2010-27 r RESOLUTION NO.2010-27
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE ADOPTING
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH
2008071017) AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PLAN FOR
THE GRAND TERRACE TOWN SQUARE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
A. RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Grand Terrace Town Square Master Development Plan ("TSMDP") would
result in the development of a commercial center consisting of the development of up to 209,611 square
feet on approximately 21 gross acres. The Project is located on the south side of Barton Road between
Michigan Street and the Gage Canal,within the General Commercial designation of the BRSP; and
WHEREAS,the TSMDP would be developed in five Development Units that correspond to five
development phases: Development Unit 1 is proposed on 7.5 acres consisting of 65,737 square feet of
commercial space; Development Unit 2 is proposed on 4.5 acres with a maximum buildable area of
58,858 square feet; Development Unit 3 is proposed on 5.0 acres with a maximum buildable area of
33,977 square feet; Development Unit 4 is proposed on 2.0 acres with a maximum buildable area of
20,700 square feet; and Development Unit 5 is proposed on 2.0 acres with a maximum building area of
20,177 square feet; and
( WHEREAS,pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") (Public Res. Code,
§ 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 15000 et seq.) the City Council of the City
of Grand Terrace ("City Council") is the lead agency for the Project, as the public agency with general
governmental powers; and
WHEREAS, the City.Council, as lead agency, determined that an Environmental Impact Report
("EIR") should be prepared pursuant to CEQA in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental
impacts of the Project; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation ("NOP") and Initial Study identifying the scope of
environmental issues were distributed to numerous state, federal, and local agencies and organizations on
July 3, 2008, for a period of 30 days, concluding on August 4, 2008,pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines
sections 15082(a), 15103 and 15375. A total of 12 comment letters were received and are included in
Appendix A of the Draft EIR ("DEIR"). Relevant comments received in response to the NOP were
incorporated into the DEIR; and
WHEREAS, a revised Notice of Preparation ("NOP") and revised Initial Study identifying the
scope of environmental issues were distributed to numerous state, federal, and local agencies and
organizations on January 30, 2009, for a period of 30 days, concluding on March 2, 2009, pursuant to
State CEQA Guidelines sections 15082(a), 15103 and 15375. A total of seven comment letters were
received and are included in Appendix A of the Draft EIR ("DEIR"). Relevant comments received in
response to the NOP were incorporated into the DEIR; and
WHEREAS, public scoping meetings were held on July 15, 2008, and on February 17, 2009, at
the City of Grand Terrace Council Chambers and input from the public providing direction and scope of
the EIR was received and has been included in Section 13.2 and Appendix A of the Draft EIR; and
Page 1 of 6
WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was distributed for a 45-day public review and comment period
commencing on April 30, 2009, and expiring on June 15, 2009. Eight comment letters were received
during the public comment period. The specific and general responses to comments are included in the
Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion ("NOC") was sent with the DEIR to the State
Clearinghouse on April 29,2009; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Grand Terrace held a public hearing to
consider the Project, the Final EIR, and staff recommendations, on July 15 2010 at the City of Grand
Terrace City Council Chambers located at 22795 Barton Road Barton Road Grand Terrace, California
92313. Notice of this Planning Commission hearing was provided through publication in the San
Bernardino County Sun on July 5,2010; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace held a public hearing to consider the
Project, the Final EIR, and staff recommendations, on July 27, 2010, at the City of Grand Terrace City
Council Chambers located at 22795 Barton Road Grand Terrace, California 92313. Notice of this City
Council hearing was provided through publication on July 16, 2010; and
WHEREAS, as contained herein, the City has endeavored in good faith to set forth the basis for
its decision on the Project; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local
CEQA Guidelines have been satisfied in the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the
potentially significant environmental effects of the Project have been adequately evaluated; and
WHEREAS, the EIR prepared in connection with the Project sufficiently analyzes both the
feasible mitigation measures necessary to avoid or substantially lessen the Project's potential
environmental impacts and a range of feasible alternatives capable of eliminating or reducing these effects
in accordance with CEQA,the State CEQA Guidelines and the City's Local CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, all of the findings and conclusions made by the City pursuant to this Resolution are
based upon the oral and written evidence presented to it as a whole and not based solely on the
information provided in this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR which the City finds are less than
significant and do not require mitigation are described in Section 5 hereof; and
WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as potentially significant but
which the City finds can be mitigated to a level of less than significant,through the imposition of feasible
mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 6 hereof; and
WHEREAS, environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR as significant but which the City
finds cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant, despite the imposition of all feasible
mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 7 hereof; and
WHEREAS, cumulative environmental impacts identified or discussed in the Final EIR are
described in Section 8 hereof; and
Page 2 of 6
'- WHEREAS, irreversible environmental changes are identified in the Final EIR and are found to
be less than significant, as described in Section 9 hereof; and
WHEREAS, the potential for growth inducing impacts described in the Final EIR and found to
be less than significant are described in Section 10 hereof-, and
WHEREAS, alternatives to the Project that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental
impacts are described in Section 12 hereof; and
WHEREAS,a Statement of Overriding Consideration is contained in Section 13 hereof; and
WHEREAS, on July 15, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the Project and voted to recommend'City Council certification of the Final EIR, and adoption
of a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
WHEREAS, on July 27, 2010, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
Project and prior to taking action, the City Council has heard, been presented with, reviewed and
considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including the Final EIR, and all
oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings and hearings; and
WHEREAS, the Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council and is deemed
adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Project; and
WHEREAS, no comments made in the public hearings conducted by the City or any additional
information submitted to the City have produced substantial new information requiring recirculation or
additional environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5• and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GRAND TERRACE
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council
of the City of Grand Terrace as follows:
1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this
Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public
hearing on July 27, 2010, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony,
and the consideration of the contents of the Final EIR, this Council hereby finds and concludes as
follows:
a. The Final EIR prepared for the Grand Terrace Town Square Master Development Plan
has been completed in compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental
Quality Act, California Public Resource Code Sections 21000 et seq. (CEQA) with the
State and the City Guidelines for implementing CEQA, and all other applicable laws and
regulations.
( 1
b. The Final EIR was presented to the Council and the Council reviewed and considered the
Page 3 of 6
information contained in the Final EIR prior to the consideration of the Project.
3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council
hereby takes the following actions:
a. Certifies the Final EIR to be in compliance with the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq.
(CEQA) with the State and the City Guidelines for implementing CEQA, and all other
applicable laws and regulations.
b. Adopts a Statement of Facts, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations for
the EIR attached hereto as Exhibit"A"respectively,based on the following findings:
i. The facts and findings set forth in the Statement of Facts and Findings and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations are supported by substantial evidence in
the administrative record and the Final EIR.
ii. The Final EIR identified all significant environmental impacts of the Project and
there are no known potentially significant environmental impacts not addressed
in the Final EIR.
iii. All significant impacts identified in the Final EIR as a result of the Project have
been identified, avoided, or reduced to an acceptable level by the imposition of
mitigation measures on the Project. These mitigation measures are attached
hereto as part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and are
incorporated herein by the reference.
iv. The Final EIR considered a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project.
Potential mitigation or Project alternatives have been incorporated into the
Project to reduce the impacts.
v. The cumulative impacts of the Project in relation to other projects in the area
have been considered. Except for the identified unavoidable impacts described in
the Statement of Facts and Findings and the Final EIR, mitigation measures are
incorporated into the Project to reduce such impacts to less than significant
levels.
vi. The unavoidable significant impacts of the Project as identified in the Statement
of Facts and Findings and the Final EIR outweighed by the economic, social, and
other benefits of the Project identified in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
5. The City Clerk shall file a Notice of Determination with the Clerk of the Board of the County of
San Bernardino within five(5)working days of final Project approval.
Page 4 of 6
PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED the 27 h day of July,2010.
AYES: Councilmember Cortes, Mayor Pro Tem Garcia and Mayor Ferre
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: Councilmember;Sta kiewitz
Maryetta F e,Mayor
ATTEST:
X��_
B enda Mesa, City Clerk
ATTEST AS TO FORM:
John Harper, i rney
f '
Page 5 of 6
l _
I,BRENDA MESA, CITY CLERK of the City of Grand Terrace, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Grand Terrace, California,at a Regular Meeting of said City Council on the 27�h of July 2010.
Executed this 27 day of July 2010, at Grand Terrace, California.
1 1,WA
Brenda Mesa, City Clerk
r_
Page 6 of 6
Exhibit A
SECTION 1
INTRODUCTION
The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace ("this Council") hereby adopts this entire document,
including the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 13 below, as its findings ("Findings")
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") for the Grand Terrace Town Square
Master Development Plan Project("Project") described in the Final Environmental Irnpact Report ("Final
EIR") for the Project, State Clearinghouse Number 2008071017. The Project as described in the Final
EIR includes all discretionary actions that will be considered by the City of Grand Terrace ("City"), and
other public agencies that may have approval authority over aspects of the Project. City's discretionary
actions in approving the Project will include: 1) Site and Architectural Review 07-12/Town Square
Master Development Plan,2) Site and Architectural Review 07-07, 3)Master Development Sign Program
09-01, Sign Program Development Unit 1, Tentative Parcel Map 08-01 (TPM No. 17787) and
Environmental Review 07-06.
In considering the potential benefits of the Project,the City identified the following objectives that will be
achieved upon development of the Project site:
• Accommodate large and small retail tenants that offer a wide range of retail commercial goods and
services, and that respond to contemporary market conditions;
• Establish a master plan that provides the framework to evaluate parking, landscaping, signage, and
building architecture design elements, as well as coordinating access and utilities to ensure high
quality development;
• Maintain the `Town Square' village image by providing pedestrian-oriented linkages and amenities
throughout the project area, and the avoidance of large sprawling parking fields by separating parking
areas among commercial buildings within the development; and
• Implement the goals and policies of the Barton Road Specific Plan with respect to the design
elements.
These Findings are based upon the entire record before this Council, including the Final EIR prepared for
the Project. The Final EIR was prepared by the City of Grand Terrace, acting as the lead agency under the
CEQA.
SECTION 2
THE PROJECT
A. Project Description
The Grand Terrace Town Square Master Development Plan Project ("TSMDP") is located at the south
side of Barton Road between Michigan Street and the Gage Canal, generally one-half mile east of
Interstate 215 (I-215) in the City of Grand Terrace, in San Bernardino County. The Project covers
fourteen parcels of undeveloped and developed land. The Project is bounded by Barton Road to the north,
Michigan Street to the west, the Gage Canal to the east, and La Paix Street to the south.The entire Master
Plan Area encompasses approximately 21 acres.
Page 1 of 41
The Project site is located within the Barton Road Specific Plan("BRSP"), and makes up Planning Area 1
of the BRSP, which is dedicated to General Commercial land uses. In accordance with the provisions of
the BRSP, the preparation of a Master Development Plan is required for Planning Area 1, and the
TSMDP has been submitted. The TSMDP establishes consistent development standards and integrated
design among the different property owners within Planning Area 1.
The TSMDP is a broad-based planning document intended to establish consistent development standards
and integrated design among the different property owners. Provisions are in place to allow development
to occur within the Development Units at any time, subject to the provision of access and conformity with
the BRSP and the TSMDP.
The TSMDP proposes development of approximately 209,611 square feet of commercial, retail, and
restaurant/fast food uses within five Development Units on approximately 21 gross acres. The five
Development Units correspond to five development phases. The timing and order of development within
the TSMDP may change based on tenant availability and other economic considerations. Further, it is
anticipated that the boundaries of the Development Units may change over time to accommodate
reciprocal easements such as, but not limited to, drive aisles and access ways. However, any changes to
Development Unit boundaries would not result in any changes to the overall boundaries of the TSMDP or
to the anticipated project build out of 209,611 square feet of commercial uses. In addition to approval of
the TSMDP and associated master planning documents, the applicant is requesting approval of
Development Unit 1/Phase 1. With regard to Development Unit 4/Phase 4, a portion of it is presently
developed; however, should Commerce Street be extended in the future, these existing commercial
buildings would need to be removed. No plans or development schedule has been proposed in relation to
Development Unit 5/Phase 5.
The five Development Unit and Phases, along with anticipated maximum square footage for each
Development Unit is shown below:
Development Phase Land Area Maximum Buildable Existing Conditions
Unit Square Footage
1 1 7.5 75,899 Miguel's Jr.,
(*65,737) abandoned residence
2 2 4.5 58,858 Vacant
3 3 5.0 33,977 Senior_assisted care
facility
4 4 2.0 20,700 Autozone, other
commercial uses
5 5 2.0 20,177 Occupied residence
21.0 209,611
*65,737 square feet is proposed in Development Unit 1
The TSMDP depicts and reserves for future development a potential realignment/extension of Commerce
Way, as contemplated in the General Plan Update being prepared by the City. The City's General Plan
Update identifies the potential future realignment/extension of Commerce Way, which may be necessary
to accommodate improvements to the I-215Barton Road Interchange and/or to support future
development within the BRSP. Improvements to the I-215Barton Road Interchange are programmed to
be constructed and are included in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) 2008,
Technical Appendix Volume H of III; therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the realignment of
Commerce Way will occur at some point prior to build out of the TSMDP area. The environmental
l effects resulting from the potential future realignment of Commerce Way will be appropriately addressed
in the environmental document associated with and prepared for the 1-215Barton Road Interchange
Page 2 of 41
Improvement project. For purposes of the proposed project, the tentative depiction of the potential
realignment/extension of Commerce Way is adequate for project review.
If and/or when Commerce Way is realigned, the building currently housing Auto Zone would be vacated
and removed; the existing alignment of Michigan Street, between Barton Road and Commerce Way,
would be vacated; street improvements and utilities would be removed and relocated; and excess right-of-
way and utility easements would be disposed of and/or vacated by the City, as appropriate.
The Project includes a Master Development Sign Program for the TSMDP. The Master Development
Sign Program includes the Development Unit 1 Sign Program that is compatible with the TSMDP's
architectural theme and site layout, and compliant with the intent of the BRSP and otherwise in
accordance with Chapter 18.80 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code. The Sign Program for the proposed
project identifies a unified sign design and guidelines for all on-site signs (monument signs, free-standing
signs, menu board signs, awning signs, and wall signs), and a freeway-oriented sign associated with the
project. It also identifies prohibited signs and construction requirements for all signs. The Community
Development Director may approve a sign that does not strictly adhere to the sign provisions of Chapter
18.80 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code provided that the sign is compatible with the surrounding
development and is in harmony with the general aesthetics and welfare of the local area. Furthermore, the
Planning Commission has the authority to allow deviations from the sign ordinance to approve creative
and innovative sign programs or sign solutions under exceptional or unusual circumstances.
For Phase 1 and Phase 2 (Development Units 1 and 2), primary access will be provided from two points
along Barton Road, and a secondary access will be provided on Michigan Street. A service access
driveway will be constructed at the southerly boundary of the project site along Michigan Street for
delivery of goods and for employee access to parking. The service access driveway loops back to the front
access drives along Barton Road. Primary access for Phase 3 (consisting of Development Unit 3) will be
provided from Barton Road. For Phase 4 (consisting of Development Unit 4), access will be via Barton
Road and Michigan Street. Access for Phase 5 (consisting of Development Unit 5)will be provided from
Barton Road as a right-in and right-out unless a traffic signal is constructed at the property frontage.
Reciprocal access easements will be required with the adjoining Development Units to facilitate internal
circulation, as required by the BRSP. The TSMDP depicts the potential extension of Commerce Way
through the project area; however, neither this construction nor the realignment of Michigan Street is
associated with development occurring within any Development Unit.
Stonewood Drive, Pascal Drive, Reed Avenue, and La Paix Street provide access to a residential
neighborhood south of the project site. The project site is enclosed and separate from the residential
neighborhood and as noted previously, vehicular access is provided from Barton Road and Michigan
Street. No vehicular access is provided to streets south of the project. A six-foot masonry wall will be
constructed along the entire southern boundary of the proposed project.
On-site parking will be provided in compliance with City requirements. Section 18.60.030 B of the Grand
Terrace Municipal Code requires one parking space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area within
commercial centers comprising approximately 75,000 square feet. Fast-food restaurants require one space
for every 75 square feet of floor space. To meet these criteria, 838 parking spaces will be required to
support proposed commercial uses at build-out of the project. Of this total project area,Development Unit
1 will provide 393 spaces.
The primary Project objectives are as follows:
• Accommodate large and small retail tenants that offer a wide range of retail commercial goods
`— and services, and that respond to contemporary market conditions;
Page 3 of 41
• Establish a master plan that provides the framework to evaluate parking, landscaping, signage,
` and building architecture design elements, as well as coordinating access and utilities to ensure
high quality development;
• Maintain the `Town Square' village image by providing pedestrian-oriented linkages and
amenities throughout the project area,and the avoidance of large sprawling parking fields by
separating parking areas among commercial buildings within the development; and
• Implement the goals and policies of the Barton Road Specific Plan with respect to the design
elements.
SECTION 3
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City initiated the environmental process with the completion of an Initial Study. The City used an
Initial Study to determine which impacts would be less than significant and did not warrant further
environmental review, while identifying those issues that required further analysis in an EIR. The City
circulated the Initial Study with a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Grand Terrace Town Square
Master Development Plan Draft EIR to State, regional, and local agencies on July 2, 2008, for a 30-day
review period that concluded on August 4, 2008, and redistributed a revised Initial Study and NOP on
January 30, 2009 for a 30-day review period, which concluded on March 2, 2009. The Initial Studies
were made available to the public during and after the comment periods. The NOPs were distributed to
the State Clearinghouse, as well as agencies, organizations, and persons who may provide appropriate
comment on Project as well as the potential environmental impacts that may result from the construction
and operation of the proposed on-site uses.
Comments received regarding the NOPs were used to help identify impacts that could result from
implementation of the proposed project. At of the close of the first 30-day NOP public review period,
fourteen responses to the NOP were received by the City. At of the close of the second 30-day NOP
public review period, seven responses to the NOP were received by the City. The NOPs and Initial
Studies, as well as the comment letters received regarding the NOPs, are included in Appendix A of the
Draft EIR.
Two public scoping meetings were held to solicit public comment on the direction and scope of the
analysis necessary for the Draft EIR. The first public scoping meeting was advertised in the Grand
Terrace City News on July 3, 2008, and was held on July 15, 2008, at 6:00 p.m., at the City of Grand
Terrace Council Chambers, 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California. The second public scoping
meeting was advertised in the San Bernardino County Sun on January 27, 2009, and was held on
February 17, 2009, at 6:00 p.m., at the City of Grand Terrace Council Chambers, 22795 Barton Road,
Grand Terrace, California. Copies of the Initial Study and the conceptual site plan were available to the
public for review during both Scoping Meetings. Approximately 9 persons were in attendance during the
first scoping meeting and approximately 13 persons were in attendance during the second scoping
meeting. Opportunity for public comment(both oral and written)was provided.
The Draft EIR was distributed to responsible and trustee agencies, other affected agencies, and interested
parties. Additionally, in accordance with Public Resources Code §21092(b)(3), the Draft EIR has been
provided to all parties who have previously requested copies. During the 45-day public review period, the
Draft EIR and technical appendices had been made available for review at the City. The Draft EIR was
distributed for a 45-day public review period on April 30, 2009, with the comment period expiring on
June 15,2009. Eight comment letters were received during the public comment period.
Page 4 of 41
After the 45-day public review period, written responses to all significant environmental issues raised
\ were prepared. These responses were made available for review for a minimum of 10 days prior to the
p p p Y
public hearing before the Grand Terrace City Council,at which time the certification of the Final EIR was
considered.The Final EIR(which includes the Draft EIR,the public comments and responses to the Draft
EIR, and findings) were included as part of the environmental record for consideration by the City
decision-makers.
SECTION 4
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND FINDINGS
City staff reports, the Final EIR, written and oral testimony at all relevant public meetings or hearings,
and these Fact, Findings, and Statement of Overriding Considerations and other information in the
administrative record serve as the basis for the City's environmental determination.
The detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the
Project are presented in Section 4.0 of the Draft EIR. Responses to comments and any
revisions/omissions to the Draft EIR are provided in Appendix G, or indicated by strikethrough
(deletions) or double-underline (additions)in the Final EIR,respectively.
The Draft EIR evaluated four major environmental categories (air quality, cultural resources, noise, and
transportation) for potential significant adverse impacts, including cumulative impacts. Both project-
specific, short- and long-term, and cumulative impacts were evaluated. In addition to the four major
environmental categories addressed in the Draft EIR, twelve other major categories were found to be
insignificant in the Initial Study prepared for the Project. Except as may be otherwise expressly provided
herein, these Findings incorporated the conclusions on these categories as outlined in the Initial Study
-' (Appendix A of the Draft EIR) and the City finds that no significant impacts have been identified as to
those categories identified in the Initial Study and no further analysis is required.
At a public hearing assembled on July 27, 2010, at the City of Grand Terrace City Council Chambers
located at 22795 Barton Road, Grand Terrace, California, the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
determined that, based upon all of the evidence presented, included by but not limited to the Final EIR,
written and oral testimony given at the meetings and hearings, and submission of testimony from the
public, organizations and regulatory agencies, the following impacts associated with the Project are: (1)
less than significant and do not require mitigation; (2) potentially significant and each of these impacts
will be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance through the identified mitigation measures and/or
implementation of an environmentally superior alternative to the Project; (3) significant and cannot be
fully mitigated to a level of less than significant but will be substantially lessened to the extent feasible by
the identified mitigation measures.
SECTION 5
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION
The following issues were found in the Final EIR as having no potential to cause significant impact and
therefore require no project-specific mitigation. The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace hereby
finds that the following potential environmental impacts of the Project are less than significant and
therefore do not require the imposition of mitigation measures.
Page 5 of 41
A. Air Quality
1. Construction Equipment Exhaust Emissions: Implementation of the Project would result in
the grading and build-out of the approximately 21-acre site. Grading and other construction activities
produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-
duty construction vehicles, equipment hauling materials to and from the site, asphalt paving, and motor
vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions during these construction activities will
vary daily as construction activity levels change. Construction equipment exhaust emissions during the
anticipated peak grading day would not exceed South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) daily construction thresholds for carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (COA nitrogen
oxides(NOJ, sulfur oxides(SO,,),reactive organic compounds(ROCs),PMIo(particulate matter less than
10 microns in size), and PM2.5 (particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size) (DEIR pp. 4.1-35).
Therefore,no significant construction-related emission impact would occur and no mitigation is required.
2. Fugitive Dust Emissions: Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing
and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during
construction varies substantially on a project-by-project basis, depending on the level of activity, the
specific operations, and weather conditions at the time of construction. Project-generated fugitive dust
emissions are well below the SCAQMD thresholds of 150 pounds per day of PMIo; and 55 pounds per
day of PM2.5 (DEIR pp. 4.1-36). Nonetheless, the City of Grand Terrace requires the implementation of
best available control measures (BACM), such as SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 standards, for all
construction projects to control fugitive dust emissions. With adherence to Rules 402 and 403, fugitive
dust emissions would remain less than significant and no mitigation is required.
3. Localized Construction Emissions: The emissions of concern from construction activities are
' NO and CO combustion emissions and fugitive PM and PM dust from site preparation activities.
l x � � to zs p p
Although the project's maximum daily disturbance area for Development Unit 1 exceeds 5 acres, the
SCAQMD thresholds for a 5-acre project site was utilized for a worst-case analysis. Use of a 5 acre site
model for the project site would result in more stringent LSTs because emissions would occur in a more
concentrated area closer to the nearest sensitive receptors than would occur in reality, due to the project
site being 21 acres. Table 4.1.F (DEIR pp. 4.1-38) presents the results of the localized emissions during
construction activity, and shows that emissions of CO,NOX, PMIo, and PM2.5 do not exceed the localized
threshold established for construction activity. Therefore, impacts are less than significant and no
mitigation is required.
4. Architectural Coating Emissions: Architectural coatings will be applied during building
construction. Architectural coatings contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which is an ozone (03)
precursor. The Project will be subject to the implementation of SCAQMD Rule 1113 regarding the use of
architectural coatings. The purpose of SCAQMD Rule 1113 is to limit the VOC content of architectural
coatings used in the Basin or to allow the averaging of such coatings, as specified, so their actual
emissions do not exceed the allowable emissions if all the averaged coatings had complied with the
specified limits. An estimate was made using the project description information and the CARB's
URBEMIS 2007 model. The model predicts a maximum VOC emissions rate of 60 lbs/day (DEIR pp.
4.1-38). This level is below the SCAQMD daily threshold of 75 pounds per day, and less than significant
impact will occur.
5. Odors: The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are residential units to the south, an
occupied residence within Development Unit 5, and an assisted living facility within Development Unit 3.
Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors; however, this activity
' would be short term and cease after construction is completed. With the exception of short term
construction related odors,the proposed uses do not include uses that are generally considered to generate
Page 6 of 41
offensive odors. While the application of architectural coatings and installation of asphalt may generate
odors, these odors are temporary, subject to SCAQMD Rules 1108 and 1113, and not likely to be
noticeable beyond the Project boundaries. Solid waste generated by on-site uses will be collected and
disposed of by a contracted waste hauler, ensuring that any odors resulting from on-site uses would be
adequately managed. Therefore, no significant odor impacts will occur and no mitigation is required
(DEIR pp.4.1-39).
6. Long-Term Microscale (CO Hot Spot) Emissions: Vehicle trips generated by the Project
would contribute to congestion at intersections and along roadway segments in the project vicinity
resulting in localized air quality impacts due to emissions. The primary mobile source pollutant of local
concern is carbon monoxide (CO), which is a direct function of vehicle idling time. The highest CO
concentrations would normally occur during peak traffic hours; hence, CO impacts calculated under peak
traffic conditions represent a worst-case analysis. CO hotspot analyses were conducted for existing and
future cumulative conditions at the following intersections: Michigan Street/Barton Road, Vivienda
Avenue/Barton Road, Canal Street/Barton Road, Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road, Preston
Street/Barton Road, Michigan Street/Commerce Way and Michigan' Street/DeBerry Street (DEIR
pp.4.1-44). Under the existing conditions both without and with the project,the intersections analyzed for
the daily peak hour would experience CO concentrations below the Federal and State standards.
Therefore, the proposed project would not have a significant impact on local air quality for CO, and no
mitigation measures are required.
7. Air Quality Management Plan Consistency: The current regional air quality management
plan is the Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP proposes policies and
measures currently contemplated by responsible agencies to achieve Federal standards for healthful air
quality in the Basin. To assess the environmental impacts as a result of new development accurately,
environmental pollution and population growth are projected by the SCAQMD in the AQMP for future
scenarios. The AQMP projections are based, in part, on the growth forecasts and General Plans from
cities and counties located in the Basin. The proposed land uses are consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning Designation for the Project site, and thereby also consistent with the AQMP. The Project would
be within walking distance of existing and planned homes and would add jobs consistent with the goals of
the AQMP for reducing the emissions associated with new development. The new employment
opportunities will improve the City's current jobs-to-housing ratio by providing job opportunities to local
residents.This Project would accommodate the growth projection in the project vicinity and itself is not a
growth inducing project. Emissions projections used to establish SCAQMD attainment objectives reflect
adopted regional and local land use plans; and emissions associated with the proposed project are
expected to be within the amounts already accounted for in the AQMP (DEIR pp. 4.1-45 — 4.1-46).
Therefore, a less than significant impact will occur and no mitigation is required.
8. Non-Carcinogenic Acute Project-Related Emissions Impacts. The nearest sensitive
receptors include an occupied residence within Development Unit 5, an assisted care facility adjacent to
Development Unit 3, residences approximately 50 feet south of the project boundary, and Grand Terrace
Elementary School approximately 100 feet north of the northwestern portion of the Project site. There are
no significant emissions of toxic air pollutants that have short-term acute health effects in the Project
vicinity. The operations expected to occur at these facilities will not emit any toxic chemicals in any
significant quantity other than diesel exhaust.While there will be other toxic substances, such as cleaning
agents,personal care products, and landscape pesticides in use on site, compliance with State and Federal
handling regulations will ensure that emissions remain below a level of significance. Because the use of
these substances is heavily regulated, no activity related to the project will emit any toxic air pollutants
that have short-term acute health effects; and there will be no machinery to emit any toxic air pollutants
that have short-term acute health effects (DEIR pp. 4.1-47). Thus, the potential for short-term acute
exposure from project-related toxic emissions will be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
Page 7 of 41
9. Carcinogenic and Chronic Project-Related Emissions Impacts: The nearest sensitive
receptors include an occupied residence within Development Unit 5, an assisted care facility adjacent to
Development Unit 3, residences approximately 50 feet south of the project boundary, and Grand Terrace
Elementary School approximately 100 feet north of the northwestern portion of the Project site.
a. Construction Health Risks. The only toxic air pollution emissions in any significant
quantity associated with construction of the proposed project occur from large, heavy-duty,
diesel-powered equipment exhaust. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
(OEHHA) currently describes the health risk from diesel exhaust entirely in terms of the amount
of particulates, or PMIo, that is emitted. Currently, the health risk associated with diesel exhaust
PMIo has only a carcinogenic and chronic effect; no short-term acute effect is recognized. The
nature of the mobile equipment used in construction operations is that mobile equipment only
operates in one location for a short time relative to the length of time required for carcinogenic
and chronic health impacts (usually 6 months or less). The cancer risk stemming from diesel
exhaust is below the cancer threshold of 10 in 1 million and chronic threshold of 1.0. Therefore a
less than significant impact will occur and no mitigation is required(DEIR pp.4.1-48).
b. Operation Health Risks. Long-term diesel exhaust health risk assessment impacts are
those associated with project-related truck deliveries to the proposed project site. The Operational
Health Risk Assessment(DEIR pp. 4.1-49) determined that the nearest sensitive receptor(located
50 feet to the south) would be exposed to an unmitigated inhalation cancer risk of no more
than3.3 in 1 million,less than the threshold of 10 in 1 million.The hazard index would be 0.0020,
which is below the threshold of 1.0. All other sensitive receptors in the project vicinity would
experience a lower cancer risk and chronic hazard index as they are located farther than 15
meters. This assessment determines the risks to the health of nearby sensitive receptors from the
proposed project's air emissions. The California Air Resources Board(GARB)website "Maps of
Estimated Cancer Risk from Air Toxics" identifies a carcinogenic risk of over 250 in 1 million
for the project area. The health risk assessment identified that the project's incremental increase is
only a very small fraction of the existing ambient condition. Therefore, a less than significant
health risk would occur and no mitigation is required.
10. Cumulative Impacts: Cumulative air quality impacts determined to have no potential to.
cause significant impact and therefore require no project-specific mitigation consist of the following:
a. Short-Term Air Quality Impacts.The cumulative area for air quality impacts is the
Basin. The Project would contribute criteria pollutants to the area during construction. A number
of individual projects in the area may be under construction simultaneously with the Project
resulting in fugitive dust and pollutant emissions. However, because all project are required to
comply with standard SCAQMD's measures, and because the Project's emissions would not
exceed the significance thresholds, the Project would have a less than significant short-term
cumulative impact(DEIR pp.4.1-59).
b. CO Hot Spot Impacts.The Project will not create significant CO hot spots.
Background concentrations are expected to decrease in future years due to concerted efforts to
improve regional air quality; therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a less than significant
cumulative CO impact would occur(DEIR pp. 4.1-59).
B. Cultural Resources
1. Religious or Sacred Uses: The Project site has not been identified as one that has been or is
currently utilized for religious or sacred purposes; nor is their evidence to suggest that the site has been
Page 8 of 41
used for human burials. In the event that human remains are found during grading or construction
activities, the Project will be subject to State law (Health and Safety Code §7050.5) governing the
discovery of human remains.Therefore,no impact to religious or sacred uses will occur and no mitigation
is required.
2. Cumulative Impacts: Implementation of the Project includes mitigation requiring the
identification, recovery, and/or recordation of suspected cultural resources or paleontological resources
that may occur within the Project limits. Although unlikely to occur, potential impacts associated with
human remains would be reduced to a less than significant level through adherence to existing State law.
There are no other projects that would, in combination with the Project, result in any significant
cumulative impacts on historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources, or to human remains.
Therefore, there are no significant cumulative impacts associated with cultural resources (DEIR pp. 4.2-
8).
C. Noise
1. Short-term Construction Noise Impacts: Potentially sensitive noise receptors include
residential uses to the south, an occupied residence within Development Unit 5 and an assisted living care
facility adjacent to Development Unit 3. Short-term noise impacts are associated with on-site excavation,
grading, and building construction; and with construction crews' commutes and staging of construction
equipment during each of the five phases of the proposed project. Although the transport of crew and
staging of construction equipment would cause intermittent noise nuisance when averaged over a period
of one hour or 24 hours, the average noise level would remain below the City's established noise
standard. While the level of construction-related noise would exceed 65 dBA, as stated in Section
8.108.040(D) of the City's Municipal Code, no significant construction noise impacts.would occur if
construction of the proposed project occurs within the permitted hours of 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday
through Saturday. Because construction activities would occur within the hours specified in the City's
Municipal Code, no significant short-term construction-related noise impacts would occur (DEIR
pp.4.3-11).No mitigation is required.
2. Groundborne Vibration Impacts: Vibration refers to groundborne noise and perceptible
motion. Typical sources of groundborne vibration are construction activities (e.g., blasting, pile driving,
and operating heavy-duty earthmoving equipment), steel-wheeled trains, and occasional traffic on rough
roads. The Project site is not located near steel-wheeled trains or rough roads, and construction activities
do not include blasting or pile driving. The primary vibratory source during the construction of the
proposed project would be large bulldozers. Section 8.108.040(D) of the City's Municipal Code indicates
that noise sources associated with vibration during construction that take place between the City's
established construction hours (7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday) are exempt from the
provisions of the Noise Chapter of the City's Municipal Code (DEIR pp. 4.3-13). Therefore, with
adherence to the established hours of construction, impacts from construction-related groundborne
vibration construction would be less than significant and no mitigation is required.
3. Long-term Project-Related Traffic Noise Impacts: Potentially sensitive noise receptors
include residential uses to the south, an occupied residence within Development Unit 5 and an assisted
living care facility adjacent Development Unit 3. The City's exterior noise standard for residential land
uses are conditionally acceptable at 65 dBA CNEL. Project-related traffic noise level increases along the
Gage Canal south of Barton Road would be 4.6 dBA during the 2012 "With Project" scenario and 9.0
dBA during the 2030 "With Project" scenario, according to the DEIR (DEIR pp. 4.3-14). While traffic
noise level increases would be perceptible to the human ear (i.e., a noise increase of 3 dB or more), the
portion of the Gage Canal with traffic noise increases greater than 3 dBA would not result in noise-
sensitive uses, exposed to traffic noise exceeding the City's 65 dBA CNEL standard for residential uses
Page 9 of 41
for the future year scenarios. This increase in noise levels as a result of the proposed project's traffic
would remain below the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour. Except as noted above, the greatest project-related
traffic noise level increases in the project vicinity would be a 1.4 dBA increase along Preston Street north
of Barton Road(during the 2011 "With Project" scenario.)All other roadway segments would experience
traffic noise increase of less than 1.4 dBA under the various future year conditions. However,this level of
noise increase would not be perceptible to the human ear in an outdoor environment.
Potential project-related traffic increases that may potentially affect the future on-site uses were
also evaluated. The City's exterior noise standard for commercial land uses are conditionally acceptable
at 75 dBA CNEL. The DEIR identifies that the proposed retail and commercial uses would not be
impacted by the 75 dBA CNEL noise contour from Barton Road (within 25 feet of roadway centerline),
Michigan Avenue (within 25 feet of roadway centerline), or Canal Street (within the roadway right-of-
way) and therefore is below the City's 75 dBA CNEL noise standard for retail/commercial uses. In
addition, standard exterior-to-interior noise attenuation from commercial buildings (more than 20 dBA
with windows closed)would provide sufficient noise reduction to meet the interior noise environment for
retail/commercial uses (DEIR pp. 4.3-23). Therefore, no significant noise impacts to on-site uses would
occur, and no mitigation is required.
4. On-site Stationary Noise Impacts (Loading, and Unloading, and Parking): On-site
retail/commercial uses would generate noise from truck delivery, loading/unloading activities and parking
lot activities. These activities are potential noise point sources that could affect noise sensitive receptors
such as existing residential uses to the south, east, and north of the project site. The proposed"Major A"
building and future buildings constructed within adjacent phases will have loading/unloading areas on the
south side of the buildings that face residential uses along La Paix Street. The loading area is
approximately 100 feet from these residences. Noise associated with loading/unloading activities could
potentially affect these existing residential uses. A 6-foot masonry wall will be constructed along the
entire southern boundary of the proposed project that would provide a minimum of 6 dBA in noise
attenuation for receptors south of the wall.
a. Loading/Unloading. Loading/unloading noise at "Major A" and future buildings
within adjacent phases would be below 63 dBA L,na, at ground level of the nearest residences
south of the project site. This range of maximum noise levels is lower than the typical exterior
noise standards of 75 dBA L.x during the day and the 70 dBA LAX standard during the night at
50 feet from sensitive noise receptors. Although a typical truck unloading process takes an
average of 15 to 20 minutes, this maximum intermittent noise level occurs in a much shorter
period of time and would amount to less than a few minutes. The maximum noise level from
truck loading/unloading activities at the proposed retail/commercial uses would not occur more
than 15 minutes in any hour cumulatively during the daytime hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m. (with the 60 dBA L25 noise standard for events lasting no more than 15 minutes in any hour).
Therefore, noise associated with loading and unloading activities at the loading areas associated
with the proposed retail/commercial uses would not result in noise levels exceeding the typical
daytime noise standards at the nearest residences to the south. In addition, if loading/unloading
activities occur during the nighttime hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., the cumulative
noise level would be restricted to below the nighttime standard of 60 dBA Lg that cannot be
exceeded for more than 5 minutes in any hour. Therefore, loading/unloading activities would not
result in any significant noise impacts at the nearest off-site residential uses (DEIR pp.4.3-24).
Similarly, loading/unloading noise from other on-site restaurants and shops would be
reduced to below 60 dBA Lam,, at ground level of the nearest residences to the south, east, and
' north from distance divergence. Therefore,noise associated with loading and unloading activities
at the loading areas associated with the proposed retail/commercial buildings would not result in
Page 10 of 41
�— noise levels exceeding the typical daytime or nighttime noise standards at the nearest residences
in the project vicinity.No mitigation measure is required(DEIR pp. 4.3-24).
Loading/unloading activities associated with the proposed "Shops 2" building may be
within 100 feet of the existing on-site residence within the Phase 5 development area.
Loading/unloading noise would be reduced to 69 dBA LAX or lower at this on-site residence due
to distance divergence. This range of maximum noise levels is lower than the typical exterior
noise standards of 75 dBA L.x during the day (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and the 70 dBA L,,.X
standard during the night (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.). Therefore, noise associated with loading and
unloading activities at the loading areas associated with the proposed retail/commercial buildings
would not result in noise levels exceeding the typical daytime or nighttime noise standards at the
nearest residence on site.No mitigation is required(DEIR pp.4.3-25).
b. Parking Lot Activity. Typical parking lot activities, such as customers conversing,
doors slamming, engine startup, and slow-moving vehicles would generate approximately 60 to
70 dBA L.,, at 50 feet. This level of noise is lower than that of the truck delivery and
loading/unloading activities.Noise in the parking lots of the retail/commercial uses would not be
significant with respect to existing residences to the south of the project site because the 6-foot
masonry boundary wall and the distance divergence would attenuate noise. Existing residences to
the north are farther away from the Project site and would be exposed to lower on-site noise with
the existing traffic noise along Barton Road being the dominant noise source for those residential
uses. Similarly, noise in the parking lots of the retail/commercial uses would not be a significant
noise issue with respect to the existing residence on site. Therefore, a less than significant impact
will occur and no mitigation is required(DEIR pp.4.3-25).
c. Other Potential On-Site Operational Noise. The Project includes rooftop heating,
ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) mechanical equipment, and ground-floor garbage
compactors.The rooftop HVAC units would generate noise levels of approximately 62 dBA at 50
feet. A combination of the 150-foot distance between the HVAC equipment and parapet would
reduce noise levels to below 49 dBA(DEIR pp. 4.3-25).
Noise associated with garbage compactors is approximately 70 dBA at 6 feet.Anticipated
garbage compactors on the south side of the proposed "Major A" building would be
approximately 100 feet from the nearest residences to the southeast. Because of the distance
divergence and 6-foot boundary wall this ground noise would be reduced to 40 dBA or lower for .
residences south of the project site. Therefore, noise impacts are less than significant. No
mitigation is required(DEIR pp. 4.3-25).
5. Airport Noise: The Project site is located approximately four miles southwest of the San
Bernardino International Airport. The City is located under the landing pattern of Ontario International
Airport (01A),which is located approximately 18 miles west of the Project site. Noise from jet aircraft is
a component of ambient noise conditions in the Project area. Due to the Project's distance from these
airports and the lack of noise in excess of the City's exterior noise standard, no significant airport-related
noise impact would occur.No mitigation is required(DEIR pp.4.3-26).
6. Cumulative Impacts:Although it is not possible to predict if contiguous properties may be
constructed at the same time and create cumulative noise impacts that would be greater than if developed
at separate times, it is unlikely that adjacent properties will be developed at the same time as the Project.
However, in the unlikely event that adjacent properties are developed at the same time as the Project,
adherence to Section 8.108.040(D) of the City's Municipal Code would result in construction noise
-- impacts that are less than significant.The cumulative roadway noise (With Project) assessment concludes
Page 11 of 41
(r that noise levels along one roadway segment would exceed baseline noise levels by 3 dBA or more,with
or without the Project. However, comparing cumulative noise levels that would occur both with and
without the Project, the Project would not expose sensitive uses located adjacent to area roadways to
excessive noise levels. Therefore, the Project's contribution to cumulative noise impacts at sensitive uses
would not be significant(DEIR pp.4.3-26).
D. Transportation/Circulation
1. Air Traffic Patterns: The Project site is located approximately four miles southwest of the
San Bernardino International Airport and is not within the designated safety zones or the flight paths
established for this facility. No aspect of the Project would change air traffic volumes, affect air traffic
patterns, create visual, electronic, or physical hazards to aircraft in flight,nor would the Project disrupt or
alter air traffic patterns.No impacts will occur and no mitigation is required(DEIR pp.4.4-33).
2. Inadequate Emergency Access: The Project would be designed, constructed, and maintained
to provide for adequate emergency access and evacuation at all times. The Project would be designed to
provide an acceptable level of vehicular access along public roads, and project driveways and parking
lots, and construct these facilities to applicable City standards. Traffic control measures would be
implemented during construction activities that may temporarily restrict vehicular traffic. Adherence to
applicable standards, regulations, and guidelines of the City, and emergency service providers would
ensure no impact related to this issue would occur. Therefore, no mitigation is required (DEIR pp. 4.4-
33).
3.Inadequate Parking Capacity: Chapter 18.60 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code regulates
the provision of parking spaces. Section 18.60.030 B of the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code
requires one (1) space for every 250 square feet of gross floor area within commercial centers comprising
° approximately 75,000 square feet or more and one(1)space for every 75 square feet of floor area for fast-
food restaurants. Build out of the Project is required to provide 838 parking spaces for general
commercial uses. The Project design would be required to comply with parking standards prior to final
site plan approval, to ensure the adequate number of parking spaces is provided to serve each
Development Unit. Additionally, reciprocal parking agreements and provisions within the BRSP, which
provides for parking incentives, would ensure that the proposed Project would not result in inadequate
parking capacity. Impacts associated with parking capacity are less than significant and no mitigation is
required(DEIR pp.4.4-33).
4. Alternative Transportation. The Project would comply with all City development policies,
standards, and programs pertaining to supporting alternative modes of transportation included in city
codes, ordinances, and policies. Further based on site plan, the Project will not conflict with existing or
proposed bikeways or bus routes. Additionally, bicycle racks would be installed at various locations
within the project site. Therefore, no impact related to this issue would occur and no mitigation is
required(DEIR pp.4.4-34).
5. Cumulative Impacts. Traffic volumes for cumulative with project traffic conditions are based
on a sum of project traffic and traffic volumes from approved and pending projects in the vicinity of the
proposed project. This yields a cumulative analysis. Five intersections will require improvements in order
to maintain the City's level of service standard.
The timing and construction of necessary roadway improvements are determined by the City to
ensure satisfactory LOS levels are achieved before performance levels fail to ensure that significant
r' impacts are avoided. Additionally, although the suggested improvements are consistent with the City's
General Plan, the project would be responsible for contributing its fair share toward the funding of the
Page 12 of 41
future improvements via payment of the City's traffic signal and road improvement fees and other fees
used to fund roadway and roadway-related improvements, resulting in a less than significant cumulative
impact.
As previously noted, the preferred design alternatives for the I-215/Barton Road interchange
(which are assumed to be built by year 2014) have not been determined at this time. However, it is
assumed that intersection and roadway network improvements associated with the interchange
improvement would be constructed to meet SANBAG requirements to meet LOS standards by year 2014.
As such the TIA has included modification in the base roadway network for year 2014 and year 2030
cumulative conditions analysis based on the preferred design alternative for the interchange.
SECTION 6
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF
LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace finds that the following environmental impacts identified
in the Final EIR are potentially significant but can be mitigated to less than significant levels through the
implementation of mitigation measures and or conditions identified in the Final EIR and summarized
below.
A. Air Quality
1. Global Climate Change Impacts: Short-term construction activities, and long-term vehicular
sources and stationary sources emissions will contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated
—' with the Project. The Project will produce approximately 13,000 metric tons per year of CO2i which is
approximately 0.013 Tg/year of CO2. As a comparison, the existing emissions from the entire SCAG
region are estimated to be approximately 176.79 million metric tonnes of CO2 per year and approximately
496.95 million metric tonnes of CO2 per year for the entire State. Project-related GHG emissions are not
project-specific impacts to global warming but are instead the project's contribution to this cumulative
impact. Project-related CO2 emissions and their contribution to global climate change impacts in the State
of California are less than significant and less than cumulatively considerable because: (1) the project's
impacts alone would not cause or significantly contribute to global climate change, and (2) the net
increase in air pollutant emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants.
However, in order to ensure that the proposed project complies with and would not conflict with or
impede the implementation of reduction goals identified in AB 32, the Governor's Executive Order S-3-
05, and other strategies to help reduce GHGs to the level proposed by the Governor,Mitigation Measure
4.1.5.10A is proposed(DEIR.pp.4.1-51).
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.1.5.10A will reduce the potential impacts
related to global climate change to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.1.5.10A: To the extent feasible and to the satisfaction of the City, the
following measures shall be incorporated info the design and construction of the project
(including specific building projects):
Construction and Building Materials
Use San Bemardino/Riverside County produced and/or manufactured building materials for
construction of the project;
Page 13 of 41
• Recycle/reuse demolished construction material; and
• Use "Green Building Materials," such as those materials that are resource efficient, and
recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way, including low Volatile
Organic Compound(VOC)materials.
Energy-Efficiency Measures
• Design all project buildings to exceed California Building Code's Title 24 energy standard
by 10%,including,but not limited to any combination of the following:
o Increase insulation such that heat transfer and thermal bridging is minimized;
o Limit air leakage through the structure or within the heating and cooling distribution
system to minimize energy consumption; and
o Incorporate ENERGY STAR or better rated windows, space heating and cooling
equipment,light fixtures, appliances or other applicable electrical equipment.
• Provide a landscape and development plan for the project that takes advantage of shade,
prevailing winds,and landscaping.
• Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems. Use daylight as an integral part of
lighting systems in buildings.
• Install light colored"cool"roofs and cool pavements.
• Install energy-efficient heating and cooling systems, appliances and equipment, and control
systems.
• Install solar or light emitting diodes (LEDs) for outdoor lighting.
Water Conservation and Efficiency Measures
• Devise a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and
location. The strategy may include the following,plus other innovative measures that might
be appropriate:
o Create water-efficient landscapes within the development;
o Install water-efficient irrigation systems and devices, such as soil moisture based
irrigation controls;
o Use reclaimed water for landscape irrigation within the project and install the
infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water;
o Design buildings to be water-efficient by installing water-efficient fixtures and
appliances,including low-flow faucets, dual-flush toilets and waterless urinals; and
o Restrict watering methods (e.g., prohibit systems that apply water to non-vegetated
surfaces)and control runoff.
Solid Waste Measures
• Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste (including, but not limited to, soil,
vegetation, concrete,lumber,metal, and cardboard);
• Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste and adequate
recycling containers located in public areas; and
l • Provide employee education about reducing waste and available recycling services.
Page 14 of 41
r- Implementation of this mitigation measure is feasible and the City Council adopts and incorporates this
\ i mitigation measures into the Project.
Supporting Explanation: After implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.1.5.10A and
application of regulatory requirements, the Project would implement appropriate GHG reduction
strategies and would ensure that it does not conflict with or impede implementation of reduction
goals identified in AB 32, the Governor's Executive Order 5-3-05, and other strategies to help
reduce GHGs to the level proposed by the Governor. Therefore, the Project's contribution to
GHG emissions would be reduced to a less than significant level(DEIR pp 4.1-56).
B. Cultural Resources
1. Paleontological Resources: Although the possibility of finding archaeological and
paleontological resources is remote for the project site (DEIR pp. 4.2-7), grading on the site would be
required. On-site excavation may uncover previously undetected subsurface archaeological resources,
resulting in a significant impact.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A will reduce the potential impact
related to paleontological resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A: In the event that a paleontological or archaeological resource is
uncovered during the course of the project, ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find
shall be redirected until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist and/or paleontologist (as determined by the City). Any such resource uncovered
during the course of project-related grading or construction shall be recorded and/or removed per
applicable City and/or State regulations
�1
Implementation of this mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
adopts and incorporates this mitigation measure into the Project. The mitigation measure would reduce
the impact to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A will require that in
the event that a paleontological or archaeological resource is uncovered during project grading or
construction that the activity around the find be redirected so that the possible resource can be
protected in place until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist and/or paleontologist.Therefore, adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A would
reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
2. Unique Ethnic Cultural Values: While no evidence has been identified suggesting that the
Project site possesses unique ethnic cultural values, nor is it likely to possess such resources, the
movement of onsite soils may uncover previous unidentified cultural resources (DEIR pp. 4.2-7). The
discovery of unidentified cultural resources would be a significant impact.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A will reduce the potential impacts
related to unique ethnic cultural values to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A: In the event that a paleontological or archaeological resource is
uncovered during the course of the project, ground-disturbing activities in the vicinity of the find
shall be redirected until the nature and extent of the find can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist and/or paleontologist (as determined by the City). Any such resource uncovered
Page 15 of 41
during the course of project-related grading or construction shall be recorded and/or removed per
applicable City and/or State regulations.
Implementation of this mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
adopts and incorporates this mitigation measure into the Project. The mitigation measure would reduce
the impact to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Should cultural resources be uncovered during grading activities,
implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A would require that grading activities be
redirected so that the suspected resources are protected until it can be evaluated by a qualified
archaeologist and/or paleontologist.Therefore, adherence to Mitigation Measure 4.2.5.1A would
reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
3. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources: The existing residence located at 22273 Barton
Road is a historic period(i.e.,pre-1957) structure,which was identified and recorded.The DEIR(pp. 4.2-
6)determined that the residence does not meet any of the four criteria used to determine if a resource is of
significance and therefore, the building is not eligible for the California Register and is not considered to
be a "historic resource" as defined by CEQA.-However the unrecorded resource will be required to be
documented on the Department of Parks and Recreation(DPR)Form 523.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure XIV.B will reduce the potential impacts
related to Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure XIV.B The project applicant for Phase V shall perform a recordation of
the existing residence located within the project limits through completion and submission of
DPR Form 523,if not previously completed.
Implementation of this mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
adopts and incorporates this mitigation measures into the Project. The mitigation measures would reduce
the impact to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Implementation of Mitigation Measure XIV.B would require that the
residence be documented on the Department of Recreation DPR Form 523. Therefore, adherence
to Mitigation Measure XIV.B would reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
C. Transportation/Circulation
1. Year 2011 (Phase I/Development Unit 1 and 2) With Project Conditions (Intersection)
Traffic and Level of Service Impacts: The two,listed below, are forecast to exceed satisfactory levels in
the year 2011 (Phase 1)with Project conditions resulting in a significant impact.
• Michigan Street/Main Street. The intersection would experience LOS F conditions in the
a.m.peak hour.
• Mount Vernon Avenue/Main Street. The intersection would experience LOS F conditions in
the a.m. and p.m.peak hours.
In addition,the intersection of I-215 Northbound Ramp/Barton Road is projected to have queues
longer than the available storage space;therefore,mitigation is required to lengthen the eastbound
left turn pocket on Barton Road between the I-215 Southbound and Northbound ramps.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.1A through 4.4.6.11) will reduce Year
Page 16 of 41
2011 (Phase I) With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and Level of Service Impacts to a
less than significant level.
Phase I,Development Unit 1
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1A Prior to, issuance of a building permit for any portion of Phase I,
Development Unit 1, the applicant or their designee shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal
Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees in accordance with Sections 4.104.030 and
4.104.040 of the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1B: As a condition of issuance of certificate of occupancy for any
portion of Phase I, Barton Road shall be re-striped between I-215 Northbound Ramps and I-215
Southbound Ramps to provide 230 feet of storage space for the westbound left-turn lane and 60
feet of storage space for the eastbound left-turn lane. The traffic signal timings at the intersection
of I-215 Southbound Ramps/Barton Road and the intersection of I-215 Northbound
Ramps/Barton.Road shall be optimized.
Phase I,Development Unit 2
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1C: As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Phase I, Development Unit 2, the applicant or their desingee shall pay the appropriate Traffic
Signal Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees in accordance with Sections 4.104.030
and 4.104.040 of the City of Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1D: The following improvements have been identified as necessary to
mitigate Phase I,Development Unit 2 traffic impacts:
"I (i) Michigan Street/Main Street: Widen and/or restripe Michigan Street to provide a
northbound left-turn lane and a southbound left-turn lane. Widen and/or restripe Main
Street to provide an eastbound left-turn lane and a westbound left-turn lane. Install a traffic
signal designed for five-phase operation with protected left-turn phasing in the eastbound
and westbound directions. The traffic signal and northbound and southbound left-turn lanes
shall be constructed by the County, the Colton Unified School District, and the City. The
applicant or their designee shall be responsible for its fair share of the costs to provide the
additional eastbound and westbound turn lanes at this intersection, as these improvements
are not included in the City's Circulation Improvement Fee program. Such fair share shall
be calculated and paid to the City as a condition of issuance of the first building permit for
any Phase I construction.
(ii) Mount Vernon Avenue/Main Street: Widen and/or restripe Mount Vernon Avenue to
provide a northbound left-turn lane, a second northbound through lane, and a southbound
left-turn lane. Widen and/or restripe Main Street to provide an eastbound left-turn lane and
a westbound left-turn lane. Install a traffic signal designed for eight phase operation. The
City shall be responsible for design and construction of the traffic signal and street
improvements. The City shall complete the traffic signal and street improvements prior to
occupancy of the first building for any Phase I, Development Unit 2 construction. The
applicant or their designee shall be responsible for the fair share costs of street
improvements not covered by the City's Circulation Improvement Fee program.
Implementation of these mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand
% Terrace adopts and incorporates these mitigation measures into the Project. These mitigation measures
`— would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Page 17 of 41
Supporting Explanation: The re-striping of Barton Road at Interstate I-215 will provide
additional storage space for vehicle queuing. The payment of Traffic Signal Improvement
Fees shall satisfy the applicant's responsibility for its fair share of traffic signal
improvements at the intersection of Michigan Street/Main Street and Mount Vernon
Avenue/Main Street. With the implementation of the recommended improvements, the
minimum level of service standards would be maintained for the 2011 (Phase I) with
Project study area intersections, and impacts would be reduced to a less than significant
level for all identified intersections (DEIR pp. 4.4-37).
2. Year 2012 (Phase H/Development Unit 3) With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic
and Level of Service Impacts: All study intersections would operate within the City's LOS D standard
at build-out of Phase II of the Project and with implementation of all improvements defined for year 2011,
plus Phase I Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.113 and Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.ID. However, without
implementation of the Phase I mitigation measures, should Phase II precede Phase I, Phase II would
contribute toward a level of service deficiency at the same two intersections identified as a significant
impact under Phase I, Development Units 1 and 2. This would result in a significant impact and
mitigation would be required.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.2A through 4.4.6.213 will reduce the
Year 2012 (Phase II/Development Unit 3) With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and
Level of Service Impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.2A: As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Phase II, Development Unit 3, the applicant or their designee shall pay the appropriate Traffic
Signal Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees in accordance with Sections 4.104.030
and 4.104.040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.2B: As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Phase II, Development Unit 3, the Project applicant shall implement Mitigation Measure
4.4.6.111 and Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.11),if not already completed.
Implementation of these mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace adopts and incorporates these mitigation measures into the Project. These mitigation measures
would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Implementation of the mitigation measures above will ensure the
maintenance of the City's LOS Dstandard at all study intersections with the addition of Phase
II/Development Unit 3 traffic.All impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.
3. Year 2014 (Phase III/Development Unit 4)With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic
and Level of Service Impacts: With the addition of Phase III/Development Unit 4 traffic, all
intersections analyzed are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of under Year 2014 (Phase
III/Development Unit 4) with Project conditions; and with implementation of mitigation measures
established for Year 2011 (Phase I/Development Unit 1 and 2) and 2012 (Phase R/Development Unit 3)
plus Project traffic conditions,with the exception of the following two intersections:
• La Cadena Drive/Barton Road, and
• I-215 Southbound Ramps/Barton Road
r
Page 18 of 41
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.3A through 4.4.6.3D will reduce Year
2014 (Phase IIUDevelopment Unit 4) With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and Level of
Service Impacts to a less than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.3A: As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Phase III, Development Unit 4, the applicant or their designee shall pay the appropriate Traffic
Signal Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees in accordance with Sections 4.104.030
and 4.104.040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.3B: As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Phase III,Development Unit 4,the project applicant or their designee shall implement Mitigation
Measure 4.4.6.1B and Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1E if not already completed.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.3C: The following improvements have been identified as necessary to
mitigate Phase III,Development Unit 4,traffic impacts:
(i) La Cadena Drive/Barton Road: Unless the General Plan Update is establishing LOS D as
the acceptable level of service, that applicant or their designee shall widen and/or restripe
Barton Road to provide an exclusive westbound right-turn lane as part of modifying the
existing traffic signal to install a westbound right-turn overlap phase. As a condition of
issuance of a building permit for any portion of Phase III, the applicant or their designee
shall contribute to the City of Colton its fair share of the cost for these improvements.
Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.3D: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 170,001
square feet of building gross floor area or Phase III, Development Unit 4, whichever comes first
and if construction on the Barton Road/1-215 interchange has not begun,the intersection of I-215
Southbound Ramps (N-S) / Barton Road (E-W) shall be improved to provide the following
geometries:
• Southbound: one left-turn lane and one shared left-turn/through lane;
•Eastbound: one left-turn lane, one through lane, and one shared through/right-turn lane; and
•Westbound: one left-turn lane and one shared through/right-turn lane.
The intersection of I-215 Northbound Ramps (N-S) / Barton Road (E-W) shall be improved to
provide the following geometries:
•Northbound: one left-turn lane and two right-turn lanes.
•Eastbound: one left-turn lane and two through lanes.
•Westbound: one through lane and one right-turn lane.
The City shall be responsible for the cost to prepare any studies required by Caltrans in order to
consider approval of the encroachment. When Caltrans approves the encroachment permit, the
City shall be responsible for the construction of the improvements, with fair-share participation
by the applicant or their designee in the amount of 30 percent of the construction cost. The
improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the 170,001
square feet of building gross floor area or Phase III,Development Unit 4,whichever comes first.
Implementation of these mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace adopts and incorporates these mitigation measures into the Project. These mitigation measures
Page 19 of 41
would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Figure 4.4.3 and Table 4.4.H of the DEIR illustrate the intersection
geometrics resulting from the recommended intersection improvements for Year 2014 (Phase
III/Development Unit 4) with project conditions and intersection levels of service with these
improvements, respectively (DEIR pp. 4.4-25 —4.4-43). With the implementation of Mitigation
Measures 4.4.6.3A through 4.4.6.31)all Phase III/Development Unit 4 impacts will be reduced to
a less than significant level.
4. Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and Level of Service Impacts:
The DEIR determined that all intersections examined are projected to operate at satisfactory levels of
service under year 2030 with project conditions with the exception of the following intersections,
resulting in a significant impact requiring mitigation(DEIR pp. 4.4-42):
• La Cadena Drive/Barton Road;
• I-215 Southbound Ramps/Barton Road;
• Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road; and
• Mount Vernon Avenue/Main Street.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.4A through 4.4.6.31) will reduce the
Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and Level of Service Impacts to a less
than significant level.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4A As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Development Unit 5, the applicant or their designee shall pay the appropriate Traffic Signal
Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees in accordance with Sections 4.104.030 and
4.104.040 of the Grand Terrace Municipal Code.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.411 As a condition of issuance of a building permit for any portion of
Development Unit 5, the project applicant or their designee shall implement Mitigation
Measures 4.4.6.1A,4.4.6.1E,and 4.4.6.3C,if not already completed.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4C The following improvements have been identified in the TIA as
necessary to mitigate traffic impacts of Development Units 1 through 5:
(i) Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road:Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road: Widen and/or
restripe Mount Vernon Avenue to provide a second southbound left-turn lane and an
exclusive southbound right-turn lane and to provide a second northbound left-turn lane
and an exclusive right-turn lane. Widen and/or restripe Barton Road to provide an
exclusive eastbound right-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal and install a
northbound right-turn overlap phase. The exclusive northbound right-turn lane and the
exclusive eastbound right-turn lane are covered under the City's current Circulation
Improvement Fee, while a portion of the traffic signal modification costs are covered
under the City's current Traffic Signal Improvement Fee. The payment of Traffic Signal
Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees will partially satisfy the applicant's
responsibility for these improvements.
The applicant or their designee of Development Unit 5 shall be responsible for the cost of
an assessment study to determine the applicant's or their designee's fair share of the
improvement costs. If the assessment study finds that the northbound left-turn lane is not
Page 20 of 41
feasible, the City shall identify alternative improvement(s) that may be substituted. The
assessment study for these improvement(s) may be included in the assessment study
required in Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.1E(i). Such fair share will be calculated and paid
to the City as a condition of issuance of the first building permit for Development Unit 5
construction
(ii) La Cadena Drive/Barton Road: Widen and/or restripe Barton Road to provide a second
westbound left-turn lane. Modify the existing traffic signal and install a northbound right-
turn overlap phasing. Upon application for a building permit for any portion of
Development Unit 5,the applicant or their designee shall contribute its fair share of the cost
for these improvements, based on a study to be prepared at the applicant's or their
designee's expense, and which is subject to review and approval by the City.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4D Unless already completed prior to Development Unit 5 and
provided that Commerce Way extension has been constructed, the applicant or their designee
shall be responsible at its sole expense for the following driveway improvement at Commerce
Way at Driveway No. 5: The final signing and striping plan of the Commerce Way Extension at
Driveway No. 5 shall be designed to include single 60-f6ot northbound and southbound left-turn
lanes to accommodate projected traffic volumes and storage requirements. These left-turn lanes
shall be within the proposed two-way left-turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches of
Driveway No. 5 shall provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes with an exclusive left-
turn lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. The outbound lanes shall be designed to
accommodate a queue of at least five vehicles or approximately 110 feet from the back of the
sidewalk. If these improvements have been completed prior to Development Unit 5, the applicant
or their designee shall pay its fair share of the improvements based on the costs of the
improvements.
Implementation of these mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace adopts and incorporates these mitigation measures into the Project. These mitigation measures
would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: As shown in Table 4.4.I of the DEIR (DEIR pp.4.4-49) with the
exception of the intersection of Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road, implementation of the
mitigation measures would maintain the minimum level of service standards for the 2030 with
project study area intersections and impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level for
all remaining intersections. Due to physical roadway constraints, there is no feasible mitigation
over and above the mitigation measure identified for the intersection of Mount Vernon
Avenue/Barton Road to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, which will be discussed
further in Section 7 of this Resolution.
5. Design Features or Incompatible Uses: Proper signalization and signal sequencing to
facilitate roadway traffic flows, and adequate outbound queuing distances are required to minimize
ingress and egress hazards. Traffic movements at project driveways and internal circulation within the
project site may increase hazards in the form of unclear right-of-way and the addition of conflict points to
traveling motorists and pedestrians.This is a significant impact requiring mitigation.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.6A through 4.4.6.6D will reduce
potential impacts related to design features or incompatible uses to a less than significant level.
r Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.6A: Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy in
Development Unit 1,the project applicant shall construct the following traffic improvements:
Page 21 of 41
r • Barton Road at Driveway No. 1: Access shall be right-turn in/out only. A stop sign and
stop bar shall be installed at the project driveway. The driveway shall be designed to
accommodate an outbound queue of at least one vehicle or approximately 20 feet from the
back of the sidewalk.
• Barton Road at Driveway No. 2: The final signing and striping plan of Barton Road at
Driveway No. 2 shall be designed to include a single 200-foot westbound left-turn lane
with a 90-foot transition and a single 60-foot eastbound left-turn lane with a 90-foot
transition to accommodate projected traffic volumes and storage requirements. Driveway
No. 2 shall provide two inbound lanes and two outbound lanes with an exclusive left-turn
lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. The two outbound lanes shall be designed to
accommodate a queue of 11 vehicles or approximately 242 feet from the back of the
sidewalk.A five-phase traffic signal shall be installed at this project driveway.
• Michigan Street at Driveway No. 4: Full access shall be permitted at this driveway. A stop
sign and stop bar shall be installed at the project driveway. The final signing and striping
plan of Michigan Street at Driveway No. 4 shall be designed to include a single 60-foot
southbound left-turn lane with a 90-foot transition to accommodate projected traffic
volumes and storage requirements. Driveway No. 4 at Michigan Street shall provide one
inbound lane and one outbound lane with a shared left turn/right-turn lane. The outbound
lane shall be designed to accommodate a queue of at least two vehicles or approximately 40
feet from the back of the sidewalk.
• Commerce Way/Michigan Street at Driveway No. S: Full access shall be permitted at this
driveway opposite existing Commerce Way. Interim access, prior to the extension of
Commerce Way, shall be controlled by a stop sign and stop bar installed at the project
driveway. The driveway shall be designed to accommodate an outbound queue of at least
two vehicles or approximately 40 feet from the back of the sidewalk.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.6B: Prior to finalization of the site plan for Development Units 1, 2,
and 3, a detailed truck access and circulation evaluation shall be prepared. Further, once a"truck
route"has been defined, it is recommended that the drive aisles be designed to a minimum width
of 30 feet to accommodate the turning requirements of large trucks. It is recommended that a
detailed on-site signing and striping plan, as well as a directional sign program be developed and
reviewed by the City of Grand Terrace to ensure vehicular conflicts are minimized at key internal
intersections of the site plan.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.6C: Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy in
Development Unit 3, the applicant shall be responsible at its sole expense for the following
driveway improvement at Barton Road and Driveway No. 3: Access shall be right-turn in/out
only. A stop sign and stop bar shall be installed at the project driveway. The driveway shall be
designed to accommodate an outbound queue of at least two vehicles or approximately 40 feet
from the back of the sidewalk.Deceleration lanes may be required for Project Driveway No. 3, as
determined by required engineering studies.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.6D: Prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy in Development
Unit 4, should it precede construction of the Commerce Way extension from Michigan Street to Barton
Road, the applicant or their designee shall be responsible at its sole expense for the following driveway
improvement at Commerce Way at Driveway No. 5: The final signing and striping plan of the Commerce
Way Extension at Driveway No. 5 shall be designed to include single 60-foot northbound and southbound
left-turn lanes to accommodate projected traffic volumes and storage requirements. These left-turn lanes
Page 22 of 41
shall be within the proposed two-way left-turn lane. The eastbound and westbound approaches of
Driveway No. 5 shall provide one inbound lane and two outbound lanes with an exclusive left-turn lane
and a shared through/right-turn lane. The outbound lanes shall be designed to accommodate a queue of at
least five vehicles or approximately 110 feet from the back of the sidewalk. If Commerce Way is
constructed, or designed and funded, prior to approval of Development Unit 4, the outbound lanes shall
be designed to accommodate traffic queuing appropriate to the project and traffic control at Driveway No.
5, as determined by the City Engineer.
Implementation of these mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand
Terrace adopts and incorporates these mitigation measures into the Project. These mitigation measures
would reduce the impacts to a less than significant level.
Supporting Explanation: Project parking areas and circulation features would be designed and
constructed to satisfy City requirements, including proper signalization and signal sequencing to
facilitate roadway traffic flows. The design of all roadways and intersections within the Project
site would incorporate design standards identified by the City and tailored specifically to site
access requirements. Paved walkways would be provided throughout the project and would
incorporate appropriate handicapped access features. The project would not create a hazard or
barrier for pedestrians or bicyclists. Compliance with City design standards identified in the
BRSP for these features would ensure no impact related to this issue would occur. Adherence to
Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.6A through 4.4.6.6D would reduce impacts associated with this
issue to a less than significant level.
SECTION 7
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AFTER
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION MEASURES
The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace finds that the following environmental impacts identified
in the Final EIR will have a significant impact on the environment and that even with the adoption and
implementation of mitigation measures,this impact will remain significant, as summarized below.
A.Air Quality
1. Long-term Project-Related Emissions Impacts: Long-term air pollutant emission impacts
resulting from the Project are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources (e.g. emissions
from landscape maintenance activities and other facility maintenance operations and the use of motor
vehicles by project-generated traffic). While the project will be implemented in five phases, for the
purposes of analysis, the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared for the Project assumed that the Project would
be implemented in three phases. When completed, the project would generate a total of 8,346 daily trips.
The air quality analysis assesses the mobile source emissions generated by vehicles driving to and from
the Project site and area source emissions generated by Project maintenance operations. As identified in
Table 4.LP of the DEIR, emissions from the project-related mobile sources would exceed the thresholds
for CO and NOx based on emission factors for the year of operation. Therefore, Project related long-term
air quality impacts would be significant and mitigation measures are required(DEIR 4.1-57).
Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce long-term
operational emissions of CO and NOx.
Supporting Explanation: Because it is not known what type of on-site equipment will be used,
�_. it is not possible to quantify the reduction in the amount of emissions that may occur. As such,no
Page 23 of 41
—� additional reduction in operational emissions was taken. Considering the volume of emissions
generated and current commuter habits, it is unlikely the implementation of Transportation
Demand Management/Transportation Control Measures would result in a reduction of operational
project emissions to below existing SCAQMD thresholds. No other feasible mitigation measures
have been identified to reduce the operational emissions of CO and NOx to a less than significant
level, and thresholds will continue to be exceeded. The project site is located in a non attainment
air basin for criteria pollutants and Project generated emissions would contribute to the
continuation of non attainment status in the Basin. In the absence of mitigation to reduce the
Project's contribution of CO and NOx emissions to below SCAQMD thresholds, potential long-
term air quality impacts resulting from the operation of the Project will remain significant and
unavoidable.
2. Localized Operational Emissions. The primary emissions from operational activities include
NOx ,CO, PMIo, and PM2.5 from stationary sources and/or on-site mobile equipment. As indicated in
Table 4.1.Q of the DEIR, operational emission rates for PMIo exceed the LST thresholds at 25 meters,
resulting in a significant impact requiring mitigation(DEIR 4.1-58).
Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce long-term
operational emissions of PMIo•
Supporting Explanation: It is not known what type of on-site equipment will be used during
Project operation; therefore it is not possible to quantify the reduction in the amount of emissions
that may occur. Thus, no additional reduction in operational emissions were taken. No other
feasible mitigation measures have been identified to reduce the localized operational emissions of
PMIo to a less than significant level, and operational emissions will continue to exceed thresholds.
The project site is located in a non attainment air basin for criteria pollutants and localized Project
generated emissions would contribute to the continuation of non attainment status in the Basin. In
the absence of mitigation to reduce the Project's contribution of PMIo emissions to below
SCAQMD thresholds,potential long-term air quality impacts resulting from the operation of the
Project will remain significant and unavoidable.
3. CumulativeImpacts
a. Long-term Regional Air Quality Impacts.The Project would exceed emission
standards for CO and NOx and would contribute to long-term regional air pollutants despite
implementation of mitigation measures. Because the Basin is in a non attainment for PMIo,PM2.5,
and ozone at the present time, the operation of the Project would exacerbate and contribute to
adverse cumulative air quality impacts. Implementation of the Proposed project would
unavoidably contribute to significant long-term cumulative air quality impacts.
b. Climate Change Impacts.It is not possible to determine whether the Project
individually will have a significant impact on global warming or climate change; however, it will
contribute to cumulative greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in California. The proposed project
would contribute approximately 0.002 percent of California's 2004 total emissions for carbon
dioxide,methane, and nitrous oxide (492 Tg CO2 Eq).Mitigation Measure 4.1.5.10A will likely
reduce the Project's emissions of GHG's;-however, without the necessary science and analytical
tools, it is not possible to determine with certainty whether the Project's emissions of GHG"s will
be cumulatively considerable, within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15065(a)(3) and
15130.Given the findings of AB 32, of SB 97 and the requirements of CEQA, the Lead Agency
\ must determine whether a project will or will not have a cumulatively considerable contribution.
With implementation of the strategies and programs described in Chapter 4.1 of the DEIR, the
Page 24 of 41
-� Project is consistent with the strategies to reduce California's emissions to the levels proposed in
Executive Order S-3-05. However, given the uncertainty of data and appropriate methodology to
accurately analyze, and the inability to quantify the reduction achieved through implementation
of strategies and programs previously identified, the Project's GHG emission contribution would
result in a cumulative impact regarding global climate change and the cumulative impacts of the
proposed project on global climate change are considered to be significant and unavoidable.
B.Traffic/Circulation
1. Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Freeway) Traffic and Level of Service Impacts:
Design Features or Incompatible Uses: Both northbound and southbound directions of I-215 between
SR-60 and Orange Show Road/Auto Plaza Drive, encompassing seven study freeway segments, will
operate at an unacceptable level of service (LOS F) without improvements for year 2030 traffic
conditions with Project traffic during the p.m. peak hour (DEIR pp. 4.4-49). This results in a significant
impact.
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.5A will reduce potential impacts under
Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Freeway); however, this impact remains significant and
unavoidable.
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.5A: Upon the establishment of a regional fee program, the City shall
work with SANBAG and Caltrans to determine the appropriate fair share contribution for
Development Units 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 for the construction of the recommended freeway
improvements on I-215 and the fair-share contribution shall be held in trust by the entity
identified in the fee program. The Project's fair share costs shall be based on the Project's
contribution to total trips for the affected locations. If, within five years of the date of collection
of Developer's fair-share contribution, the contribution has not been used then the Developer's
fair-share contribution shall be returned to the Developer.
Implementation of this mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
adopts and incorporates this mitigation measure into the Project. However, even with incorporation of
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.5A,this impact remains significant.
Supporting Explanation: With the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.5A and
associated freeway segment improvements discussed in the DEIR (DEIR pp. 4.4-50), the
minimum level of service standards would be maintained for the 2030 with project study area
freeway segments. Although the addition of an HOV lane plus three or four mixed-flow lanes
would result in acceptable levels of service, the SCAG RTIP currently calls for the addition of
one HOV lane and one mixed-flow lane in each direction on I-215 from the SR-60/SR-91/I-215
interchange in Riverside to the Orange Show Road interchange in San Bernardino. Further,
preliminary engineering and environmental analysis of this RTIP freeway mainline project is
currently underway in a coordinated effort involving the FHWA, Caltrans, SANBAG,ROTC, and
the affected local counties and cities. Although the SCAG RFTP currently shows one HOV lane
and one mixed-flow lane in each direction, the freeway mainline project has been modified to
include the addition of one HOV lane in each direction (and no mixed-flow lane) by year 2015,
with plans for an additional mixed-flow lane removed .from consideration. Given the current
efforts by these agencies to add an HOV lane in each direction by year 2015 together with the
elimination of plans to add a mixed-flow lane each way, it is unlikely that three to four mixed-
flow lanes will be planned and programmed by year 2030. For these reasons, impacts to freeway
mainline lanes would remain significant and unavoidable for all identified segments.
Page 25 of 41
2. Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road Intersection: The DEIR determined that the
intersection of Barton Road/Mount Vernon Avenue is projected to operate at unsatisfactory levels of
service under year 2030 with project,resulting in a significant impact requiring mitigation(DE1R pp. 4.4-
42):
Finding: Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4.6.4C(i) will reduce potential impacts
under Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Intersection); however, the impact remains significant
and unavoidable:
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4C(i): : Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road: Widen and/or restripe
Mount Vernon Avenue to provide a second southbound left-turn lane and an exclusive
southbound right-turn lane and to provide a second northbound left-turn lane and an exclusive
right-turn lane. Widen and/or restripe Barton Road to provide an exclusive eastbound right-turn
lane. Modify the existing traffic signal and install a northbound right-turn overlap phase. The
exclusive northbound right-turn lane and the exclusive eastbound right-turn lane are covered
under the City's current Circulation Improvement Fee, while a portion of the traffic signal
modification costs are covered under the City's current Traffic Signal Improvement Fee. The
payment of Traffic Signal Improvement and Circulation Improvement Fees will partially satisfy
the applicant's responsibility for these improvements
Implementation of this mitigation measures is feasible, and the City Council of the City of Grand Terrace
adopts and incorporates this mitigation measure into the Project. However, even with incorporation of
Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4C(i),this impact remains significant and unavoidable.
Supporting Explanation: Due to physical roadway constraints, there is no feasible mitigation
1 over and above Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4C(i)to reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Therefore, the addition of project.traffic to the year 2030 baseline scenario, would cumulatively
contribute to LOS deficiencies at the intersection of Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road
resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Although, it should be noted that the LOS
deficiencies experienced at the Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection would also occur
during the 2030 baseline scenario and that Mitigation Measure 4.4.6.4(i)would improve the LOS
at this location when compared to the baseline scenario, the improvement would not result in
maintaining the City's adopted LOS standard, and this remains a significant impact.
SECTION 8
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Cumulative impacts refer to one or more individual effects which considered together compelled or
increase the environmental impact of the Project. State CEQA Guidelines require a discussion of the
Cumulative impacts of a Project "when the Projects incremental effects are cumulatively considerable."
For example, when the incremental effects of an individual 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. The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace finds and determines that the
discussion of cumulative impacts in the Final EIR provides adequate and sufficient discussion of the
cumulative impacts of the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130. Cumulative impacts are
discussed in Chapters 2.0, 4.0 and in 5.0 of the EIR. The City Council further finds that the cumulative
impacts addressed would be less than significant, as set forth in Section 5 herein, or mitigated to a less
than significant level by incorporation of mitigation measures into the Project, as set forth in Section 6
herein, with the exception of the following environmental impacts that remain significant even with the
implementation of mitigation measures as set forth in Section 7 herein: Air Quality; (long-term Project
Page 26 of 41
related emissions and cumulative air emissions-failure to meet State and Federal ambient air quality
standards).
While on a project-level, no global climate change impact would occur, the Project will contribute to
cumulative greenhouse gas emissions in California. However, without the necessary science and
analytical tools, it is not possible to determine with certainty, whether the Project's emissions of
greenhouse gases will be cumulatively considerable, within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines Sections
15065(a)(3) and 15130. The CARB is currently in the process of designing regulations to monitor, limit,
and ultimately reduce California greenhouse gas emissions but there are as yet no clear standards for
assessing the significance of cumulative impacts from projects. Given the findings of AB 32 and the
requirements of CEQA, the lead agency must determine whether a project will or will not have a
cumulatively considerable contribution. Due to the lack of guidance for determining the significance of
cumulative impacts to climate change from projects, and out of an overabundance of caution,the effect of
0.013 Tg CO2 Eq is considered cumulatively considerable (Draft EIR p 4.1-60). This determination is
based upon a lack of clear scientific and regulatory criteria for determining the level of significance of the
Project's contribution to global climate change.
At this time, it is unknown if global warming can be reversed through the use of greener technology,
economic regulations and social practices. Project-related COZ emissions and their contribution to global
climate change impacts in the State of California are less than significant and less than cumulatively
considerable because the project's impacts alone would not cause or significantly contribute to global
climate change.
SECTION 9
SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
Determining whether the Project may result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of
whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed in such a way that there would be little possibility
of restoring them. The Project would permanently alter the 21-acre site by converting an area that is
primarily vacant to urban uses.No significant cultural,mineral, or scenic resources were identified within
the Project limits; therefore, no significant impacts related to these issues would result from development
of the Project. While the project site does contain a historic-period (i.e., pre- 1957) residence, this
residence is ineligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) or the
California Register of Historic Places (California Register).Therefore,this residence does not constitute a
historic resource pursuant to CEQA. (However, unrecorded resource will be documented and evaluated
on the Department of Parks and Recreation(DPR) Form 523.) Because this residence does not constitute
a historic resource,no significant irreversible environmental change would occur(DEIR pp. 5-2).
Natural resources in the form of common building materials (e.g., lumber, concrete, aggregate,
iron/steel/other metals, and vehicle fuel/petroleum-based products) would be utilized in the construction
of the proposed project, while energy resources in the form of electricity and natural gas would be used
during the long-term operation of the project. These resources are generally available within the region;
thus, the use of these resources is not expected to negatively impact their availability. The Project is
consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation indicating that growth has been anticipated
by the City. Further, the proposed project would be required to comply with the updated Title 24
standards for building construction. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the
requirements of Mitigation Measure 4.1.5.10A, including measures to incorporate energy-efficient
building design features(DEIR pp. 5-2).
Page 27 of 41
- SECTION 10
GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS
CEQA requires a discussion of ways in which the Project could be growth inducing specifically Section
15126.2(d) of State CEQA Guidelines states that EIRs must describe the ways in which the Project could
foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional 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.
The Project would develop approximately 210,000 square feet of commercial and retail uses on 21-acres
of land that is primarily vacant. There is no residential component to the Project. The proposed project
site is located within the City's primary commercial corridor and is planned for commercial uses in
accordance with the General Plan and Barton Road Specific Plan. Streets, water and sewer utilities, and
municipal services already exist in the adjacent roadways and would be extended to the site to serve the
proposed Project. The proposed project does not provide infrastructure or service capacity to
accommodate growth beyond the levels currently permitted by the General Plan(DEIR pp. 5-3).
Construction of the proposed project will create short-term construction jobs. These short-term positions
are anticipated to be filled by workers who, for the most part, reside in the project area; therefore,
construction of the proposed project will not generate a permanent increase in population within the
project area. Implementation of the proposed project would provide approximately 208 permanent
employment opportunities to the existing population and would serve future population growth. Given the
fact that the City and the County are considered to be jobs-poor regions, it is expected that the short-term
construction jobs and long-term jobs-created by the proposed project will be filled by current local
residents; therefore, there would be little migration to the area and, consequently, little effect on local
population size(DEIR pp. 5-3-5-4).
SECTION 11
CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL AND REGIONAL PLANS
A. Grand Terrace General Plan. Implementation of the Project will result in the construction of up
to a 209,611 square foot neighborhood commercial center within a 21 acre site. The General Plan states
that the General Commercial'designation provides for general commercial uses to serve the retail and
service needs of the community. The proposed TSMDP is a neighborhood commercial center and its
anticipated land uses(i.e., commercial,retail, grocery market,retail, food services) are consistent with the
General Commercial Land Use designation. As such, the Project is consistent with the General Plan Land
Use designated of General Commercial
The Project complies with Land Use Element goals and polices to provide a wide range of retail, service
commercial, and employment opportunities; continued development of established commercial areas, and
the incorporation of increased setbacks, walls and landscaping between commercial projects and other
areas to reduce potential land use incompatibility. It is consistent with the Circulation Element requiring
preparation of a traffic analysis prepared in accordance with SANBAG Congestion Management Program
(CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines and requiring that peak hour level of service "D" be
maintained, and with policies because sufficient off street parking, bicycle racks and trellised pedestrian
walkways will be provided. The Project complies with the Open Space and Conservation Element
because mitigation measures have been incorporated requiring conservation of energy resources in
r' building design of Development Unit 1, and the Project will be required to meet federal, state and local
regulations governing grading, erosion control, water quality, and cultural resources. It complies with
Page 28 of 41
Noise Element goals, policies and actions calling for adherence to the Noise Ordinance during
construction activities, and preparation of a noise study during the CEQA process to determine potential
impacts that could be generated by the Project. Public services are being provided as required by the
Public Services Element, and the Project meets several goals polices and actions contained in the
Sustainable Development Element calling for energy conservation, recycling, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.
B. Barton Road Specific Plan ("BRSP"). The Project site is zoned BRSP-General Commercial,
and located within Planning Area 1 of the BRSP requiring the preparation of a master development Plan.
The Project is consistent with the BRSP because it establishes the TSMDP which is made of up five
Development Units with five corresponding phases. The TSMDP establishes the development standards
and uses for the site, and it is consistent with the standards of the BRSP, and Title 18 of the Municipal
Code.Therefore,the project is consistent with the provisions of the BRSP.
C. Regional Plans.
1. Southern California Association of Governments("SCAG")Plans and Policies
a. Regional Comprehensive Plan ("RCP"). The 2008 RCP serves as a framework to guide
decision-making with respect to the growth and changes that can be anticipated in the region. The RCP is
an advisory plan that addresses regional issues such as housing, traffic/transportation, water, and air
quality, and provides voluntary practices to approach growth and infrastructure challenges in a an
integrated manner within the region.
The Project is consistent with the Land Use and Housing Chapter of the RCP to focus growth in
emerging centers along major transportation corridors, creating walkable communities within walking
distance of existing and planned transit stations, and building new business on vacant or redeveloping
lots. At build-out of the Project, the Project will result in the development of a neighborhood commercial
center over 21 acres located along the Barton Road corridor, one of the City's main transportation
corridors in proximity to I-215 and in proximity to existing housing which allows for pedestrian and
bicycle connectivity. Further, the Project will create up 208 new jobs improving the City's current jobs to
housing balance.
The Project is consistent with the Open Space and Housing Chapter of the RCP OS/Habitat to encourage
development that reduces costs on infrastructure and makes better use of existing facilities that promotes
infill and re-development, and water efficient development. The Project is proposed within the City's
identified commercial corridor, and all infrastructure is readily available resulting in a minimal need for
new infrastructure. The Project will promote infill development and re-development of land because the
site is located in the City's planned commercial corridor, and the TSMDP will guide build-out of the
approximately 21-acre site over time. Proposed uses will be subject to Title 24 and California Plumbing
Code regulations requiring the use of water saving devices. Additionally, the Project is subject to the
State's Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance which requires the use of water efficient landscaping
materials.
The project is consistent with the Water Chapter of the RCP.to encourage development that make
use of existing facilities prior to incurring new infrastructure costs, and that reduces the use of water.
Proposed uses will be subject to Title 24 and California Plumbing Code regulations requiring the use of
water saving devices. Additionally, the Project is subject to the State's Model Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance which requires the use of water efficient landscaping materials.
Page 29 of 41
The Project is consistent with the Energy Chapter of the RCP that Projects use resources
\_ efficiently, eliminate pollution and waste,promote public and alternative transportation, conserve energy,
incorporate green building measures, exceed Title 24 energy efficiency, utilize light colored roofs, and
other mechanisms to efficiently use and conserve energy because it would result in development of
employment and shopping opportunities in proximity to existing housing. The Project design will include
sidewalks, pedestrian access and bikeways along Barton Road and Michigan Street increasing alternative
transportation opportunities, and will connect to existing infrastructure.The energy use analysis contained
in Section 4.1.5.10 (DEIR pp. 4.1-50) includes strategies for conserving energy and efficient energy use;
and the Project includes the implementation of mitigation measures to promote green building measures.
The Project is consistent with the Solid Waste Chapter of the RCP which calls for the
incorporation of green measures to reduce construction and building lifetime wastes. Table 4.1.0 of the
DEIR (pp.4.1-54) list strategies that are considered to be greenhouse gas emission reduction strategies,
and which also include green building measures. These strategies are either part of the Project,required as
mitigation measures, or requirements under local or State ordinances.
The Project promotes the Transportation Chapter of the RCP to provide a more efficient
transportation system to better manage vehicle activity because the Project would result in the
development of employment and shopping opportunities in close proximity to housing. Additionally,
mitigation measures have been incorporated related to transportation improvements.
The Project promotes the Security and Emergency Preparedness Chapter to ensure transportation
safety, security and reliability. The Project has been designed in conformance with General Plan
Circulation policies to provide adequate and reliable transportation facilities. The goals and policies
identified in the City's General Plan are similar to those of the RCP that address mobility, traffic safety,
environmental concerns, and land use consistency as factors to identify existing traffic conditions and to
assess the future effects on area traffic patterns/flow. Further, the traffic impact analysis prepare for the
Project identified the necessary public and private improvements necessary for each phase of the Project
to ensure transportation safety and reliability.
The Project is consistent with the Economy Chapter of the RCP because the Project provides for
economic development within the City while being consistent with the City's and region's sustainability
goals.The ultimate development of a 210,000 square foot commercial center will allow the City to be
more self reliant through the provision of goods and services to residents and additional employment
opportunities. The addition of jobs supports the regional policy of attracting jobs to housing-rich
subregions and improving the City's jobs-to-housing ratio.
b. Regional Transportation Plan ("RTP"). The 2008 RTP contains a set of existing
socioeconomic projections used as the basis for the SCAG's transportation planning efforts. They include
projections of population, housing, and employment at the regional, county, subregional,jurisdictional,
Census tract, and transportation analysis zone levels, and takes into consideration the General Plans of the
local jurisdictions. The RTP includes policies and regulations set forth to ensure development within the
SCAG regional area is within planned and forecast socioeconomic projections.
The Project is being developed in conformance with the City's General Plan, which anticipates
the development of site as a neighborhood commercial center. Further, the General Plan contains goals
and policies that aim to minimize traffic congestion,provide adequate transportation facilities, and require
development to pay its share of costs As such, the Project is consistent with the RTP, which considered
the City's General Plan, and which resemble those of the RTP that address mobility, traffic safety,
t' environmental concerns, and land use consistency as the major traffic study factors to identify existing
traffic conditions and to assess the future effects on area traffic patterns/flow(DEIR pp. 5-13).
Page 30 of 41
c. Compass Growth Vision. The Compass Growth Vision plan provides a framework for local
{, and regional decision-making regarding growth,transportation, land use, and economic development.The
framework includes principles and a specific set of strategies intended to achieve and improve a quality of
life that promotes and sustains for future generations the region's mobility, livability, and prosperity. The
main objective of the Compass Growth Vision is to manage the forecast growth while improving future
living conditions for all people within the SCAG area,including live,work, and play activities.
Consistent with Compass Growth Vision principles, the Project allows consumers to obtain
household commodities in a single trip, thereby minimizing vehicle trip generation and will support the
prosperity of household wages by providing competitive prices of other retail and commercial sales
located primarily in the neighboring cities. Adjacent residential and commercial uses foster livability in
the community. Additionally, the Project will take advantage of existing infrastructure which is readily
available to serve the Project(DEIR pp. 5-14).
2. Other Regional and Local Plans
a. South Coast Air Quality Management District ("SCAQMD") Air Quality Management
Plan ("AQMP"). The current regional air quality management plan is the Final 2007 Air Quality
Management Plan (AQMP) adopted by the SCAQMD on June 1, 2007. The AQMP proposes policies and
measures currently contemplated by responsible agencies to achieve Federal standards for healthful air
quality in those areas under the jurisdiction of the AQMD, including the Basin. To assess the
environmental impacts as a result of new development accurately, environmental pollution and population
growth are projected by the SCAQMD in the AQMP for future scenarios. The AQMP projections are
based,in part, on the growth forecasts and General Plans from cities and counties located in the Basin.
The Project is being developed in conformance with the City's General Plan and Zoning Code
which anticipates the development of site as a neighborhood commercial center. As such, the Project is
consistent with the AQMP,which considered the City's General Plan and Zoning Code in its preparation.
The Project is located in the City's commercial corridor and abuts Barton Road, which accommodates
public transit service. In addition, the proposed retail commercial uses would be within walking distance
of existing and planned homes in the local vicinity, and generate approximately 208 jobs. It t is
reasonable that a large percentage of these jobs would be filled by persons already living within the City,
thereby improving the City's current jobs-to housing ratio. Projects that provide for walkability and
generate employment are consistent with the goals of the AQMP for reducing the emissions associated
with new development(DEIR pp.4.1-46)
b. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("RWQCB"), Basin Plan. The
RWQCB regulates the construction of subdivisions, commercial developments, industrial developments,
and roadways based upon the level of threat to water quality.
Any construction activity whose land disturbance activities exceed one acre must comply with the
statewide general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") permit for stormwater
discharges. Development of the site is in excess of one acre; therefore, the proposed project is required to
obtain an NPDES permit issued by the RWQCB. The Project's construction contractor will be required to
prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ("SWPPP") that identifies Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to limit the soil erosion during project construction along with a Notice of Intent to certify that
the applicant will comply with conditions in the statewide general NPDES permit. In addition to the
preparation of an SWPPP, the developer will be required to submit a project-specific Water Quality
Management Plan ("WQMP"). The WQMP will identify measures to treat and/or limit the post-
construction entry of contaminants into storm flows. Since the proposed project would adhere to these
Page 31 of 41
provisions of the NPDES permit, the project would be consistent with the Basin Plan of the Santa Ana
RWQCB (DEIR pp. 5-14).
SECTION 12
ALTERNATIVES
CEQA requires that an EIR evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives to a Project, or the
location of the Project,which:
1. Offer substantial environmental advantages over the Project Proposal,and
2. May be feasibly accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable amount of time
considering the economic, environmental, social, and technological factors involved.
An EIR must.only evaluate reasonable alternatives to a Project that could feasibly obtain most the
Project objectives, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. In all cases,the consideration
of the alternatives is to be judged against a rule of reason. The lead agency is not required to choose an
environmentally superior alternative identified in the EIR if the alternative does not provide substantial
advantages over the Project, and
A. Through the imposition of mitigation measures the environmental effects of the Project
can be reduced to an acceptable level; or
B. There are social, economic technical or other considerations that make the alternative
infeasible.
The State CEQA guidelines direct agencies to consider the feasibility of alternative locations. The DEIR
analyzed an alternative location for the Project located north of Van Buren Street,west of Michigan Street
and east of I-215, approximately 0.33 miles southwest of the project site. The objectives for the Project
are on page 3-12 of the DEIR (which are stated herein in Section 1). The following alternatives were
analyzed in the EIR.
A. Alternative 1—No Project Alternative
Description: Pursuant to CEQA (§15 126.6[e][2]), the No Project Alternative should discuss the
existing conditions at the time of Notice of Preparation is published and what would reasonably be
expected to occur, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community
services, in the foreseeable future. The Project site is currently zoned "General Commercial' within the
BRSP and designated by the General Plan for General Commercial uses. Given the goals and objectives
of the City of Grand Terrace and those identified in the BRSP, it is highly reasonable in the event the
Project were not approved,the site would be developed with some type of similar commercial use,subject
to the master development provisions of the BRSP. The type of uses permitted within the commercially
zoned property varies substantially, but with the No Project Alternative, development of a similar
commercial use and similar in size to the square footage of the TSMDP (up to approximately 209,611
square feet)is assumed.
Finding: The City Council finds that under the No Project Alternative, the Project site would be
developed with another master planned commercial development in accordance with the requirements of
the BRSP. All impacts of all environmental issues, including cumulative impacts, would be similar to
those associated with the Project.
Page 32 of 41
Supporting Explanation: The approximate 21-acre site is zoned BRSP-General Commercial and
has a General Commercial General Plan land use designation. The BRSP requires the establishment of
master development plan for the site. Therefore, were the project not approved it is reasonable to assume
that another project developer would develop the site with similar uses under the auspices of a master
development plan. Further, even if such developer proposed to only develop a portion of the 21-acre site,
a master development plan would still be required, and it would be subject to the same level of review.
Additionally, impacts of all environmental issues, including cumulative impacts, and the generation of
traffic, emissions,wastewater and solid waste, and water demand use.
The No Project Alternative would not preclude the subsequent development of the property nor
would it reduce or preclude environmental impacts associated with future development. Additionally, this
Alternative does not meet the project's objective of developing a commercial project that accommodates
large and small retailers offering a wide range of commercial goods or services. Therefore,the No Project
Alternative is rejected.
B. Alternative 2—Reduced Intensity Commercial Use
Description: Under this alternative, the project site would be developed with only the level of
development identified for Development Unit 1 of the Project, which includes approximately 75,899
square feet of retail and restaurant uses on approximately 7.5 acres. The remaining areas within the
project site would remain undeveloped. The commercial uses under the Reduced Intensity Commercial
Use Alternative would consist of a multi-tenant shopping center hosting one large anchor(40,000-50,000
square feet), one small shop (5,000-10,000 square feet), and two small pads(3,000-7,000 square feet).
_ Finding: The City Council finds that under the Reduced Intensity Commercial Use Alternative,
potential impacts associated with short-term construction-related air quality and noise impacts, would
remain similar to those identified with the Project. Impacts related to traffic operations would be
proportionally reduced in relation to the reduction in trip generation and long term air quality impacts and
impacts would remain less than significant. This Alternative would have reduced demands on public
services. Cultural resource impacts are reduced under this Alternative as it would reduce the area of
disturbance. This Alternative would decrease the amount of water needed to serve the project site, and
would reduce the amount of wastewater and solid waste that would be generated on site. Impacts to the
operation of local roadways and intersections would be proportionally reduced from that of the Project,
and would be mitigated to a less than significant level, with the exception of the Mount Vernon
Avenue/Barton Road intersection. Impacts to the Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection and to
freeway segments would remain significant and unavoidable.
Supporting Explanation: Because of the reduced project area under this alternative, short-term
construction impacts associated with emissions of the proposed project are less than significant. This
Alternative would generate approximately 35 percent of the daily vehicle trips than would be generated
by the Project. The volume of each operational pollutant emitted during operation of this Alternative
would be correspondingly reduced. The traffic increase under the Project did not contribute to CO
concentrations in excess of the state or federal standards, and neither will this Alternative. Although the
volume of pollutants emitted would be reduced, the long-term air quality impacts resulting from this
Alternative would still contribute criteria pollutants to an air basin that is in non-attainment for these
criteria pollutants, similar to the Project. Long-term operational air emissions associated with this
alternative would not exceed CO, ROG, NOx, PMIO, and PM2.5 thresholds based on emission factors for
2009 and 2010. Long-term air quality impacts are reduced to a less than significant level(DEIR pp.6-12).
This Alternative would result in a 65 percent reduction of daily traffic volumes. Daily traffic
-- volumes on nearby roads and intersections would be reduced in magnitude when compared to that of the
Page 33 of 41
Project. Although the volume of traffic is reduced under this alternative, impacts at nearby intersections
and roadway segments would still occur and would require mitigation. These impacts would be mitigated
to a less than significant level in a manner similar to those of the Project,with the exception of the Mount
Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection, which would be similarly significant and unavoidable. Despite
the identification of mitigation measures, freeway segments are not under the jurisdiction of the City and
cannot be guaranteed to be in place when development under this alternative would become operational.
Therefore, freeway segment traffic-related impacts would remain significant and unavoidable under this,
as well(DEIR pp. 6-16).
Due to the reduction in project area and project size under this Alternative the extent and duration
of construction activities are expected to be reduced resulting in lower construction noise. Additionally,
short term noise impacts related to construction and stationary noise would be reduced and be less than
significant. The reduction in project related traffic under this Alternative would result in an incremental
decrease in traffic noise.
This Alternative would generate approximately 35 percent of the daily trips of that associated
with the Project. Because project-related traffic under this Alternative is reduced by approximately 65
percent of that associated with the Project, it is reasonable to assume that future traffic volumes on local
roadways in the project vicinity would be correspondingly reduced. With this Alternative increases in
traffic-related noise would be lower due to a decreased contribution of future traffic volumes resulting in
a reduction of overall mobile source noise impacts within the area. Loading/Unloading activity noise,
parking lot noise, and mechanical ventilation noise would still occur under this Alternative in the same
approximate locations at similar levels to that of the Project. Therefore, noise impacts would remain less
than significant under this Alternative as well(DEIR pp. 6-15).
/ Similar to the Project, the Reduced Intensity Commercial Use Alternative would also require
water service from the local water district. This Alternative would use less water (9,780 gpd) than the
Project (27,123 gpd) due to the reduction in square footage (133,712 square feet), approximately 0.05
percent of the water purveyor's daily production. When compared to the Project, impacts associated with
water under the Reduced Intensity Commercial Use Alternative are reduced in magnitude and remain less
than significant(DEIR pp. 6-16).
The Reduced Intensity Commercial Alternative would generate approximately 6,072 gallons of
wastewater a day as opposed to the 16,800 gallons per day that the Project would generate. This decrease
in wastewater generation would result in a reduced impact on wastewater treatment facilities. The Project
would generate approximately 1,851 pounds of solid waster per day. Under this Alternative the amount of
solid waste generated would be approximately 668 pounds of solid waster per day; a daily reduction of
over 1,100 pounds. Similar to the Project, this Alternative would not impact solid waste facilities and
impacts remain the same.
Similar to the Project, the Reduced Intensity Commercial Alternative would contribute toward
long-term air quality operational emissions and increased traffic operations on local roadways and at local
intersections. Peak day construction-related air emissions would be emitted fewer days than that of the
proposed project due to the decreased area required for construction and reductions in cumulative traffic
in the project area would reduce this Alternative's cumulative contribution of several of the criteria
pollutants compared with the proposed project. Despite a reduction in the volume of air pollutants emitted
under this Alternative, several of the criteria pollutants would still contribute toward the creation of non-
attainment status air pollutant levels within the SCAQMD. This Alternative would result in a decrease in
the cumulative vehicle trips in the project area(compared with the proposed project),which would have a
corresponding effect on traffic operations on local roadways and at local intersections. Nonetheless, air
-- quality and traffic impacts resulting from this Alternative are cumulatively significant.
Page 34 of 41
r`\ C. Alternative 3—Office Park Use Alternative
Description: The Office Park Use Alternative considers the development of up to 209,611 square
feet of office uses within the Project limits. The construction of this Alternative on the Project site require
would also require the preparation of a master development plan in accordance with the BRSP prior to
development.All offices uses considered under this Alternative are permitted in the BRSP.
Finding: Under the Office Park Alternative, potential impacts associated with short-term
construction-related air quality and noise impacts would remain similar to those identified with the
Project. Impacts related to traffic operations would be proportionally reduced compared to the Project.
While the volume of pollutants emitted during operation of this Alternative would be reduced, long-term
air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Vehicle noise that may result under this
Alternative would be reduced from that identified for the proposed project. The development of this
Alternative would result in the creation of approximately 435 jobs, which may result in increase to the
City's population; however, this increase is consistent with local and regional growth projections. The
increase in population would increase the need of public services and recreation,beyond the Project. This
Alternative would increase the amount of water needed to serve the project site; it would also increase the
amount of wastewater and solid waste that would be generated. However, there is sufficient capacity at
these facilities and impacts would remain less than significant, similar to the Project. The reduction in
vehicle trips associated with this Alternative result in a proportional reduction in impacts to the operation
of local roadways and intersections and would be mitigated to a less than significant level, with the
exception of the Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection. Impacts to the Mount Vernon
Avenue/Barton Road intersection and to freeway ramps would remain significant and unavoidable. Under
this Alternative, the magnitude of impacts is reduced,but the level of significance does not change from
that identified for the Project.
Supporting Explanation: Given that the amount of land to be developed under this Alternative
would equal that of the Project, it is reasonable that a similar mix of equipment would operate during
earthmoving and construction activities. Peak daily construction emissions would be below SCAQMD
thresholds of significance for NOx, PM,o, PM2.5, CO, ROG, and SOx. Additionally, compliance with
SCAQMD rules would ensure fugitive dust emissions do not exceed established SCAQMD daily
thresholds. Construction emissions from the development of this Alternative would be similar to the
proposed project resulting in'a less than significant impact. Due to the nature of office uses, the Office
Park Alternative would generate 73 percent fewer trips than that of the Project, thereby reducing the
volume of each operational pollutant emitted during the operation of this Alternative. However, despite
this reduction, emissions of CO and NOX would continue to exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds.
When compared to the Project, impacts to air quality would be marginally increased in magnitude. The
long-term air quality impacts resulting from this Alternative would continue to be significant and
unavoidable(DEIR pp. 6-18).
Construction noise resulting from this Alternative.would be generally similar to the Project.
Short-term noise impacts resulting from construction would be similar and remain less than significant.
Parking lot noise and mechanical ventilation noise would still occur under this Alternative; however,
operational noise associated with this Alternative is reduced in magnitude, and remains less than
significant. Due to the nature of an office park use project generated traffic would be reduced by 73
percent than that generated by the Project, and traffic-related noise would be lower than those of the
Project due to a decreased contribution of future traffic volumes. When compared with the Project, this
Alternative's contribution to future traffic noise would be reduced, thereby reducing overall mobile
source noise impacts within the area. Similar to the Project, noise impacts remain less than significant
similar with this Alternative(DEIR pp. 6-20).
Page 35 of 41
As stated, this Alternative would result in a 73 percent reduction of daily traffic. Although the
magnitude of daily traffic, and traffic volumes on nearby roads and intersections would be reduced,
mitigation would still be required similar to that required by the Project. However, similar to the Project,
impacts to level of service at the intersection of Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road and freeway
segments (due to uncertainty of whether improvements would be in place when uses become operational)
would remain significant and unavoidable under this Alternative(DEIR pp. 6-21).
This Alternative would directly create up to 435 jobs, which may require the employment of
persons in specialized fields. Persons from outside of the area may be required to relocate to Grand
Terrace to fill positions in the office space, resulting in a population increase in the City. Assuming that
25 percent of the jobs are filled by new residents approximately 109 persons are assumed to relocate to
the City resulting in a potential population increase of 310 persons (109 households x 2.844 persons per
household). In comparison, the number of new residents would be greater than that identified for the
Project; however, this growth would be consistent with the population projections for the City. Although
this Alternative would generate a greater increase in population, impacts related to population and
housing would remain less than significant(DEIR pp. 6-20).
The Office Park Alternative would generate substantially greater amounts wastewater (31,441
gpd) and solid waste (3,872 lb/day) than that of the Project (16,800 gpd and 1,851 lb/day, respectively).
When compared to the Project the magnitude of wastewater and solid waste is greater; however, there is
sufficient capacity at the wastewater treatment facility and receiving landfills so that a less than
significant impact would be created, and impacts remain the same.
The magnitude of water demand to serve this Alternative is greater than the Project. This
Alternative is estimated to use 56,742 gpd, as opposed to that of the project (27,123 gpd). However, like
the Project, development under this Alternative would be required to obtain verification from the water
purveyor that water is available to serve the development, meet water purveyor water service
requirements, and comply with state requirements regarding the use of water efficient landscaping. While
the magnitude of the water usage and water treatment/conveyance facilities would be greater when
compared to the Project,impacts would remain less than significant(DEIR pp.6-22).
Because of the increase in population, this Alternative would also result in increased demands for
park services and recreation. It would also put greater demands on schools, parks, law enforcement and
fire service protection in magnitudes greater than the Project. Even though these demands are increased,
impacts remain less than significant.
This Alternative would not preclude environmental impacts associated with development of the
site. Rather it results in a greater magnitude of impacts associated with population and housing, water
consumption,wastewater and solid waste generation,public services and recreation than the Project being
considered.However,these impacts can be mitigated to levels of insignificance.This Alternative does not
meet the project's objective of developing a commercial project that accommodates large and small
retailers offering a wide range of commercial goods or services. Therefore, the Office Park Alternative is
rejected.
D. Alternative 4—Alternate Location/Off-Site Alternative
Description: The Alternative project site identified is located on approximately 21 acres north of
Van Buren Street, west of Michigan Street, and east of I-215, approximately 0.33 mile southwest of the
proposed project site. The off-site location is currently designated as "General Commercial" and is zoned
"Commercial Manufacturing" (CM). Permitted uses in the CM district include business support services,
\ communication services, public storage facilities, and other uses which are permitted in the C2 District;
Page 36 of 41
r therefore, the commercial Project would be consistent and permitted at this off site location. The Off-Site
Location Alternative would result in the same level of development as the proposed project and would
consist of 209,611 square feet of commercial uses encompassing a major retailer, smaller retail pads, and
small shops.
Finding: With this Alternative, long-term air quality operational impacts would remain
significant and unavoidable and would result in similar conditions as identified for the Project. Because of
the similarity of vehicle trips achieved under this Alternative, impacts to the operation of local roadways
and the number of intersections would be the same as identified for the proposed project and mitigated to
a less than significant level, with the exception of the Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection.
Similar to the project as well, impacts to freeway segments would remain significant and unavoidable as
well.
Because the Alternative does not fulfill the stated Project objectives,this Alternative is rejected as
infeasible.
Supporting Explanation: Under this Alternative the total amount of land to be graded would be
similar to that of the Project; and it is anticipated that a similar mix of equipment would operate during
earthmoving and construction activities on the project site. Peak daily construction emissions would be
below SCAQMD thresholds of significance for CO, ROCS, NOx, SO,,, PM,o, and PM2.5. Like the Project,
this Alternative would generate the same amount of daily vehicle trips (8,996). Since the same amount of
development would occur under the Off-Site Location Alternative as with the Project,the volume of each
operational pollutant emitted during operation of this Alternative would be the same as that identified for
the Project. CO hot spot conditions are anticipated to be similar to the Project because the alternate site is
in the same general area as the Project site and shares common roadways. The long-term air quality
impacts resulting from this Alternative would still contribute criteria pollutants to a non-attainment air
basin. Therefore, like the Project, long-term air quality impacts associated with this Alternative would
continue to be significant and unavoidable(DEIR pp. 6-24).
Because this Alternative would generate the same amount of vehicle daily trips as the Project
volumes on nearby roads and intersections would be similarly affected. Impacts to LOS at nearby
intersections and roadway segments would still occur and would require mitigation. While significant
traffic impacts may occur under the Off-Site Location Alternative, these impacts would be mitigated to a
less than significant level in a manner similar to those of the Project, with the exception of the Mount
Vernon Avenue/Barton Road intersection. Additionally, freeway segments are not under the jurisdiction
of the City and cannot be guaranteed to be in place when development under this Alternative would
become operational. Therefore,under this Alternative,impacts to the Mount Vernon Avenue/Barton Road
intersection and freeway segments remain significant and unavoidable(DEIR pp. 6-28).
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Alternate Location/Off Site Location Alternative would be
rejected in favor of the project as this Alternative would not reduce the significance of the impacts that
were identified for the Project.
SECTION 13
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace hereby declares that, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines
Section 15093, the City Council has balanced the benefits of the Project against any significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts in determining whether to approve the Project. If the benefits of the
Page 37 of 41
Project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, those impacts are considered
"acceptable."
The City Council hereby declares that the Final EIR has identified and discussed significant effects that
may occur as a result of the Project. With the implementation of the mitigation measures discussed in the
Draft EIR,these impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant except for the unavoidable and
significant impacts as discussed in Sections 7 and 8 herein(Air Quality-long-term area source and mobile
source air pollution emissions, localized operational emissions, and cumulative impacts as to failure to
meet State and federal ambient air quality standards for Ozone, PM10, and PM2.5, and global climate
change; and Traffic-Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Freeway) Traffic and Level of Service impacts,
and Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Intersection) Traffic and Level of Service Impacts at the
Intersection of Barton Road/Mount Vernon Avenue).
The City Council hereby declares that it has made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate
or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the Project.
The City Council hereby declares that to the extent any mitigation measures recommended to the
City are not incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions
on the Project that would prohibit the realization of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this
City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts.
The City Council further finds that except for the Project, all other alternatives set forth in the
Final EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of the Project objectives and/or
specific economic, social or other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh any environmental
benefits of the alternatives.
The City Council hereby declares that, having reduced the adverse significant environmental
effects of the Project, to the extent feasible by adopting the proposed mitigation measures, having
considered the entire administrative record on the Project and having weighed the benefits of the Project
against its unavoidable significant impacts after mitigation, the City Council has determined that the
social, economic and environmental benefits of the Project outweigh the potential unavoidable significant
impacts, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h), and render those potential significant
impacts acceptable based upon the following considerations:
1. The Project fulfills adopted General Plan Goals, Policies and Actions: The Project complies
with Land Use Element goals and polices to provide a wide range of retail, service
commercial, and employment opportunities; continued development of established
commercial areas, and the incorporation of increased setbacks, walls and landscaping
between commercial projects and other areas to reduce potential land use incompatibility. It
is consistent with the Circulation Element requiring preparation of a traffic analysis prepared
in accordance with SANBAG Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact
Analysis (TIA) Guidelines and requiring that peak hour level of service "D" be maintained,
and with policies because sufficient off street parking, bicycle racks and trellised pedestrian
walkways will be provided. The Project complies with the Open Space and Conservation
Element because mitigation measures have been incorporated requiring conservation of
energy resources in building design of Development Unit 1, and the Project will be required
to meet federal, state and local regulations governing grading, erosion control, water quality,
and cultural resources. It complies with Noise Element goals,policies and actions calling for
adherence to the Noise Ordinance during construction activities, and preparation of a noise
study during the CEQA process to determine potential impacts that could be generated by the
Project. Public services are being provided as required by the Public Services Element, and
Page 38 of 41
the Project meets several goals polices and actions contained in the Sustainable Development
Element calling for energy conservation,recycling,bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
2. The ultimate development of a commercial center on the primarily vacant 21-acre site will
result in the construction of approximately 209,000 square feet of commercial space,which in
turn will result in increase property tax values and generate increased sales tax revenues. The
increase of property tax and sales tax revenues will provide a social and economic benefit to
the City as these revenues will support the City's General Fund, which in turn supports City
programs and services that benefit the community.
3. The Southern California Association of Government has established a jobs-to-housing ratio
of 1.44 for the region,which means that to have a balanced jobs to housing ratio a jurisdiction
should have 1.44 jobs for every household. The City of Grand Terrace has a jobs-to-housing
ratio of 0.80, and is considered to be jobs poor. The Project will create approximately 208
permanent employment opportunities, which will have a positive social and economic effect
on the City's current jobs to housing ratio.
4. The improvement of the 21-acre master plan will result in an approximate 209,000 square
foot commercial center. The Project establishes site and architectural standards to ensure
architectural compatibility throughout the commercial center, and an integrated sign program
that complements the architectural theme, and designed in proportion to the commercial
center; thereby,providing a positive aesthetic effect in a highly visible corridor of the City.
The City Council hereby declares that the foregoing benefits provided to the public through
approval and implementation of the Project outweighs the identified significant adverse environmental
impacts of the Project that cannot be mitigated. The City Council finds that each of the Project benefits
outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in the Final SEIR and, therefore,
finds those impacts to be acceptable.
SECTION 14
CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City Council finds that it has reviewed and considered the FEIR in evaluating the Project,
that the FEIR is an accurate and objective statement that fully complies with CEQA, the CEQA
Guidelines and that the FEIR reflects the independent judgment of the City Council.
The City Council declares that no significant new impacts or information as defined by CEQA
Guidelines Section 15088.5 have been received by the City after the circulation of the DEIR that would
require recirculation. All of the information added to the FEIR merely clarifies, amplifies or makes
insignificant modifications to an already adequate EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b).
The City Council of the City of Grand Terrace hereby certifies the Final Environmental Impact
Report for the Grand Terrace Town Square Master Development Plan is adequate and complete in that it
addresses the environmental effects of the Project and fully complies with the requirements of CEQA,
CEQA Guidelines and City of Grand Terrace Local CEQA Guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act. The Final Environmental Impact Report is composed of:
a. The backup file material for the Project;
b. The Notice of Preparation;
Page 39 of 41
c. The Initial Study and the studies it relies upon;
d. The Draft Environmental Impact Report dated April 29, 2009;
e. The comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report and responses thereto;
f. The staff report for the public hearing before the City Council held on July 27,2010;
g. The minutes of the hearing and all documentary and other testimonial evidence submitted
thereat;
h. The Statement of Facts and Findings in support thereof, and
i. The Statement of Overriding Considerations.
A. Findings
1. CEQA Compliance: As the decision-making body for the Project, the City
Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Findings and supporting
documentation. The City Council determines that the Findings contain a complete and accurate reporting
of the environmental impacts and mitigation measures associated with the Project.The City Council finds
that the EIR was prepared in compliance with CEQA and that the City Council has complied with
CEQA's procedural and substantive requirements.
2. Independent Judgment of Lead Agency: The City retained the independent
consulting firm of LSA Associates, Inc. to prepare the EIR for the Project. The EIR was prepared under
- the supervision and directions of the City of Grand Terrace Community and Economic Development
Department staff. The City Council is the final decision making body for the entitlements listed below.
The City Council has received and reviewed the FEIR prior to certifying the FEIR and prior to making
any decision to approve or disapprove the Project.
Finding: The FEIR reflects the City's independent judgment. The City has exercised
independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its
own environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of the FEIR as well as reviewing,
analyzing and revising material prepared by the consultant.
3. Significant Unavoidable Impacts/Statement of Overriding Considerations:
The Project would have significant adverse impacts even following adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures which are required by the City Council. The following significant environmental impacts have
been identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report and would require mitigation but cannot be
mitigated to a level of insignificance as set forth in Sections 7 and 8 of these Findings: Air Quality-long-
term area source and mobile source air pollution emissions, localized operational emissions, and
cumulative impacts as to failure to meet State and federal ambient air quality standards for Ozone, PM10,
and PM2,5,and global climate change; and Traffic-Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Freeway) Traffic
and Level of Service impacts, and Year 2030 With Project Conditions (Intersection)Traffic and Level of
Service Impacts at the Intersection of Barton Road/Mount Vernon Avenue).The Project has eliminated or
substantially reduced environmental impacts where feasible as described in the Findings, and the City
Council determines that the remaining unavoidable significant adverse impacts are acceptable due to the
reasons set forth in the preceding Statement of Overriding Considerations.
�y
B. Conclusions:
Page 40 of 41
1. All potentially significant environmental impacts from implementation
of the Project have been identified in the FEIR and, with the implementation of the mitigation measures
defined herein and set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (also referred to as the
Mitigation Monitoring and Compliance Program),will be mitigation to a less-than-significant level.
2. Other reasonable alternatives to the Project that could feasibly achieve
the basic objectives of the Project have been considered and rejected in favor of the Project.
3. Environmental, economic, social and other considerations and benefits
derived from the development of the Project override and make infeasible any alternatives to the Project
or further mitigation measures beyond those incorporated into the Project.
SECTION 15
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council hereby adopts a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program attached hereto as Exhibit A. In the event of inconsistencies between
the mitigation measures set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.
SECTION 16
RESOLUTION REGARDING CUSTODIAN OF RECORD
The documents and material that constitute the final record of proceedings on which these
Findings have been based are located at the City of Grand Terrace. The custodian for these records is the
City Clerk of the City of Grand Terrace. This information is provided in compliance with Public
Resources Code section 21081.6.
Page 41 of 41