treatment of prehistoric archaeological
resources takes place.
Qualified
Archaeologist
and Project
Contractor
Field
Verification
1. Fontana Planning
Department
2. Fontana Planning
Department
3. During
construction
activities
Threshold 4.5 c):
Would the project
disturb any human
remains, including
those interred outside
of formal cemeteries?
MM CUL 2
If human remains are encountered during excavations associated with this project,
all work shall stop within a 30-foot radius of the discovery and the San Bernardino
County Coroner will be notified (§ 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The
Coroner shall determine whether the remains are recent human origin or older
Native American ancestry. If the coroner, with the aid of the supervising
archaeologist, determines that the remains are prehistoric, they shall contact the
NAHC. The NAHC shall be responsible for designating the Most Likely Descendant
(MLD). The MLD (either an individual or sometimes a committee) shall be
responsible for the ultimate disposition of the remains, as required by § 7050.5 of
the California Health and Safety Code. The MLD shall make recommendations within
24 hours of notification by the NAHC. These recommendations may include
scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items
associated with Native American burials (§ 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code).
Project
Construction
Contractor
Field
Verification
1. Fontana Planning
Department
2. Fontana Planning
Department
3. During project
construction
activities
4.7 Geology and Soils
Threshold 4.7 f):
Would the project
MM GEO 1 Qualified
Paleontologist
Field
Verification
1. Fontana Planning
Department
❖ SECTION 7.0 - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 7-3
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
TOPICAL AREA
IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
ACTION
1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY
2. MONITORING
AGENCY
3. MONITORING
PHASE
directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontological
resource or site or
unique geologic
feature?
If paleontological resources are uncovered during project construction, the
contractor shall halt construction activities in the immediate area and notify the
City. The on-call paleontologist shall be notified and afforded the necessary time and
funds to recover, analyze, and curate the find(s). Subsequently, the monitor shall
remain onsite for the duration of the ground disturbance to ensure the protection
of any other resources that are found during construction on the project site.
and Project
Contractor
2. Fontana Planning
Department
3. During
construction
activities
4.17 Traffic
Threshold 4.17 d)
Would the project
result in inadequate
emergency access?
MM TRANS-1
The Transportation Management Plan (TMP) shall be reviewed and approved by the
City’s Traffic Engineer prior to the start of construction activity in the public right-
of-way (ROW). The typical TMP requires items such as the installation of K-rail
between the construction area and open traffic lanes, the use of flaggers and
directional signage to direct traffic where only one travel lane is available or when
equipment movement creates temporary hazards, and the installation of steel plates
to cover trenches under construction. The TMP shall stipulate that emergency
access must be maintained at all times.
Project
Applicant
Contract
Specifications
1. Fontana
Engineering
Department
2. Fontana
Engineering
Department
3. During
construction
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.18 b):
Would the project
cause a substantial
adverse change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource that is
determined to be a
significant resource to a
California Native
American tribe
pursuant to the criteria
set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resource
Code § 5024.1(c)?
MM TCR-1
Upon discovery of any tribal cultural or archaeological resources, cease
construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be
assessed. All tribal cultural and archaeological resources unearthed by project
construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal
monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native American in origin, interested
Tribes (as a result of correspondence with area Tribes) shall coordinate with the
landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the
Tribe will request preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work
may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation takes place.
Tribal Monitor,
Qualified
Archaeologist
and Project
Contractor
Field
Verification 1. Fontana Planning
Department
2. Fontana Planning
Department
3. During
construction MM TCR-2
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,
Tribal Monitor,
Qualified
Archaeologist
and Project
Contractor
Field
Verification
❖ SECTION 7.0 - MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ❖
7230/City of Fontana Civic Center Renovation Page 7-4
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 2023
TOPICAL AREA
IMPACT MITIGATION MEASURE RESPONSIBLE
PARTY
MONITORING
ACTION
1. ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY
2. MONITORING
AGENCY
3. MONITORING
PHASE
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.
MM TCR-3
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.
Tribal Monitor,
Qualified
Archaeologist
and Project
Contractor
Field
Verification