The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDraft ISMND November 20 2025 (Enclave)16498.40232\44367104.1 November 2025 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA MASTER CASE NUMBER (MCN) 24-0026, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (TTM) NO. 24-002 (TTM NO. 20690), AND DESIGN REVIEW PROJECT (DRP) NO. 24-001 FONTANA, CALIFORNIA FONTANA CALIFORNIA LSA This page intentionally left blank 16498.40232\44367104.1 November 2025 DRAFT INITIAL STUDY/ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENCLAVE AT NORTH FONTANA PROJECT FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Submitted to: City of Fontana 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335 (909) 350-6718 Prepared by: LSA 1505 Eureka Road, Suite 310 Roseville, California 92507 (916) 772-7450 Project No. 20252531 LSA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 TABLE OF CONTENTS ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................... i FIGURES AND TABLES ............................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................. v 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION ................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Project Location and Setting .............................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Proposed Project ............................................................................................................... 2-7 2.3 Required Permits and Approvals ..................................................................................... 2-43 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED ......................................... 3-1 3.1 Determination ................................................................................................................... 3-1 4.0 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST .................................................................. 4-1 4.1 Aesthetics .......................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources .................................................................................. 4-5 4.3 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 4-7 4.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................ 4-20 4.5 Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................... 4-29 4.6 Energy .............................................................................................................................. 4-35 4.7 Geology and Soils ............................................................................................................ 4-40 4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................. 4-47 4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................................... 4-57 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................................................... 4-65 4.11 Land Use and Planning .................................................................................................... 4-77 4.12 Mineral Resources ........................................................................................................... 4-81 4.13 Noise ................................................................................................................................ 4-83 4.14 Population and Housing .................................................................................................. 4-93 4.15 Public Services ................................................................................................................. 4-96 4.16 Recreation ..................................................................................................................... 4-102 4.17 Transportation ............................................................................................................... 4-104 4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................................................................... 4-111 4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................................................... 4-114 4.20 Wildfire .......................................................................................................................... 4-119 4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance .............................................................................. 4-122 5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ........................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 6-1 APPENDICES A: AIR QUALITY, ENERGY, AND GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM B: BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA C: CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT D: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION E: PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT F: PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN G: NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS Hl: TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) H2: VMT ANALYSIS (VMT MEMO) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ii P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 FIGURES FIGURES AND TABLES ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Figure 2-1 : Regional Location .............................................................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-2 : Project Location ................................................................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-3: General Plan Land Use ....................................................................................................... 2-9 Figure 2-4 : Zoning .............................................................................................................................. 2-11 Figure 2-5 : Proposed Site Plan ........................................................................................................... 2-13 Figure 2-6 : Single Family Dwellings Cluster Plan ............................................................................... 2-17 Figure 2-7 : Plan 1 Front Elevations .................................................................................................... 2-19 Figure 2-8 : Plan 2 Front Elevations .................................................................................................... 2-21 Figure 2-9 : Plan 3 Front Elevations .................................................................................................... 2-23 Figure 2-10: Plan 4 Front Elevations .................................................................................................. 2-25 Figure 2-11: Building 101A Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-27 Figure 2-12: Building 101B Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-29 Figure 2-13: Building 201A Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-31 Figure 2-14: Building 201B Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-33 Figure 2-15: Building 301A Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-35 Figure 2-16: Building 301B Front Elevations ...................................................................................... 2-37 Figure 2-17: Proposed Landscape Plan .............................................................................................. 2-41 TABLES Table 2.A : Surrounding Land Uses and Setting .................................................................................. 2-15 Table 2.B: Summary of Residential Mix ............................................................................................. 2-15 Table 2.C: Summary of Private Open Space ....................................................................................... 2-39 Table 2.C: Preliminary Project Construction Phasing ........................................................................ 2-43 Table 2.0: Anticipated Permits and Approvals .................................................................................. 2-44 Table 4.3.A: Regional Thresholds for Construction and Operational Emissions .................................. 4-8 Table 4.3.B : SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds .................................................................... 4-9 Table 4.3.C: Short-Term Regional Construction Emissions ................................................................ 4-13 Table 4.3.D : Project Operational Emissions ....................................................................................... 4-14 Table 4.3.E : Project Localized Construction and Operational Emissions ........................................... 4-16 Table 4.3.F : Unmitigated Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors .................. 4-17 Table 4.3.G : Mitigated Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors ...................... 4-17 Table 4.6.A: Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Project ....................................................... 4-37 Table 4.8 .A: Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................................................ 4-49 Table 4.8.B: Project Consistency with the City of Fontana GHG Reduction Measures ...................... 4-50 Table 4.17.B Existing Levels of Service ............................................................................................... 4-79 Table 4.17.C Opening Year (2026) without and with Project Conditions .......................................... 4-79 Table 4.17.D Future Year (2050) without and with Project Conditions ............................................. 4-80 Table 4.13 .A: Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results ............................................................ 4-84 Table 4.13.B: Existing Traffic Noise Levels ......................................................................................... 4-86 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l iii LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.13.C: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................. 4-87 Table 4.13.D: Summary of Construction Phase, Equipment, and Noise Levels ................................ 4-88 Table 4.13.E: Construction Noise Levels ........................................................................................... 4-89 Table 4.13.F : Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment ......................................... 4-90 Table 4.13 .G: Potential Construction Vibration Annoyance .............................................................. 4-91 Table 4.13 .H: Potential Construction Vibration Damage .................................................................. 4-92 Table 4.14 .A: Housing Needs for 2021-2029 .................................................................................... 4-94 Table 4.15 .A: Estimated Student Generation .................................................................................. 4-100 Table 4.17 .A Project Trip Generation .............................................................................................. 4-105 iv P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS AAQS AB ADA ADT AQMP Basin Basin Plan BMP Cal/OSHA CalEEMod ambient air quality standards Assembly Bill Americans with Disabilities Act average daily traffic Air Quality Management Plan South Coast Air Basin Santa Ana RWQCB Water Quality Control Plan best management practice California Occupational Safety and Health Administration California Emissions Estimator Model California Register California Register of Historical Resources Caltrans CARB CBC CCR CDFW CEQA CFC City CNEL CNPS co California Department of Transportation California Air Resources Board California Building Code California Code of Regulations California Department of Fish and Wildlife California Environmental Quality Act California Fire Code methane City of Fontana Community Noise Equivalent Level California Native Plant Society carbon monoxide carbon dioxide carbon dioxide equivalent P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\4436 7104. l LSA V LSA CPTED dB dBA DCV DTSC du/acre EIR EO EPA ESA FBC FEMA FFPD FHWA FPD FUSD FWC GHG GPA gpm GSP GWh GWP HFC HREC HVAC IEUA vi ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design decibels A-weighted decibels Design Capture Volume INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 California Department of Toxic Substances Control dwelling units per acre Environmental Impact Report Executive Order United States Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Site Assessment Form-Based Code Federal Emergency Management Agency Fontana Fire Protection District Federal Highway Administration Fontana Police Department Fontana Unified School District Fontana Water Company greenhouse gas General Plan Amendment gallons per minute Groundwater Sustainability Plan gigawatt-hours Global Warming Potential hydrofluorocarbons historical recognized environmental condition heating, ventilation, and air conditioning Inland Empire Utilities Agency P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 IS ITE kWh Leq LID Lmax LOS LRA LST MEI MGD MLD MMRP MND mpg MRF MRZ MT NAHC NOx NPDES OIA Pb Initial Study Institute of Transportation Engineers kilowatt-hours day-night noise equivalent equivalent continuous sound level Low Impact Development maximum instantaneous noise level level of service Local Responsibility Area localized significance threshold maximally exposed individual million gallons per day Most Likely Descendant Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigated Negative Declaration miles per gallon Materials Recycling Facility Mineral Resource Zone metric ton nitrous oxide Native American Heritage Commission nitrogen dioxide nitrogen oxides National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ozone Ontario International Airport lead P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA vii LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 PFC PM10 PPV PRC RAFSS REC RHNA RMS RP RTP RWQCB San Bernardino County MS4 permit SB SBCTA SCAG SCAQMD SCE scs SGMA SOx SR- viii perfluorocarbons particulate matter less than 10 microns in size particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size peak particle velocity Public Resources Code Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub recognized environmental condition Regional Housing Needs Allocation root-mean-square water recycling plant Regional Transportation Plan Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana RWQCB National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the County of San Bernardino, and the Incorporated Cities of San Bernardino County Within the Santa Ana Region Area-Wide Urban Stormwater Runoff Management Program Senate Bill San Bernardino County Transportation Authority Southern California Association of Governments South Coast Air Quality Management District Southern California Edison Sustainable Communities Strategy sulfur hexafluoride Sustainable Groundwater Management Act sulfur dioxide sulfur oxides State Route P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA SRA SWPPP SWRCB TIA TPM State Responsibility Area Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan State Water Resources Control Board Traffic Impact Analysis Tentative Parcel Map Traffic Guidelines City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment USACE USFWS USGS UWMP VHFHSZ VMT VMTMemo voe WQMP United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Fish and Wildlife Service United States Geological Survey Urban Water Management Plan Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone vehicle miles traveled Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis volatile organic compounds Water Quality Management Plan P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l ix LSA X ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 1.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Project Title: Enclave at North Fontana Project 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Fontana Planning Department 8353 Sierra Avenue Fontana, California 92335 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Cecily Session-Goins, Associate Planner, (909) 350-6723 4. Project Location: ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA The 11.99-acre project site is at the northeast corner of Curtis Avenue and Catawba Avenue in the northern portion of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Stacy Sassaman Lewis Management Corporation 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, California 91786 6. General Plan Designation: Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village (WMXU-2) 7. Zoning: Form-Based Code (FBC Village District) 8. Description of Project: The proposed project includes the construction of a 153-unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units, and 69 single-family dwelling units. The proposed project would also provide private open spaces, landscaped paseos, a central neighborhood park, internal circulation consisting of six alleys, and frontage improvements along Curtis Avenue consisting of installation of sidewalk, perimeter wall, decorative signage, and driveway access. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 1-1 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is currently vacant and bounded by single-family homes to the west, single- family homes and Citrus Avenue to the east, single-family homes to the north, and Curtis Avenue to the south . 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financial approval, or participation agreements): Please refer to Section 2.3, Required Permits and Approvals . 11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resource Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? 1-2 Yes. Please refer to Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources for a description of the tribal consultation process. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA This section describes the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project (project), which is the subject of this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project includes the construction of a 153-unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units and 69 single-family dwelling units on a 11.99-acre property (project site) at the northeast corner of Curtis Avenue and Catawba Avenue in Fontana (Assessor's Parcel Number 1108-08-04). The project site location and existing conditions, as well as the details of the project itself, are described below. 2.1 PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The following describes the precise location and boundaries of the project site, including its geographic context, and provides a brief overview of the existing land uses within and in the vicinity of the project site. 2.1.1 Regional Location and Access The 11.99-acre project site is at the northeast corner of Curtis Avenue and Catawba Avenue in the northern portion of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California . The project site is surrounded by developed roadways and existing single-and two-story residential development on all sides . The project site is bounded by single-family homes to the west, single-family homes and Citrus Avenue to the east, single-family homes to the north, and Curtis Avenue to the south. Figure 2-1: Regional Location and Figure 2-2: Project Location depict the project site's location within the region. State Route (SR-) 210 facilitates regional access to the project site. SR-210 is an east/west regional highway in Southern California located south of the project site, and provides direct access to the project site via the Citrus Avenue interchange approximately 0.5-mile south of the project site . 2.1.2 Site Characteristics and Current Site Conditions The project site is rectangular in shape, generally flat, and consists of a sparsely distributed degraded chamise chaparral plant community dominated by non-native weedy annual plant species. The project site is currently vacant aside from a modular trailer in the southwest corner. The project site is secured by a chain link fence along the south side. An existing wall separates the vacant lot from the surrounding residential development along the northeastern and northwestern boundaries. 2.1.3 General Plan and Zoning According to the City's 2015-2035 General Plan Land Use Map, the project site is currently designated as Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village (WMXU-2).1 The Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village land use category designates areas for a mixture of housing types, neighborhood-serving retail, City of Fontana. 2024. General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted November 1. Website: https://www.fontanaca .gov/Docu mentCenter /View/ 44297 /Genera I-Pian-Map-FI NAL-11-1-2024 ?bid Id= (accessed September 8, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 2-1 LSA 2-2 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA 0 625 FEET 1250 I= I Project Site c.::J California Cities SOURCE : USGS 7.5' Quad -Devore (1980), CA, ESRI (2/12/2024) l:\2025\20252531\GIS\Pro\Enclave at North Fontana Project\Enclave at North Fontana Project.aprx (Fig 1-Regional Location) 8/28/2025 3:58 PM FIGURE 2-1 Enclave at North Fontana Project Regional Location LSA 2-4 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA I= I Project Site 0 125 250 FEET SOURCE : NearMap (5/8/2025) l:\2025\20252531\GIS\Pro\Enclave at North Fontana Project\Enclave at North Fontana Project.aprx (Fig 2 -Project Location) 8/28/2025 12:30 PM FIGURE 2-2 Enclave at North Fontana Project Project Location LSA 2-6 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA open space and civic uses, and site design that provides multi-modal connectivity internal to the site and external to connect with adjacent areas. The intent of this designation is to provide an alternative to conventional subdivision development. The City's Zoning Map designates the project site as Form-Based Code (FBC)-Village District.2 The Village District is intended to provide an alternative to conventional subdivision development with a mixture of housing types, neighborhood- service retail, and open space . This zoning district allows residential development at a density ranging from a minimum of 2.1 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 24 dwellings per acre. 3 2.1.4 Surrounding Land Uses The project site is bounded by single-family homes to the west, single-family homes and Citrus Avenue to the east, single-family homes to the north, and Curtis Avenue to the south. Figure 2-3: General Plan Land Use and Figure 2-4: Zoning depict the project site's surrounding land use and zoning designations. Table 2.A: Surrounding Land Uses and Setting summarizes the existing land uses, General Plan designations, and zoning designations on the project site and surrounding properties. According to the City 's 2015-2035 General Plan, 4 surrounding land use designations include Single Family Residential (R-SF) to the north and east, Residential Planned Community (R-PC) and Recreational Facilities (P-R) to the south, and Residential Planned Community (R-PC) to the west. According to the City's Zoning Map, surrounding zoning designations include R-1 to the north of the project site, SP to the south, R-1 to the west, and SP and R-PC to the east . 2.2 PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project includes the construction of a 153-unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units, and 69 single-family dwelling units. The proposed project would also provide private open spaces, landscaped paseos, a central neighborhood park, internal circulation consisting of six alleys, and frontage improvements along Curtis Avenue consisting of installation of sidewalk, perimeter wall, decorative signage, and driveway access. Figure 2-5: Proposed Site Plan illustrates the overall site plan for the proposed project. Individual project components are further described below. 2 3 4 City of Fontana . 2023b . Form Based Code Districts. July 5 . Website: https://www.fontanaca .gov/ DocumentCenter/View/32043/AII-Form-Based-Code-Districts (accessed August 27, 2025). City of Fontana . n .d .-d . Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code I Chapter 30 I Article Ill - Form-Based Code I Division 4 Development Standards by Zoning District I Section 30-370. Village District. Website: https://libra ry.municode .com/ ca/fonta na/codes/zon ing_and_ development_ code ?node Id= CH30ZODECO_ARTIIIFOSECO_DIV4DESTZODI_S30-370VIDI (accessed August 27, 2025). City of Fontana. 2024. General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted November 1. Website: https://www.fontanaca .gov/Docu mentCenter /View/ 44297 /Genera I-Pian-Map-FI NAL-11-1-2024 ?bid Id= (accessed September 8, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 2-7 LSA 2-8 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA 150 300 FEET E)Project Boundary General Plan 1111 R-PC Residential Planned Community 1111 R-SF Single Family Residential 11111 WMXU-2 Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village 1111 P-PF Public Facilities 1111 P-R Recreational Facilities SOURCE: NearMap (5/8/2025), City of Fontana (2025) l:\2025\20252531\GIS\Pro\Enclave at North Fontana Project\Enclave at North Fontana Project.aprx (Fig 3 -General Plan land Use) 9/2/2025 10:23 AM FIGURE 2-3 Enclave at North Fontana Project General Plan Land Use Proposed Site 0 LSA 2-10 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA 150 FEET 300 (3 Project Site SOURCE: NearMap (5/8/2025), City of Fontana (2023) Zoning -Form-Based Code (FBC) -Single Family (R-1) -Residential Planned Community (R-PC) D Specific Plan (SP) l:\2025\20252531\GIS\Pro\Enclave at North Fontana Project\Enclave at North Fontana Project.aprx (Fig 4-Zoning) 9/2/2025 10:22 AM FIGURE 2-4 Enclave at North Fontana Project Zoning Project Boundary 0 LSA 2-12 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA $ SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Site Plan .ai (8/28/2025) Legend Pfl(P(J5[0 STORM ORA/fl fflfPOSEODOMESTIC WA/fR PRfPOSEOFIREWA/fR _______ Y._2:1/.IAX _ PROPOSED COMBO WALL PR(P()SEORUAINING WAfL PR(P()SEO Sa/ff/I WALL MUIR FIELD IANE MICHIGAN PlACE FIGURE 2-5 Enclave at North Fontana Project Proposed Site Plan LSA 2-14 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 2.A: Surrounding Land Uses and Setting Direction Existing Land Use General Plan Designation Project Site Vacant lot Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village (WMXU-2) North Single-family residential homes Single Family Residential (R-SF) South Single-family residential homes, Ralph Residential Planned M. Lewis Memorial Sports Complex Community (R-PC), Recreational Facilities (P-R) East Single-family residential homes Single Family Residential (R-SF) West Single-family residential homes Residential Planned Community (R-PC) Sources : City of Fontana. Zoning District Map. Adopted November 1, 2024; City of Fontana. General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted November 1, 2024. 2.2.1 Residential Building Program Zoning Designation Form-Based Code (FBC) Village District Single Family (R-1) Sierra Lakes Specific Plan (SP) Single Family (R-1) Citrus Heights South Specific Plan (SP), Residential Planned Community (R-PC) Proposed residential structure types include 84 two-story duplex units all with 3 bedrooms and ranging between 1,477 and 1,819 square feet in size, and 69 two-story detached homes arranged in clusters of six units and ranging between 3 and 4 bedrooms and 1,750 and 1,944 square feet in size. Maximum heights for the duplexes would be 27 feet 5.5 inches, while maximum heights for the detached homes would be 27 feet 10 inches. The duplex units are proposed at the center of the project between Alleys D and E. Clusters of detached homes are proposed along the northern and southern portions of the project site. The northern portion of the project site proposes 36 detached homes, consisting of 12 Plan 1 units, six Plan 2 units, six Plan 3 units, and 12 Plan 4 units. The center portion of the project site proposes 84 duplex units total, consisting of 24 Plan 2 units, 36 Plan 3 units, and 24 Plan 5 units. The southern portion of the project site proposes 11 Plan 1 units, five Plan 2 units, six Plan 3 units, and 11 Plan 4 units, for a total of 33 detached homes . Figure 2-5: Proposed Site Plan illustrates the location of each proposed project component. The mix of unit types proposed is summarized in Table 2.B, Summary of Residential Mix. Table 2.B: Summary of Residential Mix Building Type Plan Bedrooms Bathrooms Square Feet 1 3 2.5 1,750 Detached 2 3 2.5 1,829 Homes 3 4 3 1,829 4 4 3 1,944 Total 2 3 2.5 1,477 Duplexes 3 3 2.5 1,606 3.1 3 2.5 1,632 5 3 3 1,819 Total Total Units P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l Number on Site 23 11 12 23 69 24 30 6 24 84 153 2-15 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 2.B: Summary of Residential Mix Building Type Plan Bedrooms Bathrooms Square Feet Number on Site 1 3 2.5 1,750 23 Detached 2 3 2 .5 1,829 11 Homes 3 4 3 1,829 12 4 4 3 1,944 23 Total 69 2 3 2.5 1,477 24 Duplexes 3 3 2.5 1,606 30 3.1 3 2.5 1,632 6 5 3 3 1,819 24 Total 84 Source : Kevin L. Crook Architect Inc., May 2024. The various housing products each would be designed to reflect Santa Barbara, Farmhouse, and Prairie styles. Conceptual front elevations of each plan type in the single-family clusters are shown in Figure 2-6 through Figure 2-10. Conceptual front elevations of each duplex building type are shown in Figure 2-11 through Figure 2-16. The style of individual units within each cluster and duplex would vary to present an interesting streetscape. Each unit would include metal sectional garage doors, fiberglass front doors, and vinyl windows with grids. Selected design features for each style include: • Santa Barbara: concrete 'S' tile roof, simulated clay tile gables, stucco walls, simulated wood shutters, and stucco over rigid foam trim • Farmhouse: concrete flat tile roof, board and batten gables, stucco/board and batten walls, simulated wood shutters, and stucco over rigid foam trim • Prairie: concrete flat tile roof, stucco walls, and stucco over rigid foam trim The design of the units would use these fac;:ade enhancements and changes in vertical and horizontal lines, color, and material changes to provide visual interest and vary the scale and massing of individual units. Lighting to ensure appropriate security would be installed in parking areas, along on-site pedestrian pathways, and within outdoor common areas. Security lighting is proposed on all building fac;:ades. All lighting on the project site would comply with local lighting standards, which require light shielding, functional and aesthetic design, and compatibility with surrounding uses. 2-16 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) LSA PLAN 1 3 BR , 2.5 Ba (1,750 sq .ft .) PLAN 2 3 BR , 2.5 Ba (1,829 sq .ft.) PLAN 4 4 BR , 3 Ba (1,944 sq .ft.) SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\SF Clu ster Plan .ai (9/15/2025) f 128'-0" =-""='~"" .;=.----1----"'"'.::,·0c..· __ ...c1-:.,·-:,,o.' =--s.=....-, !~==>=-~ ----------1 ' ' I ' ' I PLAN 3 4BR, 3 Ba (1 ,842 sq.ft.) PLAN 2 3 BR , 2.5 Ba (1,829 sq .ft.) PLAN4 4BR , 3 Ba (1,944 sq .ft.) FIGURE 2-6 Enclave at North Fontana Project Single Family Dwellings Cluster Plan LSA 2-18 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) Refer to lonchcape d1owing~ lo, wall, tree, ond ~hrvb location$ A-SANTA BARBARA Reier lo londscope dro'Nings for woll, tree, ond shrub locotlons B -PRAIRIE LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Plan 1.ai (9/15/2025) 6PACK KEYMAP Reier to londscope draV11ngs IOI' wall, tree, and shrub locallons C -FARMHOUSE FIGURE 2-7 Enclave at North Fontana Project Plan 1 Front Elevations LSA 2-20 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) B -PRAIRIE LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Plan 2.ai (9/15/2025) Reier to londscope craw;ngs for woH. tree, and shrub locotions Re fer to landscape <:rowings for wall, trco, and shrub locotions A -SANTA BARBARA C -FARMHOUSE Reier to landscape drawings !Of woll, tree. ond slYUb locotfons 6PACK KEYMAP FIGURE 2-8 Enclave at North Fontana Project Plan 2 Front Elevations LSA 2-22 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) Refer to lonchcape d1owing~ lo, wall, tree, ond ~hrvb location$ A-SANTA BARBARA Reier lo londscope dro'Nings for woll, tree, ond shrub locotlons B -PRAIRIE LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Plan 3.ai (9/15/2025) 6PACK KEYMAP Reier to londscope draV11ngs IOI' wall, tree, and shrub locallons C -FARMHOUSE FIGURE 2-9 Enclave at North Fontana Project Plan 3 Front Elevations LSA 2-24 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) A-SANTA BARBARA Refer to londscope drowings for wall, tree, end shrvb locations B -PRAIRIE LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Plan 4.ai (9/15/2025) 6PACK KEYMAP ©2023 t:::evin L. Crook. Architect. Inc. Refer lo landscape drawings rOfwoll. tree. and shrub bcolions C -FARMHOUSE FIGURE 2-10 Enclave at North Fontana Project Plan 4 Front Elevations LSA 2-26 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UNIT -2 FRONT ~i ;;: ~, ~2 ~ I I UNIT-2(R) REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) I:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 101a.ai (9/15/2025) UNIT -2(R ) UN IT-2 COLOR SCHEME I BUILD I NG -l Ol"A " SANTA BARBARA ELEVATION UNIT -2(R) RIGHT UN IT-2 LEFT 0 2 4 12 FIGURE 2-11 Enclave at North Fontana Project Build i ng 101A Front Elevations LSA 2-28 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UN IT -2 UN IT -2(RJ FRONT I ■ II ■ UN IT -2 (RJ UNIT -2 REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) I:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 101b.ai (9/15/2025) COLOR SC HE M E 4 BUILDING -101"8" FARMHOUSE ELEVATION 1 '"' ..,. ' " ' ,... " .. 7"" ' ' , -., '" ~ ' I < • W• -, C •... , • , --"'; ~ •.. ' .. ~. ~'111111--111111--11111 4 IIBl UN IT -2(RJ RIGHT UNIT-2 LEFT 0 2 4 12 FIGURE 2-12 Enclave at North Fontana Project Building 101B Front Elevations LSA 2-30 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UNIT -UN IT 3(R) FRONT - UN IT -UNIT 3.1 REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) I:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 201b.ai (9/15/2025) UN IT -UNIT 3.1 - UNIT -UNIT 3 (R) COLOR SC HE M E 2 BUILDING -201 "A" SANTA BARBARA ELEVATI ON UN IT -UNIT 3.1 RIGHT UNIT -UN IT 3(R) LEFT 0 2 4 1 2 FIGURE 2-13 Enclave at North Fontana Project Building 201A Front Elevations LSA 2-32 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UNIT -UNI T 3jR) UNIT -UN IT 3.1 FRO NT I -- UN IT -UN IT 3.1 UNIT -UN IT 3jR J REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) l:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 201b.ai (9/15/2025) COLOR SC HE M E 5 BUILDING -201 "B " F A R M H OUS E E L EVA TI ON II UN IT -UN IT 3.1 RIGH T UN IT -UNI T 3 j RJ LEFT 0 2 4 12 FIGURE 2-14 Enclave at North Fontana Project Building 201B Front Elevations LSA 2-34 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UNIT · 3(R) UN IT -5 FRO NT I UN IT-5 UNIT-3(R) REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) I:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 301a.ai (9/15/2025) COLOR SC HEME 3 BUILDING -301 "A" SANTA BARBARA ELEVATION UNIT -5 RIGHT UNIT-3 (R) LEFT 0 2 4 12 FIGURE 2-15 Enclave at North Fontana Project Building 301A Front Elevations LSA 2-36 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) UN IT -3 (R) UN IT -5 FRON T UNIT -5 UNIT -3(R ) REAR LSA SOURCE : Lewis Management Corporation (2025) I:\2025\20252531\G\Elevations Building 30 1b.ai (9/15/2025) COLOR SCHEME 6 BUILD I NG -3 0 1 "B " FARM H OUS E EL EVATION UNI T-5 RIGH T UNIT -3 (R) LEFT 0 2 4 I 2 FIGURE 2-16 Enclave at North Fontana Project Building 301B Front Elevations LSA 2-38 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 2.2.2 Landscaping, Parks, and Recreational Facilities The proposed project includes the development of a neighborhood park located in the center of the proposal project. The proposed project includes landscaped areas and private paseos located throughout the project and between the proposed dwelling units. The proposed project would include approximately 80,190 square feet of landscaped area, including a minimum of 42,491 square feet of private open space, as shown in Table 2.C . Table 2.C: Summary of Private Open Space Building Type Plan Minimum Personal Use Space Number on Site Total (square feet) (square feet) 1 325 23 7,475 Detached Homes 2 343 11 3,773 3 343 12 4,116 4 317 23 7,291 Total 22,655 2 258 24 6,192 Duplexes 3 237 30 7,110 3.1 237 6 1,422 5 213 24 5,112 Total 19,836 Total All Units 153 42,491 Source : Kevin L. Crook Architect Inc., May 2024. 2.2.2.1 Landscaping Landscaping for the proposed project would comply with City landscaping standards set forth in Section 30-667 General Landscaping Requirements of the City's Municipal Code. 5 Figure 2-17: Proposed Landscape Plan illustrates the proposed landscaping, detailing the specific plant species to be used. The proposed project would include approximately 80,190 square feet of landscaped area, and approximately 300 to 400 trees would be planted throughout the site, including new street trees along Curtis Avenue. 2.2.2.2 Enclave Park Enclave Park is a proposed 0.5-acre neighborhood park located within the proposed development. The park would be located in the center of the project between the multi-family dwelling units. Enclave Park would contain a half basketball court, picnic areas, open turf play area, tot lot area, exercise equipment, and barbeque area . 5 City of Fontana. Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code I Chapter 30 I Article X -General Landscape Requirements I Section 30-667. General landscaping requirements. Website: https ://Ii bra ry. mun icode .com/ ca/fonta na/ codes/zoning_ and_ development_ code ?nodel d=CH 30ZODECO _ ARTXGELARE (accessed August 27, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 2-39 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 2.2.3 Vehicle Access, Site Circulation, and Parking INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Roadway improvements would be made to the surrounding circulation system to allow ingress and egress to the project site. Primary access would be provided via gated entry from Curtis Avenue at Alley A, with secondary gated exit-only access provided to the west at Alley B, also from Curtis Avenue . Internal circulation would weave across the site via three north-south internal alleys (from west to east, Alleys B, A, and C) and three east-west internal alleys (from north to south, Alleys F, E, and D) with vehicle access to individual condominium units provided either directly from the alleys or by access drives that spur off the east-west alleys. The proposed project would provide 306 private garage parking spaces, and 132 on-site resident and guest surface-parking spaces dispersed throughout the site for a total of 438 parking spaces. No driveway parking is proposed. 2.2.4 Infrastructure and Utilities The project site is in an urbanized area, and existing utilities and infrastructure are available for interconnection within Curtis Avenue . The proposed project would include the installation of the following utility connections to the satisfaction of the applicable utility providers : water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, electric, natural gas, and telecommunications. Connections to existing utility infrastructure would be within the adjacent public rights-of-way. The project proposes six-inch water 2-40 P:\2025\20252531 • Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) FIGURE 2-17 I:\2025\20252531\G\Landscape Plan.ai (8/28/2025) SOURCE: Lewis Management Corporation (2025) Enclave at North Fontana Project Proposed Landscape Plan - Project Site Boundary - Short-term Noise Monitoring Location - Long-term Noise Monitoring Location LEGEND LT-1LT-1 ST-1ST-1 LSA $ CD MAIN VEHIC.I.A..AR ENTRY • ENHANC.E VEHlc.uL.AR PAVINIS • DEC.ORATIVE vetilc.uLAR !SATES t PILASTERS • DI RECTORY @ DEC.ORATIVE SI GN PI LASTER @ C.ENTRAL NEI ISH60RHOOD PARK-SEE ENLARGEMENT SHT. @ TYPIC."'L LANDSC.APED PASEO @ TYPIC."'L PRI VATE OPEN SPAC.E @ SEGONDAR Y ENTRY (EXIT ONLY) PLANTIN6 L E6END 0 © @ 0 @ 0 ..,.,.._,.._ A~ .. --•"•""" !i Ol""f "-A"'" ... , .. -~ ,c. .. ·•· .,..,..,,c __ ...., ,--. ,.,...,,,....,u.,,•---.,c,.,. ..... , ~r,. ' ,_ DbK ~..,_ _ K' s --. ,_... .. ,.... ,c_ ..... , ... ..,..... '"""'' LO<~M,,,-b ,Llfy ,,,_ ..,,...,,.,,, .. ui, ,c_ --,, , ..... l<.CS. ,c.a., ,,.., ....... ~, .,c. .. ........... , ..... ,.-,..c,w._,... ·-,............... '"""'' ._.,...,........ ,_,_ •-"'-"> ,c_ .....,,.,,,., .. ~ ,_ '°' I G-.... ,, ..... _,. .. G,.M I G- )<~l, ..... n,,, ' '"""'' ,-. ,c.... k n _,._ .<C.... c .. wo,c...., ,.,._ ............ u ......... ,c.... .... c..,...•-,.,._ ._,_.,....... ,. ........... _ ,.,._ ........,.,_,,...,,u ,_ ... c.,...-" .. ..,, .. __,.,-c,.,... ,,,_ _,., .. _,. ... ____ , ..... --..., '"""'' --.,..... ......... ,.,._ w,..,_.,..,.,,._.,_ c-,•--, .<c... w_, _ _,,.,,_.. Do,rlC00<1-~ ,,,_ \'omtll,_,_,.,,_,......., .,_ .... _ -·" ,c,.,. IRR IGATION NOTE This pruject is to beirrigatedwilll ast818 ofthean W98ther bas&d ~~ation tr181 will meet or e,ceed ma crit&narequiredbyA8 188 1 or equa l LSA 2-42 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA meters and points of connection to existing water, fire water, storm drain, and sewer infrastructure in Curtis Avenue. Additionally, five stormwater drywells are proposed south of the proposed park. In general, the depths of utility improvements would range from approximately 3 to 12 feet below ground surface. 2.2.5 Construction and Phasing Construction would include excavation for grading, paving, and construction of the proposed buildings, parking areas, and the installation of lighting, fencing, landscaping, and utility connections . During grading, on-site soils would be excavated and recompacted in accordance with the California Building Code {CBC) to accommodate the proposed residential buildings, as well as parks and parking areas. Construction parking and staging would occur on the project site. However, temporary lane closures and/or detours may be necessary along Curtis Avenue during project construction. Construction hours would conform to City standards and be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. Project construction is anticipated to begin in July 2026 and would occur over a duration of 21 months, with occupancy anticipated in September 2028 . The preliminary proposed project construction phasing is presented below in Table 2.C: Preliminary Project Construction Phasing . Table 2.C: Preliminary Project Construction Phasing Phase Duration Begin Date End Date Site Preparation 1 week July 2026 July 2026 Grading 3 weeks July 2026 August 2026 Building Construction (Models) 2 months November 2026 December 2026 Building Construction (Production Units) 21 months December 2026 September 2028 Paving & Landscaping 2 months December 2026 January 2027 Architectural Coating 21 months December 2026 September 2028 Source : Lewis Group of Companies Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to require excavation to a maximum depth of 6 feet for construction of buildings and 12 feet for construction of utilities and drainage facilities . The entire 11.99-acre project site is anticipated to be disturbed during construction activities. Grading of the project site would balance soil import/export, and would result in approximately 115,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. 2.3 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS The City of Fontana is the Lead Agency as set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 21067 and is expected to use this IS/MND in consideration of the proposed project and associated actions. These actions may include, but are not limited to, the following as listed in Table 2.D: Anticipated Permits and Approvals. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 2-43 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 2.D: Anticipated Permits and Approvals Lead Agency Permits/Approvals City of Fontana • Environmental Review/ Adoption of the IS/MND • Tentative Tract Map (20690) • Design Review Other Agencies Utility Providers • Connection Permits State Water Resources Control Board • Submittal of a Notice of Intent to comply with the General Construction Activity National Pollutant Discharge Elimination {NPDES) Permit;6 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board • Submittal of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Source : LSA {2025). Construction General Permit requirements are transferred to local agencies by way of the NPDES program . Since the City of Fontana (lead agency) complies with the NPDES program guidelines, the State Water Resources Control Board is not a responsible agency or trustee agency with jurisdiction over the proposed project . 2-44 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLAR ATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNlA LSA 3 .0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENT IALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist in Chapter 4.0. D Aesthetics D Agriculture and Forestry Resources D Biological Resources D Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils D Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Hydrology/Water Quality D Land Use/Planning D Noise D Recreation D Population/Housing D Transportation D Air Quality D Energy D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Mineral Resources D Public Services D Tribal Cultural Resources D Utilities/Service Systems □ Wildfire D Mandatory Findings of Significance 3 .1 DETERM INATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: D I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. cg] 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. D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D 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. D 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Date l J P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCI\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 1L14.25.docx (11/14/25) l 6498.40232\44367104. l 3-1 LSA 3-2 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 4.0 CEQA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 4.1 AESTHETICS Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Except as provided in Public Resource s Code Section 21099, would the project: 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. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a 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 wh ich would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 4.1.1 Impact Analysis □ □ □ □ a. Would the project have a substantial effect on a scenic vista? □ □ □ □ ~ □ □ ~ □ □ Less than Significant Impact. Much of the northern part of the City of Fontana, including the project site, has direct lines of sight to the San Gabriel Mountains, while the southern part of the City has direct lines of sight to the Jurupa Hills. 7 Per the City's General Plan, scenic view corridors towards the mountains, as well as views of the City from the mountains, are integral to the City's visual character.8 Therefore, these views are considered scenic vistas in this analysis . A potentially significant impact could occur if publicly-accessible views to these scenic resources were substantially altered by implementation of the proposed project, such that their significance as scenic landforms within the City and along scenic view corridors is diminished . Under existing conditions, background views of scenic resources, including the San Gabriel Mountains and San Bernardino Mountains to the north and northwest, are visible from the project site and adjacent roadways . While existing residential and commercial uses, landscaping, and utility features obstruct views of the lower slopes of these mountain ranges, distant ridgelines and peaks 8 City of Fontana . 2018 . Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 5.1-6. June 8, 2018 . City of Fontana. 2023 . Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 . Updated July 25, 2023. Website : https:/ /www. fonta naca .gov /Docu mentCenter /View /28271/ Comp lete-Docu ment---U pdated---Ap proved- Genera I-Pia n-Docu ments-07-25-2023 ?bid Id=. Accessed October 2025 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-1 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 remain visible. Views of the Jurupa Hills to the south are blocked by intervening residential development. The proposed project would consist of 153 residential units in total. The duplexes and detached homes would be two stories tall with maximum heights of 27 feet 5.5 inches and 27 feet 10 inches for the duplexes and detached homes, respectively. Due to the height and orientation of the proposed buildings, upon construction, the project would intermittently block existing views to the north from the south frontage of the site, which extends approximately 800 feet along Curtis Avenue. Ridgelines may remain visible between buildings and landscaping, similar to the views along other parts of Curtis Avenue . As viewers pass the site on either side of the roadway, the peaks and ridgelines of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains may be visible between buildings in adjacent residential developments. Project obstruction of views of any scenic vista would not be significant due to the limited duration and extent of obstructed views to the mountains . Furthermore, the project is located in an urbanized environment and is compatible with the type and scale of permitted and existing adjacent uses . As implementation of the project would not substantially affect existing views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north or Jurupa Hills to the south, the project would have a less than significant impact on scenic vistas . Mitigation is not required. b. Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Scenic Highway Program does not identify any State-designated scenic highways near the project site.9 The nearest eligible Scenic Highways are the portions of State Routes 38 and 138, located approximately 16.6 and 11.9 miles east and north of the project site, respectively. The project site is not visible from either highway. Therefore, the project would not affect any scenic resources within a State scenic highway. No impact would occur, and mitigation is not required. c. In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a 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 of April 1, 2020 the United States Census Bureau estimated the City's population to be 208,393 persons and the City's land area to be approximately 43.1 square miles, 10 which is approximately 4,836 persons per square mile; therefore, the project is located in an area with at least 1,000 persons per square mile and meets the definition of Urbanized Area under 9 10 4-2 California Department ofTransportation. 2018. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Website: https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116flaac aa (accessed August 29, 2025). United States Census Bureau. Fontana City, California. Website: https :/ /data.census.gov/profile/Fontana_ city,_California?g=160XX00US0624680 (accessed September 2, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Section 15387 of the CEQA Guidelines. Properties immediately surrounding the project site include residential (single-and multi-family) and recreational uses. The City of Fontana General Plan designates the project site for Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village {WMXU-2). The WMXU-2 land use category designates areas for a mixture of housing types, neighborhood-serving retail , open space and civic uses, and site design that provides multi-modal connectivity internal to the site and external to connect with adjacent areas . The intent of this designation is to provide an alternative to conventional subdivision development. The City's Zoning Map designates the project site as Form-Based Code (FBC) -Village District.11 The Village District is intended to provide an alternative to conventional subdivision development with a mixture of housing types, neighborhood-service retail, and open space. This zoning district allows residential development at a density ranging from a minimum of 2.1 dwelling units per acre to a maximum of 24 dwellings per acre .12 The City requires at least 15 percent of the site area to be landscaped {78,442 square feet). The project would provide a total of 80,190 square feet of landscaped area, or approximately 15.3 percent of the net area of the site (refer to Figure 2-6: Proposed Landscape Plan). The proposed project would incorporate landscaping throughout the project site through a combination of accent plantings/groundcovers, shrubs, and trees along the majority of the site perimeter and includes additional trees and landscape material within common areas, adjacent to buildings, and with frontage parkways. Street trees along project frontages would include a variety of 24-inch box trees {Crape Myrtle). Plant material in perimeter and common areas would include a variety of trees including Chinese Evergreen Elm, Coast Live Oak, Brisbane Box, Jacaranda, and Russet Magnolia, minimally sized at 24-inch box and 15-gallon specimens. Shrub and groundcover plant materials include various species of agave, yucca, flax, rosemary and similar species. Behind the sidewalk along the project frontages, the project would provide a six-foot tall perimeter with 16-inch split face pilasters along Curtis Avenue . Tubular steel fencing would be installed across the full 20-foot opening to the courtyards; between two and three courses of block would be installed as a base for the tubular steel fencing to act as a transition from the adjacent block walls. Additionally, aesthetic enhancements would be installed at the pedestrian gates, including lighting. The six-foot tall perimeter wall would extend to the project main entrance tubular steel pedestrian gate. The City's Design Review process would facilitate compatibility and compliance with applicable City standards and ordinances to ensure a high-quality development compatible with the General Plan land use designation, zoning district, and surrounding community. Since the proposed project would be consistent with the City's development standards, the proposed project would not conflict with 11 City of Fontana . 2023b . Form Based Code Districts. July 5 . Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/ DocumentCenter/View/32043/AII-Form-Based-Code-Districts (accessed August 27, 2025). 12 City of Fontana. 2023a. Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code/ Chapter 30 / Article Ill - Form-Based Code I Division 4 Development Standards by Zoning District I Section 30-370. Village District. Website: https:/ /Ii bra ry. mun i code .com/ ca/fonta na/ codes/zoning_ and_ development_ code ?node Id= CH30ZODECO_ARTIIIFOSECO_DIV4DESTZODI_S30-370VIDI (accessed August 27, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-3 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. d. Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant Impact. Under existing conditions, the project site is undeveloped and vacant. As such, there are no sources of light or glare present on the project site aside from existing street lights along the site's frontage on Curtis Road. Sources of light and glare in the surrounding area include street lighting and vehicles traveling on Citrus Avenue and Curtis Avenue, as well as residential and park facility lighting on adjacent properties. Local roadways are well-lit and well- traveled by vehicles. Light from recreational and residential uses in the surrounding area is also visible to the north, east, west, and south of the project site. Light-sensitive uses in proximity to the project site include the residential uses located to the north, east, south, and west . Development of the proposed project would introduce new sources of light on the project site and in the surrounding area through the development of the proposed residential uses on the site. Residential, parking area, and security lighting would be appropriately located throughout the site. Lighting associated with the proposed project would be consistent with City standards. All lighting on the project site would comply with Section 30-471 (Light and Glare), 30-476{g)(S) (Lighting), and 30- 477(1) (Building Design) of the City Municipal Code, which requires light shielding, functional and aesthetic design, and compatibility with surrounding uses. The purpose of these lighting standards is to minimize light pollution, glare, and spillover, conserve energy resources, and curtail the degradation of the nighttime visual environment. Additionally, the City's Design Review process includes consideration of material composition and colors to reduce the potential for substantial glare from the proposed development. Therefore, through compliance applicable sections of the City Municipal Code, project impacts from light and glare would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required . 4-4 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 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 Dept. 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 the forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project : a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring □ □ □ Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? 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 □ □ □ [8] to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of □ □ □ [8] Farmland, to non-agricultural use or 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 non-agricultural use? No Impact. The State's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program 13 designates the project site as "Other Land" which includes low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller than forty acres . Neither the project site nor adjacent properties are designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide 13 California Department of Conservation . 2022 . California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation .ca .gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (accessed August 29, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-5 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Importance. As such, implementation of the proposed project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. No impact to farmland would occur, and no mitigation is required. b. Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The City does not maintain any agricultural zones. In addition, no Williamson Act contracts are in effect in the City.14 Therefore, there would be no impact related to conflicts with existing agricultural zoning designations or Williamson Act contracts, and no mitigation is required. 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. Neither the project site nor adjacent lands are zoned for forest land or Timberland Production . Therefore, there is no potential for the project to conflict with existing zoning for forest land or land zoned for Timberland Production. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. d. Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forestland to non -forest use? No Impact. Refer to Section 4.2(c). The project site and adjacent land are not occupied by forest resources. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest land. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. e. Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Refer to Section 4.2(c). No farmland or forest land is present on the project site or on adjacent land, and neither the project site nor the surrounding area is zoned for agricultural use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not involve any changes in the existing environment which could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use, or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 14 California Department of Conservation . n.d.-a . California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. https:/ /maps.conservation .ca .gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/ (accessed August 29, 2025). 4-6 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 4.3 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. Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project : a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air □ □ [8] □ quality plan? b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-□ □ [8] □ attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant □ [8] □ □ concentrations? d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) □ □ [8] □ adversely affecting a substantial number of people? The following analysis is based in part on the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum prepared for the proposed project, 15 which is included in full as Appendix A to this Initial Study. The project site is within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the regional government agency that monitors and regulates air pollution within the Basin. The federal Clean Air Act and the California Clean Air Act mandate the control and reduction of specific air pollutants. Under these acts, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants, designed to protect public health and welfare. Primary criteria pollutants include carbon monoxide (CO), volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter less than 10 microns in size (PM10), sulfur dioxide (S02), and lead (Pb). Secondary criteria pollutants include ozone (03), and particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size (PM2 .s). The ambient air quality standard for each criteria pollutant represents the level that is considered safe to the public and avoids specific adverse health effects associated with each criteria pollutant. The Basin is in nonattainment for the State standards for 03, PM10, and PM2 .s, and nonattainment for the federal 03 and PM2 .s standard. The Basin is in attainment for the federal PM10, CO, S02, Pb, and nitrogen dioxide (N02) standards. SCAQMD has established daily emission thresholds for construction and operation of proposed projects. The emission thresholds were established based on the attainment status of the air basins within the SCAQMD with regard to air quality standards for specific criteria pollutants. Because the concentration standards were set at a level that protects public health with an adequate margin of safety, these emission thresholds are regarded as 15 LSA . 2025 . Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. September 30 . (Appendix A) P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-7 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 conservative and would overstate an individual project's contribution to health risks. Table 4.3.A lists the CEQA significance thresholds for construction and operational emissions established for the SCAQMD. Table 4.3.A: Regional Thresholds for Construction and Operational Emissions Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions Threshold (lbs/day) voes NOx co PM10 PM2.s Construction 75 100 550 150 55 Operations 55 55 550 150 55 Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District {SCAQMD). 2019 . Air Quality Significance Thresholds. Website: https:/ /www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/south-coast-aqmd-air-quality-signiftcance- thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=25 (accessed September 2025). CO = carbon monoxide PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size lbs/day= pounds per day SOx = sulfur oxides NOx = nitrogen oxides VOCs = volatile organic compounds PM2.s = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size SOx 150 150 Projects in the SCAQMD with construction-or operations-related emissions that exceed any of their respective emission thresholds would be considered significant under SCAQMD guidelines. These thresholds, which the SCAQMD developed, and which apply throughout the SCAQMD, apply as both project and cumulative thresholds. If a project exceeds these standards, it is considered to have a project-specific and cumulative impact. In addition, the SCAQMD published its Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology in July 2008, recommending that all air quality analyses include an assessment of air quality impacts to nearby sensitive receptors.16 This guidance was used to analyze potential localized air quality impacts associated with construction of the proposed project. Localized significance thresholds {LSTs) are developed based on the size or total area of the emission source, the ambient air quality in the Source Receptor Area {SRA), and the distance to the project. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, hospitals, and similar uses that are sensitive to adverse air quality. The closest sensitive receptors include the single-family homes adjacent to the north, west, and east of the project site . LSTs are based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant within the project's SRA and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. For the proposed project, the appropriate SRA for the LST is the Central San Bernardino Valley area (SRA 34). The SCAQMD provides LST screening tables for 25-, 50-, 100-, 200-, and 500-meter source-receptor distances. The closest sensitive receptors include the single-family homes adjacent to the north, west, and east of the project site. In cases where receptors may be closer than 82 feet {25 meters), any distances within the 82-foot {25-meter) buffer zone can be used. As such, the minimum distance of 25 meters was used for purposes of the LST assessment. Based on the anticipated construction equipment, it is assumed that the maximum 16 4-8 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. July. Website: http://www.aqmd .gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized- significance-thresholds/final-lst-methodology-document.pdf (accessed August 1, 2024). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA daily disturbed acreage would be 3.5 acres for construction of the proposed project.17 The project site is 11.99 acres; therefore, the maximum 5-acre thresholds were applied for project operation. Table 4.3.B lists the emissions thresholds that apply during project construction and operation. Table 4.3.B: SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions Threshold (lbs/day) NOx co PM10 Construction (3 .5 acres, 25-meter distance) 220.0 1,359.0 11.0 Operations (5.0 acres, 25-meter distance) 270.0 1,746.0 4 .0 Source : South Coast Air Quality Management District {SCAQMD). 2008 . Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. July. CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day= pounds per day NO x = nitrogen oxides PM2 .s = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size PM2 .s 6.0 2.0 4.3.1 Impact Analysis a. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. An Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) describes air pollution control strategies to be undertaken by a city or county in a region classified as a nonattainment area to meet the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act. The main purpose of an AQMP is to bring an area into compliance with the requirements of federal and State ambient air quality standards (AAQS). The Basin is in nonattainment for the State standards for 03 PM10, and PM2.s, and nonattainment for the federal 03 and PM2 .s standards. The Basin is in attainment for the federal PM10, CO, SO2, Pb, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) standards. Therefore, the Basin is classified as a nonattainment area and an AQMP is required. The applicable air quality plan is the SCAQMD's adopted 2022 AQMP.18 A consistency determination plays an essential role in local agency project review by linking local planning and unique individual projects to the air quality plans. A consistency determination fulfills the CEQA goal of fully informing local agency decision-makers of the environmental costs of the project under consideration at a stage early enough to ensure that air quality concerns are addressed . The City's General Plan is consistent with the SCAG Regional Comprehensive Plan Guidelines and the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Pursuant to the methodology provided in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, consistency with the Basin 2022 AQMP is affirmed when a project (1) would not increase the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause 17 18 SCAQMD . n.d . Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds. Website: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance-thresholds/caleemod- guidance.pdf (accessed September 2025). SCAQMD. 2022 . 2022 Air Quality Management Plan . December. Website : https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/ default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-management-plan/final- 2022-aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16 (accessed September 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-9 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 a new violation, and (2) is consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Consistency review is presented as follows: 1. The project would result in short-term construction and long-term operational pollutant emissions that are less than the CEQA significance emissions thresholds established by SCAQMD, as demonstrated below in Tables 4.3.C and 4.3.D; therefore, the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of an air quality standards violation or cause a new air quality standards violation. 2. The CEQA Air Quality Handbook indicates that consistency with AQMP growth assumptions must be analyzed for new or amended General Plan elements, Specific Plans, and significant projects. Projects of statewide, regional, or areawide significance include large-scale projects such as airports, electrical generating facilities, petroleum and gas refineries, residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units, and shopping centers or business establishments employing more than 1,000 persons or encompassing more than 500,000 square feet of floor space, as defined in the California Code of Regulations (CCR) {Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 13, Section 15206{b)). As discussed in the Project Location and Description section, the proposed project would comply with the City's General Plan land use designation, WMXU-2 Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village, and the existing zoning designation, Form-Based Code. The projections in the AQMP for achieving air quality goals are based, in part, on assumptions in SCAG's 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) regarding population, housing, and growth trends, as well as assumptions and projections of local planning agencies to determine control strategies for regional compliance status. According to SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, the city's households and employment are forecasted to increase by approximately 22,200 households and 15,500 jobs, respectively, between 2019 and 2050.19 The proposed project includes the construction of a 153-unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units and 69 single-family dwelling units. Based on a population forecast of 3.74 persons/unit, the 153 units proposed could result in a population of up to 572 persons.20 The addition of 153 units represents 0.7 percent of Fontana's estimated household increase of 22,200 households. As such, this population increase is minimal relative to the city's overall population. Furthermore, the proposed project would not include airports, electrical generating facilities, petroleum and gas refineries, designation of oil drilling districts, water ports, solid waste disposal sites, and offshore drilling facilities; therefore, it is unlikely that the proposed project would interfere with SCAQMD's goals for improving air quality in the region. The proposed project would not conflict 19 Southern California Association of Governments . 2024. Connect SoCal : The 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. Website: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23-2987-tr-demographicsgrowth-forecast-final-040424.pdf (accessed September 2025). 20 According to the SCAG Local Profiles Dataset for 2023 (https://scag.ca.gov/data-tools-local-profiles), Fontana has an average household size of 3.74 persons per dwelling unit. Therefore, 3 .74 x 153 dwelling units= 572 residents . 4-10 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA with the 2022 AQMP and, as such, would not jeopardize attainment of the CAAQS and NAAQS in the area under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The proposed project is therefore considered consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP per the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook consistency analysis methodology. Based on the analysis above , the proposed project would not represent substantial or unplanned employment or population growth forecasted by SCAG or the AQMP. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan . Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required . 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 Basin is currently designated nonattainment for the federal and State standards for 8-hour 03 and PM10. The Basin is also nonattainment for the State standard for 1- hour 03. The Basin's nonattainment status is attributed to the region's development history. Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region's adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of an ambient air quality standard. Instead, a project's individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts. If a project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considerable, then the project's impact on air quality would be considered significant. In developing thresholds of significance for air pollutants, SCAQMD considered the emission levels for which a project's individual emissions would be cumulatively considerable. If a project exceeds the identified significance thresholds, its emissions would be cumulatively considerable, resulting in significant adverse air quality impacts to the region's existing air quality conditions. Therefore, additional analysis to assess cumulative impacts is not necessary. The following analysis assesses the potential project-level air quality impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed project. Construction Emissions. During construction, short-term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of particulate matter emissions (i.e., fugitive dust) generated by grading, building construction, paving, and other activities. Emissions from construction equipment are also anticipated and would include CO, nitrogen oxides {NOx), VOCs, directly emitted PM2 .s or PM10, and toxic air contaminants (e .g., diesel particulate matter). Project construction activities would include grading, site preparation, building construction, architectural coating, and paving activities. Construction-related effects on air quality from the proposed project would be greatest during the site preparation phase due to the disturbance of soils. If not properly controlled, these activities would temporarily generate particulate emissions. Sources of fugitive dust would include disturbed soils at the construction site. Unless properly controlled, vehicles leaving the site would deposit dirt and mud on local streets, which could be an additional source of airborne dust after it dries. PM10 emissions would vary from day to day, depending on the nature and magnitude of construction activity and local weather conditions. PM10 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-11 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 emissions would depend on soil moisture, silt content of soil, wind speed, and amount of operating equipment. Larger dust particles would settle near the source, whereas fine particles would be dispersed over greater distances from the construction site. Water or other soil stabilizers can be used to control dust, resulting in emission reductions of 50 percent or more. SCAQMD has established Rule 403: Fugitive Dust, which would require the applicant to implement measures that would reduce the amount of particulate matter generated during the construction period. The Rule 403 measures that were incorporated in this analysis include:21 • Water active sites at least twice daily {locations where grading is to occur shall be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving). • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 2 feet {0.6 meter) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and the top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. In addition to dust-related PM10 emissions, heavy trucks and construction equipment powered by gasoline and diesel engines would generate CO, sulfur oxides (SOx), NOx, VOCs, and some soot particulate (PM2.s and PM10) in exhaust emissions. If construction activities were to increase traffic congestion in the area, CO and other emissions from traffic would increase slightly while those vehicles idle in traffic. These emissions would be temporary in nature and limited to the immediate area surrounding the construction site . Construction emissions from on-site construction equipment and emissions from worker and vehicle trips to the site were estimated for the project using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2022.1 {CalEEMod) computer program and are summarized in Table 4.3.C. This analysis assumes that construction of the proposed project is anticipated to begin in July 2026 and be complete in September 2028, which was included in CalEEMod. The proposed project would not require the import or export of soil, which was also included in CalEEMod. This analysis also assumes the use of Tier 2 construction equipment and that the proposed project would comply with SCAQMD dust control regulations. All other construction details are not yet known; therefore, default assumptions (e.g., construction worker and truck trips and fleet activities) from Cal EE Mod were used. CalEEMod output sheets are included in Appendix A. 21 SCAQMD. 2024. South Coast AQMD Rule Book. Website: https://www.aqmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/ rules (accessed September 2025). 4-12 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.3.C: Short-Term Regional Construction Emissions Construction Year Maximum Daily Regional Pollutant Emissions {lbs/day) voes 2026 2027 2028 Peak Daily Emissions SCAQMD Threshold Significant? Source: Compiled by LSA (September 2025). CO = carbon monoxide lbs/day= pounds per day NO x = nitrogen oxides 5.1 5.0 4.3 5.1 75 .0 No PM2 .s = particulate matter less than 2 .5 microns in size NOx co SOx Total PM10 Total PM2.s 48 .9 36 .8 0.1 9.0 5.0 34 .3 32 .1 <0 .1 3.0 1.7 20 .8 21.9 <0 .1 2.2 1.1 48.9 36.8 0.1 9.0 5.0 100.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55 .0 No No No No No PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District SOx = sulfur oxides VOCs = volatile organic compounds As shown in Table 4.3 .C, construction emissions associated with the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM2.s, or PM10 emissions . The proposed project would be required to implement SCAQMD Rule 403 measures, which would further reduce construction-related emissions . Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not result in emissions that would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is in nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. Operational Emissions. Long-term air pollutant emissions associated with operation of a project typically include emissions from area, energy, and mobile sources. Area-source emissions include architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping. Energy-source emissions result from activities in buildings that use natural gas . Mobile-source emissions are from vehicle trips associated with operation of a project. Mobile-source emissions include VOC and NOx emissions that contribute to the formation of ozone. Additionally, PM10 emissions result from running exhaust, tire and brake wear, and the entrainment of dust into the atmosphere from vehicles traveling on paved roadways. Trip generation rates used in CalEEMod for the proposed project were based on the trip generation assumptions for the proposed project, which includes an estimated trip generation of 1,217 average daily trips.22 Energy-source emissions result from activities in buildings that use natural gas . The quantity of emissions is the product of usage intensity (i.e ., the amount of natural gas) and the emission factor of the fuel source . The proposed project would be all-electric; therefore, energy source emissions would be nominal. Area-source emissions consist of direct sources of air emissions at the project site, including architectural coatings, consumer products, and use of landscape maintenance equipment. This analysis utilizes default assumptions for the use of architectural coating and consumer products (including cleaning supplies, kitchen aerosols, cosmetics, and toiletries) and the use of landscaping 22 Translutions, Inc . 2025a . The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-13 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 equipment. This analysis also assumes that no woodburning or natural gas fireplaces or woodstoves would be included in any of the residential units. Long-term operational emissions associated with the proposed project were calculated using CalEEMod and are presented in Table 4.3.D. CalEEMod output sheets are attached (Appendix A). The results shown in Table 4.3.D indicate the proposed project would not exceed the significance criteria for daily VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions; thus, the proposed project would not have a significant effect on regional air quality. Therefore, operation of the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project is nonattainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard. Table 4.3.D: Project Operational Emissions Emission Type Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day) voes NOx co SOx PM10 PM2 .s Mobile Sources 4.1 3.6 32.5 0.1 7.5 1.9 Area Sources 6.0 0.0 8.7 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 Energy Sources 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Project Emissions 10.1 3.6 41.2 0.1 7.5 1.9 SCAQMD Threshold 55.0 55.0 550.0 150.0 150.0 55.0 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No Source : Compiled by LSA {September 2025). Note : Some values may not appear to add correctly due to rounding. CO= carbon monoxide PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size lbs/day= pounds per day SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District NOx = nitrogen oxides SOx = sulfur oxides PM2.s = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size VOCs = volatile organic compounds Long-Term Microscale (CO Hot Spot) Analysis. Vehicular trips associated with the proposed project would contribute to congestion at intersections and along roadway segments in the vicinity of the proposed project site. Localized air quality impacts would occur when emissions from vehicular traffic increase as a result of the proposed project. The primary mobile-source pollutant of local concern is CO, a direct function of vehicle idling time and, thus, of traffic flow conditions. CO transport is extremely limited; under normal meteorological conditions, it disperses rapidly with distance from the source. However, under certain extreme meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels, thereby affecting local sensitive receptors (e.g., residents, schoolchildren, the elderly, and hospital patients). Typically, high CO concentrations are associated with roadways or intersections operating at unacceptable levels of service or with extremely high traffic volumes. In areas with high ambient background CO concentrations, modeling is recommended to determine a project's effect on local CO levels. An assessment of project-related impacts on localized ambient air quality requires that future ambient air quality levels be projected. Existing CO concentrations in the immediate project vicinity are not available. Ambient CO levels monitored at the Fontana-Arrow Highway station located at 4-14 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 14360 Arrow Boulevard {the closest station to the project site monitoring CO) showed a highest recorded 1-hour concentration of 1.9 ppm {the State standard is 20 ppm) and a highest 8-hour concentration of 1.4 ppm {the State standard is 9 ppm) from 2021 to 2023. The highest CO concentrations would normally occur during peak traffic hours; hence, CO impacts calculated under peak traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis . Reduced speeds and vehicular congestion at intersections result in increased CO emissions . The proposed project is expected to generate 1,217 average daily trips, with 82 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and 108 trips occurring in the AM peak hour. 23 As described in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA), only one intersection is forecast to operate at unsatisfactory levels of service . With the implementation of circulation improvements identified in the TIA, all intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory levels of service. Therefore, given the extremely low level of CO concentrations in the project area and the lack of traffic impacts at any intersections with implementation of the circulation improvements, project-related vehicles are not expected to result in CO concentrations exceeding the State or federal CO standards. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. c. Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Sensitive receptors are defined as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants. Sensitive receptor locations include schools, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units. As described above, the project site is surrounded by developed roadways and existing single-and two-story residential development. The closest sensitive receptors include the single-family homes adjacent to the north, west, and east of the project site. Localized Impact Analysis. Project construction and operation emissions were compared to the LST screening tables in SRA 34, based on a 25-meter source-receptor distance, a disturbed acreage of 3.5 acres for construction, and an operational project site threshold of 5.0 acres. Table 4.3.E shows the results of the LST analysis during project operation. 23 Translutions, Inc . 2025a . The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-15 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.3.E: Project Localized Construction and Operational Emissions Source Pollutant Emissions {lbs/day) NOx co PM10 PM2.s Construction Emissions On-Site Emissions 48 .8 35 .3 8.8 5.0 Localized Significance Threshold 220.0 1,359.0 11.0 6.0 Significant? No No No No Operational Emissions On-Site Emissions 0.2 10.3 0.4 0.1 Localized Significance Threshold 270.0 1,746.0 4.0 2.0 Significant? No No No No Source : Compiled by LSA (September 2025). Note: Source Receptor Area 34 , based on a 3.5-acre construction disturbance daily area and a 5.0-acre disturbance area for operation, at a distance of 25 meters from the project boundary to the nearest sensitive receptor. CO = carbon monoxide PM2 .s = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size lbs/day= pounds per day PM,o = particulate matter less than 10 microns in size NO x = nitrogen oxides By design, the localized impacts analysis only includes on-site sources; however, the CalEEMod outputs do not separate on-site and off-site emissions for mobile sources. For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions detailed in Table 4.3.E assume that all area, stationary, and energy source emissions would occur on site, and 5 percent of the project-related new mobile sources (which is an estimate of the amount of project-related on-site vehicle travel) would occur on site. The 5 percent assumption is conservative because the localized impacts analysis only includes on-site sources and the majority of vehicle travel would occur off site, resulting in emissions that would also be released off site. Table 4.3.E indicates the localized operational emissions would not exceed the LSTs at nearby residences . Therefore, the proposed operational activity would not result in a locally significant air quality impact. Health Risk to Nearby Sensitive Receptors. A construction HRA, which evaluates construction-period health risk to off-site receptors, was performed for the proposed project, and the analysis is presented below. As discussed above, the closest sensitive receptors include the single-family homes adjacent to the north, west, and east of the project site. Based on exhaust from equipment to be used for construction of the project (including diesel particulate matter), a dispersion model was used to translate an emission rate from the source location to a concentration at the receptor location of interest (i.e ., a nearby residence and worksites). This assessment was conducted using the CARB exposure methodology with the air dispersion modeling performed using the EPA dispersion model AERMOD. The model provides a detailed estimate of exhaust concentrations based on site and source geometry, source emissions strength, distance from the source to the receptor, and meteorological data. Table 4.3.F, below, identifies the results of the analysis at the maximally exposed individual (MEI), which is the nearest sensitive receptor. Model snapshots of the sources are shown in Appendix A. 4-16 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.3.F: Unmitigated Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors Location Carcinogenic Chronic Inhalation Acute Inhalation Inhalation Health Risk in One Million Hazard Index Hazard Index Residential Receptor Risk 115 .04 0 .143 0 .000 Worker Receptor Risk 0 .03 0 .002 0 .000 School Receptor Risk 0 .79 0 .004 0 .000 SCAQMD Significance Threshold 10.0 in one million 1.0 1.0 Significant? Yes No No Source : LSA (September 2025). SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District As shown in Table 4.3.F, the maximum cancer risk for the residential receptor MEI associated with project construction would be 115.04 in one million, which would exceed the SCAQMD's cancer risk threshold of 10 in one million. The school receptor MEI and worker receptor MEI risk would be lower at 0.79 in one million and 0.03 in one million, respectively, which would not exceed the SCAQMD's cancer risk threshold. The chronic hazard index would be 0.143 for the residential receptor MEI, 0.004 for the school receptor MEI, and 0.002 for the worker receptor MEI, which are below the threshold of 1.0. In addition, the acute hazard index would be nominal (0), which would also not exceed the threshold of 1.0. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, which would require the use of cleaner construction equipment, would be required to reduce substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction. Mitigation Measure AIR-1 During construction of the proposed project, the project contractor shall ensure all off-road, diesel-powered construction equipment of 50 horsepower or more used for the project construction meets, at a minimum, the California Air Resources Board Tier 2 emissions standards equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters or the equivalent. Table 4.3.G identifies the results of the analysis with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1. Table 4.3.G: Mitigated Health Risks from Project Construction to Off-Site Receptors Location Carcinogenic Chronic Inhalation Acute Inhalation Inhalation Health Risk in One Million Hazard Index Hazard Index Residential Receptor Risk 7.77 0.008 0.000 Worker Receptor Risk <0.01 <0.001 0.000 School Receptor Risk 0.06 <0.001 0.000 SCAQMD Significance Threshold 10.0 in one million 1.0 1.0 Significant? No No No Source : LSA (September 2025). SCAQMD = South Coast Air Quality Management District As shown in Table 4.3.G, the mitigated cancer risk at the residential receptor MEI would be 7.77 in one million, which would not exceed the SCAQMD's cancer risk threshold of 10 in one million. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-17 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, construction of the proposed project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds and would not expose nearby sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Once the project is constructed, the project would not be a source of substantial emissions. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, nearby sensitive receptors are not expected to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction or operation. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 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. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include : • Agricultural uses (livestock and farming) • Wastewater treatment plants • Food processing plants • Chemical plants • Composting operations • Refineries • Landfills • Dairies • Fiberglass molding facilities Construction. The project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed project may result from construction equipment exhaust. However, the construction activity would cease after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project. The proposed project would comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 regarding odors and sources that could cause nuisances . SCAQMD Rule 402 states : "A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property."24 The proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors . The proposed project would also include trash enclosures, which would reduce any potential for odors from project-related waste . Therefore, the proposed project would not result in other emissions (e .g., those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Operation. The proposed project entails the development of a 153-unit condominium community and would not include uses that would generate long-term objectionable odors. Typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed project's long-term operational uses would be stored and 24 SCAQMD . 2024. South Coast AQMD Rule Book. Website: https://www.aqmd .gov/home/rules-compliance/ rules (accessed September 2025). 4-18 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA removed from the project site per City requirements; therefore, operation of the proposed project would not result in odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-19 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 4 .4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and 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? 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? Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ □ □ □ INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ The information and analysis in this section is based on the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the proposed project, which is provided in Appendix B. 25 Prior to conducting the field investigation, a literature review was performed using the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) QuickView Tool in the Biographic Information and Observation System, the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5, the California Native Plant Society's (CNPS) Electronic Inventory, the Calflora database, compendia of special-status species published by the CDFW, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) species listings. 25 ELMT Consulting. 2024. Biological Resources Assessment for the Proposed Project Located within Assessor Parcel Number 1108-081-04 in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California . January 8. (Appendix B). 4-20 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA The field investigation was conducted on October 25, 2023, and included walking transects throughout the project site to verify land cover types and plant communities identified on aerial photographs during the literature review. 4.4.1 Impact Analysis a. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The 11.99-acre project site is generally flat and is currently vacant and undeveloped. Vegetation on-site is characteristic of that common in disturbed areas. Native plant species were present at low densities and were scattered throughout the project area. The CNDDB Rarefind 5 and the CNPS Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California were queried for reported locations of special-status plant and wildlife species as well as special-status natural plant communities in the Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle. Only one quadrangle was queried due to the proximity of the project site to quadrangle boundaries, regional topography, and surrounding development. The habitat assessment evaluated the conditions of the habitat(s) within the boundaries of the project site to determine if the existing plant communities, at the time of the survey, have the potential to provide suitable habitat(s) for special-status plant and wildlife species. The literature search identified 20 special-status plant species, 45 special-status wildlife species, and 3 special-status plant communities as having the potential to occur within the Devore 7.5-minute quadrangle. Special-status plant and wildlife species were evaluated for their potential to occur within the project site based on habitat requirements, availability and quality of suitable habitat, and known distributions. Species determined to have the potential to occur within the general vicinity of the project site is presented in Attachment D: Potentially Occurring Special-Status Biological Resources of the Biological Resources Assessment, which is provided in Appendix B of this document. Special-Status Plants. No special-status plant species were observed on-site during the field investigation. The project site has been subject to anthropogenic disturbances from construction activities, spoils dumping, and adjacent and surrounding development; the latter of which has removed onsite habitats from historic hydrological regimes that once shaped the vegetative structure of plant communities in the area. These disturbances have reduced, if not eliminated, the suitability of the habitat to support special-status plant species known to occur in the general vicinity of the project site. Based on habitat requirements for specific special-status plant species, the availability and quality of habitats needed by each species, and known distributions, it was determined that the project site does not have potential to support any of the special-status plant species known to occur in the vicinity and all are presumed to be absent . No further surveys are recommended . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-21 LSA ENCL AV E N ORTH FONTAN A FONT ANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUD Y/M I TIG ATED NEG ATI VE DECL ARATI ON NO VEM BER 2025 Special-Status Wildlife. No special-status wildlife species were observed during the field investigation. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and the availability and quality of on-site habitats, it was determined that the proposed project has a high potential to support Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperii), Costa's hummingbird (Calypte costae), and California horned lark (Eremophi/a a/pestris actia); and a low potential to support Bell 's sage sparrow (Artemisiospiza be/Ii be/Ii). It was further determined that the project site does not have the potential to support any of the remaining special-status wildlife species known to occur in the vicinity and all are presumed to be absent . None of the aforementioned species are federally or State listed as endangered or threatened. Of the aforementioned avian species, only Costa's hummingbird and Bell's sage sparrow might be expected to nest on-site. Cooper's hawk is not expected to nest on-site due to the lack of suitable nesting opportunities and California horned lark is not expected to nest on-site as the presence of free-roaming domestic cats precludes ground-nesting avian species from nesting. Based on regional significance, the potential occurrence of burrowing owl, San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and California gnatcatcher within the project site are described in further detail below. Burrowing Owl. The burrowing owl is a candidate species for State listing and therefore afforded all the protections as though it were listed under the California Endangered Species Act . It is a grassland specialist distributed throughout western North America where it occupies open areas with short vegetation and bare ground w ithin shrub, desert, and grassland environments. Burrowing owls use a wide variety of arid and semi-arid environments with well-drained, level to gently-sloping areas characterized by sparse vegetation and bare ground . 26 Burrowing owls are dependent upon the presence of burrowing mammals (such as ground squirrels) whose burrows are used for roosting and nesting. 27 The presence or absence of colonial mammal burrows is often a major factor that limits the presence or absence of burrowing owls. Where mammal burrows are scarce, burrowing owls have been found occupying man-made cavities, such as buried and non-functioning drain pipes, stand-pipes, and dry culverts . Burrowing mammals may burrow beneath rocks and debris or large, heavy objects such as abandoned cars, concrete blocks , or concrete pads . They also require open vegetation allowing line-of-sight observation of the surrounding habitat to forage as well as watch for predators . No burrowing owls or recent sign (i.e ., pellets, feathers, castings , or whitewash) were observed during the field investigation . Portions of the project site are unvegetated and/or vegetated with low-growing plant species that allow for line-of-sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, the project site lacks suitable burrows (more than 4 inches in diameter) capable of providing nesting opportunities. In addition, the site is surrounded by electrical and light poles which provide perch i ng opportunities for larger raptor species (i.e., red-tailed hawk [Buteo jamaicensis]) 26 27 Haug, Elizabeth A. and Andrew B. Didiuk. 1993. "Use of Recorded Calls to Detect Burrowing Owls." Journal of Field Ornithology. 64(2): 188-194. Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. lgl, C. M . Goldade, P.A . Rabie, and B. R. Euliss. 1999 (revised 2002). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Burrowing Owl. Jamestown, North Dakota: Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Haug, Elizabeth A. and Andrew B. Didiuk. 1993. "Use of Recorded Calls to Detect Burrowing Owls ." Journal of Field Ornithology. 64(2): 188-194. 4-22 P:\2025\20252531-Encl ave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA that prey on burrowing owls. Burrowing owl is further precluded from establishing on-site due to the presence of free-roaming domestic cats. Based on the results of the field investigation, it was determined that the project site does not have potential to support burrowing owl and focused surveys are not recommended. However, out of an abundance of caution, a preconstruction burrowing owl survey shall be conducted as described in Mitigation Measure BI0-1 prior to development to ensure burrowing owl remain absent from the project site . Mitigation Measure BI0-1: Preconstruction surveys for burrowing owl shall be conducted prior to vegetation clearing or grading of the residential development site . Two surveys are required and shall follow the methods described in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW's) Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation. The first survey shall be conducted between 30 and 14 days before initial ground disturbance (grading, grubbing, and construction), and the second survey shall be conducted no more than 24 hours prior to initial ground disturbance. If burrowing owls and/or suitable burrowing owl burrows are identified on the residential development site during the survey, the project applicant(s) shall consult with CDFW and follow the methods listed in the CDFW's Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation for avoidance and/or passive relocation . If burrowing owls or suitable burrowing owl burrows with sign (e.g ., whitewash, pellets, feathers, prey remains) are identified on the residential development site during the survey(s), these features must be completely avoided . If impacts to those features are unavoidable, then the project applicant(s) must develop a burrowing owl mitigation plan in consultation with CDFW. Mitigation methods may include passive relocation conducted outside of the owl breeding season (between September 1 and February 28). If an active owl burrow is identified, and construction is to proceed, then a qualified biologist (with two or more years of burrowing owl experience) must establish an initial disturbance-limit buffer of 500 feet around the burrow using flagging or staking. The buffer distance may be reduced in coordination with CDFW depending on time of year (i.e., in or out of breeding season), level of construction activity, and observed behavior of the burrowing owls. Construction activities shall not occur within any buffer zones until the burrow is deemed inactive by the qualified biologist. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Fontana Community Development Director or designee . San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat. The San Bernardino kangaroo rat, federally listed as endangered , is one of several kangaroo rat species in its range . The Dulzura, the Pacific kangaroo rat (Dipodomys agilis) and the Stephens kangaroo rat (Dipodomys stephensi) occur in areas occupied by the San P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-23 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Bernardino kangaroo rat, but these other species have a wider habitat range. The habitat of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat is described as being confined to pioneer and intermediate Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS) habitats, with sandy soils deposited by fluvial (water) rather than Aeolian (wind) processes. Burrows are dug in loose soil, usually near or beneath shrubs. The increased use and historic alteration of river resources by human activity has resulted in a reduction in both the amount and quality of habitat available for the San Bernardino kangaroo rat. The past habitat losses and potential future losses prompted the emergency listing of the San Bernardino kangaroo rat as an endangered species . 28 San Bernardino kangaroo rat is known to occur within Lytle Creek . The project site was once subject to the hydrologic influence of Lytle Creek, which flows from the San Gabriel Mountains north of Fontana south to Warm Creek and the Santa Ana River. However, since the installation of Interstate 15 and associated flood control infrastructure in the mid-nineteenth century, the project site has been generally removed from the hydrological influences of Lytle Creek, resulting in the on-site RAFSS plant community no longer exhibiting the dynamic vegetative succession and diversity typical of this plant community. In addition, the development of extensive residential neighborhood tracts in the mid -1990s thoroughly isolated the project site from suitable habitats within downstream portions of Lytle Creek. Field sign for kangaroo rat, including San Bernardino kangaroo rat, is distinctive and readily noted in the field. No sign (e.g., San Bernardino kangaroo rat characteristic burrows, dusting baths, and/or tail drags) was observed during the field investigation. Additionally, the project site no longer is subject to the hydrologic influence of Lytle Creek due to the channelization of Lytle Creek flood control purposes, and the project site is not subject to dynamic geomorphological and hydrological processes needed to scour and reset the onsite habitats back to pioneer or intermediate RAFSS habitats. Further, the project site no longer receives sand or sandy loam soils from scouring events needed by San Bernardino kangaroo rat for burrowing. Instead, the site supports compact and rocky soils . Based on these conditions, it was determined that the project site does not provide the requisite habitat elements needed by San Bernardino kangaroo rat to be present. Therefore, it was determined that San Bernardino kangaroo rat is presumed absent from the project site. No focused surveys are recommended. In 2002 the USFWS designated Critical Habitat for San Bernardino kangaroo rat, and the project site was included within the designated area. Subsequently, in 2008 the USFWS reduced the boundaries of their previously designated Critical Habitat which removed the project site from designation. The lack of the needed habitat features within the project site, as well as in north Fontana more generally, prompted USFWS to remove the Critical Habitat designation in this area. Finally, at the beginning of 2011 the original (2002) designated Critical Habitat was reinstated by a federal district court ruling which overturned the reduced (2008) designated Critical Habitat. Currently the project 28 United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. ETWP; Final Rule To List the San Bernardino kangaroo Rat as Endangered . Website : https://www.fws.gov/species-publication-action/etwp-final-rule-list-san- bernardino-kangaroo-rat-endangered (accessed October 2025). 4-24 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA site is located within designated Critical Habitat Unit 2, Lytle Creek/Cajon Wash. However, since the project does not have a federal nexus, a Section 7 consultation with the USFWS would not be required for loss or adverse modification of Critical Habitat. If a federal nexus does occur, a Section 7 Consultation will have to be initiated with USFWS. California Gnatcatcher. California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species with restricted habitat requirements, being an obligate resident of sage scrub habitats that are dominated by California sagebrush . This species generally occurs below 750 feet elevation in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet inland, with 99 percent of all California gnatcatcher observations occurring in areas with elevations below 950 feet . 29 California gnatcatcher ranges from Ventura County south to San Diego County and northern Baja California and is less common in sage scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs, preferring habitat with more low-growing vegetation . Population declines are attributed to loss of sage scrub habitat due to development, as well as cowbird nest parasitism . The project site ranges in approximate elevation from 1,560 to 1,585 feet above mean sea level , which is just below the known elevational range of California gnatcatcher. California gnatcatcher's preferred habitat is coastal sage scrub dominated by California sage brush. The project site does not support coastal sage scrub habitat. In addition, the site is isolated from California gnatcatcher occupied coastal sage scrub habitats and linkage areas in the region by surrounding development. Given the degraded condition of the site, plus the lack of any observation of California gnatcatcher in north Fontana and isolation of the site due to the recent development of surrounding properties, it is highly unlikely that the site might support this species. Therefore, California gnatcatcher is presumed to be absent from the project site. No further surveys are recommended . Special-Status Plant Communities. According to the CNDDB, three special-status plant communities have been reported in the Devore USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle: RAFSS, Southern Riparian Forest, and Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland (refer to Appendix B, Attachment D). No special- status plant communities were observed onsite . Special-Status Avian Species. As previously stated, special status avian species have the potential to nest in the project area. In order to ensure impacts to special-status avian species (i.e., Bell's sage sparrow, California horned lark, Cooper's hawk, Costa's hummingbird, and loggerhead shrike) do not occur from implementation of the proposed project, Mitigation Measure 810-2 would require a pre- construction nesting bird clearance survey be conducted prior to ground disturbance. With implementation of Mitigation Measures 810-1 and 810-2, impacts to special-status avian species would be less than significant. Mitigation Measure 810-2 If construction occurs between February 1st and August 31st, a pre- construction clearance survey for nesting birds, including burrowing owls, should be conducted within three (3) days of the start of any vegetation removal or ground disturbing activities to ensure that no nesting birds will be disturbed during construction . The biologist conducting the clearance survey should document a negative survey 29 Atwood, J. and J. Bolsinger. 1992. "Elevational Distribution of California Gnatcatchers in the United States," Journal of Field Ornithology, 63(2):159-168. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-25 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 with a brief letter report indicating that no impacts to active avian nests will occur. If an active avian nest is discovered during the pre- construction clearance survey, construction activities should stay outside of a no-disturbance buffer. The size of the no-disturbance buffer will be determined by the wildlife biologist and will depend on the level of noise and/or surrounding anthropogenic disturbances, line of sight between the nest and the construction activity, type and duration of construction activity, ambient noise, species habituation, and topographical barriers . These factors will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis when developing buffer distances. Limits of construction to avoid an active nest will be established in the field with flagging, fencing, or other appropriate barriers; and construction personnel will be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. A biological monitor should be present to delineate the boundaries of the buffer area and to monitor the active nest to ensure that nesting behavior is not adversely affected by the construction activity. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, construction activities within the buffer area can occur. b. Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S . Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact . According to the Biological Resources Assessment, there are no riparian corridors or other sensitive natural communities within or connected to the project site . The project site supports one plant community: degraded chamise chaparral. Therefore, no impact on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community would occur, and no mitigation is required . 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 consists of degraded chamise chaparral and is dominated by non-native species. No state or federally protected wetlands or Waters of the U.S . were identified on the project site during the field survey. No drainage features, ponded areas, wetlands, or riparian habitat subject to jurisdiction of the CDFW, United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and/or Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) were observed on the project site during the field survey; therefore, no impact on federally protected wetlands would occur, and no mitigation is required. 4-26 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA d. Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Habitat linkages provide connections between larger habitat areas that are separated by development. Wildlife corridors are similar to linkages but provide specific opportunities for animals to disperse or migrate between areas. A corridor can be defined as a linear landscape feature of sufficient width to allow animal movement between two comparatively undisturbed habitat fragments . Adequate cover is essential for a corridor to function as a wildlife movement area . It is possible for a habitat corridor to be adequate for one species yet still inadequate for others. Wildlife corridors are features that allow for the dispersal, seasonal migration, breeding, and foraging of a variety of wildlife species . Additionally, open space can provide a buffer against both human disturbance and natural fluctuations in resources . According to the San Bernardino County General Plan, the project site is not mapped as occurring within or adjacent to any Major Open Space Areas. The nearest Major Open Space Area to the project site is Cajon Pass; in proximity to the site, the Cajon Pass is composed of the Lytle Creek and Cajon Creek washes. However, in the years since the Major Open Space Areas were mapped, the southwest portion of the Cajon Pass has been largely developed and presently supports mostly residential tract neighborhoods. At present, remaining open space in proximity to the project site occurs approximately 1.5 miles to the northeast beyond existing development. Additionally, there are no riparian corridors, creeks, or useful patches of steppingstone habitat (natural areas) within or connecting the project site to these, or any other, identified wildlife corridors or linkages. As a result, implementation of the proposed project would not disrupt or have any adverse effects on any migratory corridors or linkages in the surrounding area. The project site and surrounding area provide suitable foraging habitat and nesting opportunities for a variety of year-round and seasonal avian residents, as well as migrating songbirds that could occur in the area. In addition, the project site has the potential to provide suitable nesting opportunities for birds that nest on the open ground. No active avian nests or birds exhibiting nesting behavior were observed during the field investigation, which was conducted outside of breeding season . Raptors are not expected to nest onsite due to the lack of suitable nesting opportunities. Nesting birds are protected pursuant to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513 prohibit the take, possession , or destruction of birds, their nests or eggs). With implementation of Mitigation Measure BI0-1, impacts to nesting birds would be less than significant . e. Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. Chapter 28.61-.75 of the Fontana Municipal Code (or Code) addresses tree protection, maintenance, and replacement policies . It outlines the definition of a "heritage tree", "significant tree", and "specimen tree" and the procedures necessary to replacing them within a property. As P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-27 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 stated in the City's Code, "Except as provided in section 28-65, no person shall remove or cause the removal of any heritage, significant or specimen tree unless a tree removal permit is first obtained." Heritage tree means any tree which: 1. Is of historical value because of its association with a place, building, natural feature or event of local, regional or national historical significance as identified by city council resolution; or 2. Is representative of a significant period of the city's growth or development (windrow tree, European Olive tree); or 3. Is a protected or endangered species as specified by federal or state statute; or 4. Is deemed historically or culturally significant by the city manager or his or her designee because of size, condition, location or aesthetic qualities. Windrow means a series of trees (minimum of four), usually a variety of eucalyptus, planted in a closely spaced line no more than 10 feet apart to provide a windbreak for the protection of property and/or agricultural crops. Significant tree means any tree that is one of the following species: Southern California black walnut (Jug/ans californica); Coast live oak (Quercus agrifollia); Deodora cedar (Cedrus deodora); California (western) sycamore {Platanus racemose); and London plane (Platanus acerifolia) Specimen tree is defined as a mature tree (which is not a heritage or significant tree) which is an excellent example of its species in structure and aesthetics and warrants preservation, relocation or replacement. Specimen trees shall not include any tree located on a private parcel of property of less than one acre zoned for residential use. There are no trees on the project site that meet any of the criteria listed in the City's Tree Ordinance. Therefore, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. f Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The North Fontana Conservation Program (previously referred to as the North Fontana Interim Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan) was prepared to address lands in north Fontana and the listed and special-status species that have the potential to occur on these lands . The proposed project site, though located in north Fontana, does not overlap with the North Fontana Conservation Program lands. The project site does not lie within an area covered by any other adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with a conservation plan and no impact would occur. No mitigation is required. 4-28 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project : 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 Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated □ □ □ Less Than Significant Impact [8l [8l [8l LSA No Impact □ □ □ Cultural resources are broadly defined as any physical manifestations of human activity that are at least 50 years of age and may include archaeological resources as well as historic-era buildings and structures. Archaeological resources include both precontact remains and remains dating to the historical period. Precontact (or Native American) archaeological resources are physical manifestations of human activities that predate written records and may include village sites, temporary camps, lithic (stone tool) scatters, rock art, roasting pits/hearths, milling features, rock features, and burials. Historic archaeological resources can include refuse heaps, bottle dumps, ceramic scatters, privies, foundations, and burials and are generally associated in California with the Spanish Mission Period {1769 through 1833) through the mid-late 20th century {1970s). Archaeological resources that are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places {National Register), California Register of Historical Resources {California Register), or a local register are considered historical resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 defines the term "historical resource" as: 1. A resource listed in or determined to be eligible by the State Historical Resources Commission, for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (Pub . Res . Code Section 5024 .1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4850 et seq .). 2. A resource included in a local register of historical resources, as defined in Section 5020 .l{k) of the Public Resources Code, or identified as significant in an historical resource survey meeting the requirements of Section 5024.l(g) of the Public Resources Code, shall be presumed to be historically or culturally significant. Public agencies must treat any such resource as significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that it is not historically or culturally significant. 3. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript which a lead agency determines to be historically significant or significant in the architectural, engineering, scientific, economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural annals of California may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency's determination is supported by substantial evidence in light of the whole record . Generally, a resource shall be considered by the lead agency to be "historically significant" if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-29 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 California Register of Historical Resources (Pub. Res. Code, Section 5024.1, Title 14 CCR, Section 4852) including the following: a. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. b. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. c. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values . d. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. A "substantial adverse change" to a historical resource, according to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 5020.l(q), "means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired ." The information and analysis in this section is based on the Cultural Resources Assessment prepared for the proposed project, which is provided in Appendix C. 30 a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less than Significant Impact. A Cultural Resources Assessment was prepared for the proposed project site, and included an archaeological and historical records search, additional research (e.g., historic and aerial maps of the site), and an intensive pedestrian survey of the site. A previous cultural resources assessment records search, additional research, review of an earlier study encompassed the project site, and field survey was conducted in 2004.31 The records search of the proposed project site and a one-mile radius was conducted on August 25, 2025, at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC) at California State University Fullerton. The SCCIC returned the records search results on October 22, 2025, and identified 43 historic resources and 42 previous cultural resource investigations recorded within the 1-mile search radius of the project area. Of the previous cultural resource investigations recorded, 2 were conducted, with negative results, within portions of the project area. Additionally, a single historic resource was previously identified within the project area: the historic Grapeland Homestead and Water Works Historic District, site P-36-015376, is mapped within the project area . The extreme southwestern portion of the District intersects the current project area . As one of the earliest settler communities in the region, the District spans over 10,000 acres and 30 31 LSA. 2025c. Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. October 28. (Appendix C) McKenna, Jeanette A. 2004. A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fontana Unified School District Elementary School #33 Project Area in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, CA . 4-30 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA includes a number of historic farmsteads/homesteads, historic homes, and water distribution systems. Additional research, including on line historic-period maps and aerial photographs of the project site, revealed that the subject parcel has been vacant since at least the 1950s, and that over time, the parcel has been subject to disturbance for agricultural purposes . In the past 20 years, disturbances to the parcel appear to be related to nearby construction episodes on adjacent parcels . Sometime in 2015, a trailer, likely related to nearby home construction, was placed in the southwestern corner of the parcel; that trailer is still present today. 32 Cultural resource field reconnaissance of the entire project site was conducted on October 9, 2025, which included surveying the project area by walking transects spaced 10 meters apart, with particular attention given to exposed areas and rodent aprons for cultural residues . The project area is a vacant lot on a site that has been disced and bulldozed repeatedly, based upon historic aerials of the project area . A single construction trailer remains in the southwest corner of the parcel, potentially remaining from previous episodes of housing developments on adjacent parcels . Vegetation observed on site includes Russian thistle, ironwood/greasewood, seasonal grasses, and California buckwheat. Many push piles from previous razing of property were seen throughout the parcel. The majority of the project area surface was disturbed, and visibility was poor, with approximately 90 percent of the ground surface obscured by vegetation. Modern refuse was noted throughout the site but concentrated along the southwest corner and the north and south perimeter. No additional historic or prehistoric cultural resources were identified. Although the southwestern extant of historic site P-36-015376 is within the project area, no historic features were previously documented within project site, and none were identified by the 2004 and 2025 field surveys . 33 The negative findings and severely disturbed condition of the project site (due to grading and vegetation abatement activities) are consistent with those of the earlier study that included the project site and indicated a lack of sensitivity for in situ subsurface cultural resources. Therefore, similar to the conclusions of the 2005 study in the project area, no further cultural resources work or archaeological monitoring are recommended . The following Standard Conditions would also apply, to ensure that, in the event that any previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered, the proposed project would not result in significant impacts. Standard Condition CUL-1: Upon discovery of any cultural, tribal cultural, or archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed by an archaeological monitor who would be retained by the project applicant to monitor all 32 33 LSA. 2025. Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. October 28. (Appendix C) McKenna, Jeanette A . 2004 . A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fontana Unified School District Elementary School #33 Project Area in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, CA . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-31 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Standard Condition CUL-2: Standard Condition CUL-3: INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 subsequent ground-disturbing activity in native soils under the supervision of a project archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for archaeology. All cultural, tribal cultural and archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the archaeological monitor and tribal monitor/consultant. If the resources are Native American in origin, the property owner shall coordinate with interested Tribes (as a result of correspondence with area Tribes) regarding treatment and cu ration of these resources. Typically, the Tribes will request preservation in place or recovery for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project site while evaluation takes place. Preservation in place shall be the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavation to remove the resource from the area of ground disturbance along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. All removed Tribal Cultural Resources shall be returned to the Tribes. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to the Tribe or a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes. Archaeological and Native American monitoring and excavation during construction projects shall be consistent with current professional standards. All feasible care to avoid any unnecessary disturbance, physical modification, or separation of human remains and associated funerary objects shall be taken. Principal personnel shall meet the Secretary of the Interior standards for archaeology and have a minimum of 10 years' experience as a principal investigator working with Native American archaeological sites in southern California. The principal personnel shall ensure that the archaeological monitor and all other personnel are appropriately trained and qualified. With implementation of Standard Conditions CUL-1 through CUL-3, any historic resource detected would be protected during project construction and managed in accordance with applicable regulations. Impacts associated with a substantial change in the significance of a historic resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required . 4-32 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.5 above, the records search, additional research, and pedestrian survey, conducted as part of the Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed project did not identify any archaeological resources as defined under CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 on or within one mile of the project site. As stated in Section 4.5, the negative findings and severely disturbed condition of the project site (due to grading and vegetation abatement activities) are consistent with those of the earlier study that included the project site and indicated a lack of sensitivity for in situ subsurface cultural resources . With compliance with Standard Conditions CUL-1 through CUL-3, any archeological resource detected would be protected during project construction and managed in accordance with applicable regulations . Impacts associated with a substantial change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required . c. Would the project disturb any humans remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Sections 4.5{a) and 4.5{b) above, the Cultural Resources Assessment determined that the potential for encountering subsurface cultural resources during construction is low. No evidence suggests the project site has been formally or informally used to inter human remains; therefore, there would also be a low potential for the project to disturb human remains . The proposed project must comply with all applicable regulations protecting human remains, should they be encountered, including Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, which requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains while the coroner determines whether the remains are those of a Native American. If human remains are determined as those of Native American origin, the project applicant shall comply with the State Health and Safety Code relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC {PRC Section 5097). Additionally, Section 7052 of the California Health and Safety Code states that disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony. Accordingly, City Standard Condition CUL-4 is prescribed to ensure that human remains (or remains that may be human), including Native American human remains, would be protected if they are discovered during project construction. With implementation of Standard Condition CUL-4 human remains would be protected during project construction. Standard Condition CUL-4 In the event human remains are encountered, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The County Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American , the County Coroner would notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), which would determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant {MLD). With P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-33 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 the permission of the landowner or his/her authorized representative, the MLD may inspect the site of the discovery. The MLD shall complete the inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD recommendations may include scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials, preservation of Native American human remains and associated items in place, relinquishment of Native American human remains and associated items to the descendants for treatment, or any other culturally appropriate treatment. With implementation of the standard condition identified above, impacts would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required. 4-34 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 4.6 ENERGY Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project : a. Result in a 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? The following analysis is based in part on the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum 34 prepared for the proposed project, which is included in full as Appendix A to this Initial Study. The project site is within the service territory of Southern California Edison (SCE). SCE provides electricity to more than 15 million people in a 50,000-square-mile area of Central, Coastal, and Southern California. 35 According to the California Energy Commission (CEC), total electricity consumption in the SCE service area in 2024 was gigawatt-hours (GWh). Total electricity consumption in San Bernardino County in 2024 was 16,206 GWh (16,206,000,000 kilowatt-hours [kWh]).36 Natural gas within the Southern California Gas service area in 2024 was 4,959 million therms.37 Total natural gas consumption in San Bernardino County in 2024 was 547 .2 million therms (547,200,000 therms).38 Gasoline is the most used transportation fuel in California, with 97 percent of all gasoline being consumed by light-duty cars, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles. According to the most recent data available, in 2021, total gasoline consumption in California was 289,918 thousand barrels (12 .2 billion gallons) or 1,464.7 trillion British Thermal Units (BTU).39 Of the total gasoline consumption, 273,289 thousand barrels (11.5 billion gallons) or 1,380.7 trillion BTU were consumed for transportation .40 Based on fuel consumption obtained from CARB 's California Emissions Factor 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 LSA . 2025 . Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. September 30. Southern California Edison. n.d. About Us . Website: https://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are (accessed September 2025). California Energy Commission (CEC). 2025a. California Electricity Consumption Dashboard. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy- consumption-dashboards-O (accessed September 2025). CEC. 2025b . Natural Gas Consumption Dashboard . Website: https://www.energy.ca .gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-1 (accessed September 2025). Ibid. United States Energy Information Administration (EIA). 2022. California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Data. Website: www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.php?incfile=/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_mg.html& sid=CA (accessed September 2025). Ibid . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-35 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Model, Version 2025 (EMFAC2025), approximately 753.2 million gallons of gasoline and approximately 306.6 million gallons of diesel will be consumed from vehicle trips in San Bernardino County in 2025. 4.6.1 Impact Analysis a. Would the project result in a 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 increase the demand for electricity and gasoline when compared to existing site conditions. The discussion and analysis provided below is based on the data included in the CalEEMod output files, which are included in Appendix A. Construction-Period Energy Use. The anticipated construction schedule assumes that the proposed project would begin in July 2026 and end in September 2028. Construction activities include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, and architectural coating activities. Construction would require energy for the manufacture and transportation of construction materials and construction workers, preparation of the site for grading and building activities, and construction of the building. All or most of this energy would be derived from nonrenewable resources. Petroleum fuels (e.g ., diesel and gasoline) would be the primary sources of energy for these activities. Construction equipment would not utilize natural gas and would not run on electricity. Therefore, the analysis of energy use during construction focuses on fuel consumption. Construction trucks and vendor trucks hauling materials to and from the project site would be anticipated to use diesel fuel, whereas construction workers traveling to and from the project site would be anticipated to use gasoline-powered vehicles . Fuel consumption from transportation uses depends on the type and number of trips, VMT, the fuel efficiency of the vehicles, and the travel mode. Construction activities would involve the use of standard construction material that is similar to other developments in the region. No unusual project characteristics would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy efficient than at comparable construction sites in the region or the State. Construction activities are not anticipated to result in an inefficient use of energy as gasoline and diesel fuel would be supplied by construction contractors who would conserve the use of their supplies to minimize their costs on the project. The proposed project would also utilize construction equipment that meets Tier 2 emissions standards equipped with Level 3 diesel particulate filters or the equivalent, which would ensure fuel efficiency. The project would also not cause or result in the need for additional energy facilities or an additional or expanded delivery system. For these reasons, fuel consumption during construction would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Therefore, construction energy impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Operational Energy Use. Operational energy use is typically associated with natural gas use, electricity consumption, and fuel used for vehicle trips. Electricity consumption was estimated for 4-36 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA the project using default energy intensities by land use type in CalEEMod. The proposed project would be all-electric and would not require the use of natural gas, which was assumed in CalEEMod. Table 4.6.A shows the estimated potential increased electricity, gasoline, and diesel demand associated with the proposed project. The electricity rates are from the CalEEMod analysis, while the gasoline and diesel rates are based on the traffic analysis in conjunction with USDOT fuel efficiency data, the EPA's fuel economy estimates, and the California diesel fuel economy estimates. Table 4.6.A: Estimated Annual Energy Use of Proposed Project Electricity Use (kWh per year) Proposed Project 932,344 Source : Compiled by LSA {September 2025). kWh = kilowatt hours Natural Gas Use (therms per year) 0 Gasoline Diesel (gallons per year) (gallons per year) 134,585 96,874 As shown in Table 4.6 .A, the estimated increase in electricity demand associated with the operation of the proposed project would be 932,344 kWh per year. Total electricity consumption in San Bernardino County in 2024 was 16,206,000,000 kWh. 41 Therefore, operation of the proposed project would negligibly increase the annual electricity consumption in San Bernardino County by less than 0.1 percent. The proposed project would also result in energy usage associated with motor vehicle gasoline to fuel project-related trips. The average fuel economy for light-duty vehicles (automobiles, pickups, vans, and sport utility vehicles) in the United States has steadily increased, from about 14.9 miles per gallon (mpg) in 1980 to 22.6 mpg in 2023 .42 The average fuel economy for heavy-duty trucks in the United States has also steadily increased, from 5.7 mpg in 2013 to a projected 8.0 mpg in 2021.43 Using these gasoline and diesel fuel economy estimates and the trip generation, fleet mix, and VMT from the project traffic analyses, the proposed project is estimated to result in the consumption of 134,585 gallons of gasoline and 96,874 gallons of diesel per year (as shown above in Table J). This analysis conservatively assumes that all vehicle trips generated as a result of project operation would be new to San Bernardino County. Based on fuel consumption obtained from EMFAC2025, approximately 753.2 million gallons of gasoline and approximately 306.6 million gallons of diesel will be consumed from vehicle trips in San Bernardino County in 2025. Therefore, vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would increase the annual fuel use in San Bernardino County by less than 0.1 percent for gasoline fuel usage and less than 0.1 percent for diesel fuel usage . 41 42 43 CEC. 2025a . California Electricity Consumption Dashboard . Website: https ://www.energy.ca .gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-O (accessed September 2025). United States Department of Transportation (DOT). 2025. Average Fuel Efficiency of U.S. Light Duty Vehicles. Website: www.bts.gov/content/average-fuel-efficiency-us-light-duty-vehicles (accessed October 2025). CEC. 2015 . Medium and Heavy-Duty Truck Prices and Fuel Economy 2013-2026. Website : efiling .energy.ca .gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=206180 (accessed October 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-37 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 In addition, vehicles associated with trips to and from the project site would be subject to fuel economy and efficiency standards, which are applicable throughout the State. As such, the fuel efficiency of vehicles associated with project operations would increase throughout the life of the proposed project. As described in the project's VMT Analysis 44, the proposed project would have a less than significant VMT impact. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in a substantial increase in transportation-related energy uses . In addition, since the proposed project would result in fuel usage that is a small fraction of current annual fuel use in San Bernardino County, and fuel consumption associated with vehicle trips generated by project operations would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary in comparison to other similar developments in the region. Therefore, gasoline demand generated by vehicle trips associated with the proposed project would be a minimal fraction of gasoline and diesel fuel consumption in California . Furthermore, the proposed project would be constructed using energy efficient modern building materials and construction practices, and the proposed project also would use new modern appliances and equipment, in accordance with the Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608). In addition, the proposed project would comply with the latest CALGreen and Title 24 Standards regarding energy conservation and green building standards, including solar in accordance with code requirements that would further offset energy usage. Furthermore, the proposed project would be all-electric and would not include natural gas. The elimination of natural gas in new development would help projects implement their "fair share" of achieving long-term 2045 carbon neutrality consistent with State goals. The expected energy consumption during construction and operation of the proposed project would be consistent with typical usage rates for residential uses; however, energy consumption is largely a function of personal choice and the physical structure and layout of buildings. As such, the proposed project would not result in a potential significant impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. The most recently adopted CEC energy report is the 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update.45 The 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update provides the results of the CEC's assessments of a variety of energy issues facing California. Many of these issues will require action if the State is to meet its climate, energy, air quality, and other environmental goals while maintaining energy reliability and controlling costs. The 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update covers a broad range of topics, including decarbonizing buildings, integrating renewables, energy efficiency, energy equity, integrating renewable energy, updates on Southern California electricity reliability, climate adaptation activities for the energy sector, natural gas assessment, transportation energy demand forecasts, and the California Energy Demand Forecast. As indicated above, energy usage on the project site during construction would be temporary in nature and would be relatively small in comparison to the State's available energy sources. In 44 Translutions, 2025b. The Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis . May 19 . 45 CEC. 2024 . 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update . Docket Number 24-IEPR-0l. 4-38 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA addition, energy usage associated with operation of the proposed project would be relatively small in comparison to the region's available energy sources, and energy impacts would be negligible at the regional level. Because California's energy conservation planning actions are conducted at a regional level, and because the project's total impact on regional energy supplies would be minor, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct California's energy conservation plans as described in the 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update . In addition, as demonstrated in GHG analysis below, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals of the County's Regional GHGRP, the 2022 Scoping Plan , and SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, as discussed in Section 4 .8.1. As such, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct any State or local plans related to renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-39 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. 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 di sposal 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 Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact □ □ ~ □ □ □ ~ □ □ □ ~ □ ~ □ ~ □ □ □ □ □ □ ~ ~ □ □ The information and analysis in this section is based on the Geotechnical lnvestigation 46 prepared for the proposed project, provided in Appendix D. a. Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving : i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. The project site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone as defined by the State of California in the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Act of 1972 or as defined by the City's 46 RMA Group . 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA . January 9 . 4-40 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. 47 48 The nearest Earthquake Fault Zone is located approximately 2 miles northwest of the project site, along the Cucamonga Fault. 49 As such, the risk of ground rupture due to fault displacement beneath the site is low. No impact related to fault rupture would result from the implementation of the project. Mitigation is not required. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located within a seismically active region, with a number of faults traversing or in proximity to the City. The San Andreas, San Jacinto, and Cucamonga faults are the dominate faults that pose seismic hazard for the city. 50 Due to the presence of nearby faults, the project site is expected to be subject to occasionally moderate to severe ground-shaking, as well as some background shaking from other seismically active areas in the Southern California region . The extent of ground-shaking associated with an earthquake is dependent upon the size of the earthquake and the geologic material of the underlying area. Therefore, the project would have the potential to directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death from seismic ground- shaking. Seismic activity of the San Andreas fault system would be capable of producing magnitude 7 or larger events. Construction and development of the project would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Code (CBC). State law requires the design and construction of new structures comply with CBC requirements, which address general geologic, seismic (including ground shaking), and soil constraints for new buildings. Additionally, the site-specific geotechnical investigation (see Appendix D) prepared for the proposed project provided grading and construction recommendations for the project's design and construction in conformance with the 2022 CBC requirements . 51 Mitigation Measure GE0-1 is prescribed to ensure that the project is constructed in conformance with the current CBC, applicable City standards, and recommendations identified in the site-specific geotechnical investigation (attached as Appendix D of this Initial Study) to ensure that project development would be safeguarded against the effects of seismic related activity that may occur on- site. Therefore, impacts from seismic ground-shaking would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated . Mitigation Measure GE0-1 Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City of Fontana (City) for 47 City of Fontana . 2017 . Local Hazard Mitigation Plan . Figure 4-9 : Active Fault Map. June . Approved and Adopted August 14, 2018 . 48 RMA Group . 2024 . Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. Page 3. January 9. 49 Ibid. 5° City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Page 59. June . Approved and Adopted August 14, 2018 . 51 The 2022 edition of the California Building Code has been adopted as the building code of the city, and codified in Chapter 5, Article Ill (California Building Code) of the City Municipal Code . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-41 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 review and approval that the proposed project site, residential buildings, all ancillary structures and facilities, and associated infrastructure have been designed and would be constructed in conformance with applicable provisions of the 2022 edition of the California Building Code (CBC) (or the most current edition of the CBC in effect at the time the development application is deemed complete by the City). Additionally, the project applicant shall provide evidence to the City that the earthwork recommendations cited in the project-specific Geotechnical Investigation are incorporated into project plans and/or implemented as deemed appropriate by the City. Geotechnical recommendations include, but are not limited to, removal of existing vegetation, utilities, and any other surface and subsurface improvements that would not remain in place for use with the new development. Earthwork, fill materials, and excavation activities shall occur as specified in the Geotechnical Investigation. The City's Building Official, or designee, shall confirm recommendations have been implemented into the design and construction of the proposed project prior to the issuance of a building permit. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. Liquefaction occurs when loose, unconsolidated, water-laden soils are subject to shaking, causing the soils to lose cohesion. The primary factors that influence the potential for liquefaction include groundwater table elevation, soil type and plasticity characteristics, relative density of the soil, initial confining pressure, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. The depth within which the occurrence of liquefaction may impact surface improvements is generally identified as the upper 50 feet below the existing ground surface. The project site is not located within a potential liquefaction zone. 52 Additionally, the Geotechnical Investigation states that the groundwater table was not encountered and is mapped at least 300 feet below the ground surface, and liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur and is not considered a design concern.53 Therefore, the likelihood of liquefaction occurring on the project site is low, and impacts associated with liquefaction would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. 52 53 County of San Bernardino. n.d. San Bernardino County Land Use Plan, General Plan Geologic Hazard Overlay, number FH21C. Website: https://lus.sbcounty.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/48/GeoHazMaps/FH21C-20100309.pdf (accessed September 2, 2025). RMA Group. 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. p 9 . January 9 . 4-42 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 iv. Landslides? ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA No Impact. Factors that contribute to slope failure include slope height and steepness. The project site and immediate areas exhibit level topography with low gradient. 54 The California Geological Survey has not yet prepared a Seismic Hazard Zone Map of landslide hazards for the quadrangle in which the site is located . 55 Therefore, the likelihood of a landslide on the project site is low, and there would be no impact associated with landslides. Mitigation is not required. b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. The 11.99-acre project site is generally flat and is currently vacant . During construction, earth movement may increase the potential for the erosion of on-site soils. Potential erosion impacts from project construction would be reduced through the implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and incorporation of best management practices (BMPs) intended to reduce soil erosion during construction pursuant to Standard Conditions HVD-1 and HVD-2, as identified in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality.56 Ground cover on-site consists of native grasses, weeds, and shrubs . Development of the proposed project would increase the impervious surface as in its existing condition, the site has no impervious area. 57 As such, the potential for soil erosion from the site is low during project operation. Additionally, potential erosion impacts from project operation would be reduced through implementation of the project-specific Water Quality Management Plan {WQMP) and compliance with City Municipal Code requirements, which incorporate measures to capture excess stormwater runoff and prevent soil erosion to downstream water courses from new development and significant redevelopment of the site pursuant to Standard Conditions HVD-3 and HVD-4. Refer to Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, for additional information regarding the project 's compliance with regulations to reduce potential erosion impacts during project construction and operation. Adherence to the BMPs contained in the SWPPP and WQMP would ensure appropriate measures are taken to prevent the substantial loss of topsoil and erosion from occurring during project construction and operation. Therefore, impacts related to soil erosion would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . 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 with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site and immediate areas exhibit level topography and are surrounded by urban development. There is no evidence of landslides 54 55 56 57 Ibid, p. 10. Ibid. Pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program and Chapter 23, Article IX, Section 23-519 (Regulation of construction and industrial discharges) of the City Municipal Code. K&A Engineering, Inc . 2024 . Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690, The Enclave, City of Fontana. February. p . 3-2 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-43 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 and/or slope instabilities on the project site. As detailed in Section 3.7(a)(iii) and (iv) above, the project site is not located in an area considered susceptible to liquefaction or landslides. Lateral spreading is a type of liquefaction-induced ground failure associated with the lateral displacement of surficial blocks of sediment resulting from liquefaction in a subsurface layer. Based on the site conditions, proposed grading, depth to groundwater, and level topography, the potential for lateral spreading at the project site is considered unlikely. The project site exhibits level topography and is currently undeveloped. The site is covered by topsoil and Holocene age alluvial fan deposits, generally consisting of loose, dry, silty sands that extend from the ground surface to depths of 1 to 3 feet . Based on the site conditions, proposed grading, depth to groundwater exceeding 300 feet, and gentle topography across the site, landsliding, liquefaction, ground subsidence, ground lurching and lateral spreading are considered unlikely at the site. As discussed in Section 3.7(a), the project would be required to comply with all applicable CBC, City standards, and recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation pursuant to Mitigation Measure GE0-1. With implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-1, soils would be sufficiently compacted and densified during construction to bear the weight of the proposed on-site structures, which would stabilize soils and prevent subsidence and/or collapse from occurring on-site. Therefore, impacts from subsidence and/or collapse would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 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 with Mitigation Incorporated. Expansive soils generally have a substantial amount of clay particles, which can give up water (shrink) or absorb water (swell). The change in the volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils. The amount and types of clay present in the soil influence the extent or range of the shrink/swell. The occurrence of clayey soils is often associated with geologic units having marginal stability. Expansive soils can be widely dispersed, and they can occur along hillside areas as well as low-lying alluvial basins. Soils at the site were generally granular, non-plastic, and classified as having low expansion potential.58 However, the Geotechnical Investigation recommended additional reinforcement of footings given the seismic setting of the project. As discussed in Section 5.7(a), the project would be required to comply with all applicable CBC, City standards, and recommendations of the project-specific geotechnical report pursuant to Mitigation Measure GE0-1. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-1 would ensure that impacts from expansive soils would not occur, and the project would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. As such, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 58 RMA Group. 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. Page 10. January 9 . 4-44 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project would connect to the municipal wastewater collection system along Curtis Avenue, and no septic systems are proposed. Therefore, no impact related to the septic system or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur. Mitigation is not required. f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is underlain by Holocene age alluvial fan deposits . According to the Geotechnical Investigation, the alluvium consists of surficial layer of loose silty sand that extends for the ground surface to depths of 1 to 3 feet and rests on poorly graded gravelly sand with silt. 59 Generally, Holocene sediments are too young to contain paleontological resources, but they are possibly underlain by Pleistocene sediments, which have yielded significant paleontological resources elsewhere in San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, and Orange counties. Although Holocene (less than 11,700 years ago) deposits can contain remains of plants and animals, only those from the middle to early Holocene (4,200 to 11,700 years ago) are considered scientifically important, and fossils from this time interval are not very common. Therefore, young alluvial fan deposits (Unit 5) (less than 4,200 years ago) are assigned a low paleontological sensitivity. The City's General Plan EIR (Section 5.4.1.5) states, " ... Pleistocene older fan deposits exposed at surface levels that have been mapped along the western area of the City near the intersection of Interstate 15 and SR-210 and also in the southwestern areas of the City .. .Within these Pleistocene older deposits, the potential for paleontological resources is considered to be high. Paleontological resources, including the remains of a saber-tooth cat, have been recovered in the southwest area and many fossils that include Pleistocene mega-faunal (e .g. mammoth, camels, horses have been recovered from the Jurupa Basin area near the intersection of Jurupa Avenue and Mulberry Avenue within the City of Fontana."60 These areas are located respectively 2.1 miles west and 7 .3 miles southwest from the project site. Due to the project's location, development of the project has a low potential to encounter significant paleontological resources during project construction. Although development of the project has a low potential to encounter scientifically significant paleontological resources during project construction, implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-2 would ensure that impacts to unanticipated paleontological resources encountered during project development would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated . 59 RMA Group . 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. p. 3 . January 9. 6° City of Fontana . 2018a . Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 5.4-8 . June 8 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-45 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Mitigation Measure GE0-2 During construction activities, in the event that paleontological resources are encountered, work in the immediate area of the discovery shall be halted, and a professional paleontologist who meets the qualifications established by the Society of Vertebrae Paleontology shall be retained to assess the discovery. The qualified professional paleontologist shall make recommendations regarding the treatment and disposition of the discovered resources, as well as the need for subsequent paleontological monitoring; collection of observed resources; preservation, stabilization, and identification of collected resources; cu ration of scientifically significant resources into a museum repository; and preparation of a monitoring report of findings . This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Fontana Community Development Director, or designee. 4-46 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project : 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? Potentially Significant Impact □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ ~ □ ~ LSA No Impact □ □ The following analysis is based in part on the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum, 61 which is included in full as Appendix A to this Initial Study. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are present in the atmosphere naturally, are released by natural sources, or are formed from secondary reactions taking place in the atmosphere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced global climate change are : • Carbon dioxide (CO2); • Methane (CH4); • Nitrous oxide (N2O); • Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); • Perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and • Sulfur hexafluoride (SF5). Over the last 200 years, humans have caused substantial quantities of GHGs to be released into the atmosphere. These extra emissions are increasing GHG concentrations in the atmosphere and enhancing the natural greenhouse effect, which is believed to be causing global warming. Although manmade GHGs include naturally occurring GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O, some gases like HFCs, perfluorocarbons PFCs, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SFG) are completely new to the atmosphere . Certain gases, such as water vapor, are short-lived in the atmosphere. Others remain in the atmosphere for significant periods of time, contributing to climate change in the long term. Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs above because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation. These gases vary considerably in terms of global warming potential (GWP), which is a concept developed to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another gas . The GWP is based on several factors, including the relative effectiveness of a gas in absorbing 61 LSA . 2025 . Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. September 30. (Appendix A) P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-47 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 infrared radiation and the length of time that the gas remains in the atmosphere (i.e., atmospheric lifetime). The GWP of each gas is measured relative to CO2, the most abundant GHG; the definition of GWP for a particular GHG is the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of the GHG to the ratio of heat trapped by one unit mass of CO2 over a specified time period. GHG emissions are typically measured in terms of pounds or tons of CO2 equivalents (CO2e). 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. This section describes the proposed project's construction-and operation-related GHG emissions and contribution to global climate change. The SCAQMD has not addressed emission thresholds for construction in its CEQA Air Quality Handbook; however, SCAQMD requires quantification and disclosure. Thus, this section discusses construction emissions. Construction Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would produce combustion emissions from various sources. Construction would emit GHGs through the operation of construction equipment and from worker and builder supply vendor vehicles during the construction period . The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHGs such as CO2, CH4, and N2O. Furthermore, the fueling of heavy equipment emits CH4. Exhaust emissions from on-site construction activities would vary daily as construction activity levels change. As indicated above, SCAQMD does not have an adopted threshold of significance for construction- related GHG emissions. However, lead agencies are required to quantify and disclose GHG emissions that would occur during construction. The SCAQMD then requires the construction GHG emissions to be amortized over the life of the project (which is defined as 30 years), added to the operational emissions, and compared to the applicable interim GHG significance threshold tier. Based on CalEEMod, it is estimated that the project would generate 1,027.6 MT of CO2e during construction of the project. When amortized over the 30-year life of the project, annual emissions would be 34.3 metric tons of CO2e (MT CO2e). Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Long-term operation of the proposed project would generate GHG emissions from area, mobile, waste, and water sources, as well as indirect emissions from sources associated with energy consumption. Mobile-source GHG emissions would include project-generated vehicle trips associated with trips to the proposed project. Area-source emissions would be associated with activities such as landscaping and maintenance on the project site and other sources. Waste-source emissions generated by the proposed project include energy generated by landfilling and other methods of disposal related to transporting and managing project-generated waste. In addition, water-source emissions associated with the proposed project are generated by water supply and conveyance, water treatment, water distribution, and wastewater treatment. GHG emissions were estimated using CalEEMod. Table 4.8.A shows the estimated operational GHG emissions for the proposed project. Motor vehicle emissions are the largest source of GHG emissions for the project, at approximately 86 percent of the project total. Energy sources are the next largest 4-48 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA category, at approximately 9 percent. Waste sources are approximately 3 percent of the total emissions, and area and water sources are each approximately 1 percent of the total emissions. Table 4.8.A: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Emission Type Operational Emissions (MT/yr) CO2 CH4 N2O Mobile Source 1,333 .5 0.1 0 .1 Area Source 8.6 <0 .1 <0 .1 Energy Source 146.4 <0 .1 <0 .1 Water Source 10.5 0.2 <0.1 Waste Source 11.5 1.1 0.0 Total Operational Emissions Amortized Construction Emissions Total Annual Emissions San Bernardino County Review Threshold Source : Compiled by LSA {September 2025). CH. = methane CO2 = carbon dioxide CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent Exceedance? MT/yr= metric tons per year N2O = nitrous oxide CO2e 1,357 .0 8 .6 146.3 17.2 40.2 1,569.3 34.3 1,603.6 3,000 No Percentage of Total 86 1 9 1 3 100.0 - - As discussed above, a project would have less than significant GHG emissions if it would result in operational-related GHG emissions of less than 3,000 MT CO2e per year. Based on the analysis results, the proposed project would result in approximately 1,603.6 MT CO2e per year, which would not exceed the San Bernardino County Review Threshold of 3,000 MT CO2e per year. Therefore, operation of the proposed project would not generate significant GHG emissions that would have a significant effect on the environment. Project-level and cumulative GHG emissions would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. b. Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The proposed project would be subject to applicable provisions of the California Energy Code and CALGreen Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Parts 6 and 11, respectively) in effect at the time project-specific development is proposed . The California Energy Code and CALGreen Code continue to establish increasingly stringent performance standards for residential development to reduce emissions and encourage sustainable construction practices. The CALGreen Code addresses energy efficiency, water conservation, materials conservation, planning and design, and overall environmental quality by requiring on-site renewable energy generation and storage and electrification of residential development. The City has adopted the CBC and the CALGreen Code . The project must meet all standards required by Title 24, California Energy Code, and CALGreen Code regarding the installation of solar panels and other applicable federal and local requirements related to building features, including appliances, water and space heating and cooling equipment, building insulation and roofing, electrification, and lighting, which would reduce construction and operational emissions through buildout. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-49 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 The following discussion evaluates the proposed project according to the goals of the County's Regional GHGRP, the 2022 Scoping Plan, and SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS. San Bernardino County Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. As discussed above, the City of Fontana is a participant in the San Bernardino County Regional GHGRP, which identifies the County's vision and goals on reducing GHG emissions in the different cities, local government facilities, and communities. 62 Table 4.8.B below presents the proposed project's compliance with each reduction measure evaluated for the City of Fontana, as identified in the 2021 San Bernardino County Regional GHGRP. Table 4.8.B: Project Consistency with the City of Fontana GHG Reduction Measures Measure Description Project Consistency Building Energy Energy-1. Building Energy SR Policy 1: Create a Sustainable Fontana program that Consistent. The proposed Efficiency promotes green practices in government and in the project would comply with the community. CALGreen Code, which SR Policy 2.1: Incorporate goals into the City Code for includes energy conservation resource efficiency in municipal facilities and operations. and green building standards . SR Policy 5: Promote green building through guidelines, awards, and nonfinancial incentives. SR Policy 6.1: Promote energy-efficient development in Fontana. SR Policy 6.2: Meet or exceed state goals for energy- efficient new construction. Chapter 10 Policy 7: Promote renewable energy and distributed energy systems in new development and retrofits of existing development to work towards the highest levels of low carbon energy-efficiency. Energy-2. Light Efficiency SR Policy 1: Create a Sustainable Fontana program that Consistent. The proposed promotes green practices in government and in the project would comply with the community. CALGreen Code which includes SR Policy 2.1: Incorporate goals into the City Code for energy conservation and green resource efficiency in municipal facilities and operations. building standards. SR Policy 2.2: Continue organizational and operational improvements to maximize energy and resource efficiency and reduce waste . Energy-5. Renewable SR Policy 3: Promote renewable energy programs for Consistent. The proposed Energy-New government, Fontana businesses, and Fontana project would comply with the Commercial/Industrial residences. CALGreen Code which includes Chapter 10 Policy 7 : Promote renewable energy and energy conservation and green distributed energy systems in new development and building standards. 62 San Bernardino Council of Governments (SBCOG). 2021. San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. Website : https://www.gosbcta.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/San_Bernardino_ Regional_GHG_Reduction_Plan_Main_Text_Mar_2021.pdf (accessed September 2025). 4-50 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.8.B: Project Consistency with the City of Fontana GHG Reduction Measures Measure Description retrofits of existing development to work towards the highest levels of low carbon energy-efficiency. Energy-6 . Solar Energy for SR Policy 3: Promote renewable energy programs for Warehouse Space government, Fontana businesses, and Fontana residences. Energy-7 . Title Installation SR Policy 3: Promote renewable energy programs for for Existing Housing government, Fontana businesses, and Fontana residences. SR Policy 3.1: Evaluate a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) Program for Fontana. SR Policy 3.2: Ensure that appropriate zoning and design standard regulations are in place as needed to provide for domestic solar and wind installations. Chapter 10 Policy 7 : Promote renewable energy and distributed energy systems in new development and retrofits of existing development to work towards the highest levels of low carbon energy-efficiency. Energy-8. Renewable SR Policy 3: Promote renewable energy programs for Energy-Existing government, Fontana businesses, and Fontana Commercial/Industrial residences . SR Policy 4: Continue to collaborate with SBCTA, infrastructure agencies, and utilities on greenhouse gas reduction studies and goals. Chapter 10 Policy 7: Promote renewable energy and distributed energy systems in new development and retrofits of existing development to work towards the highest levels of low carbon energy-efficiency. On-Road On Road-2 . Encourage Use CM Policy 1.4: Make land use decisions that support of Mass Transit walking, bicycling, and public transit use , in alignment with the 2014-2040 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. CM 7.2: Coordinate with regional agencies and Caltrans to participate in reg ional efforts to maintain transportation infrastructure in Fontana. CM 7.3: Participate in the efforts of the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to coordinate transportation planning and services that support greenhouse gas reductions . On Road-3 . Transportation CM Policy 1.1: Provide roadways that serve the needs of Demand Management and Fontana residents and commerce, and that facilitate safe Signal Synchronization and conven ient access to trans it , bicycle facilities, and walkways . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l Project Consistency Consistent. The proposed project would comply with the CALGreen Code which includes energy conservation and green building standards. Not Applicable. This measure is not applicable because the proposed project would not retrofit an existing building. Not Applicable. This measure is not applicable because the proposed project would not retrofit an existing building. Not Applicable. The proposed project would include a 153- unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units and 69 single-family dwelling units. Due to the nature of the proposed project, mass transit would not be feasible . Consistent. The proposed project is expected to generate 1,217 average daily trips, with 82 trips occurring in the AM peak hour and 108 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. 4-51 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.8.B: Project Consistency with the City of Fontana GHG Reduction Measures Measure Description Project Consistency CM Policy 1.2: Make safety and multimodal accessibility As described in the TIA, only the top priority of Citywide transportation planning. one intersection is forecast to CM 3.2: Promote concentrated development patterns in operate at unsatisfactory levels of service. With the coordination with transit planning to maximize service implementation of circulation efficiency and ridership. improvements identified in the CM 7.1 : Lead and participate in initiatives to manage TIA, all intersections are regional traffic. forecast to operate at CM 7.4: Participate in the efforts by Caltrans to reduce satisfactory levels of service. congestion and improve traffic flow on area freeways. On Road-4. Expand Bike CM 2.1: When constructing or modifying roadways, Consistent. The proposed Routes design the roadway space for use by all users when project would construct a feasible, including motor vehicles, buses, bicyclists, sidewalk along Curtis Avenue, mobility devices, and pedestrians, as appropriate for the filling in gaps in the City's context of the area. sidewalk network. There are no bicycle facilities along Curtis Avenue, but a Class II bike lane is present on Citrus Avenue, approximately 0.10 mile east of the project site. On Road-5. Community CM Action 7.D: Support the adoption and use of Not Applicable. The proposed Fleet Electrification technologies that reduce emissions from passenger and project would not involve City transit vehicles . fleet vehicles . Solid Waste Management Waste-2. Waste Diversion SR Policy 2.2: Continue organizational and operational Consistent. The proposed and Reduction improvements to maximize energy and resource project would be consistent efficiency and reduce waste. with County Solid Waste and Chapter 10 Policy 8.2 : Continue to maximize landfill State requirements . capacity by supporting recycling innovations, such as organic waste recycling for compost. Water Conveyance Water Conveyance Chapter 10 Policy 1 : Support initiatives to provide a long-Consistent. The proposed term supply of the right water for the right use through project would comply with the working with regional providers and the One Water One CALGreen Code regarding Watershed Plan. water conservation. Chapter 10 Policy 2.1 : Encourage use of processed water from the Inland Empire Utilities Agency systems using recycled water for all non-drinking water purposes . Chapter 10 Policy 2.2: Promote laundry-to-landscape greywater systems for single-family housing units. Water-1. Voluntary SR Policy 7 : Continue to promote and implement best Consistent. The proposed CALGREEN : New practices to conserve water. project would comply with the Construction CALGreen Code regarding water conservation. Water-2. Renovate Existing SR Policy 7 : Continue to promote and implement best Not Applicable. This measure Buildings practices to conserve water. is not applicable as the proposed project would not retrofit an existing building. 4-52 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.8.B: Project Consistency with the City of Fontana GHG Reduction Measures Measure Description Water-3. Water-Efficient SR Policy 7: Continue to promote and implement best Landscaping Practices practices to conserve water. Chapter 10 Policy 3.1: Support landscaping in public and private spaces with drought resistant plants. Chapter 10 Policy 3.2: Continue successful City water conservation programs and partnerships. Source: Compiled by LSA (September 2025). CALGreen Code = California Green Building Standards Code GHG = greenhouse gas SBCTA = San Bernardino County Transportation Authority TIA= Traffic Impact Analysis Project Consistency Consistent. The proposed project would comply with the CALGreen Code regarding water conservation . 2022 Scoping Plan. The following discussion evaluates the proposed project according to the goals of the 2022 Scoping Plan, Executive Order (EO) B-30-15, Senate Bill (SB) 32, and Assembly Bill (AB) 197. EO B-30-15 added the immediate target of reducing GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. The CARB released a second update to the Scoping Plan, the 2017 Scoping Plan, to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32. SB 32 affirms the importance of addressing climate change by codifying into statute the GHG emission reductions target of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 contained in EO B-30-15 . SB 32 builds on AB 32 and keeps the State on the path toward achieving the 2050 objective of reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. The companion bill to SB 32, AB 197, provides additional direction to the CARB related to the adoption of strategies to reduce GHG emissions. Additional direction in AB 197 intended to provide easier public access to air emission data that are collected by the CARB was posted in December 2016. The 2022 Scoping Plan assesses progress toward the statutory 2030 target while laying out a path to achieving carbon neutrality no later than 2045 . The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the State's long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on building clean energy production and distribution infrastructure for a carbon-neutral future, including transitioning existing energy production and transmission infrastructure to produce zero-carbon electricity and hydrogen, and utilizing biogas resulting from wildfire management or landfill and dairy operations, among other substitutes. The 2022 Scoping Plan states that in almost all sectors, electrification will play an important role. The 2022 Scoping Plan evaluates clean energy and technology options and the transition away from fossil fuels, including adding four times the solar and wind capacity by 2045 and about 1,700 times the amount of current hydrogen supply. As discussed in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO N-79-20 requires that all new passenger vehicles sold in California be zero-emission by 2035, and all other fleets will have transitioned to zero-emission as fully possible by 2045, which will reduce the percentage of fossil fuel combustion vehicles. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-53 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 As identified above, the 2022 Scoping Plan contains GHG reduction measures that work toward reducing GHG emissions, consistent with the targets set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32 and AB 197. The measures applicable to the proposed project include energy efficiency measures, water conservation and efficiency measures, and transportation and motor vehicle measures, as qualitatively discussed below. • • • 63 Energy-efficient measures are intended to maximize energy-efficiency building and appliance standards, pursue additional efficiency efforts including new technologies and new policy and implementation mechanisms, and pursue comparable investment in energy efficiency from all retail providers of electricity in California. In addition, these measures are designed to expand the use of green building practices to reduce the carbon footprint of California's new and existing inventory of buildings. As mentioned above, the proposed project would comply with the latest Title 24 Standards regarding energy conservation and green building standards. In addition, the proposed project would be all-electric and would not include natural gas. The elimination of natural gas in new development would help projects implement their "fair share" of achieving long-term 2045 carbon neutrality consistent with State goals. As such, if a project does not use natural gas, a lead agency can conclude that it would be consistent with achieving the 2045 neutrality goal and will not have a cumulative considerable impact on climate change. 63 Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable energy measures. Water conservation and efficiency measures are intended to continue efficiency programs and use cleaner energy sources to move and treat water. Increasing the efficiency of water transport and reducing water use would reduce GHG emissions. As noted above, the project would be required to comply with the latest Title 24 Standards, which include a variety of different measures, including reduction of wastewater and water use. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with the California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the water conservation and efficiency measures. The goal of transportation and motor vehicle measures is to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles. Specific regional emission targets for transportation emissions would not directly apply to the proposed project. SB 743 required changes be made to CEQA regulations introducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the new metric for determining project transportation impacts. A project would have a less than significant impact related to GHG emissions if the proposed project achieves a reduction in project-generated VMT below the regional average consistent with the current version of the 2022 Scoping Plan (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the recommendations provided in the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's Technical Advisory on Evaluating Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2023. Air Quality Guidelines Appendix A: Thresholds of Significance Justification. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/files/planning-and- research/ceqa/ceqa-guidelines-2022/appendix-a-thresholds-of-significance-justification_final-pdf (accessed September 2025). 4-54 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Transportation Impacts in CEQA. 64 As described in the project's VMT Analysis 65, the proposed project would have a less than significant VMT impact. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the identified transportation and motor vehicle measures and would contribute to its "fair share" of achieving long-term 2045 carbon neutrality consistent with State goals. Therefore, the proposed project not would conflict with the goals and policies of the 2022 Scoping Plan related to VMT and would result in a less than significant impact. The proposed project would comply with existing State regulations adopted to achieve the overall GHG emission reduction goals identified in the 2022 Scoping Plan, EO B-30-15, SB 32, AB 197, and AB 1279. SCAG's Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS identifies land use strategies that focus on new housing and job growth in areas served by high-quality transit, and other opportunity areas would be consistent with a land use development pattern that supports and complements the proposed transportation network. 66 The core vision in the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS is to better manage the existing transportation system through design management strategies, integrate land use decisions and technological advancements, create complete streets that are safe for all roadway users, preserve the transportation system, and expand transit and foster development in transit-oriented communities. The 2024-2050 RTP/SCS contains transportation projects to help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, as well as providing a forecast development pattern that is generally consistent with regional-level General Plan data. The forecast development pattern, when integrated with the financially constrained transportation investments identified in the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, would reach the regional target of reducing GHG emissions from automobiles and light-duty trucks by 8 percent per capita by 2020 and 19 percent by 2035 (compared to 2005 levels). The 2024-2050 RTP/SCS does not require that local General Plans, Specific Plans, or zoning be consistent with the 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, but it provides incentives for consistency for governments and developers. Implementing SCAG's RTP/SCS will greatly reduce the regional GHG emissions from transportation, helping to achieve statewide emissions reduction targets. The proposed project includes the construction of a 153-unit condominium community, with 84 multi-family dwelling units and 69 single-family dwelling units. The addition of 153 units represents 0.7 percent of Fontana's estimated household increase of 22,200 households. As such, as demonstrated in the Consistency with Applicable Air Quality Plans section above, the proposed project would not exceed the growth assumptions assumed in the SCAG's RTP/SCS . Additionally, the proposed project does not meet the criteria identified in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15205.b.2 (Projects of Statewide, Regional, or Areawide Significance) for projects of statewide, regional, or areawide significance. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with SCAG 's ability to achieve the region 's GHG reduction 64 BAAQMD . 2022 . Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April. 65 Translutions, 2025b . The Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis . May 19 . 66 SCAG. 2024. Connect SoCal : The 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report . Website : https://scag.ca .gov/sites/default/files/2024-05/23-2987-tr- demographicsgrowth-forecast-final-040424 .pdf (accessed September 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-55 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 target of 19 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035. Furthermore, the proposed project is not regionally significant per State CEQA Guidelines Section 15206 and, as such, it would not conflict with the SCAG RTP/SCS targets because those targets were established and are applicable on a regional level. Therefore, it is anticipated that implementation of the proposed project would not interfere with SCAG's ability to implement the regional strategies outlined in the RTP/SCS. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs . Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . 4-56 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project : 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 hazardou s 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 has 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? Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ □ □ □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ [8J □ [8J LSA No Impact □ □ □ □ □ The information and analysis in this section is based in part on the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment {Phase 1 ESA) prepared for the project site (Appendix E). 67 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. Development of the project has the potential to create a hazard to the public or environment through the routine transportation, use, and disposal of construction-related hazardous materials such as fuels, oils, solvents, and other materials. All hazardous materials must be disposed of in accordance with the federal, State, and local {San Bernardino County Department of Public Health and SCAQMD) regulations to safeguard the public from significant hazards during the disposal of hazardous materials. 67 Converse Consultants. 2023 . Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report. Parcel 1108-081-04-0000 Fontana, California. October 23 . (Appendix E). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-57 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Construction. The transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during construction would be regulated by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, the Fontana Fire Protection District, and the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The Code Enforcement Division of the Fontana Police Department is responsible for weed and rubbish abatement in coordination with other City and County departments. Additionally, the United States Department of Transportation Office of Hazardous Materials Safety prescribes strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials by truck and rail on State highways and rail lines, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and implemented by Title 13 of the CCR. Potential hazardous materials such as fuel, paint products, lubricants, solvents, and cleaning products may be used and/or stored on-site during construction of the proposed project. These materials are typical of materials delivered to construction sites. During construction of the proposed multi-family development, only limited quantities of these materials are expected to be used during construction, so they are not considered hazardous to the public at large. Accordingly, the potential for the release of hazardous materials during construction would be low and, even if a release were to occur, it would not result in a significant hazard to the public, surrounding land uses, or environment due to the small quantities of these materials associated with construction. Therefore, impacts from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. Operation. Residential operations and maintenance on the project site would utilize relatively small amounts of hazardous materials, such as chemicals associated with heating and cooling systems, fuel for landscape equipment, solvents, cleaning products, pesticides/fertilizers, and other similar chemicals. These materials are substantially similar to household chemicals and solvents already in wide use in residential areas throughout the City and in the vicinity of the project site. Individuals occupying the residential units are expected to use, store, and dispose of such materials in the manner prescribed by the manufacturers. Any potential transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials during project operation would be regulated by the San Bernardino County Fire Department, the Fontana Fire Protection District, and the California Occupational Safety and Health Administration. These regulations inherently safeguard life and property from the hazards of fire/explosion arising from the storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous substances, materials, and devices, as well as hazardous conditions due to the use or occupancy of buildings . Therefore, impacts from the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during project operation would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 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 with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on historical records and a review of historical aerial photographs, the project site was vacant unimproved land with small groves of trees and shrubs from at least 1930 until approximately 1954. In the 1959 aerial photograph, the project site remained vacant; however, an unimproved road was observed to traverse the north-center side of the parcel and exit on the south side onto unimproved Curtis Avenue. The project site remained vacant throughout 1988. In 1994 the project site remained undeveloped and was covered with 4-58 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA native vegetation. Tilling and grading activities were noted at this time. In 2002, land disturbance was evident along the western boundary, likely as a result of the adjacent residential lot to the west. The 2020 aerial photo depicts the project site with a temporary trailer structure in the southwest corner of the parcel. Between 2020 through current day (2025), the project site remained vacant and undeveloped, except for placement of the temporary trailer in the southwest portion of the subject site. 68 At the time of the preparation of the Phase 1 ESA, the project site was owned by Fontana Unified School District (FUSD). A previous Phase 1 ESA report was prepared in 2004 for the project site as part of a required investigation prior to potential development as a school site . The 2005 report concluded no environmental conditions of concern were identified and the Department of Toxic Substances issued a "no further action" determination .69 As detailed in Appendix E of this IS/MND, the Phase I ESA was prepared for the project site in accordance with the standards and procedures outlined in the American Society for Testing and Materials E 1527-21, as applicable. The Phase I ESA included interviews with property owner representatives and public agency personnel, review of historical data and aerial photographs, and literature review of local, state, and federal databases which evaluated the project site and its vicinity for the purposes of identifying recognized environmental conditions or historical recognized environmental conditions. A field assessment of the site was conducted on October 19, 2023. A recognized environmental condition (REC) indicates the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.70 An historical recognized environmental condition (HREC) indicates an environmental condition which in the past would have been considered a REC, but which may or may not be considered a recognized environmental condition currently. If a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products has occurred in connection with the property, with such remediation accepted by the responsible regulatory agency (for example, as evidenced by the issuance of a case closed letter or equivalent), this condition shall be considered a HREC. A controlled recognized environmental conditions (CREC) indicates a REC resulting from the past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority (i.e ., as evidenced by the issuance of a no further action letter or equivalent, or meeting risk-based criteria established by regulatory authority), with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. 68 Converse Consultants. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report. Parcel 1108-081-04-0000 Fontana, California. October 23, 2023 . (Appendix E). pp. 14-19 . 69 Ibid. p. 30. 70 The term "recognized environmental conditions" is not intended to include de mini mis conditions that generally do not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies . Conditions determined to be de minimis are not recognized environmental conditions . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-59 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 No indication of above ground storage tanks or underground storage tanks have been or are currently located on the site. No evidence of drums, sumps, pits, pools, lagoons, or ground staining was identified within the project site during the field assessment. Blown in trash (paper, cups, bottles) was observed along the perimeter of the project site. Dumped trash including a pile of concrete, clay roof shingles, weight plates, two bags of top soil, two bags of concrete, a stool, and exhaust pipe appeared to have been dumped onto the project site possibly by the neighboring residential properties. 71 A data search of the various government agency records indicated the site is listed on the Department of Toxic Substances Control Envirostor database. The previous 2004 Phase 1 ESA report was prepared as the site was under consideration as an elementary school site . As previously noted, no RECs, HRECs, or environmental concerns were identified, and no further investigation was recommended . The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) issued a "No Further Action" determination on November 8, 2004.72 The project site was not identified on any other databases . No potential asbestos-containing materials were observed on the site during the field survey, and no information was found which indicated the use, storage, or disposal of asbestos-containing materials on the site. No potential lead-based paint materials were observed on the site during the field survey, and no information was found which indicated the use, storage, or disposal of lead-based paint materials on the site. As previously mentioned, no environmental concerns were identified on the project site during the field survey outside of the blown in trash and dumped trash from the nearby residential properties. The Phase 1 ESA concluded that the dumped concrete and roofing materials are suspect building materials that may be asbestos-containing materials. Accordingly, Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 is prescribed to ensure asbestos or other potentially hazardous materials are managed with prior to site clearing. Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 Prior to site clearing and the removal of the suspect building materials from the project site, the project applicant shall provide to the City for review and approval that bulk sampling of these materials for asbestos content was conducted in accordance with the federal Toxic Substances Control Act, 40 CFR 763.86. If no asbestos is detected, no further mitigation is required. Should asbestos containing materials be detected, prior to the removal of the building materials from the project site, the project applicant shall retain a certified asbestos consultant to properly dispose of the building materials from the project site in accordance with 40 CFR 61.150. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Fontana Community Development Director or designee, and/or Building and Safety Division, or designee. 71 Converse Consultants. 2023. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report. Parcel 1108-081-04-0000 Fontana, California. pp. 25-26. October 23. (Appendix E). 72 Ibid. Page 22 . 4-60 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Only California Occupational Safety and Health Administration {Cal/OSHA) licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractors, and/or California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractors registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and Article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763, subpart E shall be allowed to transport hazardous materials off-site . Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure site clearing and any unanticipated encounters with potentially hazardous materials on the project site would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment during disposal of hazardous materials . Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated . 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 schools to the project site include: • Summit High School, 0.55 mile northwest of the project site; and • Sierra Lakes Elementary School, 0.40 mile northeast of the project site . Construction. Any transport of hazardous materials associated with construction of the proposed project would be in accordance with the United States Department of Transportation, which regulates the transport of hazardous materials and waste and requires carriers to register with the DTSC. Only Cal/OSHA licensed Hazardous Materials Substances Removal contractors, and/or California State Registered Asbestos Abatement Contractors registered by the Division of Occupational Health and Safety in accordance with the California Administrative Code, Title 8, and Article 2.5 and the SCAQMD Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 40, Part 763 , subpart E would transport hazardous materials off site, as detailed in Section 5.9 .b above. Operation. The residential nature of the project would result in the limited use of hazardous material such as household cleaners, lubricants, fuels, paint, and solvents . Beyond the limited residential use of these materials, the project does not include facilities for the manufacture, transport, storage, or disposal of hazardous material; therefore, the proposed project would not generate hazardous emissions or result in the release of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school during operation. Any hazardous materials associated with construction of the proposed project or future operations on the project site would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers' instructions and handled in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local standards and regulations as described above. Therefore, no impact related to hazardous emissions or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school would occur, and no mitigation is required. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-61 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 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. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List has been compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Materials Data Management Program.73 As previously stated, the DTSC Envirostor database identified the project site as a school site. The 2004 Phase 1 ESA, determined that there was no indication of a release of hazardous materials nor the presence of a naturally occurring hazardous material at the site . 74 Based on the Phase I ESA prepared for the project site, the DTSC determined that no further action was required as of November 8, 2004, and the listing does not represent a significant risk to public health or safety associated with the project site . The project site is not included on any other list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962 .5. Therefore, a less than significant impact related to the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List or other governmental databases compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962 .5 would occur. No mitigation required . e. Would the project be located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has 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 nearest airports to the project site are Ontario International Airport {OIA) and San Bernardino International Airport {SBIA) and, which are located approximately 9.1 miles southwest of the project site and 12.5 miles southeast of the project site, respectively. The project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area or 65 a-weighted decibels (dBA) community noise equivalent level {CNEL) noise contour established for SBIA.75 The project site is additionally located outside the OIA Influence Area of the Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan 76 and outside the 60 dBA CNEL noise impact area established for the OIA . 77 Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard or expose people working in the project area to excessive airport- related noise levels. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 73 74 75 76 77 California Environmental Protection Agency. 2025. Cortese List Data Resources. Website : https://calepa.ca .gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed September 9, 2025). California Department ofToxic Substances Control. 2022 . Envirostor Database, Final DTSC Letter, Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Determination . Website : https:/ /www.envirostor.dtsc.ca .gov/ public/final_documents2?global_id=36650020&doc_id=6005074 (accessed September 9, 2025). City of San Bernardino. 2005. City of San Bernardino General Plan. Figure LU-4. Adopted November 1. Ontario International Airport-Inter Agency Collaborative . 2011a . LA/Ontario international Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Chapter 2: Procedural and Compatibility Policies. Map 2-1: Airport Influence Area. April 19 . Ontario International Airport -Inter Agency Collaborative . 2011b . LA/Ontario international Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan . Map 2-3 : Compatibility Policy Map: Noise Impact Zones . 4-62 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA f Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities that may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic would be required to implement appropriate measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures . Section Nos . 30-429 (Public Safety) and 30-476 (Subdivision and Site Plan Design) of the City Municipal Code include prior notification of any lane or road closures with sufficient signage before and during any closures, flag crews with radio communication when necessary to coordinate traffic flow, etc. The project applicant would be required to comply with these requirements, which would maintain emergency access and allow for evacuation if needed during construction activities . Compliance with these requirements would ensure that short-term impacts related to this issue are less than significant . Mitigation is not required . In accordance with the California Fire Code, the project applicant is required to design, construct, and maintain structures, roadways , and facilities to maintain appropriate emergency/evacuation access to and from the project site as codified in Section Nos. 30-429 {Public Safety) and 30-476{g)(7) (Subdivision and Site Plan Design) of the City Municipal Code. The project would be accessible by residents via one main driveway (full access) on Curtis Avenue and a secondary, gated driveway along Curtis Avenue for exit only that also would provide additional access for emergency and other service vehicles . The project provides a 26-foot drive aisle between the proposed alleys, allowing emergency access throughout the project site. The entry security gate would include an override switch to allow access by emergency responders. All points of site access and driveway aprons are designed and would be constructed to adequate widths for public safety pursuant to local requirements. These improvements would be subject to compliance with the City Municipal Code sections specified above and would be reviewed by the Fontana Fire Protection District and Police Department through the City's general development review process. Proper site design and compliance with standard and emergency City access requirements would allow for evacuation if necessary. This would ensure that long-term impacts related to this issue are less than significant. Mitigation is not required. g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild/and fires? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the project site is not within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone {VHFHSZ). 78 The project site and vicinity are not located in areas identified by the City to be areas at risk of a wildfire event. 79 The project would be required to comply with 2022 CBC requirements for ignition-resistant construction and applicable policies of the City's General Plan Safety Element, including Goal 3, Action B, which requires structures to adhere to applicable fire codes and fire access requirements in accordance with California Fire Code and the 78 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). n.d .-a . Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map. https:// osfm . ft re .ca .gov /what-we-do/ com mun ity-wi ldfi re-prep a redness-a nd-m itigation/fi re-hazard- severity-zo nes (accessed September 23, 2024). 79 City of Fontana . 2017 . Local Hazard Mitigation Plan . Figure 4-5 : Fire Perimeter City of Fontana . June, Approved and Adopted August 14, 2018 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-63 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 City's Municipal Code. As the project site is located in an urbanized area of the city and is not located in or near wild land areas, development of the multi-family residential buildings would not expose people or structures to significant loss or injury from wildland fires. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 4-64 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project : a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or □ □ □ groundwater 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 □ □ [8] □ 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; □ □ [8] □ i i. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or □ □ [8] □ offsite; iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage □ □ [8] □ 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 □ □ [8] □ pollutants due to project inundation? e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality □ □ [8] □ control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? The information and analysis in this section is based on the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan 80 prepared for the project, provided in Appendix F. 4.10.1 Impact Analysis a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? Less than Significant Impact. This section evaluates the potential for both construction and operation of the proposed project to degrade surface or groundwater quality. Construction. Pollutants of concern during construction include sediment, trash, petroleum products, concrete waste (dry and wet), sanitary waste, and chemicals . Each of these pollutants on its own or in combination with other pollutants can have a detrimental effect on water quality. During construction activities, excavated soil would be exposed , and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and sedimentation compared to existing conditions. In addition, chemicals, 80 K&A Engineering. 2024 . Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave. February. (Appendix F). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-65 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 liquid products, petroleum products (such as paints, solvents, and fuels), and concrete-related waste may be spilled or leaked during construction. Any of these pollutants have the potential to be transported via stormwater runoff into receiving waters (i.e., Highland Channel, Etiwanda Creek Channel (north of Foothill Boulevard), Etiwanda/San Sevaine Channel, Santa Ana River Reach 3, Prado Basin, Santa Ana River Reach 2, Santa Ana Reach 1, and Pacific Ocean).81 The 11.99-acre project site exhibits level topography with an overall gradient of 3-4 percent to the southwest, and is currently vacant and undeveloped . The project and associated improvements, including paving and parking areas, would increase the impervious surface on the site . Because project construction would disturb greater than 1 acre of soil, the project would be subject to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ, NPDES No . CAS000002) (Construction General Permit). The project would also be required to comply with City Municipal Code Section 23-519, Regulation of Construction and Industrial Dischargers. Section 23-519 of the City's Municipal Code prohibits land disturbance or construction activities without first obtaining coverage under the Construction General Permit, development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), and implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to ensure that construction practices include measures to protect water quality and prevent illegal discharges . As specified in Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2 and as required by the Construction General Permit and City Municipal Code Section 53-519, the construction contractor would be required to prepare a SWPPP and implement construction BMPs detailed in the SWPPP during construction activities. Construction BMPs would include, but not be limited to, erosion and sediment control, designed to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site, and good housekeeping practices to prevent spills, leaks, and discharge of construction debris and waste into receiving waters. The Geotechnical Investigation Report stated that nearby water well data was not available to confirm the present depth to groundwater. 82 Historical data notes groundwater at depths between 300 to 600 feet in 1960. Groundwater was not encountered during the subsurface exploration conducted for the proposed project which extended to a maximum depth of 25.5 feet .83 Therefore, it is unlikely excavation activities would have the potential to encounter groundwater, and groundwater dewatering is not anticipated to be required during construction activities. With implementation of Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2, which require compliance with the Construction General Permit and Municipal Code requirements, respectively, impacts associated with a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during project construction would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 81 82 83 K&A Engineering. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave. February, 2024. p. 3-4. RMA Group. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. Page 3 . January 9, 2024. Ibid. 4-66 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Standard Condition HYD-1 Standard Condition HYD-2 Per the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Order No. 2022-0057-DWQ, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System No. CAS000002) (Construction General Permit), the project applicant shall obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit prior to issuance of a grading permit. This shall include submission of Permit Registration Documents (PRDs), including a Notice of Intent for coverage under the permit to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) via the Stormwater Multiple Application and Report Tracking System (SMARTs). The project applicant shall provide the Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID) to the City of Fontana (City), or designee, to demonstrate proof of coverage under the Construction General Permit. Project construction shall not be initiated until a WDID is received from the SWRCB and is provided to the City, or designee . A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) shall be prepared and implemented for the proposed project in compliance with the requirements of the Construction General Permit. The SWPPP shall identify construction best management practices (BMPs) to be implemented to ensure that the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation is minimized and to control the discharge of pollutants in stormwater runoff as a result of construction activities. Upon completion of construction and stabilization of the site, a Notice of Termination shall be submitted via SMARTS. Prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities, the project applicant shall provide the SWPPP to the City for review and approval pursuant to Section 23-519 of the City Municipal Code. Operation. During operation, anticipated pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project include pathogens (bacterial/viral), nutrients (phosphorous and nitrogen), sediment, oil and grease, trash/debris, pesticides/herbicides, organic compounds, and total suspended solids.84 The City of Fontana is a co-permittee under the Santa Ana RWQCB National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the County of San Bernardino, and the Incorporated Cities of San Bernardino County Within the Santa Ana Region Area-Wide Urban Stormwater Runoff Management Program (Order No. RS-2010-0036, NPDES No. CAS618036) (San Bernardino County MS4 permit).85 The San Bernardino County MS4 Permit requires the preparation of project-specific WQMPs for priority projects. The 84 K&A Engineering . 2024 . Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave . February. p . 2-3 . (Appendix F). 85 While Draft Proposed Order R-8-3024-001 has been proposed, it has not yet been formally adopted . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-67 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 project is considered a priority project because it involves the development of more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface. 86 As specified in Standard Condition HYD-3 and as required by the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit, the project would prepare a Final WQMP. The Final WQMP would specify the Site Design, Source Control, Low Impact Development (LID), and Treatment Control BMPs that would be implemented to capture, treat, and reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff. Site Design BMPs are stormwater management strategies that emphasize conservation and use of existing site features to reduce the amount of runoff and pollutant loading generated from a site. Source Control BMPs are preventative measures that are implemented to prevent the introduction of pollutants into stormwater. LID BMPs mimic a project site's natural hydrology by using design measures that capture, filter, store, evaporate, detain, and infiltrate runoff rather than allowing runoff to flow directly to piped or impervious storm drains . Treatment Control BMPs are structural BMPs designed to treat and reduce pollutants in stormwater runoff prior to releasing it to receiving waters . Standard Condition HYD-3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final WQMP) to the City of Fontana {City) for review and approval in compliance with the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board's NPDES Permit Waste Discharge Requirements for the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the County of San Bernardino, and the Incorporated Cities of San Bernardino County Within the Santa Ana Region Area-Wide Urban Stormwater Runoff Management Program (Order No . RS-2010-0036, NPDES No. CAS618036) (San Bernardino County MS4 Permit) or subsequent permit. The Final WQMP shall specify the Best Management Practices {BMPs) to be incorporated into the project design to target pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff from the project site and the necessary operation and maintenance activity for each BMP. The City shall ensure that the BMPs specified in the Final WQMP are incorporated into the final project design. The proposed BMPs specified in the Final WQMP shall be incorporated into the grading and development plans submitted to the City for review and approval. Project occupancy and operation shall be in accordance with the schedule outlined in the WQMP. A Preliminary WQMP has been prepared for the project, which details the following operational BMPs that would be implemented to reduce impacts to water quality from operation of the project.87 86 87 K&A Engineering. 2024. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave. February. p. 2-1. K&A Engineering . 2024 . Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave . February. pp . 4-1 through 4-21. 4-68 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 1. Site Design BMPs include minimizing impervious surface areas; maximizing natural infiltration capacity; preserving existing on-site drainage patterns; protecting existing vegetation and sensitive areas; re-vegetating disturbed areas; minimizing unnecessary compaction in stormwater retention/infiltration basin/trench areas; utilizing vegetated drainage swales in place of underground piping; and staking off areas to be used for landscaping to minimize compaction during construction. 2. Non-Structural Source Control BMPs include education for property owners, tenants, and occupants on stormwater BMPs; activity restrictions; landscape management BMPs ; BMP maintenance; compliance with local water quality ordinances; uniform fire code implementation; litter/debris control program; employee training; catch basin inspection program; vacuum sweeping of parking lots; and compliance with all other applicable NPDES permits. 3. Structural Source Control BMPs include storm drain signage and stenciling; trash and waste storage area design; efficient irrigation systems and landscape design ; and finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement. 4. LID BMPs include retention and infiltration. The site will drain indirectly to the on-site structural treatment control BMPs composed of Contech Underground Detention storage as well as Maxwell Infiltration Dry Well units. The entire project site consists of a single drainage area (DA-1) with one (1) drainage management area (DMA-A). The proposed on-site drainage system consists of Contech Underground Detention storage and Maxwell Infiltration Dry Well units before joining the public storm drain . Runoff will be conveyed to the proposed Contech infiltration/detention chamber system and Maxwell Infiltration dry wells (located in the proposed park area of the project site, between Alley E and Alley D) for low flow infiltration as well as detention of water volume generated in the developed condition in order to reduce high runoff flow rates to levels at or below existing flow rates for the 100-year storm event. The proposed project drainage would connect to the existing 54' storm drain located within Curtis Avenue. The Design Capture Volume {DCV) is the volume of stormwater runoff that must be captured and treated by stormwater BMPs. The required DCV of the DA-1 is 38 ,996 cubic feet. The proposed underground infiltration/detention system within DMA 1 would be designed to store and infiltrate the DCV pursuant to requirements of the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Final WQMP would be prepared to ensure that the proposed project includes LID BMPs that is sized to retain, infiltrate and discharge the required Design Capture Volume on the project site in accordance with the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit. Infiltration of stormwater could have the potential to affect groundwater quality. As discussed above, the project includes site design , source control, and LID BMPs, including catch basins and curb inlets with storm filters to capture trash and debris to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater prior to entering the proposed infiltration area and underground infiltration chamber system and infiltrating into the soil. Furthermore, when storm water is infiltrated, soil and plants absorb and filter pollutants and reduce the potential for pollutants of concern to reach groundwater. As specified in P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-69 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Standard Condition HYD-3, a Final WQMP would be prepared prior to or during final design, which would ensure that the project design would adequately target pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff before infiltrating into the soil or leaving the project site. As specified in Standard Condition HYD-4, the project would also be required to comply with City Municipal Code Section 28-111 (Stormwater Management and Rainwater Retention),88 which requires the project to incorporate stormwater BMPs into the landscape and grading design plans to minimize runoff and increase infiltration and City Municipal Code Section 30-668 {Low Impact Development), which requires a minimum of two LID standards listed in the code section 89 to be incorporated into all new development projects or rehabilitated landscaping to the maximum extent practicable and to be shown on all landscape plans. Additionally, all LID standards are required to be consistent with the project-specific WQMP. As described above, the project includes site design, source control, and LID BMPs that would minimize runoff and increase infiltration as required by Section 28-111 of the City's Municipal Code . Standard Condition HYD-4 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall submit a grading plan and landscaping plan that incorporates the stormwater management, rainwater retention, and Low Impact Development requirements outlined in the City of Fontana's Municipal Code to the City for review and approval. With implementation of Standard Conditions HYD-3 and HYD-4, which require adherence to the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit, including preparation of a Final WQMP to address pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff, and compliance with the City Municipal Code, project impacts associated with the violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . 88 Applies to development with an aggregate landscape area equal to or greater than 2,500 square feet 89 requiring a building or landscape permit, plan check, or design review. Options may include curb cutouts to allow stormwater to drain to landscape areas planted below grade; use of precast permeable concrete in parking stalls, pedestrian paths, and above-ground drainage ditches; tree preservation; vegetated swales, buffers, and strips; bioretention and rain gutters, and use of rain barrels and cisterns . 4-70 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 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. This section evaluates the potential for both construction and operation of the proposed project to impede sustainable groundwater management. Construction. The Geotechnical Investigation Report stated that nearby water well data was not available to confirm the present depth to groundwater. 90 Historical data notes groundwater at depths between 300 to 600 feet in 1960. Groundwater was not encountered during the subsurface exploration conducted for the proposed project which extended to a maximum depth of 25 .5 feet.91 During construction, the depth of excavation would not exceed approximately 6 feet below existing grade of the site . Based on the depth to local groundwater, and the depth of required on-site excavations, it is unlikely excavation activities would have the potential to encounter groundwater and groundwater dewatering is not anticipated to be required during construction activities. Therefore, construction impacts related to a decrease in groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge in a manner that may impede sustainable groundwater management would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. Operation. Once developed, the project site would be approximately 63 percent impervious for a total impervious surface area of approximately 329,142 square feet. Currently, the site is 100 percent pervious. Development of the proposed project would decrease on-site infiltration. However, as described above in Section 4.lO(a), the project includes BMPs to collect and infiltrate stormwater at the project site in accordance with the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not substantially decrease the amount of stormwater that infiltrates as compared to the existing conditions . The project site is located within the Upper Santa Ana Valley-Rialto-Colton Groundwater Basin . As discussed in Section 4.l0(e) below, the Upper Santa Ana Valley-Rialto-Colton Groundwater Basin is identified by the Department of Water Resources as a very low priority basin and therefore is not required to prepare a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP). The Fontana Water Company (FWC) would supply water to the project site, which includes local groundwater from the Chino Groundwater Basin . As discussed in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the FWC anticipates that sufficient water supplies would be available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed project's water demand would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies . Impacts related to depletion of groundwater supplies or interference with groundwater recharge in a manner that may impede sustainable groundwater management would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 90 91 RMA Group . 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. p. 3 . January 9 . Ibid. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-71 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site; Less than Significant Impact. In the current condition, runoff during storm events drains southwest on the existing surface and discharges into the street gutter in Curtis Avenue. In developed conditions, the site would drain to the proposed Contech infiltration/detention chamber system and Maxwell Infiltration dry wells (located in the proposed park area of the project site, between Alley E and Alley D) for low flow infiltration. The proposed project drainage would connect to the existing 54' storm drain located within Curtis Avenue. Construction. In existing conditions, the project site is 100 percent pervious. During grading and construction activities, soil would be exposed and disturbed, drainage patterns would be temporarily altered, and there would be an increased potential for soil erosion and siltation compared to existing conditions. Additionally, during a storm event, soil erosion and siltation could occur at an accelerated rate . As discussed above in Section 4 .l0(a) and as specified in Standard Conditions HVD-1 and HVD- 2, the project applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit, which requires preparation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP would detail Erosion Control and Sediment Control BMPs to be implemented during construction to minimize erosion and retain sediment on site . Compliance with the requirements of the Construction General Permit and implementation of the construction BMPs would ensure that construction impacts related to on-and off-site erosion or siltation would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. Operation. Implementation of the proposed project would result in 63 percent coverage of the site with impervious surfaces. Such an increase in impervious surface area may increase the rate and volume of runoff during a storm, which could in turn, more readily transport sediments to receiving waters. The project will be landscaped pursuant to City standards, which will stabilize soils and allow infiltration. Standard Conditions HVD-3 and HVD-4, which require the preparation of a Final WQMP, in compliance with the San Bernardino County MS4 permit, and the implementation of Site Design, Source Control, and LID BMPs to reduce the potential for off-site erosion and siltation would be implemented during project operations. With implementation of Standard Conditions HVD-3 and HVD-4, operational impacts related to on-or off-site erosion or siltation would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 4-72 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or offsite; and iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? Less than Significant Impact. This section evaluates the potential for both construction and operation of the proposed project to increase surface runoff, resulting in flooding or impeding or redirecting flood flows . Construction. According to the City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the project site is not located within a 100-year Flood Zone or Floodway, 500-year Flood Zone, or Flood Zone protected by a levee.92 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps No . 06071C7915H (August 28, 2008)93 indicates the project site is mapped within Flood Zone X. Zone X areas are defined by FEMA as areas of minimal flood hazard, which are the areas outside of the Special Flood Hazard Area and higher than the elevation of the 0.2 percent annual chance flood. As discussed in Section 4.l0(a), project construction would comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit and the City Municipal Code and would include the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP (Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2). The SWPPP would specify construction BMPs to control and direct on-site surface runoff to ensure that project construction does not increase the rate or amount of surface runoff or impede or redirect flood flows in manner that would result in on-or off-site flooding. With implementation of a SWPPP and associated BMPs (Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2), construction activities would not result in a substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff or impeding or redirecting flood flows in a manner that would result in on-or off-site flooding and impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. Operation. As stated in Section 4.lO(c)(i) above, development of the project would result in the installation of impervious surfaces on 63 percent of the project site, which would increase stormwater runoff and could potentially result in flooding. However, as discussed above, the project site is not within a 100-year floodplain and therefore would not impede or redirect flood flows. The proposed underground detention storage and Maxwell Infiltration Dry Wells will capture and treat the DCV required; therefore, the installation of imperious surfaces on the project site would not create runoff or impede or redirect flood flows in a manner that would result in on-or off-site flooding and impacts would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required . 92 93 City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Figure 4-1 : Flood Hazard Map. June. Approved and adopted August 14, 2018 . Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2008 . National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette No . 06071C7915H August 28 . Website: https ://msc.fema .gov/portal/search (accessed September 29, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-73 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 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 Less than Significant Impact. This section evaluates the potential for both construction and operation of the proposed project to result in exceed the capacity of stormwater drainage systems. Construction. As discussed in Section 4.10.l(a) above, project construction would comply with the requirements of the Construction General Permit and the City Municipal Code and would include the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP (Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2). The SWPPP would specify construction BMPs to control and direct on-site surface runoff to ensure that stormwater runoff from the construction site does not exceed the capacity of the stormwater drainage system and does not discharge polluted runoff during construction activities. With implementation of Standard Conditions HYD-1 and HYD-2, construction impacts related to exceeding the capacity of the stormwater drainage system or additional polluted runoff would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . Operation. As previously discussed, the project site is undeveloped and there is no existing stormwater infrastructure on-site . In the current condition, runoff during storm events drain south on the existing surface and discharges into the street gutter in Curtis Avenue. In the developed condition, the site would drain to the proposed Maxwell Infiltration Wells with Contech Underground Detention storage areas for low-flow infiltration and high-flow detention and mitigation of the peak runoff from storm events. The required DCV of the WQMP system is 38,996 cubic feet. Although the installation of impervious surfaces would increase stormwater runoff collected on the project site, the proposed stormwater infiltration/ retention provides sufficient capacity to accept and detain stormwater flows so that stormwater runoff does not exceed the capacity of the existing stormwater system pursuant to the requirements of the County of San Bernardino MS4 Permit (Standard Condition HYD-3) and the City Municipal Code (Standard Condition HYD-4). Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.10.l(a) above, the proposed project would implement operational BMPs to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff in compliance with the County of San Bernardino MS4 permit (Standard Condition HYD-3). With implementation of Standard Conditions HYD-3 and HYD-4, operational impacts related to the creation or contribution of stormwater runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.10.l(c)(ii) above, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood zone; therefore, there is no risk of a release of pollutants from the project site due to inundation from a flood. The project site is approximately 45 miles northeast of the Pacific Ocean, with the Santa Ana Mountains located between the project site and the Pacific Ocean. Based on the distance from the 4-74 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Pacific Ocean and the presence of an intervening topography, there is no risk of a release of pollutants from the project site due to inundation from a tsunami. Seiches are oscillations in enclosed bodies of water that are caused by a number of factors, most often wind or seismic activity. The project site is not located within an identified dam inundation hazard zone . 94 According to the Geotechnical Investigation Report, there are no large bodies of water in the project vicinity. Due to the project site's inland location and lack of nearby bodies of standing water, tsunamis and seiches do not pose a hazard to the project site . 95 The project site is not located within an identified flood inundation zone . Given the distance of large standing bodies of water from the project site, there is no risk of a release of pollutants from the project site due to seiche-related flooding. Given that the project site is not located within a flood hazard zone and the substantial distance from the Pacific Ocean and from closed bodies of water, implementation of the project would not result in the risk of a release of pollutants due to project site inundation from a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche . Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB . The Santa Ana RWQCB adopted a Water Quality Control Plan (i.e., Basin Plan) (January 1995, Updated June 2019) that designates beneficial uses for all surface and groundwater within its jurisdiction and establishes the water quality objectives and standards necessary to protect those beneficial uses . The proposed project would comply with the Construction General Permit and the existing San Bernardino County MS4 Permit, which require the preparation of an SWPPP, preparation of a Final WQMP, and implementation of construction and operational BMPs to reduce pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in water quality impacts that would conflict with the Basin Plan . Impacts related to a conflict with the Basin Plan would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was enacted in September 2014. SGMA requires governments and water agencies of high-and medium-priority basins to halt overdraft of groundwater basins . SGMA requires the formation of local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies , which are required to adopt GSPs to manage the sustainability of the groundwater basins. The project site is located within the Upper Santa Ana Valley-Rialto-Colton Groundwater Basin . The Upper Santa Ana Valley-Rialto-Colton Groundwater Basin is identified by the Department of Water 94 95 City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Figure 4-2 : Dam Inundation areas in Fontana. June. Approved and adopted August 14, 2018. RMA Group . 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. p . 9 . January 9 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-75 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Resources as a very low priority basin;96 therefore, development of a GSP or an approved GSP alternative is not required. As discussed previously, due to the depth to groundwater, it is not expected that any stormwater that may infiltrate during project construction or operation would affect groundwater quality because the groundwater table is deep, and pollutants would be filtered prior to reaching groundwater. Pollutants in stormwater are generally removed by soil through absorption as water infiltrates. Therefore, in areas of deep groundwater, there is more absorption potential and, as a result, less potential for pollutants to reach groundwater. Furthermore, given the depth to groundwater, there is not a direct path for pollutants to reach groundwater. Although the proposed project would increase impervious surface area of the site, which would decrease on-site infiltration, the proposed project would collect and infiltrate the required DCV in accordance with the requirements of the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially decrease on-site infiltration and/or groundwater recharge when compared to existing conditions . Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan, and impacts would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required. 96 California Department of Water Resources . n .d . SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. Website : https://gis.water.ca .gov/app/bp-dashboard/final/ (accessed September 29, 2025). 4-76 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project : 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? 4.11.1 Impact Analysis Potentially Significant Impact □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated □ □ Less Than Significant Impact a. Would the project physically divide an established community? LSA No Impact ~ □ No Impact. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a physical feature (such as an interstate or railroad tracks) or removal of a means of access (such as a local road or bridge) that would impair mobility within an existing community, or between a community and outlying area. For example, the construction of an interstate highway or railroad track through an existing community may constrain travel from one side of the community to another; similarly, such construction may also impair travel to areas outside the community. The project site is bounded by single-family residential uses to the north; single-family residential uses and recreational facilities (Ralph M. Lewis Sports Complex) to the south; and single-family residential uses to the east and west . The project site is undeveloped and the proposed project would continue the pattern of residential development surrounding the site; therefore, the project would not physically divide an established community. As such, no impact would occur, and no mitigation is required . b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project was evaluated for consistency with policies, plans, and regulations related to air quality, energy, and greenhouse gas emissions in Sections 4.3, 4.6, and 4.8 of this document. General Plan Land Use and Zoning. The project site is currently designated Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village (WMXU-2) in the City's General Plan and is zoned Form-Based Code (FBC) -Village District. The WMXU-2 land use and FBC zoning district is intended to provide an alternative to conventional subdivision development. According to the City's General Plan, the WMXU-2 Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village can include a mixture of housing types, neighborhood-serving retail, open space, and civic uses . Site design should provide for multi-modal connectivity internal to the site and external to connect with adjacent areas . WMXU-2 residential densities range from 12 to 24 du/acre, and non-residential uses can have up to a FAR of 1.0. In these developments, residents can walk or bike to neighborhood destinations . Additionally, per the City's Zoning Code, the FBC -Village District P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-77 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 zoning district allows for residential or mixed-use developments. This zoning district includes maximum heights for fences and walls along front or side street setbacks of 3 feet for a solid wall, or 4 feet for open fencing. Population Growth Projections. As discussed in Section 4.14.1, typically, growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans and land use plans. Based on the project site and the number of units proposed, the project would provide 13 .34 du/ac, which is within the residential density range established by the City for the project site. Significant growth impacts could also occur if the project provides infrastructure or service capacity to accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by local or regional plans and policies. The project site is located along Curtis Avenue in an area that is fully served by dry and wet utility providers; therefore, the project does not require the extension of new or expansion of existing roads or other infrastructure. Because the proposed project would remain within the maximum density assumed for the site by the General Plan, zoning code, and, subsequently, SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, the project is not expected to result in growth in the area or City beyond that which was planned for at General Plan buildout. Intersection Level-of-Service. The City of Fontana's General Plan has established a LOS standard of LOS C as the minimum level of service standard for intersection operations, but the City has also established a "balanced approach" to maintaining vehicular LOS, so that vehicular LOS is not prioritized at the expense of other travel modes such as walking and biking. 97 Translutions included LOS in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)98 prepared for the proposed project. While level of service (LOS) is no longer the standard by which transportation impacts are evaluated pursuant to CEQA, the LOS analysis determines whether the traffic associated with construction and operation of the proposed project would result in an intersection's LOS to worsen and exceed the City's LOS thresholds under existing and cumulative conditions. Study intersections which are forecast to operate at unsatisfactory conditions (i.e. at LOS worse than LOS C for city intersections) would be identified as cumulatively deficient intersections. Table 4.17.B details existing LOS at study area intersections in the project vicinity. As detailed in Table 4.17 .B, under existing conditions, all study area intersections are currently operating at satisfactory levels of service with the exception of Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway during the PM peak hour. 97 City of Fontana. City of Fontana General Plan, Chapter 9-Community Mobility Circulation Element. Approved and adopted July 23, 2023 . 98 Translutions, Inc. 2025. The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis . May 1. 4-78 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.17.B Existing Levels of Service Without Project Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Catawba Ave-Alley Band Curtis Ave Fontana B B Curtis Ave and Alley A Fontana Future Intersection Citrus Ave and Curtis Ave Fontana B B Citrus Ave and Sierra Lakes Pkwy Fontana C D* Citrus Ave and SR-210 WB Ramps Caltrans C B Citrus Ave and SR-210 EB Ramps Caltrans C C Source : Table C, The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Translutions, Inc., May 1, 2025. (Appendix Hl). *Exceeds LOS Standard LOS = Level of Service Table 4.17.C details the project opening year {2026) without-and with-project LOS at study area intersections in the project vicinity. As detailed in Table 4.17.C, project opening year (2026) without- and with-project conditions, all study area intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS with the exception of Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway during the PM peak hour. Table 4.17.D details the project future year {2050) without-and with-project LOS at study area intersections in the project vicinity. As identified in Table 4.17 .D, under future year (2050) without- and with-project conditions, all study intersections are forecast to operate at satisfactory LOS with the exception of Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway during the PM peak hour. Table 4.17.C Opening Year (2026) without and with Project Conditions Without Project With Project Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Hour Hour Catawba Ave-Alley Band Curtis Ave Fontana B B B B Curtis Ave and Alley A Fontana Future Intersection B B Citrus Ave and Curtis Ave Fontana B A B B Citrus Ave and Sierra Lakes Pkwy Fontana C D* C D* Citrus Ave and SR-210 WB Ramps Caltrans C B C B Citrus Ave and SR-210 EB Ramps Caltrans C C C C Source : Table D, The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Translutions, Inc., May 1, 2025. (Appendix Hl). *Exceeds LOS Standard LOS = Level of Service P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-79 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.17.D Future Year (2050) without and with Project Conditions Without Project With Project Intersection Jurisdiction AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak Hour Hour Hour Hour Catawba Ave-Alley Band Curtis Ave Fontana B B B B Curtis Ave and Alley A Fontana Future Intersection B B Citrus Ave and Curtis Ave Fontana B A B A Citrus Ave and Sierra Lakes Pkwy Fontana C D* C D* Citrus Ave and SR-210 WB Ramps Caltrans C C C C Citrus Ave and SR-210 EB Ramps Caltrans C C C C Source : Table E, The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Translutions, Inc., May 1, 2025. (Appendix Hl). *Exceeds LOS Standard LOS = Level of Service Opening and future year with project conditions exceed the LOS standards established by the City at the Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway study area intersection during the PM peak hour. Therefore, for locations where the LOS standard is not met (Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway during the PM peak hour), circulation improvements have been recommended as conditions of approval that the City can adopt in order to ensure that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan policies and level of service guidelines. Accordingly, Project-Specific Condition of Approval TRA-1 is recommended to ensure impacts related to LOS at Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway meet the level of service requirements specified in the City's General Plan . Condition of Approval TRA-1 In order to maintain acceptable LOS during Opening Year {2026) AM and PM peak hours at local roadway intersections, the project shall pay its fair share contribution to the City of Fontana for the implementation of the following improvements at Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway: • Add overlap phasing to the northbound right-turn at Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway. By adopting these COAs or the equivalent, the City would ensure that the proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan and circulation policies. The project would be consistent with policies and plans related to air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and zoning, and circulation. Additionally, the project would not foster growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in the City's General Plan or by SCAG. Therefore, impacts related to conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect are less than significant. Mitigation is not required . 4-80 P:\2025\20252531 • Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project : a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 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 Potentially Significant Impact □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ □ □ □ LSA No Impact C8l C8l a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. In 1975, the California Legislature enacted the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act which, among other things, provided guidelines for the classification and designation of mineral lands. Areas are classified on the basis of geologic factors without regard to existing land use and land ownership . The areas are categorized into four Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs): MRZ-1: An area where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence. MRZ-2: An area where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. MRZ-3: An area containing mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated . MRZ-4: An area where available information is inadequate for assignment to any other MRZ zone . The project site is located within Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3),99 which is defined as areas containing known or inferred mineral deposits, the significance of which cannot be evaluated . No historic mineral resource recovery has been recorded on-site or in the immediate project vicinity. In the absence of any significant on-site mineral resources, the project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required . 99 California Department of Conservation . 1975 . Mineral Land Classification Map, San Bernardino P-C Region . Fontana Quadrangle, Special Report 143, Plate 7 .2. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-81 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 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 11.99-acre project site is currently undeveloped. The project site is bounded by single-family homes to the west, single-family homes and Citrus Avenue to the east, single-family homes to the north, and Curtis Avenue to the south. The project site is currently designated WMXU- 2 (Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village) in the City's General Plan and is zoned FBC (Form-Based Code). Since the project site is not delineated as an area for mineral resource recovery, its absence of known mineral or aggregate resources, and due to the absence of any such mineral extraction activity on the site or in adjacent areas, there is no potential for the project site to be used for mineral resource recovery. Therefore, no impact from the loss of available mineral resources would occur, and no mitigation is required. 4-82 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.13 NOISE Would the project result in : a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? 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 2 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? Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ [8] □ [8] □ LSA No Impact □ □ □ The following analysis is based in part on the Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis 100 prepared for the proposed project, which is included in full as Appendix G to this Initial Study. Noise is usually defined as unwanted sound. Noise consists of any sound that may produce physiological or psychological damage and/or interfere with communication, work, rest, recreation, and sleep . Several noise measurement scales exist that are used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement that indicates the relative intensity of a sound . Sound levels in dB are calculated on a logarithmic basis . An increase of 10 dB represents a 10-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 dB is 100 times more intense, and 30 dB is 1,000 times more intense . Each 10 dB increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness; and similarly, each 10 dB decrease in sound level is perceived as half as loud . Sound intensity is normally measured through the A-weighted sound level (dBA), and this scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. The A-weighted sound level is the basis for 24-hour sound measurements which better represent how humans are more sensitive to sound at night. As noise spreads from a source, it loses energy so that the farther away the noise receiver is from the noise source, the lower the perceived noise level would be . Geometric spreading causes the sound level to attenuate or be reduced, resulting in a 6 dB reduction in the noise level for each doubling of distance from a single point source of noise to the noise sensitive receptor of concern . There are many ways to rate noise for various time periods, but an appropriate rating of ambient noise affecting humans also accounts for the annoying effects of sound. Equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) is the total sound energy of time varying noise over a sample period. However, the predominant rating scales for human communities in the State of California are the Leq, the CNEL, and the day-night average level (Lcin) based on A-weighted decibels (dBA). CNEL is the time varying 100 LSA . 2025 . Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the Proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project in Fontana, California . September 30 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-83 LSA ENCL AV E N ORTH FONTAN A FONT ANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUD Y/M I TIG ATED NEG ATI VE DECL ARATI ON NO VEM BER 2025 noise over a 24-hour period, with a 5 dBA weighting factor applied to the hourly Leq for noises occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m . (defined as relaxation hours) and 10 dBA weighting factor applied to noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (defined as sleeping hours). Ldn is similar to the CNEL scale, but without the adjustment for events occurring during the evening relaxation hours. CNEL and Ldn are within one dBA of each other and are normally exchangeable . The noise adjustments are added to the noise events occurring during the more sensitive hours. Overview of the Existing Noise Environment. Transportation facilities are the primary existing noise sources in the project area . Traffic noise in the project area includes Curtis Avenue , Citrus Avenue, and other local roadways . Existing land uses within the project area include existing single-family residences to the north, east, south, and west and the Ralph M . Lewis Sports Complex to the southeast across Curtis Avenue . To assess the existing noise conditions in the area, long-term {24-hour) noise measurements were collected from August 28 to August 29, 2025 at three locations in the project vicinity. The locations of the noise measurements and the results are summarized in Table 4.13.A . Noise measurement data are provided in Appendix G. Table 4.13.A: Long-Term Ambient Noise Monitoring Results Monitoring Noise Level (dBA) Location L,q lmax No . Daytime Nighttime Daytime Nighttime CNEL 16047 Muirfteld Lane, Fontana , CA . In front of the home on a 47.6-60.0 50.0-53 .5 LT-1 light pole. Approximately 420 (53.4)1 (51.2)2 61.7-78.2 58.6-70.6 58 .2 feet from the Citrus Avenue centerline . 5982 Georgetown Way, Fontana , CA . In front of the 46 .4-58.4 48.9-55.6 LT-2 home on a light pole. (53.4)1 (52 .9)2 62.2-80.0 58.6-72 .7 59 .8 15870 Curtis Avenue. In the front yard . On a tree along the 51.2-56.6 52.7-55 .3 LT-3 eastern property line. (54.7)1 (54 .0)2 66.7-74.5 64.0-77.5 60 .8 Approximately 110 feet from the Curtis Avenue centerl ine . Source : Compiled by LSA (2025). Note : The long-term (24-hour) noise level measurements were conducted from August 28 to August 29 , 2025. 1 Average daytime no ise level. 2 Average nighttime noise level. CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level HVAC = heating, ventilation, and air conditioning dBA = A-weighted decibels L,q = equivalent continuous sound level ft = foot/feet Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level Noise Source Fa int traffic on Citrus Avenue . HVAC noise at nearby residence and occasional vehicles on Notre Dame Street and Georgetown Way. Traffic on Curtis Avenue . 4-84 P:\2025\20252531-Encl ave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.13.1 Impact Analysis ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 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. Two types of short-term noise impacts could occur during construction on the project site. First, construction crew commutes and the transport of construction equipment and materials to the site for the proposed project would incrementally increase noise levels on roads leading to the site. The pieces of heavy equipment for construction activities would be moved on site, would remain for the duration of each construction phase, and would not add to the daily traffic volume in the project vicinity. Although there would be a relatively high single-event noise exposure potential causing intermittent noise nuisance (passing trucks at 50 feet would generate up to a maximum of 84 dBA), the effect on longer-term (daily) ambient noise levels would be small because the daily construction-related vehicle trips are small compared to the existing daily traffic volume on Curtis Avenue and Citrus Avenue, which would be used to access the project site . The results of the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod)(version 2022.1) contained in the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum 101 (Appendix A) indicate that the combined building construction, paving, and architectural coating phase would generate the most trips out of all of the construction phases due to overlapping schedules and have an acoustical equivalent traffic volume of 290 and 266 passenger car equivalent vehicles on Curtis Avenue and Citrus Avenue, respectively. Table 4.13.B lists the existing traffic noise levels on roadways in the project vicinity. These noise levels represent the worst-case scenario, which assumes that no shielding is provided between traffic and the location where the noise contours are drawn . Based on Table 4 .13 .B, Curtis Avenue and Citrus Avenue have estimated existing average daily traffic (ADT) volumes of 2,480 and 13,510, respectively, near the project site . Based on the information above, construction-related traffic would increase noise levels by up to 0.5 dBA . A noise level increase of less than 3 dBA would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment. Therefore, short-term construction-related noise impacts associated with worker commute and equipment transport to the project site would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. 101 LSA . 2025 . Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. September 30. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-85 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.13.B: Existing Traffic Noise Levels Centerline to Centerline to Centerline to CNEL (dBA) 50 ft Roadway Segment ADT 70dBACNEL 65 dBACNEL 60dBACNEL from Centerline of Outermost (ft) (ft) (ft) Lane Curtis Avenue west of Catawba Avenue 2,830 <50 < 50 57 60.1 Curtis Avenue between Catawba Avenue and Alley 2,480 <50 < 50 52 59 .6 A Curtis Avenue between Alley A and Citrus Avenue 2,480 <50 < 50 52 59 .6 Catawba Avenue south of Curtis Avenue 670 <50 < 50 <50 49.0 Citrus Avenue north of Curtis Avenue 13,510 <50 95 197 66.4 Citrus Avenue between Curtis Avenue and Sierra 13,740 <50 96 199 66.5 Lakes Parkway Citrus Avenue between Sierra Lakes Parkway and 24,210 73 139 290 68.4 SR-210 WB Ramps Sierra Lakes Parkway west of Citrus Avenue 10,800 <50 70 141 64.2 Sierra Lakes Parkway west of Citrus Avenue 18,900 <50 99 203 66.4 Source : Compiled by LSA (2025). Note : Traffic noise within 50 ft of the roadway centerline should be evaluated with site-specific information . ADT = average daily traffic ft = foot/feet CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level SR= State Route dBA = A-weighted decibels WB = westbound The second type of short-term noise impact is related to noise generated from construction activities. Construction is performed in discrete steps, each of which has its own mix of equipment and, consequently, its own noise characteristics. The project anticipates site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases of construction. These various sequential phases change the character of the noise generated on a project site. Therefore, the noise levels vary as construction progresses. Despite the variety in the type and size of construction equipment, similarities in the dominant noise sources and patterns of operation allow construction- related noise ranges to be categorized by work phase. Table 4.13.C lists the Lmax recommended for noise impact assessments for typical construction equipment included in the FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook, 102 based on a distance of 50 feet between the equipment and a noise receptor. Table 4.13.D lists the anticipated construction equipment for each construction phase based on the CalEEMod {Version 2022.1) results contained in the Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum (Appendix A). Table 4.13.D shows the combined noise level at 50 feet from all of the equipment in each phase and the Leq noise level for each equipment at 50 feet based on the quantity, reference Lmax noise level at 50 feet, and the acoustical use factor. As shown in Table 4.13.D, construction noise levels would reach up to 89.2 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet. 102 FHWA . 2006 . FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. 4-86 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Table 4.13.C: Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Equipment Description Acoustical Use Factor 1 Maximum Noise Level ( Lmax) at 50 ft 2 Backhoe 40 80 Compactor (ground) 20 80 Compressor (air) 40 80 Crane 16 85 Dozer 40 85 Dump Truck 40 84 Excavator 40 85 Flatbed Truck 40 84 Man Lift (Forklift) 20 85 Front-End Loader 40 80 Generator 50 82 Grader 40 85 Impact Pile Driver 20 95 Jackhammer 20 85 Paver 50 85 Pavement Scarafier 20 85 Pickup Truck 40 55 Pneumatic Tools 50 85 Pump 50 77 Rock Drill 20 85 Roller 20 85 Scraper 40 85 Tractor 40 84 Welder/Torch 40 73 Source : FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook, Table 9 .1 (FHWA 2006). Note: The noise levels reported in this table are rounded to the nearest whole number. 1 Use factor is the percentage of time during a construction noise operation that a piece of construction equipment is operating at full power. 2 Maximum noise levels were developed based on Spec 721.560 from the CA/T program to be consistent with the City of Boston, Massachusetts, Noise Code for the "Big Dig " project. CA/T = Central Artery/Tunnel ft= foot/feet FHWA = Federal Highway Administration Lmax= maximum instantaneous noise level P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA 4-87 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.13.D: Summary of Construction Phase, Equipment, and Noise Levels Reference Acoustical Noise Level Combined Construction Construction Quantity Noise Level Usage at SO ft Noise Level Phase Equipment at SO ft at SO ft (dBA Lmax) Factor 1 (%) (dBA leq) (dBA leq) Site Preparation Dozer 3 85 40 85 .8 87.3 Front End Loader 4 80 40 82.0 Grader 1 85 40 81.0 Excavator 2 85 40 84 .0 Grading Front End Loader 2 80 40 79 .0 89.2 Scraper 2 85 40 84 .0 Dozer 1 85 40 81.0 Man Lift 3 85 20 82.8 Generator 1 82 so 79.0 Building Construction Crane 1 85 16 77.0 86.5 Welder/ Torch 1 73 40 69 .0 Front End Loader 3 80 40 80.8 Paving and Paver 2 85 so 85 .0 Pavement Scarafier 2 85 20 81.0 87.6 Landscaping Roller 2 85 20 81.0 Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 80 40 76.0 76.0 Source: Compiled by LSA (2025). 1 The acoustical use factor is the percentage of time during a construction noise operation that a piece of construction equipment operates at full power. dBA = A-weighted decibels leq = equivalent continuous sound level ft= foot/feet Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level Construction equipment is not situated at any one location during construction activities but is typically spread throughout the residential development site at various distances from sensitive receptors. Therefore, this analysis employs FTA guidance for calculating construction noise, which recommends measuring construction noise produced by all construction equipment simultaneously from the center of the residential development site. Table 4.13.E shows the construction noise levels at the closest residential property would reach up to 75.6 dBA Leq from the center of the project site . Construction noise is temporary and would stop once project construction is completed. Compliance with the City's hours of construction in Standard Condition NOl-1, pursuant to Section 18-63{b)(7) of the City's Municipal Code listed below would ensure construction-related noise would not be generated during the more sensitive nighttime hours. Standard Condition NOl-1: The construction contractor shall limit construction activities to 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 pursuant to Section 18-63{b)(7) of the City's Municipal Code (City of Fontana 2025). Construction is prohibited outside these hours and on Sundays. As shown in Table 4.13.E, construction-related noise levels would be below the FTA noise level standard of 80 dBA Leq for residential uses . Therefore, construction noise impacts would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required . 4-88 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.13.E: Construction Noise Levels Reference Distance Construction Exceeds Land Use Direction Noise Level Distance Attenuation Shielding Noise Level Noise Standard Daytime at 50 ft (ft) (ft) (dBA) (dBA L.,q) (dBA L.,q) Noise Standard? (dBA L.,q) Residence North 89.2 314 16.0 0.0 73.2 80 No Residence East 89.2 415 18.4 0.0 70.8 80 No Residence East 89.2 380 17.6 0.0 75.6 80 No Residence South 89 .2 415 18.4 0.0 74 .8 80 No Source : Compiled by LSA (2025). dBA = A-weighted decibels Le" = equivalent continuous sound level ft= foot/feet Lm ax = maximum instantaneous noise level Long-Term Traffic Noise. The FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA RD-77-108) was used to evaluate traffic-related noise conditions along roadways in the project vicinity. The Existing, Opening Year (2026), and Future (2050) without and with project ADT volumes were derived from the Traffic Impact Analysis103 prepared for the proposed project (Appendix Hl). The additional traffic generated by the project represents an incremental increase to the existing roadway traffic volumes; therefore, the project would increase noise by up to 1.1 dBA . This would not be a perceptible noise level increase (i.e ., more than 3 dBA CNEL) in an outdoor environment; therefore, traffic noise from project-related traffic on off-site sensitive receptors would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required . Operational Noise . The proposed project includes on-site ground floor heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units for the proposed residences, which could potentially operate 24 hours per day. Each HVAC unit would generate a noise level of 44.4 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet. Based on the site plan of the proposed project and surrounding land uses, it is estimated that off-site residences would be exposed to up to four HVAC units from on-site residences, which would generate a noise level of 50.4 dBA Leq at a distance of 50 feet. The closest residential property line is approximately 10 feet from the four HVAC units and would be exposed to noise levels of 59.4 dBA Leq (50.4 dBA + 14.0 dBA = 64.4 dBA). This noise level would be lower when factoring shielding from the proposed residential building, the existing 6 foot high walls located on the north, east, and half of the west boundaries of the project site, and/or the proposed 6 foot high wall which would extend along the other half of the west boundary of the project site, and would not exceed the City's daytime and nighttime stationary noise standard of 65 dBA. Therefore, noise impacts from project operations would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. b. Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. Ground borne noise is typically assessed at locations where there is no airborne noise path, or for buildings with substantial sound insulation such as a recording studio . For 103 Translutions, Inc . 2025 . The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-89 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 typical buildings, the interior airborne noise levels are often higher than groundborne noise levels. Therefore, the main focus of the discussion and analysis is ground borne vibration as it relates to human annoyance and off-site building damage. Construction. This construction vibration impact analysis discusses the level of human annoyance using vibration levels in root-mean-square (RMS) amplitude and assesses the potential for building damage using vibration levels in peak particle velocity (PPV) (inches per second [in/sec]). Vibration levels calculated in RMS velocity are best for characterizing human response to building vibration, whereas vibration levels in PPV are best for characterizing damage potential. Table 4.13.F shows the reference vibration levels at a distance of 25 feet for each type of standard construction equipment from the Caltrans Manual.104 site preparation and grading for the proposed project is expected to require the use of large bulldozers and loaded trucks, which would generate ground-borne vibration of up to 0.089 in/sec PPV-max (0 .062 in/sec PPV-RMS) and 0.076 in/sec PPV- max (0 .053 in/sec PPV-RMS), respectively, when measured at 25 feet. Pile drivers, vibratory rollers, and other heavy-tracked construction equipment would not be used during construction of the proposed project. Table 4.13.F: Vibration Source Amplitudes for Construction Equipment Reference PPV/Lv at 25 ft Equipment Maximum PPV (in/sec) RMS PPV (in/sec)1 Pile Driver {Impact), Typical 0 .644 Pile Driver (Sonic), Typical 0 .170 Vibratory Roller 0.210 Hoe Ram 0.089 Large Bulldozer 2 0.089 Caisson Drilling 0.089 Loaded Trucks 2 0.076 Jackhammer 0.Q35 Small Bulldozer 0.003 Sources : Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual {Caltrans 2020). 1 RMS vibration velocity is 70 percent of the maximum PPV. 2 Equipment shown in bold is expected to be used on site . µin/sec= microinches per second Lv = velocity in decibels Caltrans = California Department of Transportation PPV = peak particle velocity ft= foot/feet RMS= root-mean-square 0.451 0.119 0.147 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.053 0 .025 0 .002 in/sec= inches per second VdB = vibration velocity decibels The greatest vibration levels are anticipated during the site preparation and grading phases. All other phases are expected to result in lower vibration levels. The distance to the nearest buildings for vibration impact analysis is measured between the nearest off-site buildings and the project boundary (assuming the construction equipment would be used at or near the project boundary) because vibration impacts normally occur within the buildings. 104 Caltrans. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. 4-90 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Table 4.13.G lists the projected vibration levels from various construction equipment expected to be used on the project site in the active construction area to the nearest buildings in the project vicinity. As shown in Table 4.13.G, the closest residential building is approximately 335 feet from the center of the project site and would experience a vibration level of up to 0.004 in/sec PPV-RMS. This vibration level would not have the potential to result in community annoyance because vibration levels would not exceed the Caltrans annoyance threshold of 0.04 in/sec PPV-RMS. Other building structures that surround the project site would experience lower vibration levels because they are farther away. Table 4.13.G: Potential Construction Vibration Annoyance Reference Distance to Land Use Direction Equipment/ Vibration Level Structure Vibration Level Activity at 25 ft (ft)l (in/sec [PPV-RMS]) (in/sec [PPV-RMS]) Residence North Large bulldozers 0.062 335 0 .004 Loaded trucks 0.053 335 0 .003 Residence East Large bulldozers 0.062 425 0 .003 Loaded trucks 0.053 425 0 .002 Residence South Large bulldozers 0.062 410 0.003 Loaded trucks 0.053 410 0.002 Residence West Large bulldozers 0.062 435 0.003 Loaded trucks 0 .053 435 0 .002 Source : Compiled by LSA (2025). Note : The Caltrans annoyance threshold is 0.04 in/sec PPV-RMS . 1 Distance from the center of the project site to the building structure . Caltrans = California Department of Transportation PPV = peak particle velocity ft = foot/feet RMS= root-mean-square in/sec= inches per second Similarly, Table 4.13.H lists the projected vibration levels from various construction equipment expected to be used on the project site at the project construction boundary to the nearest buildings in the project vicinity. As shown in Table 4.13 .H, the closest building is approximately 10 feet from the project construction boundary and would experience a vibration level of up to 0.244 PPV (in/sec). This vibration level would not have the potential to result in building damage because the building is conservatively assumed to be an older residential structure or better, and the anticipated project-related vibration levels would not exceed the Caltrans vibration damage threshold of 0.30 PPV (in/sec). Other building structures that surround the project site would experience lower vibration levels because they are farther away and are also conservatively assumed to be an older residential structure or better, and the anticipated project-related vibration levels would not exceed the Caltrans vibration damage threshold of 0.30 PPV (in/sec). Therefore, vibration levels generated from project construction would be less than significant . No mitigation measures are required . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-91 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Table 4.13.H: Potential Construction Vibration Damage Reference Land Use Direction Equipment/ Vibration Level Distance to Activity at 25 ft Structure (ft)1 PPV (in/sec) Residence North Large bulldozers 0.089 18 Loaded trucks 0.076 18 Residence East Large bulldozers 0.089 10 Loaded trucks 0.076 10 Residence South Large bulldozers 0.089 85 Loaded trucks 0.076 85 Residence West Large bulldozers 0.089 14 Loaded trucks 0.076 14 Source : Compiled by LSA {202S). Note: The Caltrans building damage threshold for older residential structures is 0 .30 PPV (in/sec). 1 Distance from the project construction boundary to the building structure . Caltrans = California Department of Transportation in/sec= inches per second ft = foot/feet PPV = peak particle velocity Vibration Level PPV (in/sec) 0.128 0.109 0.244 0.208 0 .023 0 .020 0 .168 0.144 Operations. Once operational, the proposed project would not generate vibration. In addition, vibration levels generated from project-related traffic on the adjacent roadways (i.e., Curtis Avenue and Citrus Avenue) would be unusual for on-road vehicles because the rubber tires and suspension systems of on road vehicles provide vibration isolation. Therefore, vibration levels generated from project-related operations would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. 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 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The closest public airport to the project site is Ontario International Airport, which is 9.1 miles southwest of the project site. The LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan shows that the project site is outside the 60 to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour.105 Also, there are no private airstrips within 2 miles of the project site . Therefore, the project would not expose people working in the project vicinity to aviation-related excessive noise levels. No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. 105 Ontario International Airport -Inter Agency Collaborative . 2011a . LA/Ontario international Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan . Compatibility Policy Map. Noise Impact Zones. 4-92 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project : a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 4.14.1 Impact Analysis Potentially Significant Impact □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ □ □ LSA No Impact □ a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2[d] identifies a project as growth inducing if it fosters economic or population growth, or development of businesses or housing either directly or indirectly in the surrounding environment. New employees from commercial or industrial development and new population from residential development represent direct forms of growth, which have a secondary effect of expanding the size of local markets and inducing additional economic activity in the area. Under CEQA, growth inducement is not considered necessarily detrimental, beneficial, or of little significance to the environment. Typically, the growth-inducing potential of a project would be considered substantial if it fosters growth or a concentration of population in excess of what is assumed in pertinent master plans, land use plans, or in projections made by regional planning agencies (e.g ., SCAG). The project site is located along Curtis Avenue in an area that is fully served by dry and wet utility providers; therefore, the project does not require the extension of new or expansion of existing roads or other infrastructure. As of April 1, 2020 the United States Census Bureau estimated the City's population to be 208,393 persons.106 Based on a population forecast of 3.74 persons/unit, the 153 units proposed could result in a population of up to 572 persons.107 According to SCAG's 2024-2050 RTP/SCS, the City's population, households, and employment are forecast to increase by approximately 36,100 residents, 22,200 households, and 15,500 jobs, 106 United States Census Bureau. n .d. Fontana City, California. Website : https://data .census.gov/profile/ Fontana_city,_California?g=160XX00US0624680 (accessed September 2, 2025). 107 According to the SCAG Local Profiles Dataset for 2023 (https://scag.ca .gov/data-tools-local-profiles), Fontana has an average household size of 3.74 persons per dwelling unit. Therefore, 3 .74 x 153 dwelling units= 572 residents . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-93 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 respectively, between 2019 and 2050.108 The City's General Plan has a year 2035 buildout horizon; however, the General Plan does not specify or anticipate when complete buildout would occur, as long-range demographic and economic trends are speculative. The California Department of Housing and Community Development supplies a regional housing goal to SCAG, which is then mandated to allocate the housing goal to City and County jurisdictions in the region through a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). SCAG adopted its RHNA for the 6th cycle, which covers an eight-year planning period {2021-2029) to address housing issues related to future growth in the SCAG region . The major goal of the RHNA is to assure a fair distribution of housing with the SCAG region so that every community provides an opportunity for a mix of housing that accommodates all economic segments of the community. Fontana's share of the SCAG regional growth allocation is 17,519 new housing units.109 Table 4.14.A identifies the distribution of these housing units for each economic category. Table 4.14.A: Housing Needs for 2021 -2029 Income Category (percent of County Adjusted Median lncome)1 Number of Units Percent Extremely Low (30 percent of less) 2,554 Very Low (31 to 50 percent)2 2,555 Low (51 to 80 percent) 2.950 Moderate (81 to 120 percent) 3,035 Above Moderate (over 120 percent) 6,425 Total 17,519 Source : Table 3-44, Fontana 6'h Cycle Housing Element Update. City of Fontana . Adopted February 8, 2022. 1 In 2019, the median household income for Fontana was $72,918, whereas the County median income was $63,362.15. 15 15 17 17 37 100 2 Pursuant to AB 2634, local jurisdictions are also required to project the housing needs of extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI). In estimating the number of extremely low-income households, a jurisdiction can use 50% of the very low-income allocation or apportion the very low-income figure based on Census data . The project would provide a mix of 3-and 4-bedroom units providing housing options suitable to various economic segments of the community, furthering the provision of housing required under the RHNA. The proposed project would remain within the site's maximum density {24 du/acre) would remain under the proposed project. Therefore, the project would be consistent with the development standards previously anticipated for the project site in the General Plan and zoning, and the proposed project would not result in regional growth exceeding that previously forecast by SCAG. Impacts related to population growth would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 108 Southern California Association of Governments, Connect SoCal 2024 Demographic & Growth Forecast Technical Report. Table 13. Adopted April 4, 2024. https ://scag .ca .gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/23-2987-tr-demographics-growth-forecast-final- 040424 .pdf (website accessed : February 20, 2025). 109 City of Fontana. 2022 . Fontana 6th Cycle Housing Element Update . Adopted February 8 . 4-94 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA b. Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The project site is currently vacant, and no residential units are present on the site. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere . No impact would occur, and no mitigation is required. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-95 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project: a. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services : i. Fi re protection? ii. Police protection? iii . Schools? iv. Parks? v. Other public facilities? 4.15.1 Impact Analysis Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ □ □ INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact 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: i. Fire protection? Less than Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project may incrementally increase the demand for fire protection services due to the introduction of a resident population at the project site, but not to the degree that the existing fire stations, staff, and equipment within the City could not meet demand. The San Bernardino County Fire Department provides fire protection, fire prevention, and emergency services to the Fontana Fire Protection District (FFPD) for the City of Fontana, including the project site. The project site is located within the jurisdiction of Division 1 110 with the nearest fire stations being Station 78 located at 7110 Citrus Avenue, approximately 1.35 miles (via local roadways) south, and Station 81 located at 16615 Casa Grande Avenue, approximately 1.31 mile northeast of the project site. Fire Station 78 is staffed with one captain, one engineer, two firefighter paramedics, and one firefighter, and is equipped with one medic engine, and one medic squad vehicle .111 This station responds to approximately 6,000 incidents per year, 80 percent of which are for emergency medical services . In 2022, the response time for San Bernardino County Fire Department for critical emergencies was 7 minutes and 30 seconds .112 However, this 110 San Bernardino Fire Protection District. n.d.-a . Fire Stations. https://sbcfire.org/firestations/ (accessed October 16, 2025). 111 City of Fontana. n.d.-a. About the Fontana Fire District, Stations & Equipment, Fire Station 78. Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/639/Stations-Equipment (accessed October 16, 2025). 112 San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. n.d .-b. Service Zone FP-5, 2022 Information, Valley Service Zone, West Valley. Website : https://sbcfire.org/fp5/ (accessed October 22, 2025). 4-96 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA time is skewed due to the long response distances in outlying areas of the County. The County Fire Department, in urban areas, has a target response time of 7 minutes and 30 seconds. Average travel time between Fire Station 78 and the project site is approximately 4 minutes. The project site would generate 82 new AM peak hour trips, 108 new AM peak-hour trips. As discussed in the project- specific Traffic Impact Analysis, 113 future conditions on the route from Fire Station 78 to the project site entry on Curtis Avenue would not exceed the City 's established Level of Service standard or increase congestion . Furthermore, the project site is located in an urban setting already served by the FFPD . First responders already patrol the project site vicinity, and all vehicles are required to yield the right-of-way to authorized emergency vehicles pursuant to California Vehicle Code 21806 . Therefore, the proposed project is not expected to increase the FFPD's response times such that the target response time of 7 minutes and 30 seconds could not be maintained . As detailed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, the project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the city or region. Furthermore, the project site is located within an urbanized area and would be connected to existing municipal roadways and utility infrastructure. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the project site is not within a State or Local Responsibility Area {SRA or LRA) High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone {VHFHSZ) and is not located in an area identified by the City to be at risk of a wildfire event. The proposed project would be constructed in accordance with the current {2022) California Building Code, Part 9 (the California Fire Code or CFC), as adopted by reference and amended by the San Bernardino County Fire Protection District and as administered locally by the Fontana Fire Protection District. The CFC requires the proposed buildings to incorporate construction techniques and materials such as roofs, eaves, exterior walls, vents, appendages, windows, and doors resistant to and/or to perform at high levels against ignition during exposure to fires . Fire sprinklers also would be incorporated throughout the proposed buildings to further reduce fire risk and service demand. The FFPD provides technical review of all building construction plans within the City of Fontana and would review the proposed project to ensure the buildings meet the most current adopted version of the CFC and CBC prior to construction . The project would implement fire prevention and suppression, including fire hydrants, fire alarms, and building sprinkler systems, to reduce the potential for fires at the site and demand for fire services . The proposed project's internal circulation system would also be developed to be consistent with County and Fire Code requirements to facilitate emergency vehicles access. The proposed project design would be submitted to and approved by the FFPD prior the issuance of building permits to ensure the design meets the requirements of the FFPD and would be designed and operated per applicable standards required by the City for new development with regard to fire protection In addition, the City maintains mutual aid agreements with fire protection agencies in the surrounding cities (e.g., Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, and Rialto), which allow for the services of nearby fire departments to assist the FFPD during major emergencies. Construction and occupation of the proposed multi-family residential project in accordance with applicable policies (i.e ., CBC and CFC) designed to minimize fires and risk to persons and structures from exposure to fires would not require new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the 113 Translutions, Inc . 2025 . The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis . May 1. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-97 LSA ENCL AV E N ORTH FONTAN A FONT ANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUD Y/M I TIG ATED NEG ATI VE DECL ARATI ON NO VEM BER 2025 construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Impacts associated with the need to expand fire protection services and facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of service would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . ii. Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. The City of Fontana Police Department (FPD) headquarters is located at 17005 Upland Avenue, approximately 3.2 miles southeast of the project site . The City monitors staffing levels to ensure that adequate police protection and response times continue to be provided as individual development projects are proposed and on an annual basis as part of the City Council's budgeting process . Additionally, the City employs a 5-year strategic planning process to ensure adequate police services as buildout of the City occurs. Implementation of the proposed multi-family residential uses could incrementally increase the demand for police services . However, the site has been designated for residential development and would not result in substantial changes in the amount or location of population forecast by the City in its General Plan or in police strategic planning. The FPD has just over 300 employees, with 192 sworn officers and 112 civilian staff, and operates out of the FPD headquarters. The FPD is organized with four patrol beats, with the project site located in Beat 1 (all area north of SR-210). The Patrol Division is divided into five patrol teams, with officers working three 12-hour shifts to cover the four beats . The FPD operates with a mandatory minimum of 10 officers per shift, though a shift typically includes 12 to 14 officers supervised by a corporal, sergeant, and lieutenant.114 In August 2025, the current average response time for Class I calls (calls related to an immediate risk to life/safety) was 4 .32 minutes, 115 and the FPD made 674 Class A arrests, of which approximately nine percent were made within FPD Beat 1. As discussed in Section 4.17, Transportation, the project would generate approximately 82 and 108 vehicle trips during the AM and PM peak hour, respectively, and is not expected to result in an adverse effect on the surrounding transportation network or increase congestion on roadways within the project vicinity such that roadway intersections would operate at deficient levels of service . Furthermore, the project site is located in an urban setting already served by the FPD . First responders already patrol the project vicinity, and all vehicles are required to yield the right-of-way to authorized emergency vehicles pursuant to California Vehicle Code 21806 . Accordingly, the continual monitoring of police staffing levels by the City would ensure the proposed project would not result in a significant reduction in police response times. The project would be designed and operated per applicable standards required by the City and FPD for new development with regard to public safety. The City maintains mutual aid agreements with police agencies in the surrounding cities (e.g., Rancho Cucamonga, Ontario, and Rialto) and with the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department, which allow for the services of nearby police departments to assist the FPD during major emergencies . 114 Heintze, Hillard. 2020. Fontana Police Department, An Independent Assessment of Law Enforcement Operations. p. 11. November 6. Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/34041/ Hillard-Heintze-Report-for-the-Fontana-Police-Department-11-06-20?bidld= (accessed October 22, 2025). 115 Fontana Police Department. 2025 . Police Department Monthly Report, August 2025 . Website : https://www.fontanaca .gov/DocumentCenter/View/47182/Crime-Stats-August-2025 (accessed October 22, 2025). 4-98 P:\2025\20252531-Encl ave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA The FPD employs Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles during the development review process for new construction and offers CPTED inspection services free of charge to reduce the likelihood of criminal activity and create safer places for the community.116 The proposed project would incorporate CPTED pursuant to Section 30-395 of the City's Zoning and Development Code to keep FPD service demand increases to a minimum. For example, the proposed project would implement informal surveillance design such as architecture, landscaping, and lighting designed to minimize visual obstacles and eliminate places of concealment. Additionally, access to the project site would be managed with security gates, and the proposed residential buildings would have security lighting located on the building fa<;ades to reduce the potential for crime. Construction and occupation of the proposed multi-family residential project in accordance with applicable policies designed to ensure adequate public safety would not require new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Impacts associated with the need to expand police protection services and facilities in order to maintain acceptable levels of service would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. iii. Schools? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the Fontana Unified School District (FUSD), which operates 45 schools serving students from preschool through adult education, including 30 elementary schools, 7 middle schools, 5 high schools, 1 alternative high school, 1 adult school, and an online learning program .117 As of the 2024-25 school year, FUSD reported an enrollment of 33,039 students.118 The project site is located within the attendance boundaries of the following schools:119 • Dorothy Grant Elementary School: 2023-24 enrollment, 695 students 120 • Wayne Ruble Middle School: 2023-24 enrollment, 1,371 students 121 • Summit High School : 2023-24 enrollment, 2,626 students 122 116 City of Fontana. n.d .-b. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design . Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/Docu mentCenter /View /7 417 /CPTED-Gu idelines (accessed October 22, 2025 ). 117 Fontana Unified School District. n.d .-b. Schools. Website: https://www.fusd.net/schools (accessed September 11, 2025). 118 California Department of Education . n .d . Data Quest. 2024-25 Enrollment by Grade, Fontana Unified Report {36-67710). Website : https://dq .cde .ca .gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdlevels.aspx?cds= 3667710&agglevel=District&year=2024-25 (accessed September 11, 2025). 119 Fontana Unified School District. n .d .-a. School Locator. https ://fusd .maps .arcgis .com/apps/ webappviewer/index.html?id=46e253283ab94860b685ff39ec7f5014 (accessed September 11, 2025). 120 Fontana Unified School District. 2023a . Dorothy Grant Innovations Academy 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. Website: https://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100102517 _1.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). 121 Fontana Unified School District. 2023c . Wayne Ruble Middle School 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. Website : https://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100102509_1.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). 122 Fontana Unified School District. 2023b. Summit High School 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. Website : https ://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100108191_1.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44 367104. l 4-99 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 The FUSD Developer Fee Justification Study123 identified the development of 3,961 additional residential units within the District's boundaries during the five year (2024-2029) forecast period. Of these, 183 were anticipated to be single-family detached units, and 3,778 multi-family attached units. Although sufficient school capacity at the middle and high school level was available, the Developer Fee Justification Study identified a shortage of permanent capacity at the elementary school level that would result from new residential development within FUSD boundaries.124 Based on FUSD student generation factors, and as detailed in Table 4.15.A, the proposed project would generate up to 58 additional students. Of these, 29 students would attend elementary school. Table 4.15.A: Estimated Student Generation School Level Student Generation Factor Units Students (per unit) Elementary School 0.1905 153 29 Middle School 0.0704 153 10 High School 0.1303 153 19 Total 58 Source : EH&A . Developer Fee Justification Study for Residential & Commercial/Industrial Development. Table 4. March 19, 2024. California Government Code {Section 65995[b]) establishes the base amount of allowable developer fees imposed by school districts. These base amounts are commonly referred to as "Level 1 fees" and are subject to inflation adjustment every two years. School districts are placed into a specific "level" based on school impact fee amounts that are imposed on the development. With the adoption of Senate Bill 50 and Proposition lA in 1998, schools meeting certain criteria can now adopt Level 2 and 3 developer fees. The amount of fees that can be charged over the Level 1 amount is determined by the district's total facilities needs and the availability of State matching funds . If there is State facility funding available, districts can charge fees equal to 50 percent of their total facility costs, termed "Level 2" fees. If, however, there are no State funds available, "Level 3" fees may be imposed for the full cost of their facility needs .125 As determined by the Developer Fee Justification Study, the FUSD is fully justified in levying the maximum residential school Fee of $5 .17 per square foot for all new future residential development. Per California Government Code, "The payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement levied or imposed ... are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts on the provision of adequate school facilities ." The project applicant would be required to pay these development fees in accordance with Government Code 65995 and Education Code 17620. Through 123 EH&A. 2024. Developer Fee Justification Study for Residential & Commercial/Industrial Development. March 19. Website: https://www.fusd.net/cms/lib/CA50000190/Centricity/Domain/4/Fontana% 20Unified%20Developer%20Fee%20Justification%20Study%202022.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). 124 Ibid. p. 16. 125 California State Legislature, Legislative Analyst's Office . 2001. An Evaluation of the School Facility Fee Affordable Housing Assistance Programs, January 2001 . Website : http://www.lao.ca.gov/2001/ 011701_school_facility_fee.html (accessed February 18, 2025). 4-100 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA payment of applicable development fees, impacts to school facilities and services would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. v. Parks? Less than Significant Impact. Please refer to Section 4.16, Recreation, below for a discussion and analysis of park and recreation impacts based on implementation of the proposed project. The proposed project does not include the development of publicly available park/recreational uses on site, nor would it generate more population or growth than anticipated for the area such that impacts to park/recreational facilities would result in the need for new facilities, the development of which could cause a significant environmental effect. Furthermore, the payment of required park fees would be uses to acquire, develop, expand, or maintain park and recreation facilities in the City under separate actions, as needed. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. v. Other public facilities? Less than Significant Impact. Development of the project would result in incremental impacts to the City's public services and facilities such as storm drain usage, solid-waste disposal, water usage, and wastewater disposal. These impacts are analyzed in Section 5.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Section 5.19 Utilities and Service Systems. Other public facilities include the City's three libraries: Fontana Lewis Library and Technology Center (8437 Sierra Avenue), San Bernardino County Library Summit Branch (15551 Summit Avenue), and the Kaiser Branch Library {11155 Almond Avenue), respectively located 3.2 miles southeast, 0.50 miles northwest, and 6.8 miles southwest of the project site. At full occupancy, the proposed project could increase the City's population by up to 572 residents, which would equate to an approximate 0.27 percent population increase in the City. The population increase may incrementally increase demand on public facilities such as local public libraries. However, the proposed project is consistent with the intensity of use previously anticipated in the City General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and would not result in population growth exceeding that previously forecast by the city such that existing public facilities would be required to be expanded or new facilities constructed to serve the new residents of the project. As the proposed project would not substantially affect existing public facilities or require the need for new or altered public facilities, impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-101 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 4.16 RECREATION 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 Potentially Significant Impact □ □ INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact 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? Less than Significant Impact. The closest recreational facilities to the project site are Ralph M. Lewis Sports Complex (6198 Citrus Avenue) and Patricia Marrujo Park (5730 Avenal Place), located approximately 0.10-mile south and 0.30-mile northeast, respectively. The Ralph M. Lewis Sports Complex includes football fields, restrooms, a snack bar, and a soccer field. Patricia Marrujo Park provides ball fields, barbeque areas, picnic tables, trails, restrooms, picnic shelters, a playground, and a basketball court. The proposed project would develop Enclave Park, a 0.50-acre neighborhood park in the center of the project between the proposed duplexes that would include a half basketball court, picnic areas, open turf play area, tot lot area, exercise equipment, and barbeque area. As these features are part of the project, their potential environmental effects are addressed as part of this environmental document. The proposed project does not include the development or expansion of any off-site recreational facilities; therefore, no off-site effect on the environment would occur. The City maintains a performance standard of five acres for every 1,000 residents. Based on the per- unit occupancy and number of residential units, the project has the potential to increase the City's population by up to 572 persons . Per the City General Plan, the City's park inventory includes 34 parks encompassing 1,196 acres of protected open space .126 As discussed in Section 4.14(a), the City's population is estimated at 208,393 persons, which equates to a current parkland ratio of 5.74 acres per 1,000 residents. Assuming persons occupying the new residential uses are all new 126 City of Fontana. 2018b. City of Fontana General Plan, Conservation Open Space, Parks and Trails Element. Page 7 .6. Approved and adopted November 13 . 4-102 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA residents of the City, the City's parkland ratio would decrease to 5.72 acres per 1,000 residents;127 which still exceeds the City's desired parkland-to-resident ratio. California Government Code Section 66477 (Quimby Act) specifically authorizes the City to require dedication of park land or payment of fees in lieu of such dedication in set amounts to meet the needs of the citizens of the community for park land and to further the health, safety and general welfare of the community. The Quimby Act further authorizes the city to require payment of certain recreational facilities fees to serve new development in accordance with the master infrastructure facilities plan to be adopted by the City Council in accordance with the requirements of the city's General Plan. The City's process for implementing the Quimby Act are outlined in Sections 21-81 through 21-98 of the City's Municipal Code.128 The project would be required to pay the City's Quimby Fees for future park maintenance and development, which would be utilized (as determined appropriate by the City) for the acquisition, development, expansion, or maintenance of park and recreation areas in the City under separate actions . Therefore, impacts related to increased use of park and recreation facilities are less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 127 Existing population (208,393) + project population (572) = 208,965. 1,196 acres/208,965 = 5.72 acres/1,000 residents. 128 City of Fontana. n.d.-c. Fontana, California -Code of Ordinances/ Chapter 21 / Article IV. Fee or Dedication of Land for park and Recreation Facilities/ Sections 21-81 through 21-98. Website : https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeld=CO_CH21PLDE (accessed September 15, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-103 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.17 TRANSPORTATION Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and □ ~ □ □ pedestrian facilities? b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §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? □ □ ~ □ The information and analysis in this section is based on the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)129 and the VMT Analysis (VMT Memo)130 prepared for the proposed project, which are included as Appendices Hl and H2, respectively, to this Initial Study. 4.17.1 Impact Analysis a. Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less than Significant Impact. This section evaluates the potential for the proposed project to conflict with a plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system. Circulation System. Other than construction of the two driveways proposed along Curtis Avenue and the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along the project frontages, the project would not alter Curtis Avenue. A project-specific TIA and VMT Memo were prepared to assess potential impacts associated with the proposed project. These analyses were conducted to satisfy the requirements for a traffic analysis established in City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment {Traffic Guidelines)131 and the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP).132 The City has adopted vehicle level of service (LOS) policies that set standards for which local agency infrastructure would strive to maintain. These policies are contained in the City General Plan and apply to discretionary approvals of new land use and transportation projects. 129 Translutions, Inc. 2025. The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. 130 Translutions, Inc. 2025. The Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis. May 19. 131 City of Fontana. 2020. City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment 132 San Bernardino County adopted November 3, 1993, and last revised in 2016 Congestion Management Program 4-104 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA The project trip generation for the proposed residential use was based on Land Use 220 "Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise) Not Close to Transit", and Land Use 210 "Single-Family Detached Housing" from the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (/TE) Trip Generation Manual (11th Edition). As shown in Table 4.17.A, the project is forecast to generate 82 trips during the AM peak hour, 108 trips during the PM peak hour, and 1,217 new daily trips. Table 4.17.A Project Trip Generation Land Use Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Single-Family Residential Trip Generation Rates 1 69 DU 0 .18 0.52 0.70 0 .59 0 .35 0 .94 9.43 Trip Generation 13 35 48 41 24 65 651 Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) Trip Generation Rates 2 0 .10 0.30 0.40 0 .32 0 .19 0 .51 6 .74 Trip Generation 84 DU 8 26 34 27 16 43 566 Total Trip Generation 21 61 82 68 40 108 1,217 Source : Table A, The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Translutions, Inc ., May 1, 2025 . (Appendix Hl). 1 Trip generation based on rates for Land Use 210-"Single-Family Detached Housing" from Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition. 2 Trip generation based on rates for Land Use 220-"Multifamily Housing (Low Rise) from Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition . DU = Dwelling unit The City's Traffic Guidelines require TIAs to determine if project-generated vehicle trips would adversely affect the surrounding transportation network are required if a project generates 50 or more trips during the AM or PM peak hour.133 The proposed project is expected to generate 82 vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 108 vehicle trips during the PM peak hour. Therefore, a project-specific TIA was prepared to evaluate the following six intersections:134 • Catawba Avenue-Alley Band Curtis Avenue • Alley A and Curtis Avenue • Citrus Avenue and Curtis Avenue • Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway • Citrus Avenue and SR-210 Westbound Ramps • Citrus Avenue and SR-210 Eastbound Ramps Each of these intersections were evaluated under the following scenarios : 133 City of Fontana. 2020. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled {VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. p. 4. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. October 21. 134 The project would be accessible by residents via one main driveway (full access) on Curtis Avenue (identified as Study Intersection 2 in the TIA) and a secondary driveway (exit only) on Curtis Avenue (identified as Study Intersection 1 in the TIA). The secondary driveway along Curtis Avenue also would be used by emergency and other service vehicles to enter and exit the site . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-105 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA • Existing Conditions • Opening Year (2026) Without Project Conditions • Opening Year (2026) With Project Conditions • Future Year (2050) Without Project Conditions • Future Year (2050) With Project Conditions INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Revisions to CEQA Guidelines resulting from passage of Senate Bill (SB) 743, removed the consideration of vehicle delay and level of service (LOS) from CEQA and replaced it with vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the applicable metric against which impacts to transportation are evaluated . A project-specific TIA 135 and VMT Memo 136 were prepared for the proposed project. These analyses were conducted to satisfy the requirements for a traffic analysis established in City of Fontana Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled and Level of Service Assessment ( October 2020).137 While LOS and congestion are no longer considered in CEQA documents, the City has adopted LOS policies in its General Plan. The recommended improvements stated in the TIA required to offset the proposed project's effects on LOS would be addressed through the imposition of a condition of approval on the project, Condition of Approval TRA-1, as discussed in Section 4.11.1, thereby ensuring that General Plan standards relative to congestion on the City's circulation system are appropriately addressed. Bicycle Facilities. The City's bikeway network includes three types of facilities and are discussed below : • Class I (Shared-Use Paths): Class I bikeway is a shared-use path that allows for two-way off-street bicycle use and also may be used by pedestrians, skaters, wheelchair users, joggers, and other non-motorized users. • Class II (Bicycle Lanes): Class II bikeway is a bicycle lane that is a portion of the roadway that has been designated by striping, signing, and pavement markings for the preferential and exclusive use of bicyclists. Bicycle lanes are always located on both sides of the road (except one-way streets) and allow bicyclists to ride in the same direction as adjacent motor vehicle traffic. • Class Ill (Bike Routes): Class Ill bikeways generally employ bikeway signage, and may also use pavement markings, to guide bicyclists to popular destinations on low-volume, bike-friendly roadways. Currently, no bicycle facilities exist along Curtis Avenue, the proposed project's frontage. An existing Class II bike lane is present on Citrus Avenue, approximately 0.10 mile east of the project site. According to Chapter 9, Community Mobility and Circulation, of the City's General Plan (Exhibit 9.6), Class II bike lanes are planned along Sierra Lakes Parkway, approximately 0.30 mile south of the 135 Translutions, Inc. 2025. The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. 136 Translutions, Inc. 2025. The Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis. May 19. 137 City of Fontana . Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and level of Service Assessment. Pages 13 and 14. October 21, 2020. 4-106 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA project site under a separate action.138 The proposed project does not include the installation of bicycle facilities but would not affect or alter the City's future plans to develop such facilities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not impact existing or planned bicycle facilities, programs, plans, or policies addressing bicycle facilities. Pedestrian Facilities. Sidewalks in the project vicinity are provided on the south side of Curtis Avenue, on the north side of Curtis Avenue east and west of the project site, on the east side of Catawba Avenue near the existing multi-family uses , and on the east and west sides of Citrus Avenue. The proposed project includes construction of a sidewalk and a landscaped parkway along the project frontage of Curtis Avenue. Implementation of the proposed project would help fill in gaps in the City's sidewalk network pursuant to General Plan Community Mobility and Circulation Element Goals 1 and 2 to facilitate pedestrian movement to and from the project site . Therefore, the project would not impact any existing or planned programs, plans, or policies addressing pedestrian facilities . Transit Facilities. The project area is currently served by Omnitrans, a public transit agency serving various jurisdictions within San Bernardino County along the following routes : • Route 82 provides service to Fontana, Rancho Cucamonga, and Ontario . Route 82 operates at 60- minute headways during the week and 70-minute headways on the weekends . The nearest stop is located on the southwest corner of Curtis Avenue and Citrus Avenue. Major stops include the Fontana Metrolink Transit Center and the Ontario Mills Mall. Commuter rail service is provided by Metrolink, which is operated by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority. Metrolink train service is available between the counties of Ventura, Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Orange , Riverside, and north San Diego . The City of Fontana is served by the San Bernardino Line, which runs east-west between the San Bernardino Station and the Los Angeles Union Station. The Fontana Station is the nearest Metrolink station to the project site and is approximately 3.5 miles southeast of the project site. As stated previously, Omnitrans Route 82 provides direct access to the Fontana Metrolink Transit Center. The proposed project does not include the installation of any transit facilities along the proposed project's frontage . Transit facilities exist on the southern side of Curtis Avenue . Therefore, the project would not impact any existing or planned programs, plans, or policies addressing transit facilities . Based on the discussion above, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable goals, policies, plans, and programs that address the circulation system, and impacts would be less than significant . No mitigation is required . 138 City of Fontana . 2023b . City of Fontana General Plan, Chapter 9 -Community Mobility Circulation Element . Exhibit 9 .6 Bicycle Facilities in Fontana . Approved and adopted July 23 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44 367104. l 4-107 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines §15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) establishes "vehicle miles traveled" criteria in lieu of "level of service" {LOS) for analyzing transportation impacts and was signed into law as Senate Bill {SB) 743 in 2013. VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. As a result of Senate Bill (SB) 743, the California Office of Administrative Law cleared the revised CEQA Guidelines for use on December 28, 2018. Among the changes to the guidelines was the removal of vehicle delay and level of service from consideration under CEQA. The intent of SB 743 and the revised State CEQA Guidelines is to promote the reduction of GHG emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. With the adopted guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project's effect on VMT. The City's Traffic Guidelines indicate that if project-generated VMT exceeds 15 percent below the baseline County of San Bernardino VMT per service population, then the project would result in a significant "project generated" VMT impact. The San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model Plus Model (SBTAM+) was utilized to determine the base year VMT for the County as 39.2. Therefore, the VMT threshold is 33.3, a reduction of 15 percent from the County's baseline. The project-generated VMT for the proposed project is 29 .7, which does not exceed the threshold. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to VMT. No mitigation is required . The San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model Plus Model was utilized to determine the base year VMT for the County as 39 .2 which results in a threshold of 33.3 . The project generated VMT for the proposed project is 29 .7, which shows that the project would have a less than significant impact on VMT. Therefore, impacts of the proposed project related to VMT can be presumed to be less than significant . No mitigation is required. 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. Construction of the proposed project may temporarily require partial lane closures . Standard construction safety measures would be implemented, including appropriate signage and flagmen visible to approaching motorists and pedestrians indicating roadway access limitations and other necessary warnings. Full road closures are not anticipated during construction. In the event that partial lane closures are required during construction, detour/safety signage would be installed to direct drivers around construction activities along adjacent streets . The project would be accessible via one main driveway (full access) on Curtis Avenue and a secondary driveway (exit only) on Curtis Avenue. The project provides a 26-foot drive aisle around and between the project site. The project driveway (Alley A) would provide a 35-foot driveway entrance and allow a 35-foot radius for a typical fire truck which would ensure full and safe vehicular circulation within the site. Other than the construction of these two driveways, and the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along the project frontages, the project would not alter the alignment or function of Curtis Avenue or Catawba Avenue. 4-108 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA The proposed residential development would not result in uses that would be incompatible with the existing land uses surrounding the project site, which also includes multi-family residential uses to the north, east and west. The project would be subject to design review by the Development Advisory Board which would ensure that entrances and exits would be marked with appropriate directional signage, and all site access points, and driveway aprons would be constructed at appropriate distances from public intersections and to adequate widths for public safety and to ensure the project access driveways would not result in hazardous geometric design hazards (e .g., blind/sharp curves or dangerous intersections). In the absences of any substantial geometric design hazards or incompatible uses, impacts are less than significant . Mitigation is not required . d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. This section evaluates the potential for both construction and operation of the proposed project to result in inadequate emergency access. Construction. Construction of the proposed project may require partial lane closures that may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic and therefore would be required to implement appropriate measures to facilitate the passage of persons and vehicles through/around any required road closures . A Traffic Control Permit is required for any work within the public right-of-way. The City of Fontana's Excavation and Traffic Control Permit (see Fontana Municipal Code Section 25-151 through 25-155) requirements may include prior notification of any lane or road closures with sufficient signage before and during any closures, flag crews with radio communication when necessary to coordinate traffic flow, etc. As appropriate, the project applicant would be required to comply with these requirements, which would maintain emergency access and allow for evacuation, if necessary, during construction activities. Compliance with these requirements would ensure that short-term impacts related to emergency access are less than significant . Mitigation is not required. Operation. In accordance with the California Fire Code, project structures, access, and on-site features would be designed, constructed, and maintained to allow appropriate emergency/evacuation access to and from the project site, as codified in Section Nos. 30-529 (Public Safety), 30-541(D)(7)(a) and (b) (Fences and Walls), and 30-550 (h) (Site Plan Design) of the City Municipal Code. The project would be accessible via one main driveway (full access) on Curtis Avenue and a secondary driveway (exit only) on Curtis Avenue. The project would provide a 26-foot drive aisle around and between the project site . The project driveway (Alley A) would provide a 35-foot driveway entrance and allow a 35-foot radius for a typical fire truck which would ensure full and safe vehicular circulation within the site . All entry security gates would include an override switch to allow access by emergency responders. Except for the installation of access points, curb, gutter, and sidewalks, the project would not alter existing roadways in the project area and, therefore, would not affect usage of these roadways by emergency vehicles. All points of site access and driveway aprons are designed and would be constructed to adequate widths for public safety pursuant to local requirements. These improvements would be subject to compliance with the City Municipal Code sections specified above and would be reviewed by the Fontana Fire Protection District and Police Department through the City's design review process by P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-109 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 the Development Advisory Board, ensuring the long-term impacts related to emergency access are less than significant. Mitigation is not required. 4-110 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project : a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.l(k)? Or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024 .1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. 4.18.1 Impact Analysis Potentially Significant Impact □ □ ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA Less Than Significant with Less Than Mitigation Significant Incorporated Impact □ □ □ □ LSA No Impact □ □ a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is : i . Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.l(k)? Or ii. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024 .1? In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024 .1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. The term "California Native American tribe" is defined as "a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non-federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC." Chapter 532, Statutes of 2014 (i.e ., Assembly Bill 52) requires Lead Agencies to evaluate a project's potential to affect "tribal cultural resources." Such resources include "sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe that P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-111 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources." Assembly Bill (AB) 52 also gives Lead Agencies the discretion to determine, supported by substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a "tribal cultural resource." CEQA defines a "historical resource" as a resource that meets one or more of the following criteria: (1) is listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register); (2) is listed in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.l{k); (3) is identified as significant in a historical resource survey meeting the requirements of PRC Section 5024.l{g); or (4) is determined to be a historical resource by a project's Lead Agency (PRC Section 21084 .1 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.S[a]).139 "Local register of historical resources" means a list of properties officially designated or recognized as historically significant by a local government pursuant to a local ordinance or resolution. A resource may be listed as a historical resource in the California Register if it meets any of the following National Register of Historic Places criteria as defined in PRC Section 5024.l{C): a. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California's history and cultural heritage. b. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. c. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values. d. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. A "substantial adverse change" to a historical resource, according to PRC Section 5020.l{q), "means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration such that the significance of a historical resource would be impaired." Per AB 52 (specifically California Public Resources Code 21080.3.1), Native American consultation is required upon request by interested California Native American tribes that have previously requested that the City provide them with notice of such projects. A Sacred Lands File Search was conducted through the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on August 22, 2025 . The NAHC responded on September 3, 2025 with a "positive" search result indicating the presence of Native American resources in the project site vicinity. Pursuant to the provisions of AB 52, the City sent letters to tribal contacts on November 13, 2025, informing tribes of the proposed project and requesting the initiation of consultation. 139 The State CEQA Guidelines do not preclude identification of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 5020.l(j) or 5024.1. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.S[c][4], if an archaeological resource is neither a unique archaeological nor a historical resource, the effects of the project on those resources shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. It shall be sufficient that both the resource and the effect on it are noted in the Initial Study, but they need not be considered further in the CEQA process . 4-112 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA As stated in Section 4.5, the negative findings and severely disturbed condition of the project site (due to grading and vegetation abatement activities) are consistent with those of the earlier study that included the project site and indicated a lack of sensitivity for in situ subsurface cultural resources, including tribal cultural resources. Compliance with Standard Conditions CUL-1 through CUL-5 would ensure that any tribal cultural resource detected would be protected during project construction and managed in accordance with applicable regulations. Impacts associated with a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-113 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Would the project: a. 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 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 waste? 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 relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. Proposed project improvements include the construction and expansion of water, drainage, electric, and telecommunication facilities, as discussed in Section 2.2.6, Infrastructure and Utilities. The proposed residential development would interconnect to existing utilities within Curtis Avenue . The approval of drainage features and other utility improvements occurs through the building plan check process and during the applicable interconnection process required by utility service providers. As part of this process, all project-related drainage features and utility infrastructure would be required to comply with Section 21-8S{c) (Additional Public Improvements) and Chapter 27 (Utilities) of the City Municipal Code, as well as Santa Ana RWQCB standards. On-site project-related drainage features would be designed, installed, and maintained per the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit, the City Municipal Code, and the requirements identified in the Final WQMP (per Standard Conditions HVD-3 and HVD-4). All proposed improvements and interconnection to drainage, electric power, water, and wastewater facilities would be installed simultaneously with finish grading activities and required project frontage improvements (sidewalk, landscaping, and trees) along Curtis Avenue . The areas of potential impact from drainage and utility infrastructure improvements occur in an urbanized 4-114 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA environment and are included in the analytical footprint of this Initial Study and associated technical studies, and impacts are mitigated where necessary to less than significant levels. As a result, interconnection to the existing utilities in the project vicinity would not result in substantial disturbance to native habitat or soils, or to the operation of existing roadways and utilities. There would be no significant environmental effects specifically related to the installation of utility interconnections that are not encompassed within the project's construction and operational footprints, and therefore already identified, disclosed, and subject to all applicable mitigation measures, as well as local, State, and federal regulations, as part of this Initial Study. Therefore, impacts related to relocation or construction of utilities would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required. b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? Less than Significant Impact. The FWC supplies water to the project site via groundwater supplies from three adjudicated basins, including the Chino Basin, Rialto-Colton Basin (including the No Man's Land Basin), and the Lytle Basin. The Chino Basin is the main source of water for the FWC. According to the FWC Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), none of the basins supplying groundwater to the FWC are in "critical condition of overdraft." FWC's current available pumping capacity totals approximately 37,222 gallons per minute (gpm), with individual well production ranging from approximately 189 gpm to 2,955 gpm .140 In addition, the proposed Chino Basin Program will augment the existing Chino Basin groundwater supply with recycled water through the construction of an advanced water treatment facility to provide high-quality recycled water for storage in the Chino Basin.141 Based on the projected future population within the FWC service area and assuming current per capita water consumption patterns, the FWC determined it has adequate water supplies to meet the projected demand for Normal Year, Single Dry Year, and Five Consecutive Dry Year scenarios through the year 2045.142 The General Plan designation for the site is Walkable Mixed Use Urban Village (WMXU-2) and is zoned Form-Based Code (FBC) -Village District. As discussed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, based on a population forecast of 3.74 persons/unit, the proposed 153 dwelling units could result in a population of up to 572 persons . The maximum density {24 du/acre) associated with the site under the WMXU-2 designation would remain under the proposed project. Therefore, the project is consistent with the General Plan density used in the development of the UWMP, and the proposed project would not increase water demand on-site beyond that which is anticipated for the property in the UWMP. As the FWC has determined that a sufficient water supply is available to 140 San Gabriel Water Company, Fontana Water Company Division . 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. pp. 6-5 through 6-8. June 2021. 141 San Gabriel Water Company, Fontana Water Company Division. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. pp. 7-9. 142 San Gabriel Water Company, Fontana Water Company Division . 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. pp . 7-5 through 7-8, 8-1. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-115 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 meet normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry year demands through the year 2045, impacts related to water supply are less than significant. Mitigation is not required. c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is within the sewer service area of the City of Fontana and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). Operational discharge flows treated by the IEUA would be required to comply with waste discharge requirements for that facility. IEUA serves approximately 950,000 people over 242 square miles in Western San Bernardino County and provides services to the Cities of Chino, Chino Hills, Fontana, Montclair, Ontario, Upland, Rialto, and Rancho Cucamonga.143 IEUA operates five Regional Water Recycling Plants (RPs), including RP-1, RP-2, RP-4, RP-5, and the Carbon Canyon Water Recycling Facility. IEUA's RP-4 located near the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and 6th Street in the City of Rancho Cucamonga treats local wastewater generated by the City of Fontana . IEUA's five RPs have a combined treatment capacity of approximately 86 million gallons per day {MGD) and currently treat over 50 MGD.144 RP-1 has a capacity of 44 MGD and treats an average flow of 28 MGD of wastewater, with a surplus capacity of approximately 16 MGD, and is operated in conjunction with RP-4 to provide recycled water to users.145 RP-4 has recently been expanded to a capacity of 14 MGD and treats an average flow of 10 MGD, with a surplus capacity of approximately 4 MGD.146 Together, RP-1 and RP-4 have a 20 MGD surplus capacity. The project's estimated wastewater treatment demand is estimated at 41,310 gallons per day, 147 which would represent 0.2 percent of the current daily surplus capacity of RP-1 and RP-4. Therefore, sufficient surplus wastewater treatment capacity is available to serve the project. Wastewater from the proposed project would flow to an existing sewer line located within Curtis Avenue. As sufficient wastewater conveyance and treatment capacity exists to accommodate the proposed project, impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 143 Inland Empire Utilities Agency. n.d.-a. About us. Website: https://www.ieua.org/about-us/ (accessed October 20, 2025). 144 Inland Empire Utilities Agency. n.d.-b. Facilities. Website: https://www.ieua.org/facilities/ (accessed October 20, 2025). 145 Inland Empire Utilities Agency. n.d.-b. Facilities, Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 1. Website: https://www.ieua.org/regional-water-recycling-plant-no-1/ (accessed October 20, 2025). 146 Inland Empire Utilities Agency. n.d.-b. Facilities, Regional Water Recycling Plant No. 4. Website: https://www.ieua.org/regional-water-recycling-plant-no-4/ (accessed October 20, 2025). 147 City of Fontana. n.d.-g. Fontana, California -Code of Ordinances/ Article V -Fees, Charges, and Billing/ Division 1 Generally I Section 23-316. Calculation of equivalent dwelling units for purposes of determining connection charges. Website: https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/code_of_ordinances? nodeld=CO_CH23SESEDI_ARTVFECHBI_DIV1GE_S23-316CAEQDWUNPUDECOCH (accessed October 21, 2025). 4-116 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. Solid waste collection is a "demand-responsive" service, and current service levels can be expanded and funded through user fees. The City currently contracts with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc. to provide trash and recycling services . Once collected, solid waste is transported to the West Valley Materials Recycling Facility (MRF)/Transfer Station located in the City of Fontana. From the MRF, the non-recyclable material would be sent to Mid-Valley Landfill.148 Mid- Valley Landfill has a daily throughput of 7,500 tons. The maximum and remaining capacity of this landfill is 101,300,000 and 54,219,377 cubic yards, respectively, and has an estimated closure date of 2045 .149 Based on a generation rate of 5.9 pounds per capita per day, 150 at full occupancy, the proposed project would generate up to 3,375 pounds (1.6874 tons) of solid waste per day.151 This amount is equivalent to as much as 0.0225 percent of the daily throughput at Mid-Valley Landfill.152 As such, Mid-Valley Landfill has adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. As adequate daily surplus capacity exists at the receiving landfill, and the project would comply with local and State waste reduction strategies, the project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. e. Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the proposed project would occur in accordance with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Construction. The City would require the project applicant to prepare and implement a Construction Waste Management Plan in accordance with CalGreen Code Section 4.408.2 to ensure a minimum 65 percent of all construction waste would be recycled/reused in accordance with CalGreen Code 148 City of Fontana. 2018. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental Impact Report. City of Fontana, California. SCH #2016021099 https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/ 29524/Draft-Environmental-Jmpact-Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update (accessed September 29, 2025). 149 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Cal Recycle). n.d . Solid Waste Information System (SW/SJ. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details : Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill {36-AA-0055). Website : https ://www2.calrecycle .ca .gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?sitelD=2662 (accessed September 29, 2025). 15° California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Cal Recycle). 2024. Disposal Rate Calculator (Fontana, 2024). Website: https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/slcp/capacityplanning/ recycling/DisposalRateCalculator (accessed September 29, 2025). 151 5 .9 pounds per capita per day x 572 residents= 3,375 pounds/day(+ 2,000 pounds/ton = 1.6874 tons). 152 1.6874 tons/day+ 7,500 tons/day daily throughput= 0 .0225 percent. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-117 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Sections 4.408 and 5.408. The Construction Waste Management Plan would identify the construction and demolition waste materials to be diverted from disposal by recycling, reuse on the project, or salvage for future use or sale; specify whether construction and demolition waste materials will be sorted on-site or bulk mixed; identify diversion facilities where the construction and demolition waste material will be taken; identify construction methods employed to reduce the amount of construction and demolition waste generated; and specify that the amount of construction and demolition waste materials diverted shall be calculated by weight or volume, but not by both . The CalGreen Code requires that the Construction Waste Management Plan be updated as necessary and available during construction for examination by the City. Therefore, the project would comply with federal, State, and local management reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste during project construction. Impacts would remain less than significant. Mitigation is not required. Operation. The project operator is required to coordinate with Burrtec Waste Industries, Inc., which would collect solid waste from the site and transfer the solid waste to the MRF. The MRF would sort the solid waste into recyclable and non-recyclable waste and would transfer the non-recyclable waste to Mid-Valley Landfill for disposal. All development within the city, including the project site, is required to comply with applicable elements of AB 1327, Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991) and other local, State, and federal solid waste disposal standards. The City's target disposal rate is 6.0 pounds/day per capita and has a (2024) disposal rate of 5.9 pound/day per capita, 153 further satisfying solid waste reduction goals. Therefore, the project would comply with federal, State, and local management reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste during project operation. Impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not required. 153 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (Cal Recycle). 2024. Disposal Rate Calculator (Fontana, 2024). Website : https ://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/AnnualReporting/slcp/ capacityplanning/recycling/DisposalRateCalculator (accessed September 29, 2025). 4-118 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 4.20 WILDFIRE Less Than Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project : a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary 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 □ □ [8J □ □ [8J □ □ □ □ a. Would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within a State Responsibility Area. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE) Fire Hazard □ □ □ □ Severity Zones mapping, the project site is located within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA) but is not designated as a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).154 The nearest VHFHSZ is located approximately 0.70 miles north of the site. The project is located in an area that is developed with local roads and regional highways that provide adequate access and departure from the area in the event of an emergency, such as a wildfire. The proposed project would be designed to comply with the current CFC (2022) standards for development for residential uses, CBC standards, and standards as set forth by the FFPD. The project would be accessible via two driveways, on Curtis Avenue, one main driveway (full access) and a secondary driveway (exit only). The project provides a 26-foot drive aisle between the proposed alleys, allowing emergency access throughout the project site . Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. 154 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2025c. FHSZ Viewer. Map of CAL FIRE's Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas -Fontana (34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a- 4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge .net) (accessed August 29, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-119 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 b. Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is not located within a State Responsibility Area or within High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (HFHSZ or VHFHSZ). Wildfires have the tendency for uncontrolled spread when the terrain is hilly or mountainous and not conducive to practicable firefighting capabilities. The project site and vicinity are not located in areas identified by the City to be areas at risk of a wildfire event. The likelihood of uncontrolled spread of a wildfire near or on the project site is relatively low since the site and surrounding areas are generally level, substantially developed, and sufficiently distant from areas of natural open spaces that are susceptible to wildfires. San Bernardino County and Fontana are subject to seasonal wind events including times during the fall when Santa Ana Wind conditions are prevalent. Santa Ana Wind conditions in the area of the proposed project typically blow from a northeast to southwest direction (an offshore flow). Wildfires have been recorded to occur in such Santa Ana Wind events sometimes leading to uncontrolled spread of wildfires. CAL FIRE and the San Bernardino County Fire Department have taken these conditions and the locations of Fire Hazard Severity Zones into consideration when determining potential impacts associated with wildfire spread within the City of Fontana and surrounding cities. If such a conflagration 155 driven by winds were to get out of control, the City's FFPD and San Bernardino County Fire Department have procedures in place to respond to such an emergency and evacuate residents and employees as needed.156 Wind events can also result in smoke drift from nearby wildfires resulting in smoke settling in low- lying areas. The city is located in a valley between the San Bernardino/San Gabriel Mountains and the Jurupa Mountains; as such, the potential for smoke settlement from nearby wildfires is a possibility. Such smoke settlement is expected to clear out within a couple days of when settlement commenced (based on weather conditions). Overall, implementation of the proposed project would have a low probability of exposing occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope or prevailing winds. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. c. Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? Less than Significant Impact. As described above, the proposed project is not located within or near a wildfire State Responsibility Area, nor is the land classified as a VHFHSZ. The proposed project includes development of 153 residential units, a neighborhood park, surface parking lot, on-site utility infrastructure, and landscaping. In the absence of any significant potential for on-site or 155 Conflagration is an extensive fire that destroys a great deal of land or property. 156 City of Fontana. 2017. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Page 176. June. Approved and adopted August 14, 2018. 4-120 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA adjacent wildfire hazard, the proposed project would not need to incorporate fire protection infrastructure, such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities that may themselves exacerbate fire risk. As stated in Section 4.17(d), project structures, access, and on-site features would be designed, constructed, and maintained to allow appropriate emergency/evacuation access to and from the project site, as codified in Section Nos . 30-429 (Public Safety), 30-464 (Hedges, walls, and fences), and 30-476 (Subdivision and site plan design) of the City Municipal Code ; therefore, impacts related to this issue would be less than significant . Mitigation is not required . d. Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Less than Significant Impact. As described above, the proposed project is not located within or near a wildfire State Responsibility Area , nor is the land classified as an LRA VHFHSZ. According to the City's Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, the project site is not located in flood hazard or inundation zones, 157 and the site is not located near bodies of water or enclosed water storage features which could generate tsunamis or seiches. Therefore, risks associated with runoff caused by post-fire slope instability or post-fire drainage change are low. The project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by residential land uses. The site and surrounding areas are generally level, substantially developed, and sufficiently distant from areas of natural open spaces that are susceptible to wildfires. Due to the absence of hills in the project vicinity, development of the proposed project would not expose persons or property to post-fire slope instability or post-fire drainage changes. Therefore, potential impacts related to the exposure of people or structures due to significant downstream flooding or landslides as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes would be less than significant. Mitigation is not required. 157 City of Fontana . 2017 . Local Hazard Mitigation Plan . Figure 4-1 : Flood Hazard Map and Figure 4-2 : Dam Inundation areas in Fontana . June . Approved and adopted August 14, 2018 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-121 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA 4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 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 Potentially Significant Impact □ □ □ INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 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? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is bounded by single-family homes to the west, single-family homes and Citrus Avenue to the east, single-family homes to the north, and Curtis Avenue to the south. Additionally, the project site has been subjected to repeated and ongoing disturbance from human activities. No riparian or sensitive natural community is located on site. The project site does not include any federally protected wetlands or any drainage features, ponded areas, wetlands, or riparian habitat subject to jurisdiction by the CDFW, USACE, and/or RWQCB, nor any sensitive natural community. The Burrowing Owl is a candidate species for State listing and therefore afforded all the protections as though it were listed under the California Endangered Species Act. No burrowing owls or recent sign (i.e., pellets, feathers, castings, or whitewash) were observed during the field investigation. Portions of the project site are unvegetated and/or vegetated with low-growing plant species that allow for line-of-sight observation favored by burrowing owls. However, the project site lacks suitable burrows (more than 4 inches in diameter) capable of providing nesting opportunities. In addition, the site is surrounded by electrical and light poles which provide perching opportunities for larger raptor species (i.e., red-tailed hawk [Buteo jamaicensis]) that prey on burrowing owls. 4-122 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA Burrowing owl is further precluded from establishing on-site due to the presence of free-roaming domestic cats. Mitigation Measure BI0-1 requires that a pre-construction burrowing owl survey be conducted prior the initiation of project activities and identifies the process to ensure active nests are protected. In addition, Mitigation Measure BI0-2, which requires a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey be conducted prior the initiation of project activities, would ensure impacts to special-status avian species (i.e ., Bell's sage sparrow, California horned lark, Cooper's hawk, Costa's hummingbird, and loggerhead shrike) and nesting birds do not occur from implementation of the proposed project. With implementation of Mitigation Measures BI0-1 and BI0-2, impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special-status species would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Based on the results of the cultural records search and cultural resource survey, no cultural resources have been previously recorded or identified on the project site. Although there were no cultural resources identified on the project site, the project would be required to comply with all applicable regulations protecting cultural and tribal cultural resources in the event that these resources are encountered during project construction. Though implementation of Standard Conditions CUL-1 through CUL-4, the project would be conditioned to cease excavation or construction activities if cultural or tribal cultural resources or human remains are identified and would include provisions for Native American monitoring of ground-disturbing activities in such an instance . These conditions also would ensure further consultation with interested Native American Tribes for the appropriate treatment of Tribal Cultural Resources and establish the notification and treatment process in the even human remains are encountered during ground disturbance or construction activity. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-2 would ensure unanticipated paleontological resources encountered during construction would be managed pursuant to applicable regulatory policy. Accordingly, impacts to important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. The proposed project has either no impact, a less than significant impact, or a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated with respect to all natural resources issues pursuant to CEQA. Implementation of the mitigation measures described above would ensure impacts to the quality of the environment would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated . b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. CEQA defines cumulative impacts as "two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable, or which can compound to increase other environmental impacts." Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines requires evaluation of potential environmental impacts when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-123 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of "reasonably foreseeable probable future" projects, per CEQA Section 15355. Cumulative effects can also be evaluated by considering the project's compatibility with projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document with regard to long-term population, employment, and household projections of the region .158 Cumulative impacts can result from a combination of the proposed project together with other closely related projects that cause an adverse change in the environment or an unplanned increase in land use or development intensity that could potentially overburden community infrastructure or service capacity. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over time. Potentially significant impacts that would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation of mitigation include the topics of air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology, hazardous materials and wastes, and transportation . Specifically, implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, which would require the use of cleaner construction equipment, would be required to reduce substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction. Before implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, the maximum cancer risk for the residential receptor MEI associated with project construction would be 115.04 in one million, which would exceed the SCAQMD's cancer risk threshold of 10 in one million. After implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, the mitigated cancer risk at the residential receptor MEI would be 7.77 in one million, which would not exceed the SCAQMD's cancer risk threshold of 10 in one million. Therefore, with implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1, nearby sensitive receptors are not expected to be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during project construction or operation . Other cumulative development in the City would implement similar standard conditions or the recommendations identified in the site-and project-specific air quality analyses prepared (as necessary) for those projects. With the implementation such measures, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to air quality. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 810-1 would ensure that impacts to nesting birds are reduced to a less than significant level. Other cumulative development in the City would implement similar standard conditions or the recommendations identified in the site-and project-specific biological resource assessments prepared (as necessary) for those projects. With the implementation such measures, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to biological resources. With regard to geology, potentially significant impacts to humans and structures from ground shaking and unstable soils would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-1, while potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to less-than-significant levels with implementation of Mitigation Measure GE0-2. Other cumulative development in the City would implement similar standard conditions or the recommendations identified in the site-and project-specific geology, soils, and seismicity analyses prepared (as 158 City of Fontana. 2018a. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099. Page 7-1. June 8. 4-124 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA necessary) for those projects. With the implementation such measures, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact to geology, soils, and seismicity. Impacts related to hazardous wastes and materials could occur during removal of the dumped concrete and roofing materials, which were identified as suspect building materials that may be asbestos-containing materials. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would ensure asbestos or other potentially hazardous materials are managed with prior to site clearing . As cumulative development occurs in the city, hazardous material impacts (if any) would be addressed through compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and the recommendations of the site-and project-specific hazardous materials investigation(s). With mitigation, the proposed project would not significantly contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact relative to hazards or hazardous materials . Because the project is consistent with local and regional growth projections, it would not result in an unplanned increase in land use or development intensity that could result in a cumulatively considerable overburdening of community infrastructure, such as the circulation network and utilities and service systems, or service capacity, such as public services and recreation facilities. As identified in Section 4 .11, under Opening and future year with project conditions exceed the LOS standards established by the City at the Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway study area intersection during the PM peak hour. Consistent with the City's guidelines, circulation improvements have been recommended for locations where the LOS standard is not met (Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway during the PM peak hour). Accordingly, Project-Specific Condition of Approval TRA-1 is prescribed to ensure impacts related to LOS at Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway are reduced to less than significant levels . With adoption of this Condition of Approval, the study area intersection (Citrus Avenue and Sierra Lakes Parkway) would comply with City requirements for levels of service in circulation for both Opening Year (2026) and Future Year (2050). Therefore, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable goals, policies, plans, and programs, and when considered with other past, current, and future projects, land use impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. The San Bernardino Transportation Analysis Model Plus Model was utilized to determine the base year VMT for the County as 39 .2 which results in a threshold of 33.3 . The project generated VMT for the proposed project is 29 .7, which shows that the project would have a less than significant impact on VMT. The project is also located along a bus corridor that connects two regional transit stations, thereby facilitating the reduction of VMT through the use of public transportation. Therefore, the project would not contribute to a significant VMT impact, and when considered with other past, current, and future projects, transportation impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. All environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through the implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in this Initial Study, and all discretionary projects in the City would be subject to similar review and mitigation to collectively mitigate impacts to air quality, biological and geological resources, hazardous materials and wastes, hydrology, and transportation, thereby ensuring the proposed project's contribution to cumulatively considerable impacts would be reduced to less-than- significant levels with implementation of mitigation . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 4-125 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 As development proposals are considered by the city, each would undergo environmental review pursuant to CEQA. As necessary and appropriate, mitigation measures would be identified to reduce the significance of those site-or project-specific impacts. Implementation of these measures would ensure that the impacts of the proposed project and other projects in the vicinity would be below established thresholds of significance to the extent feasible. In most cases, this environmental review and compliance with project conditions of approval, relevant policies of the City's General Plan, compliance with applicable regulations, and site-and project-specific mitigation would ensure that significant impacts would be avoided or otherwise mitigated to less than significant levels . Project-specific impacts would not combine with the impacts of other cumulative projects to result in a cumulatively considerable impact on the environment as a result of project development. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the analysis provided throughout this IS/MND, the project would have no impact or less than significant impact directly or indirectly on human beings with regard to aesthetic resources, energy, GHG emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use, mineral resources, noise, population/housing, public services, recreation, utilities, and wildfire. All development associated with the proposed project must comply with applicable provisions of the 2022 CBC and the City's building regulations. Accordingly, proper engineering design and construction in conformance with the 2022 CBC standards and a site-specific geotechnical investigation prepared in conformance the current CBC and applicable City standards (Mitigation Measure GE0-1) would ensure that the project does not expose people or structures to significant geologic hazards. The City is a co-permittee under the Santa Ana RWQCB NPDES Permit Waste Discharge Requirements and the San Bernardino County MS4 Permit. Under these permits, the project and other cumulative developments are required to implement low-impact development best management practices to mimic a project site's natural hydrology to capture, filter, store, evaporate, detain, and infiltrate runoff. All development in the City is subject to these regional permits and City Standard Conditions HVD-1 through HVD-4, which require adherence to the applicable policies, regulations, and requirements of the permits. As such, the project-and site-specific impacts of the project would not adversely impact water quality. As detailed in Section 5.13, Noise, construction and operation of the project would not generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels or generate vibration in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance with adherence to Standard Condition NOl-1. Adherence to Standard Condition NOl-1 would ensure noise and vibration would be restricted to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on 4-126 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA weekdays and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays, during which time the City considers vibration "an acceptable intrusion of the ambient noise within that project area."159 The appropriate testing and remediation of asbestos or other hazardous material related to suspect building material at the project site, as required under Mitigation Measure HAZ-1, would ensure that significant hazardous material impact to persons would not result from development of the project. With incorporation of mitigation measures and standard conditions, the proposed project would not result in any environmental effects which could cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Potential impacts on human beings would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. 159 City of Fontana . 2018a . Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Draft Environmental Impact Report. SCH #2016021099 . Page 5 .10-7. June 8 . P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 4-127 LSA 4-128 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS Theresa Wallace, AICP, Principal in Charge Kat Hughes, AICP, Project Manager/Senior Environmental Planner Victoria Aispuro, Assistant Environmental Planner Jessica Coria, Associate/Director of Air Quality Services Bianca Martinez, Air Quality Specialist JT Stephens, Executive Vice President/Principal Noise and Vibration Jason Lui, Associate/ Senior Noise Specialist Matt Behrend, Cultural Resources Manager Jaimi Starr, Cultural Resources Assistant Meredith Canterbury, GIS P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 5-1 LSA 5-2 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA 6.0 REFERENCES Atwood, J. and J. Bolsinger. 1992. "Elevational Distribution of California Gnatcatchers in the United States," Journal of Field Ornithology, 63(2):159-168. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). 2022. Justification Report: CEQA Thresholds for Evaluating the Significance of Climate Impacts From Land Use Projects and Plans. April. Website: Microsoft Word -FINAL CEQA Thresholds Report for Climate Impacts 03_30_22 revisions with tracked changes (baaqmd.gov) (accessed September 2025). __ .2023. Air Quality Guidelines Appendix A: Thresholds of Significance Justification. Website: https://www.baaqmd.gov/"' /media/fl les/planni ng-and-resea rch/ ceqa/ ceqa-gu idel ines- 2022/append ix-a-thresholds-of-sign ifica nce-j ustification_fi nal-pdf (accessed September 2025). California Department of Conservation . 1975. Mineral Land Classification Map, San Bernardino P-C Region. Fontana Quadrangle, Special Report 143, Plate 7.2. __ 2022 . California Important Farmland Finder. https://maps.conservation .ca .gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (accessed August 29 , 2025). __ n.d.-a . California Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. https://maps.conservation.ca .gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/ (accessed August 29, 2025). California Department of Education . n.d. Data Quest. 2024-25 Enrollment by Grade, Fontana Unified Report {36-67710). https :// dq .cde .ca .gov/ dataq uest/ dqcensus/EnrGrd Levels.aspx?cds=3667710&agglevel=Distri ct&year=2024-25 (accessed September 11, 2025). California Energy Commission. 2024. 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update . Docket Number 24-IEPR-0l. __ . 2025a . California Electricity Consumption Dashboard . Website : https://www.energy.ca .gov/ data-reports/ energy-a I manac/ca I ifornia-electricity- data/ca liforn ia-energy-consu m ption-dash boa rds-0 (accessed September 2025). __ . 2025b. Natural Gas Consumption Dashboard. Website : https ://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption- dashboards-1 (accessed September 2025). California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2025a . Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zones: City of Fontana -San Bernardino County. Website : https://calfire.app.box .com/s/wahuw9ny7cgn89xpxh7092ur50rlpwvj/file/1810967490480 (accessed September 23 , 2024). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\443 67104. l 6-1 LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ___ . 2025b. Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/community- wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-hazard-severity-zones (accessed September 23, 2024). __ . 2025c. FHSZ Viewer. Map of CAL FIRE's Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Local Responsibility Areas -Fontana (34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a-4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge .net) (accessed August 29, 2025). California Environmental Protection Agency. 2025. Cortese List Data Resources . Website: https ://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ (accessed September 9, 2025). California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2024. Disposal Rate Calculator (Fontana, 2024). Website: https ://www2. ca I recycle .ca .gov /LG Ce ntra I/ Ann ua I Reporting/ s I cp/ ca pacityp I an n i ng/ recycling /DisposalRateCalculator (accessed September 29, 2025). __ n.d. Solid Waste Information System {SW/SJ . SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details: Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill {36-AA-0055). Website : https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1880?sitelD=2662 (accessed September 29, 2025). California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 2022. Envirostor Database, Final DTSC Letter, Phase 1 Environmental Assessment Determination. Website : https ://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/fina1_documents2?globa1_id=36650020&doc_id= 6005074 (accessed September 9, 2025). California Department of Transportation . 2018. California State Scenic Highway System Map . Website : https://ca ltra ns. maps.a rcgis.com/a pps/weba ppviewer /index. html?id=465dfd3d807 c46cc8e8 057116flaacaa (accessed August 29, 2025). California Department of Transportation. 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. California Department of Water Resources . n.d. SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard. Website : https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp-dashboard/final/ (accessed September 29, 2025). California Energy Commission. 2024. 2024 Integrated Energy Policy Report Update . Docket Number 24-IEPR-01. __ .2025a. California Electricity Consumption Dashboard. Website: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity- data/california-energy-consumption-dashboards-O (accessed September 2025). 6-2 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA __ .2025b. Natural Gas Consumption Dashboard. Website : https://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/california-energy-consumption- dashboards-1 (accessed September 2025). California State Legislature, Legislative Analyst's Office. 2001. An Evaluation of the School Facility Fee Affordable Housing Assistance Programs, January 2001. Website: http://www.lao.ca.gov/2001/011701_school_facility_fee.html (accessed February 18, 2025). City of Fontana . 2017 . Local Hazard Mitigation Plan . June . Approved and Adopted August 14, 2018. __ . 2018a. Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035 Draft Environmental Impact Report. City of Fontana, California. SCH #2016021099 https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/29524/Draft-Environmental-lmpact- Report-for-the-General-Plan-Update (accessed September 29, 2025). __ 2018b. City of Fontana General Plan, Conservation Open Space, Parks and Trails Element. Page 7.6 . Approved and adopted November 13, 2018. __ 2018c . Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. 2018 . Approved and Adopted August 14, 2018 . __ 2020 . Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled {VMT) and Level of Service Assessment. p. 4. Department of Engineering, Traffic Engineering Division. October 21. __ 2022 . Fontana 6th Cycle Housing Element Update. Adopted February 8. __ 2023a. Form Based Code Districts. July 5. Website: https ://www.fontanaca.gov/Docu mentCenter /View /32043/ All-Form-Based-Code-Districts (accessed August 27, 2025). __ 2023b. City of Fontana General Plan, Chapter 9 -Community Mobility Circulation Element. Exhibit 9.6 Bicycle Facilities in Fontana . Approved and adopted July 23, 2023 . City of Fontana. 2023c . Fontana Forward General Plan Update 2015-2035. Updated July 25. Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/Docu mentCenter /View /282 71/Complete-Docu ment---U pdated- --Approved-Genera I-Pla n-Docu ments-07-25-2023 ?bid Id= (accessed October 2025). __ 2024. General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted November 1, 2024. Website: https://www.fontanaca .gov/DocumentCenter/View/44297/General-Plan-Map-FINAL-11-1- 2024?bidld= (accessed September 8, 2025). __ n.d.-a. About the Fontana Fire District, Stations & Equipment, Fire Station 78. https://www.fontanaca.gov/639/Stations-Equipment (Accessed October 16, 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44 367104. l 6-3 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 __ n.d.-b. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Website: https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7 417 /CPTED-Guidelines (accessed October 22, 2025). __ n.d.-c. Fontana, California -Code of Ordinances/ Chapter 21 I Article IV. Fee or Dedication of Land for park and Recreation Facilities I Sections 21-81 through 21-98. Website: https://library. municode.com/ ca/fontana/ codes/ code_ of_ ordinances ?nodeld=CO _ CH21PLD E (accessed September 15, 2025). __ n.d .-d . Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code I Chapter 30 I Article Ill -Form- Based Code/ Division 4 Development Standards by Zoning District/ Section 30-370. Village District. Website: https://libra ry. municode.com/ca/fonta na/codes/zon i ng_ and_ development_ code ?node ld=C H30ZODECO_ARTIIIFOSECO_DIV4DESTZODI_S30-370VIDI (accessed August 27, 2025). __ n.d.-e. Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code/ Chapter 30 / Article Ill -Form- Based Code/ Division 4 Development Standards by Zoning District/ Section 30-370. Village District. Website: https://libra ry. mu nicode .com/ca/fonta na/ codes/zon i ng_a nd_ development_ code ?node ld=C H30ZODECO_ARTIIIFOSECO_DIV4DESTZODI_S30-370VIDI (accessed August 27, 2025). __ n.d.-f. Fontana, California -Zoning and Development Code I Chapter 30 I Article X -General Landscape Requirements I Section 30-667. General landscaping requirements. Website: https://libra ry. mun icode .com/ca/fonta na/codes/zon i ng_ and_ development_ code ?nodeld=C H30ZODECO_ARTIIIFOSECO_DIV4DESTZODI_S30-370VIDI (accessed August 27, 2025). __ . n.d.-g. Fontana, California -Code of Ordinances I Article V-Fees, Charges, and Billing I Division 1 Generally I Section 23-316. Calculation of equivalent dwelling units for purposes of determining connection charges. Website: https://library.municode.com/ca/fontana/codes/ code_of_ordinances?nodeld=CO_CH23SESEDI_ARTVFECHBI_DIV1GE_S23- 316CAEQDWUNPUDECOCH (accessed October 21, 2025). City of San Bernardino. 2005. City of San Bernardino General Plan. Figure LU-4. Adopted November 1. Converse Consultants. 2023. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report. Parcel 1108-081-04- 0000 Fontana, California. October 23. County of San Bernardino. 2010. San Bernardino County General Plan: Land Use Plan Geologic Hazard Overlay, number FH21C. Website: https://lus.sbcounty.gov/wp- content/uploads/sites/48/GeoHazMaps/FH21C-20100309.pdf (accessed September 2, 2025). Dechant, J. A., M. L. Sondreal, D. H. Johnson, L. D. lgl, C. M. Goldade, P. A. Rabie, and B. R. Euliss. 1999 (revised 2002). Effects of management practices on grassland birds: Burrowing Owl. Jamestown, North Dakota : Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. 6-4 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA EH&A. 2024. Developer Fee Justification Study for Residential & Commercial/Industrial Development. March 19. https://www.fusd.net/ems/I ib/CA50000190/Centricity /Domain/ 4/Fonta na%20U nified%20De veloper%20Fee%20Justification%20Study%202022.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). EIA . 2022 . California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Data . Website: www.eia .gov/state/seds/ data .php?incfile=/state/seds/sep_fuel/html/fuel_mg.html&sid=CA (accessed September 2025). ELMT Consulting. 2024. Biological Resources Assessment for the Proposed Project Located within Assessor Parcel Number 1108-081-04 in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, California. January 8. Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2008. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette No. 06071C7915H August 28 . Website: https ://msc.fema .gov/portal/search (accessed September 29, 2025). Federal Highways Administration (FHWA). 2006 . FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. Fontana Police Department. 2025. Police Department Monthly Report, August 2025. Website : https ://www.fontanaca.gov/Docu mentCenter /View/ 4 7182/Crime-Stats-August-2025 (accessed October 22, 2025). Fontana Unified School District. 2023a. Dorothy Grant Innovations Academy 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. https://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100102517 _l.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). __ . 2023b. Summit High School 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. https ://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100108191_1.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). __ . 2023c. Wayne Ruble Middle School 2023-2024 School Accountability Report Card. https://edfographics.com/SARC/CURRENT/ _1/36677100102509_1.pdf (accessed September 11, 2025). __ .n.d.-a . School Locator. https://fusd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id= 46e253283ab94860b685ff39ec7f5014 (accessed September 11, 2025). __ . n.d.-b. Schools. https://www.fusd .net/schools (accessed September 11, 2025). Haug, Elizabeth A. and Andrew B. Didiuk. 1993. "Use of Recorded Calls to Detect Burrowing Owls." Journal of Field Ornithology. 64(2): 188-194. P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l 6-5 LSA ENCLAVE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 Heintze, Hillard. 2020. Fontana Police Department, An Independent Assessment of Law Enforcement Operations. p. 11. November 6. https://www.fontanaca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/ 34041/Hillard-Heintze-Report-for-the-Fontana-Police-Department-11-06-20?bidld= (accessed October 22, 2025). Inland Empire Utilities Agency. n.d.-a. About us . Website: https://www.ieua.org/about-us/ (accessed October 20, 2025). __ . n.d.-b Facilities. Website: https ://www.ieua.org/facilities/ (accessed October 20, 2025). K&A Engineering. 2024. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Tract 20690 The Enclave. February. LSA . 2025a. Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Technical Memorandum for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. September 30. LSA. 2025b . Noise and Vibration Impact Analysis for the Proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project in Fontana, California. September 30. LSA . 2025c. Cultural Resources Assessment for the proposed Enclave at North Fontana Project. October 28. McKenna, Jeanette A. 2004. A Phase I Cultural Resources Investigation of the Fontana Unified School District Elementary School #33 Project Area in the City of Fontana, San Bernardino County, CA. Ontario International Airport -Inter Agency Collaborative. 2018a. LA/Ontario international Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Chapter 2: Procedural and Compatibility Policies. Map 2-1: Airport Influence Area . Website : https://content.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/2025- 07 /ONT-AIA%20policy%20map%202-l.pdf (accessed October 2025). __ . 2018b. LA/Ontario international Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Compatibility Policy Map. Noise Impact Zones. Website: https://content.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/2025- 07 /ONT-AIA%20policy%20map%202-3rev2.pdf (accessed October 2025). RMA Group. 2024. Geotechnical Investigation for Curtis Avenue Development, Curtis and Citrus Avenues, Fontana CA. January 9. San Bernardino Council of Governments {SBCOG). 2021. San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan. Website: https://www.gosbcta .com/wp-content/ u ploads/2019/09 /Sa n_Berna rd i no _Regiona I_ G HG _Reduction_ Plan_Main_Text_Mar_2021.pdf (accessed September 2025). San Bernardino County Fire Protection District. n.d.-a Fire Stations. https://sbcfire.org/firestations/ (accessed October 16, 2025). 6-6 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA __ . n.d.-b. Service Zone FP-5, 2022 Information, Valley Service Zone, West Valley. https ://sbcfire.org/fp5/. (accessed October 22, 2025). Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2024. Connect SoCal: The 2024-2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy of the Southern California Association of Governments Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report . Website: https ://scag. ca .gov/ sites/ defa u lt/fi les/2024-05 /23-2 98 7-tr-demogra ph icsgrowth-forecast- fi na l-040424. pdf (accessed September 2025). South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 2008. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. July. Website: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/ loca I ized-sign ifica nee-thresholds/ti na I-lst-methodology-docu ment. pdf ( accessed August 1, 2024). __ . 2022. 2022 Air Quality Management Plan. December. Website: https ://www.aqmd .gov/docs/ default-source/clean-air-plans/air-quality-management-plans/2022-air-quality-management- plan/final-2022-aqmp/final-2022-aqmp.pdf?sfvrsn=16 (accessed September 2025). __ . 2024. South Coast AQMD Rule Book. Website: https ://www.aqmd .gov/home/rules- compliance/rules (accessed September 2025). __ . n.d. Fact Sheet for Applying CalEEMod to Localized Significance Thresholds . Website: http://www.aqmd .gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/localized-significance- thresholds/caleemod-guidance.pdf (accessed September 2025). Southern California Edison. n.d. About Us. Website : https ://www.sce.com/about-us/who-we-are (accessed September 2025). San Gabriel Water Company, Fontana Water Company Division . 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Pages 6-5 through 6-8. June 2021. Translutions, Inc. 2025a. The Enclave at North Fontana Residential Traffic Impact Analysis. May 1. __ . 2025b. The Enclave at North Fontana -VMT Analysis. May 19. United States Census Bureau. n.d. Fontana City, California. Website: https:// data .census .gov /profile/Fontana_ city,_ California ?g=160XX00US0624680 ( accessed September 2, 2025). United States Energy Information Administration . 2022 . California State Profile and Energy Estimates, Data. Website: www.eia.gov/state/seds/data.php?incfile=/state/seds/ sep_fuel/html/fuel_mg.html&sid=CA (accessed September 2025). United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. ETWP; Final Rule To List the San Bernardino kangaroo Rat as Endangered. Website: https://www.fws.gov/species-publication-action/etwp-final- rule-list-san-bernardino-kangaroo-rat-endangered (accessed October 2025). P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44 367104. l 6-7 LSA 6-8 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX A ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA AIR QUALITY, ENERGY, AND GREENHOUSE GAS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM FOR THE PROPOSED ENCLAVE AT NORTH FONTANA PROJECT, FONTANA, CALIFORNIA P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX B ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATED WITHIN ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER 1108-081- 04 IN THE CITY OF FONTANA, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX C ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX D ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR CURTIS AVENUE DEVELOPMENT, CURTIS AND CITRUS AVENUES, FONTANA CA P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX E ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT REPORT. PARCEL 1108-081-04-0000 FONTANA, CALIFORNIA P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX F ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA PRELIMINARY WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TRACT 20690 THE ENCLAVE P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX G ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA NOISE AND VIBRATION IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED ENCLAVE AT NORTH FONTANA PROJECT IN FONTANA, CALIFORNIA P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX Hl ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA ENCLAVE AT NORTH FONTANA TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA) P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 APPENDIX H2 ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA LSA ENCLAVE AT NORTH FONTANA -VMT ANALYSIS (VMT MEMO) P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25) 16498.40232\44367104. l LSA ENCLA VE NORTH FONTANA FONTANA, CALIFORNIA This page intentionally left blank INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOVEMBER 2025 P:\2025\20252531-Enclave at North Fontana\PRODUCT\ISMND\Public\Draft Enclave ISMND 11.14.25.docx (11/14/25)