HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
DRAFT INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FONTANA FIRE STATION 80 PROJECT
APN 0228-021-46
FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
City of Fontana
8353 Sierra Avenue
Fontana, California 92335
Prepared by:
CHAMBERS GROUP, INC.
3151 Airway Avenue, Suite F208
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(949) 261-5414
December 2023
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION 1.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................... 5
1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ....................................................................................... 5
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................ 5
1.2.1 Project Site Location ........................................................................................................ 5
1.2.2 Project Site Access and Circulation .................................................................................. 5
1.2.3 General Plan/Zoning ........................................................................................................ 5
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 6
1.3.1 Training Facilities .............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
1.3.2 Fire Station ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.3.3 Parking and Hardscape .................................................................................................... 6
1.3.4 Operations ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.3.5 Landscaping ...................................................................................................................... 7
1.3.6 Construction ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.4 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS.......................................................................................... 8
1.4.1 Permits and Approvals ..................................................................................................... 8
SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ........................................................................... 12
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: .............................................................. 12
2.2 DETERMINATION ........................................................................................................................ 12
SECTION 3.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.............................................................. 13
SECTION 4.0 – CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ..................................................................... 15
4.1 AESTHETICS ................................................................................................................................. 15
4.1.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 15
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................................................................... 17
4.2.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 17
4.3 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................................ 19
4.3.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 19
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 26
4.4.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 27
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 30
4.5.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 30
4.6 ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 33
4.6.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 33
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 35
4.7.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 35
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 39
4.8.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 39
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
iii
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.................................................................................... 41
4.9.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 41
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................ 44
4.10.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 45
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ......................................................................................................... 47
4.11.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 48
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................. 48
4.12.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 48
4.13 NOISE .......................................................................................................................................... 49
4.13.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 49
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ...................................................................................................... 54
4.14.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 54
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES......................................................................................................................... 54
4.15.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 55
4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................... 56
4.16.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 56
4.17 TRANSPORTATION ...................................................................................................................... 57
4.17.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 57
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................... 61
4.18.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 61
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................... 62
4.19.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 63
4.20 WILDFIRE..................................................................................................................................... 65
4.20.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 66
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................. 67
4.21.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 67
SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 69
APPENDIX A – Air Quality, Energy and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis
APPENDIX B – Biological Reconnaissance Assessment
APPENDIX C – Cultural Resources Survey and Report
APPENDIX D – Geotechnical Exploration Report
APPENDIX E – Noise Study
APPENDIX F – Traffic Study
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Construction-Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions ........................................................ 20
Table 2. Construction-Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions .............................................................. 20
Table 3. Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions ....................................................................... 21
Table 4. Operations-Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions ................................................................. 22
Table 5. Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions ..................................................................... 40
Table 6. Construction Noise Levels at the Nearby Sensitive Receptors ..................................................... 50
Table 7. Operational Noise Levels at the Nearby Homes to South and West of Project Site ..................... 51
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Vicinity ............................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 2: Project Location ........................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 3: Preliminary Site Plan .................................................................................................................... 11
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
5
SECTION 1.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
The City of Fontana (City) is proposing to construct a new fire station and training facility (Fire Station
No. 80) on a vacant 3.6-acre site at the northeast corner of Cherry Avenue and South Highland Avenue in
Fontana, California (Project or Proposed Project). The Proposed Project is identified in the City’s adopted
Capital Improvement Program as a means to provide effective and efficient delivery of services for fire
protection and emergency response to the residents and landowners of the City and adjacent areas of
unincorporated San Bernardino County.
Following the construction of the Project, the City would turn over the operation and maintenance of the
new fire station to the Fontana Fire Protection District, which contracts with the County of San Bernardino
(County) Fire Department. The new Fire Station 80 and training facility will be added to the eight existing
fire stations, including one currently under construction, under the Fontana Fire Protection District (FFPD)
in order to maintain the appropriate levels of response times to calls for service within its service area:
6 minutes or less for a 1st unit; 8 minutes or less for a 2nd unit; 12 minutes or less for full assignments. A
full assignment for a residential structure fire consists of four engines, one ladder truck, one medic squad
and one battalion chief.
The FFPD provides emergency response services for fires, medical assistance, hazardous materials,
rescues, public assistance, and other responses, such as natural disasters or acts of terrorism. FFPD is
staffed with full-time personnel, safety employees and non-safety employees (City 2023).
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
1.2.1 Project Site Location
The Project site is located in the northwestern portion of the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County,
California. The triangular parcel is designated Assessor’s Parcel Number 0228021460000 and is situated
at the northeastern corner of Cherry Avenue and South Highland Avenue. Cherry Avenue borders the site
to the west and South Highland Avenue borders the site to the south. A utility easement owned by the
Metropolitan Water District (MWD) is adjacent to the southeastern edge of the Project site. Flood control
channels managed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District are located along the northern
edge of the Project site.
1.2.2 Project Site Access and Circulation
Project site access would be via two proposed driveways along Cherry Avenue. Traveling north from the
Project site, Cherry Avenue leads to on-ramps for State Route (SR) 210 East and West. SR-210 offers a
connection to I-215 to the east. Traveling south from the Project site, Cherry Avenue leads to Baseline
Avenue and eventually to downtown Fontana.
1.2.3 General Plan/Zoning
The Project site is located within the Westgate Specific Plan Area and is therefore zoned Specific Plan (SP)
by the City (City 2021b). The City’s General Plan designates land uses within the Project site as Regional
Mixed Use (RMU), and the Westgate Specific Plan designates the Project site for Mixed Use – 1 (MU-1)
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
6
land uses (City 2021a). The MU-1 designation provides for a broad range of business, commercial retail,
medical, educational, entertainment, commercial services, and other complementary uses, including the
Proposed Project (City 2017a). All areas surrounding the Project site are also within the Westgate Specific
Plan Area and are zoned SP.
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Proposed Project includes Fire Station 80 and Training Center, which will be a new facility built by the
City of Fontana in coordination with the San Bernardino County Fire Department. The Project proposes to
construct an approximately 14,663-square-foot fire station, 4,203-square-foot training center,
7,019-square-foot training tower, and an equipment storage area. Site improvements proposed include a
a parking lot, outdoor training grounds, security fencing, concrete masonry wall, and landscaping. The
Proposed Project will be a one-unit station. The unit would consists of an engine, staffed with three
captains, an engineer, and a firefighter/paramedic.
1.3.1 Fire Station and Training Facilities
The training facilities include a training tower equipped with gas props and smaller Class A burning rooms.
The facilities will include a 50-seat training classroom, lobby, electrical closet, two offices, three storage
rooms, and four restrooms. Two restrooms would be accessed from inside the building and two restrooms
with showers would be accessed from the back of the building. One underground water storage tank with
30,000 gallons capacity would be installed to support the training facility.
A portion of the fire station would be built at the same time as the training facilities during Phase 1, and
will include the administrative office, the training classroom, shower and locker facilities, and an outside
patio. The remainder of the fire station would be completed during Phase 2 and includes a 2-bay, double-
deep apparatus room, individual dormitories, kitchen, dining room, day room, physical training room, and
the various support spaces required for a facility of this type. The proposed fire station will house
approximately three employees during each of the three shifts, for a total of nine fire personnel. The
station will include one Captain, one Engineer, and one Firefighter Paramedic.
1.3.2 Parking and Hardscape
Two driveways from Cherry Avenue would be constructed on the western side of the Project site. The
northern driveway would allow access to the fire station, and its dimensions would be designed
specifically for fire truck access. The southern driveway would allow access to the proposed parking lot,
and its dimensions would be designed for passenger vehicle access. Six parking spots would be available
for visitors, and 26 secured parking stalls would be located behind a 26-foot-wide sliding security gate for
fire station employees. A second 36-foot-wide gate would be installed behind the fire station. Both gates
would provide entrance to the Project’s training facilities, which would be fenced-off to prevent public
access using automated fencing.
1.3.3 Operations
The training facilities will be in operation up to five days per week and would consist of classroom and
drill ground training for 14 firefighters and two instructors. Large training events would be conducted
three times per week, with large training events using two instructors and 17 firefighters. Typical training
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
7
activities would include engine and truck company operations, laying hose, throwing ladders, flowing
water, active fire training, ventilation, rescue operations, and confined space rescue training. Training
activities would occur from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
A water recovery system would be incorporated into the Project’s design to reduce overall water needs
required for training. The station would connect to existing utilities located in Cherry Avenue. During
training exercises, propane props would be used for pyrotechnic effects and would consist of nine propane
tanks. Training will include high volumes of water for short periods of time. A water reclamation system
and hydrants will be placed on site.
The fire station operation would provide emergency response services for fires, medical aids, hazardous
materials, rescue, public assistance, and other responses such as natural disasters or acts of terrorism.
Fire Station No. 80 will be in operation 24/7, will primarily serve the western areas of the FFPD boundary,
and will provide support to the other fire stations, as needed.
The Project’s Fire Station No. 80 will house 4 engines, 1 ladder truck, 1 medic squad, and one battalion
chief.
A backup power generator would be installed onsite for any loss of power. Requirements for the generator
would be decided later in the design process, however, it is assumed that a generator comparable to a
Cat C9 with a rating of 180ekW to 300ekW would be used.
1.3.4 Landscaping
The Project’s landscaping would be designed in conformance with the City’s Landscaping and Water
Conservation Standards, Article IV of the Municipal Code. Water Efficiency and Landscaping Standards.
1.3.5 Construction
Construction of the Proposed Project would include operators, grade checker, and laborers (an estimate
of one per 11,000 cubic feet). Equipment to be used include loaders, pick-up trucks, backhoes, water
trucks for dust suppression, cranes, asphalt pavers, and excavators. Project materials will be staged within
the existing vacant parcels currently managed by the MWD. Approximately 11,000 cubic feet of soil would
be exported as part of the grading (preliminary estimate). The training tower will be constructed off-site
and be transferred into the Project site through the use of a crane and large flatbed for transport. All other
portions of the Project, including the training classrooms and fire station, would be constructed on-site.
Construction would be completed in two phases. Phase 1 would include the training center and tower,
and a portion of the fire station facilities described above in Section 1.3.2. Phase 2 of construction would
include a 2-bay, double-deep apparatus room, individual dormitories, kitchen, dining room, day room,
physical training room, and other support spaces.
Construction Schedule
Phase 1 of the Project is expected to break ground in Summer 2023 and be completed by January 2025;
with Phase 2 anticipated to begin in June 2027. Phase 1 of the Project will involve construction of the
proposed training facility and site improvements. Phase 2 of the Project will involve construction of the
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
8
new Fire Station 80. Construction activities will take place from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, in accordance with the City’s Noise Ordinance.
1.4 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Reviewing Agencies include those agencies that do not have discretionary powers but may review the
Mitigated Negative Declaration for adequacy and accuracy. Responsible Agencies have discretionary
approval authority for a project. Potential Reviewing Agencies and Responsible Agencies include the
following:
Responsible Agencies
• City of Fontana Planning
• City of Fontana Fire Protection District
• County of San Bernardino Fire Department
Reviewing Agencies
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
• Metropolitan Water District
• Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and tribes requesting consultation
1.4.1 Permits and Approvals
The following permits and approvals may be required prior to construction of the Project:
• Site Plan review
• Demolition Permit
• Grading Permit
• Building Permit
• Compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General
Permit by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
9
Figure 1: Project Vicinity
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
10
Figure 2: Project Location
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
11
Figure 3: Preliminary Site Plan
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
12
SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklists on the following pages.
For each of the potentially affected factors, mitigation measures are recommended that would reduce the
impacts to less than significant levels.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Hydrology /Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources
Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities /Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
2.2 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
1. I find that the project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
2. I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
3. I find the Proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
4. I find that the Proposed Project may have a “potentially significant impact” or
“potentially significant unless mitigated impact” on the environment, but at least one
effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
5. I find that although the Proposed Project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards,
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
Proposed Project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Name Title
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
13
SECTION 3.0 – 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. A “No Impact” answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact”
answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including 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 substantial
evidence exists that an effect may be significant. If one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries
are marked when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier
analyses may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR
or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the
following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead 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 to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
14
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. 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.
*Note: Instructions may be omitted from final document.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
15
SECTION 4.0 – CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
4.1 AESTHETICS
1.
AESTHETICS.
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
(b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
(c) 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?
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
4.1.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Fontana has direct site lines to the San Gabriel Mountains
and Jurupa Hills, which are considered scenic resources (City 2018a). The area immediately
surrounding the Project is undeveloped providing minimal-to-no scenic or visual value. Existing views
from the site include both the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and Jurupa Hills to the south. Vacant
lands and tower lines are viewed to the east and west. Once developed, the Project would not result
in substantial adverse impact on a scenic vista because it would not be blocking views of a scenic vista,
and the Proposed Project is not located within or nearby a scenic vista or resource. The buildings
proposed would maintain a maximum height of 60 feet and would not exceed the City’s height
requirements. The Project would not create a significant visual disturbance to the area. Thus, less than
significant impacts to any scenic vistas are anticipated due to the construction and operation of the
Proposed Project.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. There are no scenic highways officially designated by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) within or adjacent to the Project area, and no roadways within the Project
area are currently eligible for scenic highway designation (Caltrans 2022). The Conservation, Open
Space, Parks and Trails Element (Chapter 7 of the General Plan Update) proposes policies and actions
to support tree conservation and planting, and expand the City’s tree canopy, in order to preserve
and expand the city’s urban forest with drought-resistant trees. However, no trees exist onsite or
surrounding the Project area. Therefore, no impact would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
16
c) 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. As discussed in response 4.1.1(a), the Proposed Project site is located in
an undeveloped part of the City of Fontana, with existing views of both the San Gabriel Mountains
and the Jurupa Hills. Currently, the Project site is vacant and located south of the SR-210 and north of
Southern California Edison transmission lines. As discussed, the Project would have a maximum height
of 60 feet, which would not impact views of the San Gabriel Mountains. Therefore, a less than
significant impact would occur.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Main light sources around the Proposed Project come from vehicles
along the existing roadways and from SR-210. Additional lighting sources include roadway lights and
spill over lights from the freeway structure. Outside of sidewalk and roadway lights, no other lighting
is currently located within the Project site. During construction, the Proposed Project would generate
light and glare from the presence and operation of vehicles and equipment. Construction would be
scheduled between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on any day except for Sunday or a Federal
holiday, or between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on Sunday or a Federal holiday; no
construction activities would occur during nighttime hours.
Once operational, the Proposed Project would include new permanent lighting from outdoor building
lights and security lighting for the parking area. While the Proposed Project would include installation
of new permanent lighting, this type of lighting would be consistent with lighting requirements for
the area. The Proposed Project would comply with Fontana Municipal Code, Section 30.15.311 (see
below), which addresses general lighting guidelines for day and nighttime uses of buildings of all the
districts and would include any shielding or barriers to minimize spill over into other businesses and
residences. Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
17
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES
2.
AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES.
(In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to
forest resources, including timberland, are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest
land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project;
and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the
California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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 nonagricultural use?
(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
(c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of,
forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
(d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
(e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
4.2.1 Impact Analysis
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 nonagricultural use?
Less than Significant. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) administered by the
California Department of Conservation (DOC) produces maps and statistical data to analyze impacts
on California’s agricultural resources. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation
status. The Proposed Project site is categorized as ‘Unique Farmland’ as part of the FMMP due to its
location in an undeveloped portion within the City of Fontana (DOC 2022a). The California
Department of Conservation defines ‘Unique Farmland’ as farmland with lesser quality soils used for
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
18
the production of the state's leading agricultural crops. This land is usually irrigated but may include
non-irrigated orchards or vineyards as found in some climatic zones in California. Land must have
been cropped at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. The Project is
approximately 2.25 acres in size and is designated as Regional Mixed Use (City 2021b). While the
Project site was historically used for agricultural operations for cultivating wine grapes, there is no
current agricultural use of the site. Further, the current zoning and land use permits governmental
facilities to operate on the Project site. The Project does not involve converting the land uses, and
therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact. The Project site is zoned as the Westgate Specific Plan (SP). Neither the Project site, nor
any other property within the immediate vicinity, is in a Williamson Act contract or conflict with any
existing agricultural use (County 2021). The Proposed Project does not include activities related to
agricultural operations nor does it involve any rezoning to agricultural use. No impact would occur.
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section
51104(g))?
No Impact. The Proposed Project site is located within the Westgate Specific Plan. The City’s General
Plan designates land uses within the Project site as Regional Mixed Use (RMU) and the Westgate
Specific Plan designates the Project site for Mixed Use – 1 (MU-1) land uses (City 2021a). The MU-1
designation provides for a broad range of business, commercial retail, medical, educational,
entertainment, commercial services, and other complementary uses including the Proposed Project
(City 2017a). The Proposed Project would not conflict with the existing zoning and there are no
forested lands within the area. 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. As discussed above in threshold (c), the Project is located in an undeveloped portion of
the City within the Westgate Specific Plan and is designated as Mixed Use. The Specific Plan does not
account for any forest land or timberland. No forest land would be lost or converted to non-forest
uses for the purpose of the Proposed Project. 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 nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land
to non-forest use?
No Impact. The Proposed Project will include a parking lot, training facility and storage building to
operate a fire station. The proposed buildings are sited on a currently vacant and graded City-owned
lot. No changes are anticipated in the existing environment during construction or operation, which
could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non-
forest use. The Proposed Project does not include activities related to agricultural operations nor
would it involve conversion of any agricultural properties. No impact would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
19
4.3 AIR QUALITY
3.
AIR QUALITY.
Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
(b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
(d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
4.3.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less than Significant Impact. Vista Environmental prepared an Air Quality, Energy, and
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impact Analysis (Appendix A) for the Proposed Project to determine
the potential air quality, energy, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impacts associated with
the proposed fire station and training center.
Regulatory Summary
The Proposed Project will be required to comply with Federal (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Clean Air Act), State (SCAQMD, California Code of Regulations [CCR]) and local regulations
(City). Full discussion of the regulatory background is provided in Appendix A.
Modeling Results
The criteria air pollution and GHG emissions impacts created by the Proposed Project have been
analyzed through use of CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0. CalEEMod is a computer model published
by the SCAQMD for estimating air pollutant emissions. The project characteristics in the CalEEMod
model were set to a project location of the South Coast Air Basin portion of San Bernardino
County, a Climate Zone of 10, utility company of Southern California Edison, and project opening
year of 2025. Land use parameters and construction parameters were included to obtain the
necessary outputs to determine construction and operational related emissions. Detailed
modeling and descriptions are provided in Appendix A with the summarized results below.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
20
Table 1. Construction-Related Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation1
Onsite2 2.66 27.18 18.34 0.04 8.90 5.07
Offsite3 0.07 0.26 0.72 <0.01 0.24 0.07
Total 2.73 27.44 19.05 0.04 9.14 5.14
Grading1
Onsite2 1.66 17.03 14.76 0.03 3.49 2.00
Offsite3 0.06 0.26 0.61 <0.01 0.21 0.06
Total 1.72 17.29 15.37 0.03 3.69 2.06
Building Construction
Onsite2 1.47 13.44 16.17 0.03 0.61 0.58
Offsite3 0.27 1.11 2.68 0.01 0.90 0.25
Total 1.74 14.56 18.85 0.04 1.52 0.83
Paving
Onsite 1.27 7.53 12.18 0.02 0.35 0.33
Offsite 0.07 0.04 0.65 <0.01 0.22 0.06
Total 1.34 7.57 12.83 0.02 0.58 0.39
Architectural Coatings
Onsite 14.91 1.15 1.81 <0.01 0.06 0.06
Offsite 0.04 0.03 0.42 <0.01 0.15 0.04
Total 14.96 1.17 2.23 <0.01 0.21 0.10
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 14.96 27.44 19.05 0.04 9.14 5.14
SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold?
No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Site Preparation and Grading based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403.
2 Onsite emissions from equipment not operated on public roads.
3 Offsite emissions from vehicles operating on public roads.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0.
Table 2. Construction-Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
Construction Phase NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Site Preparation2 27.21 18.42 8.93 5.08
Grading2 17.06 14.84 3.51 2.01
Building Construction 13.58 16.50 0.73 0.61
Paving 7.54 12.26 0.38 0.33
Architectural Coatings 1.15 1.86 0.07 0.06
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 27.21 18.42 8.93 5.08
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
21
SCAQMD Local Construction Thresholds3 737 25,755 218 113
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Notes:
1 The Pollutant Emissions include 100% of the On-Site emissions (off-road equipment and fugitive dust) and 1/8 of the Off-Site emissions (on
road trucks and worker vehicles), in order to account for the on-road emissions that occur within a ¼ mile of the project site
2 Site Preparation and Grading phases based on adherence to fugitive dust suppression requirements from SCAQMD Rule 403.
3 The nearest offsite sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located as near as 2,200 feet (670 meters) east of the project site. In
order to provide a conservative analysis, the 500-meter thresholds were utilized.
Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for two and five acres in Air Monitoring Area 34, Central San Bernardino Valley.
Table 3. Operational Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Activity VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources1
0.61 <0.01 <0.01 0.00 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Usage2
<0.01 0.02 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Mobile Sources3
0.12 0.84 1.11 <0.01 0.27 0.08
Backup Generator4
0.38 1.07 0.98 <0.01 0.06 0.06
Total Emissions
1.11 1.94 2.11 <0.01 0.33 0.14
SCAQMD Operational Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Area sources consist of emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment.
2 Energy usage consist of emissions from electricity and natural gas usage.
3 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.
4 Backup Generator based on a 300 ekW (467 Horsepower) diesel generator that has a cycling schedule of 30 minutes per week.
Source: Calculated from CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
22
Table 4. Operations-Related Local Criteria Pollutant Emissions
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Onsite Emission Source NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Energy Usage 0.02 0.02 <0.01 <0.01
Mobile Sources1 0.11 0.14 0.03 0.01
Backup Generator2 1.07 0.98 0.06 0.06
Total Emissions 1.20 1.14 0.09 0.07
SCAQMD Local Operational Thresholds3 737 25,755 53 27
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Notes:
1 Mobile sources based on 1/8 of the gross vehicular emissions, which are the estimated portion of vehicle emissions occurring within a quarter
mile of the project site.
2 Backup Generator based on a 300 ekW (467 Horsepower) diesel generator that has a cycling schedule of 30 minutes per week.
3 The nearest offsite sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located as near as 2,200 feet (670 meters) east of the project site. In
order to provide a conservative analysis, the 500-meter thresholds were utilized.
Source: Calculated from SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for two and five acres in Air Monitoring Area 34, Central San Bernardino Valley.
CEQA requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable
General Plans and regional plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that applies
to the Proposed Project includes the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Therefore,
the Air Quality Analysis discusses in detail any potential inconsistencies with the AQMP but is
summarized below.
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended [General Plan] Elements (including
land use zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be
analyzed for consistency with the AQMP." Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually
not required. A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it
furthers one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook
identifies two key indicators of consistency:
(1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air
quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of
air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP.
(2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on
the year of project buildout and phase.
Based on the results of the modeling in the Air Quality Analysis and summarized tables above,
short-term regional construction air emissions and ongoing operations would not result in
significant impacts based on SCAQMD regional thresholds. Long-term local air quality impacts
showed that local pollutant concentrations would not exceed the air quality standards
(Appendix A).
The Project site is located within the Westgate Specific Plan Area as MU-1. This designation
provides for a broad range of business, commercial retail, medical, educational, entertainment,
commercial services, and other complementary uses including the Proposed Project. As such, the
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
23
Proposed Project is consistent with the current land use designation with respect to the regional
forecasts utilized by the AQMPs. Therefore, the Proposed Project is not anticipated to exceed the
AQMP assumptions for the Project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the
second criterion. Furthermore, based on the results of the emissions modeling, the Proposed
Project will not exceed the regional thresholds, nor would it be inconsistent with the AQMP.
Impacts would be less than significant.
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. The Proposed Project would not 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. The SCAQMD has published a
report on how to address cumulative impacts from air pollution: White Paper on Potential Control
Strategies to Address Cumulative Impacts from Air Pollution. Therefore, this analysis assumes that
individual projects that do not generate operational or construction emissions that exceed the
SCAQMD’s recommended daily thresholds for project- specific impacts would also not cause a
cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the Air Basin is in
nonattainment, and, therefore, would not be considered to have a significant, adverse air quality
impact. Alternatively, individual project-related construction and operational emissions that
exceed SCAQMD thresholds for project-specific impacts would be considered cumulatively
considerable.
Construction Emissions
The construction activities for the Proposed Project are anticipated to include site preparation
and grading of approximately 3.68 acres; construction of the proposed training center and fire
station; paving of onsite driveways, paved training area, and parking lots; and application of
architectural coatings.
Construction would be completed in two phases. Phase 1 of the Proposed Project is expected to
break ground in June 2024 and be completed by January 2025; with Phase 2 anticipated to begin
in June 2027. In order to provide a worst-case analysis, however, construction activities from both
phases were modeled as occurring at the same time, starting June 2024 and ending by June 2025.
The construction emissions have been analyzed for both regional and local air quality impacts.
The results of the modeling data above in Section a) show that none of the analyzed criteria
pollutants would exceed the regional or local emission thresholds during either the site
preparation, grading, building construction, paving, or architectural coatings phases.
Operational Emissions
The ongoing operation of the Proposed Project would result in a long-term increase in air quality
emissions. This increase would be due to emissions from the project-generated vehicle trips,
emissions from energy usage, onsite area source emissions, and backup generator emissions
created from the on-going use of the Proposed Project.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
24
The operations-related regional criteria air quality impacts created by the Proposed Project have
been analyzed through use of the CalEEMod model with worst-case summer emissions for long-
term operations. Based on the model data, none of the analyzed criteria pollutants would exceed
the regional emissions thresholds. In addition, the Proposed Project would not be expected to
exceed the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards for emissions
of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxide (NOX), PM10, and PM2.5.
The Proposed Project has been analyzed for potential local CO emission impacts from the project-
generated vehicular trips and on-site operations. CO is the pollutant of major concern along
roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO
concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and
are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be
assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal CO
standards of 20 ppm over one hour or 9 ppm over eight hours. As discussed in further detail in
Appendix A, all intersections near the Proposed Project are much smaller with less traffic than
intersections the SCAQMD has modeled. Therefore, it is determined that it would not exceed
either the one hour or eight hour CO standard. Accordingly, no local CO hotspots are anticipated
to be created from the Proposed Project and no CO Hotspot modeling was performed.
Therefore, impacts related to criteria pollutant for construction and operations and with regional
and local air quality requirements would be less than significant.
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities may expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations of localized criteria pollutant concentrations and from toxic air
contaminant emissions created from onsite construction equipment. Refer to Section b) and in
Appendix A for criteria pollutant data.
The greatest potential for toxic air contaminant emissions would be related to diesel particulate
matter emissions associated with heavy equipment operations during construction of the
Proposed Project. According to SCAQMD methodology, health effects from carcinogenic air toxics
are usually described in terms of “individual cancer risk.” “Individual Cancer Risk” is the likelihood
that a person exposed to concentrations of toxic air contaminants over a 70-year lifetime will
contract cancer, based on the use of standard risk-assessment methodology.
Given the relatively limited number of heavy-duty construction equipment, the varying distances
that construction equipment would operate to the nearby sensitive receptors, and the short-term
construction schedule, the Proposed Project would not result in a long-term (i.e., 30 or 70 years)
substantial source of toxic air contaminant emissions and corresponding individual cancer risk.
The California Code of Regulations Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449 regulates
emissions from off-road diesel equipment in California, including by regulating equipment and
vehicle idling, requiring upgrading of the emission level of equipment, and requiring the provision
of annual reports to California Air Resources Board regarding fleet usage and emissions. Due to
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
25
limitations in off-road construction equipment, a less than significant short-term impact would
occur during construction.
The on-going operations of the Proposed Project may expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations of local CO emission impacts from the project-generated vehicular trips
and from the potential local air quality impacts from onsite operations. CO is the pollutant of
major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this
reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway
network and are used as an indicator of potential impacts to sensitive receptors. As discussed in
the previous Section b), no local CO Hotspot are anticipated to be created from the Proposed
Project and no CO Hotspot modeling was performed.
The local air quality impacts from the operation of the Proposed Project would occur from onsite
sources such as architectural coatings, landscaping equipment, onsite usage of natural gas
appliances, backup generator and from vehicles operating onsite and immediate vicinity of the
project site. The results indicated in Appendix A, and above in Section b) show that the Proposed
Project would not exceed the local NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5 thresholds of significance. Risk to
sensitive receptors from toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions would be negligible with
adherence to operating time limit per SCAQMD limits.
Therefore, because the construction and operational emissions would not exceed local and
regional levels, and the Proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations. Impacts would be less than significant.
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. The Proposed Project would not result in other emissions, such as
those leading to odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. The local
concentrations of criteria pollutant emissions, and TAC emissions that may adversely impact a
substantial number of people have been analyzed in Appendix A which were found that these
emissions would create less than significant impacts.
Individual responses to odors are highly variable and can result in a variety of effects. Generally,
the impact of an odor results from a variety of factors such as frequency, duration, offensiveness,
location, and sensory perception. The frequency is a measure of how often an individual is
exposed to an odor in the ambient environment. The intensity refers to an individual’s or group’s
perception of the odor strength or concentration. The duration of an odor refers to the elapsed
time over which an odor is experienced. The offensiveness of the odor is the subjective rating of
the pleasantness or unpleasantness of an odor. The location accounts for the type of area in which
a potentially affected person lives, works, or visits; the type of activity in which he or she is
engaged; and the sensitivity of the impacted receptor.
Construction-Related Odor Impacts
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include the application of
coatings such as asphalt pavement, paints, and solvents and from emissions from diesel
equipment. Standard construction requirements that limit the time of day when construction may
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
26
occur as well as SCAQMD Rule 1108 that limits Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) content in
asphalt and Rule 1113 that limits the VOC content in paints and solvents would minimize odor
impacts from construction. Further, the objectionable odors that may be produced during the
construction process would be temporary and would not likely be noticeable for extended periods
of time beyond the Project site’s boundaries. Through compliance with the applicable regulations
that reduce odors and due to the transitory nature of construction odors, a less than significant
odor impact would occur, and no mitigation would be required.
Operations-Related Odor Impacts
Potential sources of odor emission during operation of the Proposed Project would include diesel
emissions from the fire trucks and backup generator as well as odors from trash storage areas. All
fire trucks that operate on the project site will be required to meet State emissions standards that
require the use of diesel particulate filters that would minimize odors created from the fire trucks.
The operation of the backup diesel generator would be limited to 200 hours or less per year and
would include an exhaust stack with a diesel particulate filter that would limit the exhaust and
associated odors created from the generator to negligible levels. Pursuant to City regulations,
permanent trash enclosures that protect trash bins from rain as well as limit air circulation would
be required for the trash storage areas. Due to the distance of the nearest sensitive receptor from
the Project site and through compliance with SCAQMD’s rules that include Rule 402 (odor
regulations) and Rule 1110.2 (backup generator regulations) and the City’s trash storage
regulations, a less than significant impact related to odors would occur during the on-going
operations of the Proposed Project. Operational-related odor impacts would be less than
significant.
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(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?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
27
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(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 wildlife
nursery sites?
(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
(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?
4.4.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification,
on any species identified as candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Chambers Group conducted a literature review
and biological reconnaissance-level survey of the Project site to document existing vegetation
communities, identify special status species with a potential for occurrence, and map habitats that
could support special status wildlife species, as well as evaluate potential impacts of the Project to
these resources (Appendix B).
A literature review was conducted for soils, jurisdictional water features that contribute to hydrology,
and special status species known to occur within the Project’s vicinity (approximately 5 miles), known
as the survey area. The biological reconnaissance survey was conducted on foot with site photographs
taken depicting current site conditions. The survey was conducted between 0800 and 1200 hours on
June 15, 2022.
Following the literature review and assessment of the various habitat types in the Survey Area, it was
determined that of the seven special status plant species known to historically occur within the Survey
Area, all seven species are considered absent within the Survey Area due to a lack of suitable habitat
for these species. No special status species were observed during the field survey.
In addition, it was determined that all 30 special status wildlife species known to occur within the
Project site are considered absent due to a lack of suitable habitat for these species. No sensitive
wildlife species were observed during the field survey.
Although there are no trees onsite, to minimize potential impacts to nesting birds protected under
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), construction activities should take place outside nesting season
(February 1 to August 31) to the greatest extent practicable.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
28
If construction activities must occur during nesting season, the following mitigation measures shall be
implemented to address potential impacts to nesting birds. In addition, to the maximum extent
practicable, a minimum buffer zone around occupied nests should be determined by a qualified
biologist to avoid impacts to the active nest. The buffer should be maintained during physical ground-
disturbing activities. Once nesting has ceased, the buffer may be removed.
Because the Project site does not contain any sensitive plant species, lacks any sensitive habitat, and
has not been found to house sensitive wildlife species, impacts would be less than significant. While
there are no sensitive species that are expected to occur, MBTA applies to bird species native to the
U.S. To address potential impacts to nesting birds, mitigation measure MM BIO-1 would be
implemented and result in impacts to nesting birds to be less than significant.
MM BIO-1: Should construction occur during the nesting bird season (February 1 to August
31), a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted approximately 3
days prior to ground-disturbing activities by a qualified biologist retained by the
Applicant. If nests are found during surveys, they shall be flagged and a 250-foot
buffer to a 500-foot buffer (for raptors) shall be fenced around the nests. The
buffer area shall be kept in place until the young have fledged and leave the nest.
To the maximum extent practicable, a minimum buffer zone around occupied
nests should be determined by a qualified biologist to avoid impacts to the active
nest. The buffer should be maintained during physical ground-disturbing
activities. Once nesting has ceased, the buffer may be removed.
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 or regulations, or by the California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Project site does not contain any riparian or other sensitive habitat, nor is it located
near any such habitats. The Project site is undeveloped and is located adjacent to SR-210 including
off- and on-ramps. While there is a cement-lined channel that runs parallel to the north of the Project
site, no work will occur within or adjacent to the channel. The Project will not involve any habitat
modifications or uses that may involve sensitive natural communities. No impact would occur.
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. The Project site is undeveloped land with no wetlands or other hydrological feature. The
nearest major hydrological features are located to the north near the San Sevaine Flood Control Basin
approximately 1 mile driving distance to the north. The Project site does not contain any habitats and
is undeveloped. The Project site is adjacent to a high traffic freeway including off- and on-ramps. The
cement-lined channel that runs parallel to the north of the Project site will be avoided and no work
would occur that could result in impacts to the channel. No impact would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
29
d) Would the project Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use
of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. According to the San Bernardino County General Plan Open Space Element, the City of
Fontana does not contain any wildlife corridors, greenbelts, areas of critical concern or designated
wilderness areas. The Project site, while undeveloped, does not contain any habitats or sensitive
communities (Appendix B) on the Project site or adjacent to the site. The Project involves construction
of a training facility that includes a 6-story building. The presence of the Project would not interfere
with the movement of any wildlife, nor would it impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No
impact would occur.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such
as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The City of Fontana considers trees as a valuable asset. The Public Services Department
published a Tree Policy Manual to provide guidance on the preservation, maintenance, and continued
growth of the City’s urban forest. The Project site is vacant and does not have any trees or other
sensitive vegetation. The Proposed Project will include landscaping throughout the property
consisting of a variety of trees, shrubs, grasses, groundcovers, and vines. Therefore, construction of
the Project would not result in conflicting with any policy or ordinance related to trees. No impact
would occur.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Conservancy Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
No Impact. According to the City’s Conservation Open Space Element, the Proposed Project will not
be located within its habitat conservation areas or Forest Service lands. The majority the City’s
designated open spaces, forests and habitat conservation areas are located north of the Project site
along Summit Avenue, south of the San Gabriel Mountains. The Project site is undeveloped with no
areas for potential habitats. No impact would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
30
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
(c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
4.5.1 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 Cultural Resources Survey Report was prepared by Chambers Group for the Proposed
Project (Appendix C). The report summarizes the results of the record search, literature review and
field survey that was conducted on February 18, 2022, of the entire Project site. The report gathered
and analyzed information needed to assess the potential for impacts to cultural resources.
A record search review was completed to determine if any additional historic properties, landmarks,
bridges, or other potentially significant or listed properties are located within the Project footprint or
1 mile from the Project site. This background research included, but was not limited to, the National
Register of Historic Places, California State Historic Property Data Files, California State Historical
Landmarks, California Points of Historical Interest, Office of Historic Preservation Archaeological
Determinations of Eligibility, historical aerial imagery accessed via NETR Online, historical U.S.
Geological Survey topographic maps, Built Environment Resource Directory, and California
Department of Transportation State and Local Bridge Surveys. As a result of the archival research, in
addition to the resource indicated in the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) record
search results, no previously recorded resources or any other listed or potentially significant
properties were identified within the Project site. Because there are no existing structures in the
Project site, and the results of the record search provided no evidence of any recorded resources or
properties within a one-mile vicinity, no impact would occur.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The record search resulted in negative results for
the presence of recorded resources or historic properties. Historic maps and aerial imagery indicate
that the Project site has remained largely undeveloped from 1938 to present. The historical aerial
imagery and topographic maps indicate that the earliest alignment of Highland Avenue was
established sometime before 1896. Historic aerial imagery shows that the overall area, including the
Project site, was developed for agricultural use by 1938 and continued to be utilized for agriculture
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
31
through the 1980’s. The Project site appears to have been subject to minimal agriculture or re-
vegetation efforts between 2002 and present. The Project site was surveyed to confirm of any
evidence of resources that could be onsite. The results of the survey of the Project site showed no
surface evidence of prehistoric or historic archaeological resources or paleontological resources was
identified within the Project site.
However, given the largely undisturbed nature of the Project site with no previous development
beyond historic agricultural activity within the site, there remains potential that the current Project’s
ground disturbing activity could impact intact native soil formations or intact geologic units known to
be fossil bearing in the region. Therefore, to mitigate impacts to undiscovered cultural resources, the
following mitigations measures would be implemented to ensure impacts to be less than significant.
MM CUL-1 The Applicant shall retain the services of a Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of
the Interior Standards or County standards, whichever is greater, and require that all initial ground-
disturbing work be monitored by archaeological specialist (monitor) proficient in artifact and feature
identification in monitoring contexts. The Consultant (Qualified Archaeologist and/or monitor) shall be
present at the Project construction phase kickoff meeting.
MM CUL-2 Prior to commencing construction activities and thus prior to any ground disturbance in the
Proposed Project site, the Consultant shall conduct initial Worker Environmental Awareness Program
(WEAP) training to all construction personnel, including supervisors, present at the outset of the Project
construction work phase, for which the Lead Contractor and all subcontractors shall make their personnel
available. A tribal monitor shall be provided an opportunity to attend the pre-construction briefing, if
requested. This WEAP training will educate construction personnel on how to work with the monitor(s) to
identify and minimize impacts to archaeological resources and maintain environmental compliance. This
WEAP training will educate the monitor(s) of construction procedures to avoid construction-related injury
or harm. This training may be performed periodically, such as for new personnel coming on to the Project
as needed.
MM CUL-3 The Contractor shall provide the Consultant with a schedule of initial potential ground-
disturbing activities. A minimum of 48 hours will be provided to the Consultant of commencement of any
initial ground-disturbing activities such as vegetation grubbing or clearing, grading, trenching, or mass
excavation.
A monitor shall be present on-site at the commencement of ground-disturbing activities related to the
Project. The monitor, in consultation with the Qualified Archaeologist, shall observe initial ground-
disturbing activities and, as they proceed, adjust the number of monitors as needed to provide adequate
observation and oversight. All monitors will have stop-work authority to allow for recordation and
evaluation of finds during construction. The monitor will maintain a daily record of observations to serve
as an ongoing reference resource and to provide a resource for final reporting upon completion of the
Project.
The Consultant and the Lead Contractor and subcontractors shall maintain a line of communication
regarding schedule and activity such that the monitor is aware of all ground-disturbing activities in advance
in order to provide appropriate oversight.
MM CUL-4 In the event of the discovery of previously unidentified archaeological materials, the Contractor
shall immediately cease all work activities within an area of no less than 60 feet (approximately 18 meters)
of the discovery. After cessation of excavation, the Contractor shall immediately contact the City. Except
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
32
in the case of cultural items that fall within the scope of the Native American Grave Protection and
Repatriation Act, the California Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, or California Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98, the discovery of any cultural resource within the Project area shall not
be grounds for a project-wide “stop work” notice or otherwise interfere with the Project’s continuation
except as set forth in this paragraph. Additionally, all consulting Native American Tribal groups that
requested notification of any unanticipated discovery of archaeological resources on the Project shall be
notified appropriately. If a discovery results in the identification of cultural items that fall within the scope
of the Native American Grave Protection and Repatriation Act, the Contractor shall immediately cease all
work activities within an area of no less than 100 feet (30 meters) of the discovery. In the event of an
unanticipated discovery of archaeological materials during construction, the Applicant retained Qualified
Archaeologist shall be contacted to evaluate the significance of the materials prior to resuming any
construction-related activities in the vicinity of the find. If the Qualified Archaeologist determines that the
discovery constitutes a significant resource under CEQA and it cannot be avoided, the Applicant shall
implement an archaeological data recovery program.
MM CUL-5 In the event that cultural resources are discovered during project activities, all work in the
immediate vicinity of the find (within a 60-foot buffer) shall cease and the Qualified Archaeologist shall
assess the find. Work on the other portions of the project outside of the buffered area may continue during
this assessment period. Additionally, the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources
Department (YSMN) shall be contacted, as detailed within TCR-1, regarding any pre-contact and/or
historic-era finds and be provided information after the archaeologist makes his/her initial assessment of
the nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and treatment.
If significant pre-contact and/or historic-era cultural resources, as defined by CEQA (as amended, 2015),
are discovered and avoidance cannot be ensured, the archaeologist shall develop a Monitoring and
Treatment Plan, the drafts of which shall be provided to YSMN for review and comment, as detailed within
TCR-1. The archaeologist shall monitor the remainder of the project and implement the Plan accordingly.
MM CUL-6 At the completion of all ground-disturbing activities, the Consultant shall prepare an
Archaeological Resources Monitoring Report summarizing all monitoring efforts and observations, as
performed, and any and all prehistoric or historic archaeological finds as well as providing follow-up reports
of any finds to the SCCIC, as required.
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less than Significant Impact. The results of the record search and survey summarized that the Project
site does not have any recorded sites of prehistoric or historic resources, and it is not anticipated that
significant archaeological, historical resources, or burial resources are onsite. While there are
currently no identified Native American cultural resources and low likelihood to encounter previously
unknown and unrecorded human remains, in the unlikely event that human remains or other buried
materials including funerary objects are encountered during any activities associated with the Project,
the following measure shall be implemented.
MM CUL-7 In the unlikely event that human remains or other buried materials including funerary
objects are encountered during any activities associated with the Project, work in the immediate
vicinity (within a 100-foot buffer of the find) the Proposed Project would be subject to California
Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and California Public Resources Code Section
5097.98.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
33
As required by state law, the County Coroner shall be notified immediately should humans remains
are encountered. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the County Coroner shall
notify the NAHC, which shall notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the
inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and
nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials
(Appendix C). Compliance with the regulatory standard would result in impacts to be less than
significant.
4.6 ENERGY
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
4.6.1 Impact Analysis
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. The Proposed Project would utilize energy resources during
construction and operation. Energy resources that would be potentially utilized include electricity,
natural gas, and petroleum-based fuel supplies and distribution systems. Appendix A calculates the
potential energy consumption associated with the construction and operations of the Proposed
Project and provides a determination if any energy utilized by the Proposed Project is wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Discussion with construction- and
operations-related electricity, construction-related natural gas, and construction-related petroleum
fuel use are provided in Appendix A.
Construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would be required to adhere to all State
and SCAQMD regulations for off-road equipment and on-road trucks, which provide minimum fuel
efficiency standards. As such, construction activities for the Proposed Project would not result in the
wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Development of the Project
would not result in the need to manufacture construction materials or create new building material
facilities specifically to supply the Proposed Project. It is difficult to measure the energy used in the
production of construction materials such as asphalt, steel, and concrete, it is reasonable to assume
that the production of building materials such as concrete, steel, etc., would employ all reasonable
energy conservation practices in the interest of minimizing the cost of doing business.
The Proposed Project would comply with all Federal, State, and City requirements related to the
consumption of transportation energy that includes California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
34
California Green Building Standards that require the Proposed Project to provide both long-term and
short-term bicycle parking spaces that will promote the use of alternative transportation. Therefore,
it is anticipated the Proposed Project will be designed and built to minimize transportation energy
through the promotion of the use of clean air vehicles, including electric-powered vehicles and it is
anticipated that existing and planned capacity and supplies of transportation fuels would be sufficient
to support the Proposed Project’s demand. Thus, impacts with regard transportation energy supply
and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be
required.
Operation of the Proposed Project would result in increased consumption of propane, related to the
use of propane props in the training tower for approximately 100 pyrotechnic training events per year.
As detailed in the Air Quality Analysis (Appendix A), the Project will consume approximately 1,800
gallons of propane per year, which equates to 0.0003 percent of the propane consumed annually in
California. As such, the operations-related propane use would be nominal, when compared to current
propane usage rates. It should be noted that each pyrotechnic training event will be required to obtain
a permit from SCAQMD and will be required to meet the requirements from SCAQMD Rules 208 and
444 that limits the duration of the use of the propane props as well as other measure that will
minimize the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of propane. Thus, impacts with regard
propane fuel use would be less than significant and no mitigation measures would be required.
In conclusion, the Proposed Project would comply with regulatory compliance measures outlined by
the State and City related to Air Quality, GHG, Transportation/Circulation, and Water Supply.
Additionally, the Proposed Project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable City
Building and Fire Codes. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. Impacts
would be less than significant.
b) Would the project Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The applicable energy plan for the Proposed Project
is the Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 (General Plan), adopted November 18, 2018.
The Proposed Project would be consistent with the policy below:
Goal 2.2 Government facilities and operations are models of resource efficiency.
Continue organizational and operational improvements to maximize energy and resource
efficiency and reduce waste.
The Project would be consistent with Goal 2.2 as it will be designed to meet the most current Title 24
Part 11 CalGreen standards that require that new non-residential buildings to maximize resource
efficiency and reduce waste.
The Proposed Project would be consistent with all applicable energy-related policies from the General
Plan. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
35
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
(b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
(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?
(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?
(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?
(f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
4.7.1 Impact Analysis
a) i) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication
42.
Less than Significant Impact. A Geotechnical Exploration Report was prepared for the Proposed
Project by Leighton Consulting, Inc. on May 2022 (Appendix D). The report evaluated the geologic
hazards and geotechnical conditions of the Project site with respect to the proposed development.
The Project site is located in Southern California is which a seismically active area. As such, many areas
in Southern California could be subject to some seismic activity. The Project site approximately 2.3
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
36
miles south of the Cucamonga fault zone. The Project site is not located within a designated State of
California Earthquake Fault Zone, nor a fault zone identified by the County of San Bernardino. No
active faults have been mapped within or trending towards the Project site and it is not within a
designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. Impacts would be less than significant.
ii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. Ground shaking is a potential hazard resulting from earthquakes along
major active or potentially active faults. According to the Geotechnical Exploration Report, the Project
site has been exposed to relatively significant seismic events; however, the Project site does not
appear to have experienced more severe seismicity compared to much of Southern California. There
are no documented events to show that earthquake damage in the vicinity of the Project would be
worse than the majority of Southern California (Appendix D).
Because of the Project site’s location, it is not expected that it would cause substantial adverse effects
involving strong seismic ground shaking. Furthermore, the Project would not involve any excavation
or ground disturbing activities that could exacerbate any nearby fault zones. The Proposed Project
will be constructed to comply with the 2019 California Building Code that includes minimum standards
to protect life safety and prevent collapse. Impacts would be less than significant.
iii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less than Significant Impact. Secondary seismic hazards for the region include liquefaction, slope
instability, earthquake-induced seiches, tsunami flooding and slope instability. Liquefaction occurs
when loosely packed, water saturated sediments that are near or at ground surface lose their strength
due to ground shaking, which in turn, causes the sediment to act like a fluid. For liquefaction to occur,
the area has to have loose, clean granular soils, be shallow groundwater, and have strong, long
durations of ground shaking.
The Geotechnical Exploration Report states that no groundwater was encountered during the site
exploration and that Project site is outside the zone of liquefaction potential. Groundwater at the site
has been historically greater than approximately 289 feet deep beneath the site. Due to the lack of
groundwater and dense condition of the native soils, liquefaction is unlikely to occur (Appendix D).
Impacts would be less than significant.
iv) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides?
No Impact. Landslides occur when there is a disturbance in the stability of a sloped area which can be
initiated by rainfall, snowmelt, change in water levels, erosion, groundwater changes, earthquakes,
volcanic activity, disturbance through human activities, or a combination of these factors. Seismically
induced landslides and other similar slope failures are a common occurrence during or after
earthquakes, particularly within the region. The County of San Bernardino for the Devore Quadrangle
have mapped the area and it is found that the Project site is outside a zone of landslide potential
(Appendix D). The Project site and its vicinity are gently sloping and is not located along or nearby any
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
37
sloped hills. Therefore, the potential for landslide activity has been determined to be negligible due
to the lack of significant slopes. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant Impact. Topsoil is the top layer of soil that usually holds high concentrations of
organic matter, which are typically found in fields and other vegetated areas. Loss of topsoil or any
type of soil erosion occurs when dirt is left exposed to physical factors such as strong winds, rain, and
flowing water.
The Project site is currently undeveloped and vacant. While the Project site was historically used for
agricultural operations for cultivating wine grapes, the existing site is devoid of any vegetation or signs
of existing agricultural operations. Any topsoil that may have been historically onsite is likely to have
eroded over the decades. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in loss of topsoil.
The vacant lot is currently subjected to winds and rain. Once construction of the Proposed Project
begins, the site will be excavated and graded, thereby disturbing the existing dirt/soils which could be
subject to erosion. As part of the Rule 403 of AQMD to address fugitive dust, implementation of these
dust control methods would minimize any potential soil erosion. Other general construction methods
that would be implemented include use of barriers covers. Best management practices for erosion
control are required under National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations
pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act. NPDES requirements for construction projects disturbing 1
acre or more in area are set forth in the San Bernardino County MS4 permit issued by the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB; State Water Board Order No. R8-2010-0036/NPDES No.
CAS618036) (RWQCB 2010). Once the Project site has been constructed, all dirt areas would be
covered in concrete, asphalt, or landscaping. With implementation of general construction methods
and with the Project site being covered, impacts would be less than significant.
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. Landslides and liquefaction areas are discussed in section a)iii and a)iv.
Lateral spreading is the lateral movement, usually soils, that are caused by earthquake-induced
liquefaction. The shaking reduces the stiffness and strength of the soil thereby causing ground
movement ranging from a few centimeters to several meters. Lateral spreading often occurs along
shorelines and riverbanks where there are loose, saturated sandy soils that are at shallow depths.
Subsidence on land is the downward shift (gradual or sudden) of the land surface that can be caused
by natural or human-induced activities through the moving of earth materials such as soils. Main
causes of land subsidence include but are not limited to drainage of organic soils, underground
mining, sinkholes, compaction, or removal of underground water.
The Project site is not located along any riverbank or waterbody. The Project site is located south of a
flood control channel; however, the channel is a cement-lined and its waters are not anticipated to
intrude into the soils of the Project site. The Proposed Project construction and operational activities
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
38
will not include removal of groundwater, nor would any grading or excavation occur along sloped
areas as the site is gently sloped. Therefore, lateral spreading and subsidence is unlikely to occur at
the Project site due to the lack of liquefaction potential, lack of groundwater, and lack of sloped areas.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
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 are soils, clay, and other fine viscous particles that are
prone to expansion or shrinkage due to a direct variation in water content/volume. Swelling would
occur when there is a large amount of water present and shrink when water evaporates. The
continued cycle of swelling and shrinking causes soil to move which can cause structures built on
expansive soil to sink or rise unevenly, thereby requiring foundation repairs.
The City of Fontana is identified to have a relatively stable geology and soils. It is unlikely that there
would be a potential risk that represents a significant change or increase from the conditions that are
currently present (City 2018b). Given the stability of the soils and negligible risk of soil instability as
previously discussed, impacts due to expansive soils would be less than significant.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project will utilize existing utilities that are available on
site including an existing sewer system. As such, the Proposed Project will not utilize septic tanks for
its operations Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.5, a record search and survey were conducted
for the Project site. The record search showed that no fossil localities have been identified within the
Project site or within a one-mile radius of the Project site. Based on these results, the paleontological
sensitivity is considered low to moderate in the overall area considering the lack of known fossil
localities within the one-mile radius. The paleontological records search did not identify any
previously recorded paleontological fossil localities within the Project site and surrounding study area,
and no evidence of paleontological resources was observed on the surface during the pedestrian
survey (Appendix C). Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
39
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
4.8.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project is anticipated to generate GHG emissions from
area sources, energy usage, mobile sources, waste disposal, water usage, backup generator, and
construction equipment. The project’s GHG emissions have been calculated with the CalEEMod model
based on the construction and operational parameters detailed in Appendix A (and provided in the
table below). A summary of the results is shown in Appendix A and in the CalEEMod model. The data
resulted with the Proposed Project would create 183.51 MTCO2e per year. Based on the threshold of
significance used to evaluate such emissions, which is based on a proposed threshold developed by
the SCAQMD, a cumulative global climate change impact would occur if the GHG emissions created
from the on-going operations would exceed 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, a less than significant
generation of greenhouse gas emissions would occur from development of the Proposed Project.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
40
Table 5. Project Related Greenhouse Gas Annual Emissions
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons per Year)
Category CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Area Sources1 <0.01 0.00 0.00 <0.01
Energy Usage2 52.93 <0.01 <0.01 53.21
Mobile Sources3 76.51 <0.01 <0.01 79.44
Backup Generator4 4.62 <0.01 0.00 4.64
Solid Waste5 4.71 0.28 0.00 11.68
Water and Wastewater6 15.24 0.16 <0.01 20.41
Construction7 13.98 <0.01 <0.01 14.14
Total GHG Emissions 168.00 0.45 0.01 183.51
Threshold of Significance 3,000
Exceed Thresholds? No
Notes:
1 Area sources consist of GHG emissions from consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscaping equipment.
2 Energy usage consists of GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas usage.
3 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles.
4 Backup Generator based on a 300 ekW (467 Horsepower) diesel generator that has a cycling schedule of 30 minutes per week.5 Waste includes
the CO2 and CH4 emissions created from the solid waste placed in landfills.
6 Water includes GHG emissions from electricity used for transport of water and processing of wastewater.
7 Construction emissions amortized over 30 years as recommended in the SCAQMD GHG Working Group on November 19, 2009.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2020.4.0
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy
or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. The Proposed Project
consists of the development of the proposed fire station and training center. The Proposed Project is
anticipated to create 183.51 MTCO2e per year, which is well below the threshold of significance of
3,000 MTCO2e per year. The SCAQMD developed this threshold through a Working Group, which also
developed detailed methodology for evaluating significance under CEQA. At the September 28, 2010
Working Group meeting, the SCAQMD released its most current version of the draft GHG emissions
thresholds, which recommends a tiered approach that includes a quantitative annual threshold of
3,000 MTCO2e for all land use type projects, which was based on substantial evidence supporting the
use of the recommended thresholds. In addition, the proposed structures would be required to
comply with the most current State and City energy efficiency requirements that includes CCR Title
24, Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11: California Green Building
Standards. The CCR Title 24, Part 6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
41
measures to be incorporated into the proposed structures. Therefore, the Proposed Project would
not conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(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?
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
(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?
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within
2 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?
(f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
(g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death
involving wildland fires?
4.9.1 Impact Analysis
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. According to the City’s hazard screening maps, SR-210 and Cherry
Avenue (designated as a Major Highway under the Community Mobility and Circulation Element) have
been identified as hazardous material transportation routes due to their capacity of high volumes of
traffic (City 2017a, 2018a). While these roadways/highways would be likely used for hazardous
materials transport from other businesses throughout the City, the Proposed Project does not involve
routine transport of large quantities of hazardous materials like other industrial facilities. The
Proposed Project is the construction of a new fire station and training center.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
42
Construction of the Proposed Project would result in the generation, transport and use of various
waste materials that would require recycling and/or disposal. Some of the waste generate could be
classified as hazardous wastes/hazardous materials. Hazardous materials typically consist of
chemicals that may be categorized as toxic, corrosive, flammable, reactive, an irritant, or strong
sensitizer. During construction, the Proposed Project will use potentially hazardous materials from
petroleum-based fuels, lubricants, cleaning products and other similar materials. The quantities of the
used chemicals that will be present at the Project site would be limited and temporary.
Operations of the Project will include use of potentially hazardous materials such as grease, oils,
cleaning products, fuel and other similar materials. However, the use of such materials will not create
a significant hazard to the public or the environment because the handling, storage and disposal of
these materials during construction and operations will be done in compliance with the
manufacturer’s standards for storage and spill procedures, and with existing regulations such as the
California Health and Safety Code, Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, and Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act. Impacts would be less than significant.
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. According to the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
databases, the Project site is not located within 1000 feet of any listed site in the Geotracker
(SWRCB 2022) and Envirostor database (DTSC 2022). The Proposed Project will not result in the
accidental release of hazardous materials to the environment.
As discussed in part a), the Proposed Project will utilize potentially hazardous chemicals during
construction and operations. While hazardous materials will be present onsite, the quantities will be
limited, and the materials will be handled and stored according to the manufacturer’s guidelines and
be disposed according to local, State, and federal guidelines. Impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. The nearest school to the Proposed Project is Cecilia Lucero Solorio Elementary School,
15172 Walnut St, Fontana, CA 92336. It is located approximately 1.4 miles driving distance (or
approximately 0.8 miles direct distance) to the east. The Proposed Project would not emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous substances within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
No impact would occur.
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. As discussed in part b), the Proposed Project is not located within 1000
feet of any listed site in the DTSC databases nor is the Project site, or any location in its immediate
vicinity, listed on the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List). Because the Project
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
43
site will not be located at or adjacent to a hazardous materials site, its construction or operation would
not result in a significant hazard to the public or environment. Impacts would be less than significant.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan had not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport. The
nearest airport to the Project is Ontario International Airport (ONT-IAC), which is approximately 6
miles southwest from the Project site (ONT-IAC 2018). Furthermore, according to the Ontario
International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Project site is not within its airport influence
areas and therefore, is not subject to specific operational criteria including but not limited to noise,
safety or air protection. 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. The City of Fontana has prepared and adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation
Plan as an update to the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (City 2017b). The intent and purpose of the plan
is to reduce and/or eliminate loss of life and property and to demonstrate reducing or eliminating
risks in the City based on regionally specific disasters.
The Proposed Project would involve the construction of a fire station at the northwest corner of
Highland Avenue and Cherry Avenue. The construction may result in temporary traffic delays with the
presence of construction equipment in the area which could affect the utilization of Cherry Avenue,
Highland Avenue and SR-210 in the event of an emergency. However, this would be a temporary
occurrence and there are several roads in the vicinity of the Project that will allow access to the
freeways and other areas of the City. During operations, the Proposed Project is to provide a training
center for the City’s fire department and include a future fire station. The addition of the fire station
would provide additional emergency response services to the area. The Proposed Project is not
anticipated to impair or physically interfere an adopted emergency response plan because the
proposed construction and operational activities will occur within the Project site. Furthermore, the
Proposed Project will be a benefit to the community as it is providing additional emergency services
to the area and will provide training facilities to local fire fighters and other safety personnel. Impacts
would be less than significant.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
Less than Significant. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Fire and Resource
Assessment Program provides a Fire Hazards Severity Zone Viewer (FHSZ) to provide a visual reference
to locate fire hazards areas in California. The maps were developed utilizing science and field-tested
models that assigns a hazard score based on factors that influence fire likelihood and behavior. Factors
include but are not limited to fire history, existing and potential fuel (natural vegetation), predicted
flame length, embers, terrain, and typical fire weather in the area.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
44
The Project site is not located within a FHSZ area (CAL FIRE 2011). The area north of SR-210 and west
of the Interstate 15 are designated as Very FHSZ due to its proximity to the San Gabriel and San
Bernardino Mountains. The Project site is relatively flat and does not include a significant amount of
brush or vegetation that could be a fuel source for wildland fires. During training sessions, materials
may be set on fire for educational purposes to show how to extinguish a fire properly. However, these
are training simulations and be limited to designated areas on the Project site away from public right-
of-way or other landscaped areas. Fire suppression systems will be installed onsite, and experience
fire personnel will be present during the training sessions. Therefore, because of the Project location,
and with implementation of fire safety procedures during operations and training, the Project would
not expose people or structures to wildland fires. Furthermore, the addition of a fire station in this
area would provide additional response to the community in the event of a fire. Impacts would be
less than significant.
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
(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 off-
site;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flood on- or off-site;
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
iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
(d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release
of pollutants due to project inundation?
(e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
45
4.10.1 Impact Analysis
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. Impacts related to water quality would be categorized under short-term
construction related impacts and long-term operational impacts. Construction related activities have
the potential to degrade surface and groundwater quality by exposing soils to surface runoff from
debris and other materials, including runoff from various construction equipment. Pollutants of
concern during typical construction activities include sediments, dry and wet solid wastes, petroleum
products, solvents, cleaning agents and other similar chemicals. During ground disturbing activities,
excavated soil would be exposed thereby creating a potential for soil erosion. During a storm event
or water spill, these pollutants and soils could be spilled, leaked, or transported as runoff into
drainages or downstream waters, and potentially into receiving waters.
The Proposed Project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land to construct a fire station and associated
training center. Per the City’s Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) Handbook, new development
creating over 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surfaces will require the preparation of a
Project WQMP, a Stormwater Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), Erosion Control and Grading
Plan, and implement construction and post-construction best management practices to ensure that
the Project does not violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Stormwater
runoff would be contained for the WQMP treatment event and infiltrated within a new underground
infiltration system provided in the grading/drainage and storm drain plans. Runoff in excess of the
WQMP event would overflow and bubble out onto a riprap area in the southwest corner of the Project
site and continue offsite.
Furthermore, construction of the Project site would implement surface drainage designs noted in the
Geotechnical Investigation Report which provides setback requirements for drainage area and
location of pad drainages and drainpipes to ensure that runoff would be contained to the site.
Therefore, mandatory compliance with the WQMP BMPs would result in less than significant impacts
by complying with the discharge requirements during short-term construction and long-term
operational activities.
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 Fontana Water Company (FWC) provides water services such as
producing, treating, storing, and delivering drinking water to the City of Fontana (FWC 2018).
According to the Urban Water Management Plan prepared for FWC and the San Gabriel Valley Water
Company, the FWC’s water supplies include sources from local surface waters, groundwater basins,
Inland Empire Utilities Agency and San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District and from recycled
water (FWC 2020). The City of Fontana is also serviced by the Chino Basin Water Conservation District
which protects and preserves the Chino Groundwater Basin which is within the City’s boundary (FWC
2018).
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
46
Site testing from the Geotechnical Exploration Report show that no groundwater was encountered
during the site exploration. Groundwater at the site have been historically greater than approximately
289 feet deep beneath the site.
During construction, the Proposed Project would not require excavation to a depth that would
encounter groundwater and thereby affect the rate of recharge or involve the extraction of
groundwater. The Proposed Project’s construction-related activities are not expected to have a
significant impact on groundwater supplies, because these activities would be short term and will not
require intensive activities of water use outside of site watering for erosion control or for site cleaning.
Furthermore, as discussed above, the Project would comply with the requirements of the City’s
WQMP and NPDES permits and would implement BMPs and other water quality features on the
Project site.
During Project operations, the facilities will tie in to existing water services at the Project site. The
Proposed Project will include the installation of a 30,000-gallon water tank with small pump to use
and recirculate water for training exercises. The Proposed Project will utilize water for training, onsite
residence, office and maintenance purposes. The water will be reused on site and will not require
dewatering or require groundwater extraction. While the Proposed Project will increase the amount
of impervious surfaces at the Project site, its construction and operations do not involve groundwater
extraction, nor would it affect any groundwater management plans. The Project site is currently
vacant and undeveloped and has not been used as a groundwater extraction site. Impacts would be
less than significant.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces,
in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources or polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. Drainage patterns are typically formed by the streams, rivers, lakes, or
other bodies of water. Over time, the system is formed via a network of channels and tributaries that
are determined the type of geologic features of a particular landscape. The Project site has no natural
drainage courses, rivers, or streams. The construction activities have potential to degrade water
quality through exposure of surface runoff to exposed soils, dust, and other site debris. However, as
discussed, the Project will implement an Erosion Control and Grading Plan, SWPPP and WQMP in
compliance with the MS4 permit and City’s guidelines to address site erosion and runoff during
construction and operations and implement stormwater management as noted in the City’s Municipal
Code Section 28-111. Additionally, as discussed in the previous section, stormwater runoff would be
contained for the WQMP treatment event and infiltrated within a new underground infiltration
system provided in the grading/drainage and storm drain plans. Runoff in excess of the WQMP event
would overflow and bubble out onto a riprap area in the southwest corner of the Project site and
continue office. Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
47
d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
No Impact. Tsunamis are high sea waves typically caused by earthquakes and underwater landslides.
Seiche occurs in bodies of water (semi or full-enclosed) and are caused by strong winds or rapid
changes in the atmosphere that pushes water from one end to another and typically acts as a standing
wave/oscillating body of water. Floods are an overflow of large bodies of water beyond its normal
capacity.
The Project site is not in coastal area and is not located nearby any rivers, streams, or other large body
of water. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Project site is not
located within a special flood hazard area. According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the Project is
located in Zone X, which is an area determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance flood plain
(FEMA 2008, 2022). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not release pollutants due to inundation
from a flood. No impact would occur.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The RWQCB has implemented a water quality control
plan for the Santa Ana River Basin (Basin Plan) that contains the policies for managing the water
quality of the region. The Basin Plan includes water quality standards and objectives, management,
improvement initiatives, policies and practices for quality standards and implementation plans
(RWQCB 2019). To comply with the Basin Plan, the Project shall develop and implement an Erosion
Control and Grading Plan, SWPPP and WQMP to manage runoff from the construction of the Proposed
Project. In addition, the Proposed Project shall comply with the MS4 Permit to manage and minimize
pollutant discharges into the stormwater.
The Proposed Project will not result in the obstruction or conflict with a groundwater management
plan as there are no proposed activities that require groundwater extraction. While the Proposed
Project would introduce additional impervious surfaces to the Project site, it would not interfere with
any recharge plans as the stormwater would be directed into the storm drains. Therefore, impacts to
any water quality or groundwater management plan would be less than significant.
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
11. LAND USE/PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Physically divide an established community?
(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?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
48
4.11.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The Proposed Project includes construction of the Fontana Fire Protection District Station
80, Fire Training Facilities, and storage facility. The site is owned by the City of Fontana and in an
underdeveloped portion of the City. The nearest developed portion of the area surrounding the
Project includes the I-15 and SR-210, with the nearest residences being located 0.5 mile east of the
Project site. No impact would occur.
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 Proposed Project, as noted above, is located in an area within minimal development
surrounding the Project. As discussed in 4.2, the area is part of the Westgate Specific Plan and zoned
for Mixed Use. The MU-1 designation provides for a broad range of business, commercial retail,
medical, educational, entertainment, commercial services, and other complementary uses including
the Proposed Project (City 2017a). No impact would occur because the Proposed Project is consistent
with the existing land uses and would not require any changes to the land use or zoning of the area.
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(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?
4.12.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value
to the region and the residents of the state?
Less than Significant. The Proposed Project is located on land within a Mineral Resource
Zone (MRZ) 2, within a significant mineral resource zone in the California Department of
Conservation’s Mineral Land Classification Map (DOC 1986). MRZ-2 zones are areas where adequate
information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high
likelihood for their presence exists. This zone shall be applied to known mineral deposits or areas
where well-developed lines of reasoning, based upon economic geologic principles and adequate
data, demonstrate that the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral deposits is high. However,
the Project site is not designated as a mining area, nor was the Project site previously used for mining
operations. While the site may be shown to have mineral resources available, the existing zoning and
land uses do not permit mining uses. Furthermore, there are no active mines are in the City of Fontana
(DOC 2022b). A less than significant impact would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
49
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
No Impact. The City of Fontana General Plan does not identify any nearby significant mineral resource
deposits. Further, as noted above, the City does not have any active mines within the City. No impact
would occur.
4.13 NOISE
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
(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?
4.13.1 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. A Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix E) was prepared by Vista
Environmental to determine the noise impacts associated with the Proposed Project. The noise
impacts from construction of the Proposed Project have been analyzed through use of the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA)’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM). The FHWA compiled
noise measurement data regarding the noise generating characteristics of several different types of
construction equipment used during the Central Artery/Tunnel project in Boston.
Construction noise impacts to the nearby sensitive receptors have been calculated according to the
equipment noise levels and usage factors listed in the Noise Impact Analysis and through use of the
RCNM. For each phase of construction, all construction equipment was analyzed based on being
placed in the middle of the Project site, which is based on the analysis methodology detailed in Federal
Transit Authority (FTA) Manual for a General Assessment. However, in order to provide a conservative
analysis, all equipment was analyzed, instead of just the two nosiest pieces of equipment as detailed
in the FTA Manual. The RCNM model printouts are provided in Appendix E.
Construction Related Noise
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
50
Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment
used on the site. Operation of construction equipment causes ground vibrations that spread through
the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Buildings in the vicinity of the construction site
respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible effects at the low levels
to slight damage at the highest levels.
The construction activities for the Proposed Project are anticipated to include site preparation and
grading of approximately 3.68 acres, building construction of the proposed training center and fire
station, paving of onsite driveways, paved training area, and parking lots, and application of
architectural coatings.
Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would be a function
of the noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land
uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. The nearest sensitive receptors to the
project site are homes located as near as 2,200 feet to the east of the project site and as near as 2,500
feet to the south of the Project site.
The City’s the Municipal Code does not limit construction noise 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, and
construction of the Project will be limited to those hours. Nonetheless, in order to determine if the
proposed construction activities would create a significant substantial temporary noise increase, the
FTA construction noise criteria thresholds have been utilized. Under such thresholds, a significant
construction noise impact would occur if construction noise exceeds 80 dBA at any of the nearby
homes.
Table 6. Construction Noise Levels at the Nearby Sensitive Receptors
Construction Phase
Construction Noise Level (dBA Leq) at:
Nearest Homes to East1 Nearest Homes to South2
Site Preparation 54 52
Grading 53 52
Building Construction 54 53
Paving 52 51
Painting 41 40
FTA Construction Noise Threshold3 80 80
Exceed Thresholds? No No
Notes:
1 The nearest homes to the east are located as near as 2,200 feet from the project site.
2 The nearest homes to the south are located as near as 2,500 feet from the project site.
3 The FTA Construction noise thresholds are detailed above in Error! Reference source not found..
Source: RCNM, Federal Highway Administration, 2006
The Table 6 shows that greatest construction noise impacts would be as high as 54 dBA Leq during
the site preparation and building construction phases at the nearest homes, located east of the
project site. All calculated construction noise levels shown are within the FTA daytime construction
noise standard of 80 dBA averaged over eight hours. Therefore, with adherence to the limitation of
allowable construction times provided in Section 18-63(b)(7) of the Municipal Code, construction-
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
51
related noise levels would not exceed any standards established in the General Plan or Noise
Ordinance, nor would construction activities create a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise
levels. Impacts would be less than significant.
Operational-Related Noise
Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires. The level of
traffic noise depends on three primary factors (1) the volume of traffic, (2) the speed of traffic, and
(3) the number of trucks in the flow of traffic. Operational noise levels are provided in Table 7.
Operational Noise Levels at the Nearby Homes to South and West of Project Site that includes fire
station activities, rooftop equipment, parking lot and generator uses.
Table 7. Operational Noise Levels at the Nearby Homes to South and West of Project Site
Noise Source
Homes East of Project Site Homes South of Project Site
Distance - Source to
Property Line (feet)
Noise Level1
(dBA Leq)
Distance - Source to
Property Line (feet)
Noise Level1
(dBA Leq)
Fire Station Activities
(including siren use)2 2,200 18 2,500 17
Rooftop Equipment3 2,200 20 2,500 19
Parking Lot4 2,200 10 2,500 9
Backup Generator5 2,200 42 2,500 41
Combined Noise Levels 42 41
City Noise Standard6 (day/night) 70/65 70/65
Exceed City Noise Standard? No/No No/No
Notes:
1 The noise levels were calculated through use of standard geometric spreading of noise from a point source with a drop-off rate of 6.0 dB for
each doubling of the distance between the source and receiver.
2 Fire Station Activities is based on a reference noise measurement of 55.7 dBA at 30 feet.
3 Rooftop equipment is based on a reference noise measurement of 66.6 dBA at 10 feet.
4 Parking lot is based on a reference noise measurement of 63.1 dBA at 5 feet.
5 Backup Generator is based on a reference noise measurement of 82 dBA at 23 feet.
6 City Noise Standard obtained from Section 30-543(d) of the City’s Municipal Code
The Proposed Project does not propose any uses that would require a substantial number of truck
trips and the Proposed Project would not alter the speed limit on any existing roadway so the
Proposed Project’s potential offsite noise impacts have been focused on the noise impacts associated
with the change of volume of traffic that would occur with development of the Proposed Project.
The General Plan Noise Element Goal 8 and associated policies, requires the protection of noise
sensitive land uses through diligent planning that includes a prohibition of new sensitive land uses in
incompatible areas and noise-tolerant uses shall be located in noise-producing areas such as near
transportation corridors. However, neither the General Plan nor the CEQA Guidelines define what
constitutes a “substantial permanent increase to ambient noise levels.” As such, this impact analysis
has utilized guidance from the FTA for a moderate impact that has been detailed in the Noise Impact
Analysis. Project contribution to the noise environment can range between 0 and 7 dB, which is
dependent on the existing noise levels.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
52
The Transportation Assessment for the City of Fontana’s Fire Station No. 80 and Training Center
(Appendix F) found that the Training Center would generate 18 average daily trips (ADT) per day and
the fire station would also generate 18 ADT per day. In addition to the automobile daily trips, there
would also be an average of six times per day when emergency vehicles would leave the fire station,
which would generate 12 trips per day (leaving and returning to fire station). As such, the entire
Project would generate a total of 48 ADT. Most of these trips would travel north on Cherry Avenue to
Interstate 210 and not pass any sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project site.
The Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental Impact Report, June 8,
2018, shows that for the year 2017, Cherry Avenue in the vicinity of the Project site had an average
of 20,800 daily vehicle trips. In order for Project-generated vehicular traffic to increase the noise level
of Cherry Avenue in the vicinity of the Project site, by 3 dB, the roadway traffic would have to double,
and for the roadway noise levels to increase by 1.5 dB, the roadway traffic would have to increase by
50 percent. Since the Proposed Project would only result in a maximum of a 0.2 percent increase in
traffic volumes on Cherry Avenue, the Project-related roadway noise increase is anticipated to be
negligible. Impacts would be less than significant.
Onsite Noise Sources
The operation of the proposed fire station and training center may create an increase in noise levels
created onsite from fire station activities, rooftop mechanical equipment, backup generator, and
parking lot activities. Section 30-543(d) of the City’s Municipal Code limits the noise created onsite at
the property lines of the nearby residential properties to 70 dBA between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
and 65 dBA between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. In order to determine the noise impacts from the
operation of fire station activities, including noise related to siren use at the fire station, rooftop
mechanical equipment, the backup generator, and parking lot activities, reference noise
measurements were taken of each noise source.
The results of the operational noise show that the Proposed Project’s worst-case operational noise
from the simultaneous operation of all noise sources on the Project site would create a noise level of
42 dBA at the homes to the east and 41 dBA at the homes to the south of the Project site. The worst-
case operational noise level of 64 dBA at the nearby homes would be within both the City’s daytime
noise standard of 70 dBA and nighttime noise standard of 65 dBA. Therefore, operational onsite noise
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
Less than Significant Impact.
Construction-Related Vibration Impacts
The construction activities for the Proposed Project are anticipated to include site preparation and
grading of approximately 3.68 acres, building construction of the proposed training center and fire
station; paving of onsite driveways, paved training area, and parking lots; and application of
architectural coatings. Vibration impacts from construction activities associated with the Proposed
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
53
Project would typically be created from the operation of heavy off-road equipment. The nearest
sensitive receptors to the Project site are homes located as near as 2,200 feet to the east of the Project
site.
Section 30-543(c) of the City’s Municipal Code restricts the creation of vibration which can be felt
beyond the property line. However, since neither the Municipal Code nor the General Plan provide a
quantifiable vibration threshold level, Caltrans guidance has been utilized, which defines the
threshold of perception from transient sources at 0.25 inch per second peak particle velocity (PPV).
The primary source of vibration during construction would be from the operation of a bulldozer. A
large bulldozer would create a vibration level of 0.089 inch per second PPV at 25 feet. Based on typical
propagation rates, the vibration level at the nearest homes (2,200 feet away) would be 0.001 inch per
second PPV. The vibration level at the nearest homes would be well below the 0.25 inch per second
PPV threshold detailed above. Impacts would be less than significant.
Operations-Related Vibration Impacts
The Proposed Project would consist of the development of a fire station and training center. The
Proposed Project would result in the operation of fire trucks on the Project site, which are a known
source of vibration. The nearest sensitive receptors to the project site are homes located as near as
2,200 feet to the east of the Project site.
Caltrans has done extensive research on vibration level created along freeways and State Routes and
their vibration measurements of roads have never exceeded 0.08 inches per second PPV at 15 feet
from the center of the nearest lane, with the worst combinations of heavy trucks. Based on typical
propagation rates, the vibration level at the nearest homes would by 0.0003 inch per second PPV.
Therefore, vibration created from operation of the Proposed Project would be well below the 0.25
inch per second threshold detailed above. Impacts would be less than significant.
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 us airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The Proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to
excessive noise levels from aircraft. The nearest airport is Ontario International Airport, which is
located approximately seven miles southwest of the Project site. The Project site is located outside of
the 60 dBA Community Noise Equivalence Levels (CNEL) noise contours of Ontario International
Airport. No impacts would occur from aircraft noise.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
54
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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)?
(b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
4.14.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The Proposed Project does not provide permanent housing or include operations that
could result in unplanned growth such as extension or roadways or expansion of existing
infrastructure. Although the fire station would include dormitory facilities, these are temporary
facilities to account for the nature of fire-fighting operations and the need to provide living facilities.
The Proposed Project would not induce population growth as the Project would be a new facility that
would pull from the local working population. No impacts would occur.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. There are no residences
at the Project site or surrounding the Project site. No impact would occur.
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
15. PUBLIC SERVICES.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
55
i) Fire Protection?
ii) Police Protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
4.15.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection?
No Impact. The Proposed Project includes construction of a new fire station, training facility, and
storage shed. Implementation of the Project would involve an expansion of service; however, this
would support the population growth already planned for by the City of Fontana. The new facility will
be an expansion of the San Bernardino Fire Department, Fontana Fire Protection District and will be
located approximately 2 miles north of Fontana Station 73, and 2 miles west of Station 78. The
Proposed Project would not increase the demand for fire protection or require new facilities; it is
projected to maintain the service ratio goals set forth by the department. No impacts are expected.
b) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for police protection?
No Impact. The Proposed Project accounts for a new fire station, training facility, and storage shed,
and would maintain service standards. The Proposed Project site is located approximately 3.8 miles
northwest of the City of Fontana Police Department (Google 2022). The Proposed Project would not
induce growth requiring the extension of existing services or creation of new services; there would
not be any increase in the demand for police protection or requirement of new facilities. The area is
currently being serviced by the Fontana Police Department and would continue to receive the same
services as nearby businesses. No impacts would occur.
c) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools?
No Impact. As described above in 4.15.1 (i and ii), the Proposed Project includes construction of a new
fire station, training facility and storage facility for the Fontana Fire Protection District and does not
involve the expansion of services however this would support the planned population growth already
planned for by the City of Fontana. The Project site is approximately 1.3 miles northeast of the
Heritage Intermediate School. The Proposed Project would not induce growth requiring the extension
of existing educational services or creation of new services. The Proposed Project would not increase
the demand for schools in the City. No impacts would occur.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
56
d) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks?
No Impact. The Proposed Project includes the construction of new facilities for the Fire Department
but would not induce growth requiring the extension of existing or creation of new park services. The
Proposed Project would not increase the demand for parks. No impacts are expected.
e) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities?
No Impact. The Proposed Project would not induce growth requiring the extension of existing or
creation of new services. While the Fire Department would have a new fire station and training facility,
it would not induce expansion or addition of new service areas. The Proposed Project would not
increase the demand for other public facilities. No impacts would occur.
4.16 RECREATION
16. RECREATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(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?
4.16.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include features that would contribute to the increased
use of existing neighborhood, regional parks or other recreational facilities or would cause substantial
deterioration of the facility. The Proposed Project would not induce population growth as it would
construct a new fire station to provide additional public services to the existing neighborhood. No
impacts are expected.
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?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
57
No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include recreational facilities or require the construction
or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment. The Proposed Project does not involve the addition of a substantial number of new jobs
that may result in increased population and increased demands on recreational resources. No impacts
are anticipated.
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
17. TRANSPORTATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
(b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
(c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
4.17.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. The City prepared a General Plan Update and Community Mobility and
Circulation Element (City 2018a) outlining the goals and policies within the City, with a focus on
connectivity between the neighborhoods and City destinations. The goals include expanding active
transportation choices, particularly for pedestrian and bicycle mobility within the City.
According to the General Plan’s Existing Transportation Network map, there are several bike networks
located throughout the City ranging from Class I to Class III facilities. Within the City, Class I consists
of 9 miles of shared-use pathways, Class II at 37 miles, and Class III with 18 miles of bike
routes/neighborhood greenways.
Cherry Avenue and Highland Avenue, which that border the Project site, are not included in the bike
networks and therefore, the Proposed Project would not interfere with the existing bikeways
network. The Project site is currently unimproved with no sidewalks and does not have any transit
stops. There would be no impact to existing transit systems (City 2018a).
A Transportation Assessment was prepared for the Project by David Evans and Associates, Inc.
(Appendix F). The assessment evaluated if the Project would require the preparation of a traffic
impact study to determine if the Project would cause a deficiency in the City’s level of service policies,
affect site access and safety, and assesses if the Project may be exempted from a Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) analysis. The assessment follows the procedures and thresholds in the City’s Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for VMT and Level of Service Assessments (hereby referred to as TIA).
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
58
A trip generation estimated was prepared based on the proposed operations of the site. Combined,
the training center and fire station would generate about 16 trips in the morning peak hours and 6
trips in the afternoon peak hours, or approximately 36 total trips per day. The City’s TIA guidelines
provided the following guidance regarding preparation of a traffic impact analysis:
• A Traffic Impact Analysis must be prepared when a proposed change in land use, development
project, or at local discretion, a group of projects are forecast to equal or exceed the CMP
threshold of 250 two-way peak hour trips generated, based on trip generation rates published for
the applicable use or uses in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual or
other approved data source.
• Any project meeting the CMP threshold of 250 two-way peak hour trips that expects to add at
least 50 two-way peak hour trips to a State highway facility is required to prepare a TIA report for
City and Caltrans’ review.
• If a project is forecast to generate between 100 and 249 two-way peak hour trips, a traffic impact
analysis will be required, but the extent of the analysis will be lesser.
• If a project generates between 50 and 100 two-way peak hour trips, a focused traffic analysis will
be required.
• If a project generates less than 50 peak hour trips, a traffic analysis shall not be required, and a
trip generation memo will be considered sufficient unless the City has specific concerns related
to project access and interaction with adjacent intersections.
Given the combined traffic counts is less than 50 two-way peak hour trips on a typical weekday, a
traffic impact analysis is not required.
The TIA includes site access and safety analysis guidelines specific for project access driveways related
to safety. The safety analysis of the Project’s driveways needs to reflect any future roadway and traffic
control improvements that would affect the outcome of the analysis.
The City received a grant from the US Department of Transportation for infrastructure improvements
and the City received an award in 2022 for the “Building a Better-Connected Inland Empire – A
Complete Streets Solution” project. The project included street, bike, sidewalk, and improvements for
Cherry Avenue and Victoria Street. The projects on Cherry Avenue include improving the existing rural
area without sidewalks, curbs, or gutters to a six-lane major highway with raised landscaped median,
sidewalks and curb and gutter. The grant also included installing traffic signals at South Highland
Avenue. Based on the construction schedule of the Proposed Project, and the scheduled
improvements listed in the grant, while there may be an overlap of the proposed work, it would not
interfere with the proposed improvements, and the completed Cherry Avenue improvements will
improve site access safety conditions.
The Proposed Project would not cause a conflict with the City’s program, plans or policies related to
the circulation of the area, including bicycle access and pedestrian facilities. The Proposed Project
involves the construction of a new fire station and fire training facility within an undeveloped parcel.
The operation of a fire station would be a consistent use of the area and therefore, would not conflict
with the permitted uses onsite or the existing and proposed circulation of the area. Impacts would be
less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
59
b) Would the project Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less than Significant Impact. The City’s VMT guidelines identify four types of project screening that
can be applied to screen out projects from requiring a project-level VMT assessment. The screening
criteria is consistent with other agency’s screening criteria in San Bernardino County. The screening
criteria, which if met, are presumed to have a less than significant impact. The screening criteria is
listed below and discussed in Appendix F.
1. Projects located in a Transit Priority Area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact
absent substantial evidence to the contrary.
2. Projects located within a Low-VMT Generating Area. Projects located within these areas may be
presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Projects
screened from requiring a VMT analysis need to be shown to generate VMT per resident, per worker,
or per service population that is like the existing land uses in the low VMT area. The San Bernardino
County Transportation Authority provides a web-based tool that can be used to identify whether
individual parcels are located within a low-VMT generating area.
3. The Low Project Type screening criterion identifies local serving retail projects (having less than
50,000 square feet) that may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial
evidence to the contrary. Local serving retail generally improves the convenience of shopping close
to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle miles of travel.
Non-retail land uses can also be local serving uses and be presumed to have a less than significant
impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. This includes local serving community institutions
such as public libraries, fire stations and other local government facilities.
4. Projects generating net daily trips of less than 500 vehicular trips / day. Projects that generate fewer
than 500 average daily trips (ADT) would not cause a substantial increase in the total citywide or
regional VMT. The Traffic analysis determined the project would generate less than 500 trips per day.
In summary, the Proposed Project is a fire station to be located within a low VMT Generating Area
which is a necessary local serving community institution, and would generate fewer than 500 average
daily trips. Thus, the project does not require further VMT analysis. The Proposed Project would be
consistent with the CEQA guidelines for traffic analysis resulting 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 Transportation Assessment included analysis on site access and
safety which cover deceleration or turning lanes, intersection sight distance, and corner clearances.
At side-street stop-controlled intersections and driveways a substantially clear line of sight should be
maintained between the driver of a vehicle, bicyclist or pedestrian stopped on the minor
road/driveway and the driver of an approaching vehicle on the major road that has no stop. Gaps in
both directions of the flow of traffic on the major street need to provide adequate time for the
stopped vehicle on the minor road to either cross all lanes of through traffic, cross the near lanes and
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
60
turn left, or turn right, without requiring through traffic to radically alter their speed. The visibility
required for these maneuvers form a “sight triangle.” There should be no sight obstructions within an
intersection’s sight triangles (Appendix F).
The Transportation Assessment illustrates the extent of the required minimum clear sight distance
triangles at each of the Project’s driveway with Cherry Avenue under the current configuration and
width and under future configuration and width. Phase 1’s corner sight distances of 700 and 830 feet
(based on 45 mph) are theoretically achievable due to Cherry Avenue’s flat horizontal and vertical
alignment and lack of obstructions. Practically, however, the 830-foot clear sight distance triangle
required for turning left may occasionally be challenging for drivers because part of the triangle passes
through the shadow created by the I-210 overcrossing and the multi-lane configuration may obscure
vehicles in the outside lane. However, as previously discussed, the completed Cherry Avenue
improvements would dramatically improve site access safety conditions.
Driveways should be located sufficiently distant from the functional area of an adjacent intersection
so that right turns exiting a Project driveway do not interfere with the right turn queuing at the
intersection and provide enough maneuvering distance so the egressing vehicles can safely enter the
adjacent intersection’s left-turn lanes. A minimum corner clearance would not be applicable to the
Project’s phase driveways because the driveways are located “downstream” of the functional area (or
departure area) of the Cherry Avenue / South Highland Avenue intersection. In addition the driveways
would not interfere with queues that form, or lane change maneuvering at the approaches to
intersections. The estimated peak hour traffic volumes the Project do not exceed 50 vehicles for all
movements combined, and do not trigger the threshold for considering right turn deceleration lanes.
Therefore, because improvements would improve site access safety and would not trigger for
deceleration lane, and because there would not be any site obstructions, impacts would be less than
significant.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. As previously discussed, SR-210 and Cherry Avenue are designated as a
Major Highway under the Community Mobility and Circulation Element. According to the General Plan
Update EIR, numerous alternative routes, secondary points of access, cul-de-sac turnarounds, and
other features that improve traffic circulation are planned into new development and redevelopment
during the City's internal review process of the Project applications and site plans by City staff and
engineers.
The Project site would be accessible to emergency responders during construction and operation
activities. Construction is not anticipated to require any full road closures. As such, adequate
emergency access to the Project site and vicinity would be maintained during construction activities.
The Project would provide additional emergency services to the existing neighborhood. As discussed
in the Transportation Impact Assessment, street improvements unrelated to the Proposed Project
would improve the existing conditions. The proposed driveways would be designed and constructed
to City and County standards and comply with the width, clearance, and turning-radius requirements.
Driveway designs and compliance with all applicable local requirements related to emergency vehicle
access and circulation would ensure the Project would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
61
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
18.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register
of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k), or
(b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
4.18.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that
is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that
is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance
of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
The City transmitted letters of notification to the California Native American tribes traditionally and
culturally affiliated with the Project area on March 2, 2023. The City transmitted letters of notification
to the following tribes:
Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation, Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, San Gabriel Band of
Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians, and Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation.
Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation has elected to be a consulting party under CEQA and requests
specific mitigation measures to be included as part of the Project/permit/plan conditions.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
62
Implementation of these mitigation measures would result in less than significant impact to tribal
cultural resources that may be uncovered within the Project area.
MM TCR-1 The Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation Cultural Resources Department (YSMN) shall be
contacted, as detailed in CUL-1, of any pre-contact and/or historic-era cultural resources
discovered during project implementation, and be provided information regarding the
nature of the find, so as to provide Tribal input with regards to significance and
treatment. Should the find be deemed significant, as defined by CEQA (as amended,
2015), a cultural resources Monitoring and Treatment Plan shall be created by the
archaeologist, in coordination with YSMN, and all subsequent finds shall be subject to
this Plan. This Plan shall allow for a monitor to be present that represents YSMN for the
remainder of the project, should YSMN elect to place a monitor on-site.
MM TCR-2 Any and all archaeological/cultural documents created as a part of the project (isolate
records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be supplied to the
applicant and Lead Agency for dissemination to YSMN. The Lead Agency and/or
applicant shall, in good faith, consult with YSMN throughout the life of the project.
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
19. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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 which could cause significant
environmental effects?
(b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
(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?
(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?
(e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid wastes?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
63
4.19.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or expansion of which could cause significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. There are residential developments located towards the south, east and
north east of the Project site along Walnut Street and San Sevaine Road. All other undeveloped parcels
surrounding the Project site consists of a variety of mixed use and residential land uses.
The following utilities are available to the Proposed Project and future developments to the area:
• Water: Fontana Water Company
• Sewer: City of Fontana/Inland Empire Utility Agency (IEUA)
• Stormwater: City of Fontana
• Electricity: Southern California Edison
• Natural Gas: Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas)
• Telephone/Internet: Several service providers in the area
Electric power, natural gas, and telecommunication facilities will be available to the Project due to its
proximity to existing and future development in the area. The Proposed Project would not require
expansion of new utilities. Impacts to electricity, natural gas and telecommunication would be less
than significant.
Construction activities will result in the use of water for dust control during ground disturbing
activities. Such activities would be temporary and limited and therefore, not consume large amounts
of water. Operations of the Proposed Project will require water use for general onsite maintenance,
dormitory facilities, landscaping, and training purposes. The Proposed Project will tie in to existing
water lines available to the site by FWC. the nearest water main is approximately 3,100 feet east on
South Highland Avenue and San Sevaine Road. Therefore, impacts to water would be less than
significant.
Wastewater treatment is provided by IEUA in partnership with the City of Fontana. There are four
regional wastewater treatment facilities operated by IEUA with a treatment capacity of approximately
86 million gallons per day (MGD). RP-4 is responsible for treating local wastewater generated by the
City of Fontana and treats and average flow of 10 MGD and expanded to 14 MGD in 2009. The
Proposed Project will operate a fire station and training facility. It is estimated to generate
approximately 810 gallons of wastewater per day and utilize 1,080 gallons per day. However, the
Project site will install a 30,000-gallon water tank for training purposes which will include a pump to
recirculate and reuse for training purposes. Therefore, impacts to wastewater would be less than
significant.
The Proposed Project will implement an Erosion Control and Grading Plan and WQMP to manage
construction activities which would maintain the hydrology of the Project site. During operations, the
Project would result in the increase of impermeable surfaces that would result in an increase in
stormwater runoff. The Project would be required to adhere to the MS4 Permit requirements which
state, that the project must infiltrate, harvest and use, evapotranspire, or bio-treat the runoff from a
two year, 24 hour storm event. In compliance with the MS4 Permit, the Project would include a
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
64
retention basin with an underground infiltration system to capture and infiltrate stormwater runoff
from a 24 hour storm event. Therefore, impacts to stormwater would be less than significant.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during normal dry and multiple dry years?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would require temporary water use for dust
control and site maintenance. During Project operations, the Proposed Project will require water use
for general onsite maintenance, dormitory facilities, landscaping, and training purposes.
The FWC would provide water to the Project site. The FWC provides water services such as producing,
treating, storing, and delivering drinking water to the City of Fontana. The Proposed Project would be
categorized as an institutional/governmental use type per the categories in the Urban Water
Management Plan. The proposed demands for institutional/governmental uses are estimated to be
1,737 acre-feet in 2025 and 1,867 acre-feet in 2040. Deficits between the water supplies and demand
after utilization of previous supplies will be met using the Chino Basin groundwater. The Chino Basin
is expected to provide sufficient water supplies to serve the balance of future projected demands in
normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year scenarios. The Proposed Project will be adequately served
by FWC. Furthermore, the water used onsite for training purposes will be reused by storing and pump
into the underground water tank. Impacts would be less than significant.
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. Wastewater from the Proposed Project would be conveyed by the City’s
collection system and treated by IEUA which will be processed into recycled water at the RP-4 facility
which has an expanded capacity of 14 MGD. The Proposed Project is estimated to generate 1080
gallons per day which would be from general onsite uses, maintenance, and dormitory uses. Water
use for fire fighter training would be sourced from the 30,000-gallon water tank with pump installed
for water reuse. The generated wastewater amounts to 95 percent of the RP-4’s capacity. This would
be a nominal increase of wastewater treated daily. Therefore, the City and IEUA would have capacity
to serve the Proposed Project. Impacts would be less than significant.
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?
Less than Significant Impact. The City is mandated by the State of California to implement programs
to reduce the amount of waste sent to landfills. To comply with the State mandate, the City requires
contractors or homeowners to provide a Construction Waste Management plan (CWMP). The plan
shall outline how materials will be diverted from the landfill. The City contracts with Burrtec Waste
Industries to provide trash and recycling services in the City with solid waste being disposed at the
Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill with a remaining capacity of 61,219,377 cubic yards (CalRecycle 2022a).
The Proposed Project would generate construction and operational wastes. Construction wastes
could include insulation materials, metals, wood, cement, paints and varnishes, and other similar
materials. The Proposed Project would apply and prepare a CWMP to document compliance with the
CalGreen Code Section 4.408 and 5.408 for waste reduction.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
65
Wastes generated during operations include typical commercial refuse such as paper products, and
potentially hazardous chemicals such as cleaning materials. According to CalRecycle, government
facilities generate approximately 0.59 tons (approximately 1,180 pounds) of waste per employee per
year (CalRecycle 2022b). At an estimated 9 employees onsite per day, this would equate to
approximately 1,939 tons per year. The Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill currently accepts 7,500 tons per
day. The estimated wastes generated per day for 9 employees is approximately 5.31 tons, which is
0.09% of the daily maximum and therefore, would not generate wastes in excess of the existing
capacities. In addition, the Proposed Project would implement waste reduction practices, including
recycling of waste products to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act to
implement programs to divert solid wastes. Because the Proposed Project is not expected to generate
wastes beyond the existing facility capacities and will implement waste reduction practices, impacts
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 Proposed Project would generate construction and operation-
related wastes. The Proposed Project will comply with federal, State, and local regulations related to
solid waste including the preparation of a CWMP to outline how recoverable materials will be
diverted. The final CWMP shall be completed after the completion of the Project and be submitted to
the Building and Safety Department prior to final inspection. The Proposed Project will also comply
with the solid waste diversion, reduction, and recycling goals of the City such as Goal 8 of the
Stewardship and Implementation of the General Plan:
Goal 8: All residences, businesses, and institutions have a dependable, environmentally safe means
to dispose of solid waste.
• Continue to maximize landfill capacity by supporting recycling innovations, such as organic
waste recycling for compost.
o Continue recycling and green programs.
o Continue to work with San Bernardino County to minimize impacts from the landfill.
With compliance with City requirements and State mandates, impacts would be less than significant.
4.20 WILDFIRE
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
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
(b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
66
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
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(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?
(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?
4.20.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The Proposed Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone of
State or Local responsibility (CAL FIRE 2011). There are no actions that would interfere with an
evacuation or emergency plan. The Project helps meet the service goals of the San Bernardino Fire
Protection District. No impact would occur.
b) Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
No Impact. The Proposed Project site is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone of
State or Local responsibility (CAL FIRE 2011). Additionally, the Project site is located in a low-lying and
underdeveloped area and not within or adjacent to any open spaces which are identified as a very
high fire hazard severity zone. The lack of wildland-urban interface in or near the Proposed Project
site reduce any risk associated with exacerbation of wildfire risks. Additionally, the Project supports
wildland fire suppression. No impact would occur.
c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or
that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. As noted in Response 4.20.1(a), the Proposed Project site is not in an area at risk of
wildfire. The Proposed Project would not require infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risk. No
impact would occur.
d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability or drainage changes?
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
67
No Impact. The Proposed Project site is not in an area prone to wildfire or in close proximity to any
waterbodies. Additionally, the topography of the area is relatively flat and does not pose a risk of
downstream flooding. No impact would occur.
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
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?
(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?)
(c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
4.21.1 Impact Analysis
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?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the literature review and
biological reconnaissance survey, it was identified that the Project site does not contain any riparian
or other sensitive habitat or communities. The Project site is underdeveloped, and it was not found
that any special status species were found onsite. Although the Project site is found to not have any
sensitive communities or habitats that could house special status species, the Proposed Project could
result impacts to nesting birds if construction activities were to be scheduled during the nesting
season. Therefore, implementing mitigation measure BIO-1 would result in less than significant to
nesting birds.
Based on the results of the record search and survey of the Project site, there were no records showing
that the Proposed Project contains evidence of paleontological resources, sacred lands, new, or
previously recoded cultural resources. Given that the Project site is undeveloped, here remains
potential that the current Project’s ground disturbing activity could impact intact native soil
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
68
formations or intact geologic units known to be fossil bearing in the region. Therefore, the Project
would implement mitigation measures CUL-1, through CUL-7, PAL-1, PAL-2 and TCR-1 and TCR-2 to
result in less than significant impacts.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects?)
Less than Significant Impact. According to the adopted Capital Improvement Program Seven-Year
Budget, the following future projects have been listed which would occur within the vicinity of the
Project site.
Street Improvement – Future Project List
• FUTURE PROJECT F3600012 36EN/360ENG 4 - CHERRY: S HIGHLAND TO I-15 / Cherry Avenue
from S. Highland Avenue to I-15 Freeway
• FUTURE PROJECT F3600032 36EN/360ENG 4 - SO HIGHLAND: CHERRY-CITRUS / So. Highland
Avenue from Cherry Avenue to Citrus Avenue
• FUTURE PROJECT F3600053 36EN/360ENG 4 - CHERRY: BASELINE TO SO. HIGHLAND / Cherry
Avenue from Baseline Road to So. Highland Avenue
• FUTURE PROJECT F3600012 36EN/360ENG 4 - CHERRY: S HIGHLAND TO I-15 / Cherry Avenue
from S. Highland Avenue to I-15 Freeway
Tentative Parcel Maps
• TPM NO. 20391: Parcel Subdivision along Hemlock Avenue and Blue Spruce Lane.
Currently there have been no assigned construction schedules for these projects and is therefore not
expected to impact the Proposed Project. Additionally, the Proposed Project would not result in
cumulative net increase of criteria pollutants. Impacts would be less than significant.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Environmental effects that may cause
substantial adverse effects on humans typically result from impacts to air quality and greenhouse gas,
noise, hazardous materials, ground shaking, hazardous design features regarding transportation and
roadway designs and wildfire. The analysis of this document indicates that impacts would be less than
significant to the environmental areas mentioned above. and, therefore, would not cause substantial
adverse impacts to human beings.
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
69
SECTION 5.0 – REFERENCES
The following is a list of references used in the preparation of this document.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
2011 Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer. Available online at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
2022a SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details; Salton City Solid Waste Site (13-AA-0011).
Available online:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/4186?siteID=598
2022b Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates. Available online at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/wastecharacterization/general/rates#Institution
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2022 State Scenic Highway System Map. Available at:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46c
c8e8057116f1aacaa
City of Fontana (City)
2017a West Gate Specific Plan. Available at:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/18283/West-Gate-Specific-Plan---
Approved-March-2017?bidId=
2017b Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Appendix E: Hazard Screening Maps. Available online:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/29774/LHMP-Appendix-E---Hazard-
Screening-Maps
2018a Community Mobility and Circulation Element. Available online:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/26748/Chapter-9---Community-
Mobility-and-Circulation
2018b Fontana Forward Final Environmental Impact Report. Available at:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/27556/Appendix-Five---Fontana-GP-
Final-EIR
2019 Fontana Fire Protection District. Available online at:
https://www.fontana.org/635/About-the-Fontana-Fire-District
2021a City of Fontana Zoning Map. Accessed August 2022. Available online at:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/28163/General-Plan-Land-Use-Map-
3-2-2021?bidId=
2021b General Plan Map. Available at:
https://www.fontana.org/DocumentCenter/View/28163/General-Plan-Land-Use-Map-
3-2-2021?bidId=
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
70
County of San Bernardino (County)
2021 Parcels under Open Space contract report. Accessed August 2022. Available at:
https://secureservercdn.net/192.169.221.188/787.15f.myftpupload.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/07/NPP874-WilliamsonActParcels.pdf
California Department of Conservation (DOC)
1986 Mineral Land Classification Of the Greater Los Angeles Area Part VII.
2022a California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed August 2022. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
2022b Mines Online. Accessed July 2022 Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/mol/index.html
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
2022 Envirostor Database. Accessed August 2022. https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
2008 FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 7915H
2022 Flood Map Service Center. Accessed August 2022.
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=cherry%20and%20highland%20ave
nue%20fontana%20ca#searchresultsanchor
Fontana Water Company (FWC)
2018 Water Service Areas. Available online at: https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/Service_Area_FONTANA.pdf
2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at:
https://www.fontanawater.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/FWC-2020-UWMP-June-
2021-Final.pdf
Google
2022 Google Earth Pro. Available at: https://earth.google.com/web/.
Ontario International Airport (ONT-IAC)
2018 Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Airport Influence Areas.
Available online at: https://www.ont-iac.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ONT-AIA-
policy-map-2-1.pdf
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
2010 NPDES Permit and WDR for San Bernardino County Flood Control District. Accessed
August 2022. Available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/board_decisions/adopted_orders/orders/2
010/10_036_sbc_ms4_permit_01_29_10.pdf
2019 Santa Ana River Basin Plan. Available online at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/basin_plan/
Fontana Fire Station 80 Project
Fontana, California
Chambers Group, Inc.
21289
71
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
2022 GeoTracker Database. Accessed August 2022. https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
A
– Ai
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
,
E
n
e
r
g
y
a
n
d
G
r
e
e
n
h
o
u
s
e
G
a
s
I
m
p
a
c
t
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
B
– Bi
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
R
e
c
o
n
n
a
i
s
s
a
n
c
e
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
C
– Cu
l
t
u
r
a
l
R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
S
u
r
v
e
y
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
D
– Ge
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
E
x
p
l
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
E
– No
i
s
e
S
t
u
d
y
AP
P
E
N
D
I
X
F
– Tr
a
f
f
i
c
S
t
u
d
y