RENAISSANCE EAST ADDENDUM TO THE RENAISSANCE SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT VOLUME 1 OF 2 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #

Transcription

1 RENAISSANCE EAST ADDENDUM TO THE RENAISSANCE SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT VOLUME 1 OF 2 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE # Prepared For: City of Rialto 150 South Palm Avenue Rialto, CA Prepared By: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 401 B Street, Suite 600 San Diego, California August 2017

2 This page intentionally left blank.

3 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME I 1 Purpose of the Addendum Description of Proposed Project Renaissance Specific Plan Environmental Impact Analysis Summary Renaissance East Project Environmental Impact Analysis and Project Approvals Determination of Appropriate CEQA Documentation Conclusion References LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Regional Location Map... 9 Figure 2: Project Vicinity Map Figure 3: Renaissance Specific Plan Area Figure 4: Site Plan Figure 5: Street Layout LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Parcel Summary... 5 Table 2: Parking Summary... 6 Table 3: Construction Emissions Without Mitigation Table 4: Construction Emissions With Mitigation Table 5: Maximum Daily Operational Emissions Table 6: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Construction Table 7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Operations with GHG Reductions and Mitigation Table 9: Topographic Map Summary Table 11: Existing Conditions Intersection Operations Table 12: Existing Conditions Roadway Operations Table 13: Existing Plus Growth Intersection Operations Table 14: Existing Plus Growth Roadway Operations Table 15: Existing Plus Growth Plus Project Intersection Operations Table 16: Existing Plus Growth Plus Project Roadway Operations Renaissance Specific Plan i Renaissance East

4 Table of Contents Table 17: Cumulative Without Project Intersection Operations Table 18: Cumulative Without Project Roadway Operations Table 19: Cumulative Plus Project Intersection Operations Table 20: Cumulative With Project Roadway Operations Table 21: Estimated Wastewater Generation Table 22: Solid Waste Generation TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME II LIST OF APPENDICES A. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program B. Air Quality Technical Report C. Biotic Resources Report D. Paleontological Resource Assessment Report E. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment F. Preliminary Drainage Report and Water Quality Management Report G. Noise Analysis G. Traffic Impact Study Renaissance Specific Plan ii Renaissance East

5 Purpose of the Addendum 1 PURPOSE OF THE ADDENDUM This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (California Public Resources Code [PRC] et seq.); the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] et seq.); and the rules, regulations, and procedures for implementing CEQA as set forth by the City of Rialto. Section 15164(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Pursuant to Section 15162(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is only required when: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) (B) (C) (D) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. The Renaissance Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) 1 (State Clearinghouse [SCH] No ) was prepared by the City of Rialto (City), acting as the Lead Agency, in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines to evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Renaissance Specific Plan (Specific Plan) Project inclusive of roadway and infrastructure requirements to support the Specific Plan. The Final EIR was certified and the Specific Plan Project was approved by the City Council on November 9, The Specific Plan area is 1,445.3 gross acres located within the northwestern portion of the City. It is planned as an integrated community of varied housing types located near, and linked to, places of employment, retail uses, services, and schools. 1 As set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, the Final EIR consists of the Draft EIR, comments received on and responses to comments on the Draft EIR, and any other information added by the Lead Agency. Renaissance Specific Plan 1 Renaissance East

6 Purpose of the Addendum The Specific Plan will accommodate 16.2 million square feet of business and commercial uses (inclusive of 835,200 square feet of already existing uses); 1,667 dwelling units; a school; a community park; and multiple neighborhood parks proximate to one another and organized in a grid pattern. Required infrastructure improvements were identified in the Specific Plan and their potential environmental impacts were evaluated as a part of the Specific Plan Project in the Final EIR. As addressed in the Final EIR, infrastructure improvements associated with the Specific Plan include circulation; water, wastewater and sewer systems; the storm water drainage system; and other utility systems. Ayala and 210 Partners, LLC (Applicant) is currently proposing the development of the Renaissance East Project. The Project would include the development of up to 79,048 square feet of commercial uses with the existing Renaissance Specific Plan. The proposed Renaissance East site (Project site) comprises the portion of Planning Area 29 within the Renaissance Specific Plan, in the northeast corner of the Plan Area. The Project site is located directly south of the SR-210 freeway, east of Ayala Drive, and directly north of Renaissance Parkway. Vehicular access for the Project site would consist of three full-movement driveways on Renaissance Parkway. All entrances to the site would be unsignalized. Additional Project components are discussed in Section 2, Description of the Proposed Project. The purpose of this Addendum is to analyze any potential differences between the impacts identified in the Final EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project. Pursuant to provisions of CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines, the City is the Lead Agency charged with the responsibility of deciding whether to approve development on the Project site. As part of its decision-making process, the City is required to review and consider whether the proposed Project would create new significant impacts or significant impacts that would be substantially more severe than those disclosed in the Final EIR. Additional CEQA review beyond this Addendum would only be triggered if the Project created new significant impacts or impacts that are more severe than those disclosed in the Final EIR used to approve the Specific Plan Project in To use an Addendum as the appropriate CEQA document for the proposed Project, the City must find that major revisions to the Final EIR are not necessary and that none of the conditions described in State CEQA Guidelines Section calling for the preparation of additional CEQA documentation has occurred. As detailed herein, the proposed Project would result in no new significant impacts that were not analyzed in the Final EIR, nor would the proposed Project cause a substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts. The potential impacts associated with proposed Project would either be the same or less than those described in the Final EIR. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the proposed Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the Final EIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section of the State CEQA Guidelines, this Addendum to the previously certified Final EIR is the appropriate environmental documentation for the proposed Project. In taking action on any of the approvals, the decision-making body must consider the whole of the data presented in the Final EIR and the previously adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), as augmented by this Addendum. It should be noted that the Renaissance Specific Plan Amendment Recirculated Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was prepared and circulated in September The SEIR was prepared to address potential environmental impacts associated with the Renaissance Specific Plan Amendment, which includes land use changes to the original Specific Plan. The Renaissance Specific Plan Renaissance Specific Plan 2 Renaissance East

7 Purpose of the Addendum Amendment did not include the entire original project boundary, and the proposed Renaissance East Project is outside of the boundaries of the Specific Plan Amendment. Thus, it is appropriate to tier off of the Renaissance Specific Plan EIR prepared in 2010 for the purposes of this Addendum. Renaissance Specific Plan 3 Renaissance East

8 Purpose of the Addendum This page intentionally left blank. Renaissance Specific Plan 4 Renaissance East

9 Description of Proposed Project 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT 2.1 Project Setting and Location The Project site is located within the northwestern area of the City of Rialto (City) in San Bernardino County. The 7.68-acre site is located on the northeast corner of Renaissance Parkway and Ayala Drive within the northeastern portion of the Renaissance Specific Plan. The SR-210 freeway is located directly north of the Project site. This Addendum to the Renaissance Specific Plan Final EIR (Final EIR) and the associated technical studies evaluate the potential impacts associated with the construction and operation of up to 79,948 fs of commercial uses. Figure 1: Regional Location Map and Figure 2: Project Vicinity Map, depict the site in a regional and local context, respectively. The Project site is designated as Renaissance Specific Plan in the City of Rialto General Plan, and is located within Planning Area 29 which has a Freeway Incubator (FI) land use designation in the Specific Plan as shown in Figure 4: Renaissance Specific Plan Area. The FI designation allows for larger retail and business uses that serve the region. Project site is comprised of vacant disturbed land. The site is relatively flat and the topography of the site slopes to the southwest. Site elevation is approximately 1,444 feet above mean sea level, and is comprised primarily of Tujunga gravelly loamy sand and is mostly void of vegetation. The site is bound to the north by former City of Rialto well and pump controls, and further north is the SR- 210 freeway. The site is bounded to the south by Renaissance Parkway and a large drainage basin. The site is bound to the east by a concrete lined flood control channel. Beyond the channel to the east are residences. The site is bound to the west by Ayala Parkway. A shopping center is currently under construction just west of Ayala Parkway. 2.2 Project Description The Project site is approximately 7.68 acres and will include the development of six parcels with six buildings for commercial uses; refer to Figure 3: Site Plan. Table 1: Parcel Summary, which identifies the parcel size, building size and tenant/use for each parcel. Table 1: Parcel Summary Parcel Number Parcel Size (square feet) Building Size (square feet) Tenant/Use Parcel 1: 99,785 10,486 Cracker Barrel Parcel 2: 38,215 2,720 Sonic Drive-In Parcel 3: 41,949 4,900 Multi-tenant with Drive Thru Parcel 4: 41,948 4,300 Multi-tenant Parcel 5: 30,147 4,800 Multi-tenant Parcel 6: 81,216 52, Room Hotel Total: 333,260 79,948 As shown in Table 1, two tenants are known at this time; Cracker Barrel Restaurant in Parcel 1 and Sonic Drive-In Restaurant in Parcel 2. Tenants for the remaining Parcels 4-6 have not been identified. However, it is anticipated that Parcel 3 would be developed as a multi-tenant building with a drive thru restaurant and patio seating. Parcels 4 and 5 would be developed for multi-tenant uses, such as small scale retail Renaissance Specific Plan 5 Renaissance East

10 Description of Proposed Project shops and/or restaurants. Both Parcels 4 and 5 would include patios. Parcel 6 would be developed for hotel purposes, with a maximum height of 4 stories and 108 rooms. The proposed Project would also require a Specific Plan Amendment to allow for a modification to landscape easements along Renaissance Parkway east of Ayala Drive. Upon approval of the associated Specific Plan Amendment, Renaissance Parkway east of Ayala Drive would no longer require a landscape easement and the parkway on the south side of Renaissance Parkway, east of Ayala Drive, would be reduced to a minimum of 5 feet. The Project would also include a street right of way vacation for Easton Street, an existing dedication located on the Project site. Easton Street was originally planned to traverse the parcels included in the proposed Project; however, due to the proximity of the Easton Street and Ayala Drive intersection and the SR-210 on-ramps, the path of Easton Street was previously modified and constructed to intersect with Ayala Drive southeast of the Project site Site Access Vehicular access for the Project site would consist of three full-movement driveways on Renaissance Parkway. All entrances to the site would be unsignalized. Signage would be located throughout the Project site for building identification purposes Parking All automobile parking would be provided on site. The Project site would provide 423 parking stalls for employees and visitors. The parking would be located throughout the Project site. The proposed Project would provide bike racks/spaces for 10% of the auto parking spaces, which is consistent with City requirements. Table 2: Parking Summary, identifies the number of parking stalls required by the City of Rialto and the number of parking stalls proposed by the Project. Table 2: Parking Summary Parcel Number Parking Stalls Provided Parking Stalls Required Parking Stalls Provided Above Requirements Parcel 1: Parcel 2: Parcel 3: Parcel 4: Parcel 5: Parcel 6: Total: The City requires 1 stall per 100 sf of restaurant uses, and 1 stall per 250 sf of multi-tenant uses. Using this calculation, and as shown in Table 2, the Project provides 43 excess parking stalls above City requirements Landscaping Landscaping will be included throughout the Project site, including within the parking lot areas. Landscaping will be included along Ayala Avenue and Renaissance Parkway. There will be no landscape easement on the north side of Renaissance Parkway east of Ayala Drive. The 10-foot landscaped easement on the south side of Renaissance Parkway would be reduced to a minimum of 5 feet east of Ayala Avenue. Additionally, a monument sign and associated landscaping would be placed at the corner of Ayala Avenue and Renaissance Parkway for the shopping center. The specific plan currently allows for a maximum sign height of 50 feet. The proposed Project would include the approval of a variance to allow for a pylon sign height of 80 feet above existing grade. Renaissance Specific Plan 6 Renaissance East

11 Description of Proposed Project Lighting Site lighting would be used to provide adequate lighting for circulation, safety, and security. The Project site assumes that night lighting would be provided seven days per week. Outdoor lighting for the parking areas would be provided consistent with the requirements set forth in the Specific Plan. Light poles would be a maximum of 30 feet above finished grade and enclosed within landscape planters in the passenger vehicle parking lot. Lighting levels would be a minimum of 1.0 foot-candle maintained across the surface of the parking areas. Additionally, a lighting plan is required by the City and would be submitted with construction plans Hours of Operation The hotel use is anticipated to be open 24-hours a day to accommodate travelers. The remaining restaurant and retail uses are anticipated to be open during standard business hours. However, Sonic Drive-In would be open until 1:00AM Infrastructure and Off-site Improvements Roadway improvements include dual left turn lanes, dual thru lanes, a bike lane, and a dedicated right turn lane to be constructed at the intersection of Ayala Avenue and Renaissance Parkway. Additionally, on West Renaissance Parkway, the road would be widened and designated to be a Major Arterial per the Renaissance Specific Plan, Amendment #1. Ayala Parkway will include two northbound lanes and two southbound lanes. Additionally, sidewalks, curbs, and gutters would be implemented along both Ayala Avenue and Renaissance Parkway refer to Figure 5: Street Layout. Existing sewer and water facilities are located within Ayala Drive and would be extended east along Renaissance Parkway to service the proposed Project. 2.3 Construction Schedule Construction of offsite improvements is anticipated to commence in January 2018 and require approximately 14 months to complete. Construction of the individual parcels would be commensurate with the sale of the parcels. It is anticipated that the sale of the first parcel would occur in Fall Project Approvals The City of Rialto is the Lead Agency as set forth in CEQA Section and is responsible for reviewing and approving the Addendum to the Renaissance Specific Plan Final EIR. The City will consider the following discretionary approvals for the Renaissance East Project: Specific Plan Amendment Master Precise Plan of Design (PPD) o o o o o o Site Specific PPD for Parcel 1 (10,486 restaurant building) Site Specific PPD for Parcel 2 (2,72 sf building with drive thru) Site Specific PPD for Parcel 3 (4,900 sf building with drive thru) Site Specific PPD for Parcel 4 (4,300 retail building) Site Specific PPD for Parcel 5 (4,800 multi-tenant building) Site Specific PPD for Parcel 6 (52,742 sf hotel) Conditional Development Permit (CDP) for Parcel 3 (4,900 sf building with drive thru) Renaissance Specific Plan 7 Renaissance East

12 Description of Proposed Project Conditional Development Permit for Parcel 6 (52,742 sf hotel) Tentative Map Variance for Sign Height Street Right of Way Vacation Additional permits may be required upon review of construction documents. Other permits required for the Project may include but are not limited to the issuance of encroachment permits for driveways, sidewalks, and utilities; security and parking area lighting; building permits; grading permits; construction water quality and air quality permits; and permits for new utility connections. Renaissance Specific Plan 8 Renaissance East

13 Project Site Rialto, CA Source: Google Maps, 2017 FIGURE 1: Regional Location Map Renaissance East Rialto, CA

14 210 SR-210 On-Ramp Ayala Dr Project Location W Renaissance Pkwy Source: Google Earth, 2017 FIGURE 2: Project Vicinity Renaissance East Rialto, CA

15 T T PARCEL 5 30,147 S.F. 5 MULTI-TENANT 4,800 S.F. 6 PROPOSED 4 STORY HOTEL 108 ROOMS PARCEL 4 41,948 S.F. 4 MULTI-TENANT 4,300 S.F. PARCEL 6 81,216 SF 1 PARCEL 3 41,949 S.F. 3 D/T THRU MULTI-TENANT 4,900 S.F. PARCEL 1 99,785 S.F. 2 PARCEL 2 38,215 S.F. (Easton St.) R e n a i s s a n c e P a r k w a y PARCEL SUMMARY PARCEL SIZE BUILDING SIZE STALLS PROVIDED STALLS REQ'D (Cracker Barrel) PARCEL 1: (Sonic) PARCEL 2: 99,785 SF 38,215 SF 10,486 SF 2,720 SF 132 STALLS 33 STALLS 105 STALLS 27 STALLS PARCEL 3: 41,949 SF 4,900 SF 47 STALLS 49 STALLS PARCEL 4: 41,948 SF 4,300 SF 52 STALLS 43 STALLS PARCEL 5: 30,147 SF 4,800 SF 50 STALLS 48 STALLS PARCEL 6: 81,216 SF 52,742 SF 109 STALLS 108 STALLS TOTAL: 333,260 SF 79,948 SF 423 STALLS 380 STALLS Fernando Acosta R.E. INC. Phone: SITE STUDY #16 RENAISSANCE EAST PARKING REQUIRED RESTAURANT: 1 PER 100 SQ. FT. MULTI TENANT: 1 PER 250 SQ. FT. NORTH DATE: PROJECT NUMBER: NEC AYALA AVE. & RENAISSANCE PARKWAY RIALTO, CA PLANNING ARCHITECTURE INTERIORS 3436 N. VERDUGO ROAD, SUITE 200, GLENDALE, CA P F FIGURE 3: Site Plan Renaissance East Rialto, CA

16 Palmetto Avenue Tamarind Avenue Alder Avenue Laurel Avenue Laurel Avenue Locust Avenue Maple Avenue Linden Avenue Fitzgerald Avenue Casmalia St 1 Freeway Incubator 22.5 ac.23 FAR 2a Employment 31.4 ac 630,200 SF.44 FAR 3 Freeway Incubator 14.4 ac.23 FAR 2b Employment 18.8 ac 433,370 SF.53 FAR 4a Employment 2.4 ac.4 FAR 4b Employment 7.3 ac 150,300 SF.47 FAR 4c Employment 161,300 SF 9.3 ac.4 FAR 5 Freeway Incubator 15.9 ac.23 FAR 4d Employment 428, ac.52 FAR 6 Employment 18.3 ac.4 FAR 7 Freeway Incubator 8.6 ac.23 FAR 8 Freeway Incubator 7.1 ac.23 FAR 9 Freeway Incubator 6.3 ac.23 FAR SR 210 SR 210 Easton Steet SR 210 LEGEND LEGEND Color Land Use Category AC FAR DU/AC DU Low Density Residential du/ac (Target 8) LDR Medium Density Residential du/ac (Target 12.5) MDR Medium High Density Residential du/ac (Target 16 ) MHDR High Density Residential du/ac (Target 25) HDR Town Town Center Center -.25 FAR 71.9 General General Commercial Commercial FAR Freeway Freeway Commercial FAR Freeway Incubator FAR Corporate Center -.30 FAR 26.7 Business Center -.5 FAR Employment-.4 FAR Schools Schools Utilities/Public Facilities12.9 Facilities Slope / Buffer 4.8 Public Park Public Park 45.9 Private Rec. Center Private Rec. Center 2.5 Commercial Overlay Commercial Overlay Employment Existing Uses Overlay to Remain (Existing uses as of April 2016) Existing Residential Uses Overlay to Employment Remain Overlay Residential Overlay Project Area/RSP Amendment Area Existing Jerry Eaves Park to Remain Source: Placeworks, 2015 Baseline Road 10 Freeway Commercial 21.6 ac.23 FAR 15 Employment 17.3 ac.4 FAR FIGURE 4: Renaissance Specific Plan Area Figure 3-4: Proposed RSP Plan Amendment Area Renaissance East Rialto, CA 16 Employment 8.2 ac.4 FAR 11 Freeway Commercial 10.4 ac.23 FAR 12 Utilities 4.6 ac 13 Employment 23.4 ac.4 FAR Walnut Street 14 Employment 26.9 ac.4 FAR 17 Employment 8.0 ac.4 FAR 18 Fwy Comm 2.3 ac.23 FAR 21 Fwy Comm 4.3 ac.23 FAR 22b Employ. 4.2 ac.4 FAR Miro Way 59 Bus. Ctr. 0.9 ac.3 FAR 19 Freeway Incubator 9.2 ac.23 FAR 23b Business Center 13.0 ac.5 FAR 65 Employment 743,000 SF 32.5 ac.52 FAR 66a Emp..7 ac.4 FAR 23a Employment 499,000 SF ac.32 FAR 105 Business Center 625,167 SF 35.4 ac.4 FAR 66b Util..7 ac 66c Emp. 1.5 ac.4 FAR 106 Utilities 1.8 ac 67 Employment 8.9 ac.4 FAR 68 Employment 7.1 ac.4 FAR 20 Corporate Center 13.4 ac.3 FAR 24 Business Center 928,000 SF ac.5 FAR 107 Business Center 1,093,440 SF 55.2 ac.45 FAR Renaissance Parkway 69 Employment 374,100 SF 18.4 ac.47 FAR 25 Util. 1.7 ac 100 Corporate Center 13.3 ac.25 FAR 102 Employment 18.6 ac.4 FAR 108 Business Center 4,000,000 SF ac.52 FAR 70 Employment 725, ac.47 FAR 103 Town Center 12.6 ac.23 FAR 71 Employment 763,600 SF 35.2 ac.49 FAR Renaissance Parkway 121 Util. 1.9 ac 113 LDR 23.3 ac 8 du/ac 186 du 125 Employment 3.0 ac.4 FAR 110 MHDR 19.8 ac 16 du/ac 317 du 116 MDR 15.3 ac 12.5 du/ac 191 du 75 Employment 10.9 ac.4 FAR 122 REC.5 Ac 112 REC.5 ac 126 Public Park 20.0 Ac 117 REC 1.5 ac 76 Comm 2.8 ac.25 FAR 111 Slope/Buffer 2.0 ac LEW DATE: = Town Center 523,314 SF 53.2 ac.23 FAR 114 MDR 13.9 ac 12.5 du/ac 174 du 118 LDR 24.2 ac 8 du/ ac 194 du 123 School 13.0 ac 78 Comm 3.4 ac.25 FAR Ayala Drive Employment 17.2 ac.4 FAR 79 Employ. 4.7 ac.4 FAR Town Center 65,724 SF 6.4 ac.24 FAR 115 HDR 8.0 ac 25 du/ac 200 du 119 Employment 4.2 ac.4 FAR Lieske Drive 124 Employment 5.5 ac.4 FAR 58 Utilities 2.3 ac 128 Public Park 4.6 ac 80 Employment 4.8 ac.4 FAR 29 Freeway Incubator 8.2 ac.23 FAR NOTES: 1. The boundaries of the land use designations are approximate and generally follow streets and property lines. Minor changes in boundary alignment and location are permissible as described in Section 6, Implementation. 2. The transfer of residential units and square footage in the Business Center land use categories is allowed as described in Section 6, Implementation. 3. If the school is relocated or if the school district chooses not to develop a school within Renaissance, then the underlying land use shall revert to the Medium High Density Residential (MHDR) land use designation and can accept the transfer of residential units from other areas of the Specific Plan, as described in Section 6, Implementation. 4. See city zoning code for nonconforming uses. 5. PA 132 will remain as an Employment Area with the option to become Low Density Residential. As Low Density Residential it will be calculated at 8 du/ac for a total of 23 dwelling units. 6. Existing uses noted based on approved square footage and FAR. Figure 2-2 Land Use Diagram "=400'

17 AYALA DRIVE W N RE E NC SA A IS Y WA RK PA SIGN LEGEND: TYPICAL SECTION LEGEND: TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL SECTION TYPICAL SECTION NORTH FIGURE 5: Street Layout Renaissance East Rialto, CA

18

19 Final EIR Analysis Summary 3 RENAISSANCE SPECIFIC PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY The Final EIR found the following to be significant unavoidable impacts: Air Quality: Construction and operational emissions; Air Quality: Inconsistency with Air Quality Management Plan; Air Quality: Cumulative air quality emissions; Noise: Cumulative and project level vehicular noise off site (permanent increase); Traffic: Freeway segments from project and cumulative traffic; Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Climate Change): Generation of GHG emissions; and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Climate Change): Conflict with applicable plans. The Final EIR found the following effects to be less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation: Air Quality: Exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (health risk); Biological Resources: Modification of Coastal California Gnatcatcher habitat; Biological Resources: Modification of San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat habitat; Biological Resources: Modification of Burrowing Owl habitat; Biological Resources: Construction during bird nesting season; Biological Resources: Riparian habitat; Cultural Resources: Damage to prehistoric archaeological resources; Cultural Resources: Damage to historic resources; Cultural Resources: Damage to paleontological resources; Geology and Soils: Exposure of persons or structures to seismic hazards; Geology and Soils: Erosion during construction; Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Removal and disposal of contaminated soils during construction; Hydrology and Water Quality: Storm water discharge requirements and water quality; Hydrology and Water Quality: Drainage facility capacity; Noise: Expose persons or generate noise levels in excess of established standards during construction and operations; Noise: Construction-related and operation-related groundborne vibration; Noise: Result in substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels; Noise: Result in substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels; Traffic: Conflict with the performance of the circulation system (cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to existing traffic load); and Traffic: Conflict with an applicable Congestion Management Plan (exceed, either individually or cumulatively, an established level of service). Renaissance Specific Plan 15 Renaissance East

20 Final EIR Analysis Summary Implementation of mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR would reduce potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. As applicable, mitigation measures in the Final EIR will be incorporated into the proposed Project. The Final EIR found that buildout of the Specific Plan would have a less than significant impact or no impact to the remaining topical areas evaluated in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. Renaissance Specific Plan 16 Renaissance East

21 4 RENAISSANCE EAST PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS AND PROJECT APPROVALS The scope of the City s review of the proposed Project is limited by provisions set forth in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. This review is limited to evaluating the environmental effects associated with the proposed Project to the Specific Plan Project as set forth in the Final EIR. This Addendum also reviews new information, if any, of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable due diligence at the time the Final EIR was certified. This evaluation includes a determination as to whether the changes proposed for the Project would result in any new significant impacts or a substantial increase in a previously identified significant impact. Although State CEQA Guidelines Section does not stipulate the format or content of an Addendum, the topical areas identified in the City of Rialto Environmental Checklist (Checklist) were used as guidance for this Addendum. This comparative analysis provides the City with the factual basis for determining whether any changes in the Project, any changes in circumstances, or any new information since the Final EIR was certified would require additional environmental review or preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Supplemental EIR. Pursuant to Section of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that implementation of the proposed Project does not propose substantial changes to the Specific Plan Project, no substantial changes in circumstances would occur which would require major revisions to the Final EIR, and no new information of substantial importance has been revealed since the certification of Final EIR that would result in either new significant effects or an increase in the severity of previously analyzed significant effects. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was adopted as a part of the Final EIR that minimized impacts associated with implementation of the Specific Plan Project. The previously adopted mitigation measures applicable to the proposed Project will be imposed as conditions of the Project, and the MMRP, as applicable to the proposed Project, is contained in Appendix A. Renaissance Specific Plan 17 Renaissance East

22 This page intentionally left blank. Renaissance Specific Plan 18 Renaissance East

23 4.1 Aesthetics Threshold (a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The Renaissance East Project (proposed Project) would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The dominant scenic views from the Project site and the surrounding area include the San Gabriel Mountains and the San Bernardino Mountains. The foothills of the San Bernardino National Forest are located approximately five miles to the north. The site is bound to the north by former City of Rialto well and pump controls, and further north is the SR-210 freeway. The site is bounded to the south by Renaissance Parkway and a large drainage basin. The site is bound to the east by a concrete lined flood control channel. Beyond the channel to the east are residences. The site is bound to the west by Ayala Parkway. A shopping center is currently under construction just west of Ayala Parkway. The proposed Project is at a similar elevation as the surrounding area and would be consistent with surrounding development. The proposed Project would not exceed the height limit established by the Specific Plan for this area (75 feet). The maximum proposed building height would be 55 feet. For these reasons, the Project s encroachment into the viewshed would not be significant. This determination is consistent with the finding of less than significant impact for the Specific Plan Project, which allows for greater height on the Project site than is proposed by the Project. In addition, similar scale commercial uses either have been physically or conceptually established within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Therefore, the change in views of the Project site from the surrounding area would not cause a significant impact on a scenic vista. Impacts are less than significant. Accordingly, no new impacts relative to adverse effects on a scenic vista or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Final EIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR None identified in the Final EIR. Conclusion No significant impacts to aesthetics are identified in the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be designed consistent with the guidelines and standards within the Specific Plan. Therefore, no new and/or modified mitigation measures are required for issues related to aesthetics. Threshold (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway. There are no State- or County-designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the Project site. 2 Further, the Rialto General Plan does not identify any designated scenic corridors. The area surrounding the Project site is developed or planned for development. 2 California Department of Transportation. Official Designated Scenic Highways. Available at: Accessed June 28, Renaissance Specific Plan 19 Renaissance East

24 The Final EIR also determined that future development that is consistent with the Specific Plan would not result in any adverse aesthetic impacts. Therefore, no adverse impacts on scenic resources, including resources within a State scenic highway, would result from the proposed Project s implementation. Accordingly, no new impacts relative to adverse aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Final EIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR None identified in the Final EIR. Conclusion No significant impacts to aesthetics are identified in the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be designed consistent with the guidelines and standards within the Specific Plan. Therefore, no new and/or modified mitigation measures are required for issues related to aesthetics. Threshold (c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. The proposed Project would change the site appearance from disturbed vacant land to a modern commercial shopping center. The aesthetic appearance of the development would be consistent with the overall Specific Plan as design guidelines are intended to create a uniform and consistent theme within the overall Specific Plan area. The visual characteristics of the site would change although it would be consistent with existing development regulations. Additionally, similar commercial uses either have been physically or conceptually established within the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Therefore, the change in visual character would not significantly impact the site or the surrounding area. Impacts are less than significant. Accordingly, no new impacts relative to adverse aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Final EIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR None identified in the Final EIR. Conclusion No significant impacts to aesthetics are identified in the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be designed consistent with the guidelines and standards within the Specific Plan. Therefore, no new and/or modified mitigation measures are required for issues related to aesthetics. Renaissance Specific Plan 20 Renaissance East

25 Threshold (d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Existing sources of light and glare include street lighting and lights from commercial and industrial uses, and limited residential uses, in the area. Residential land uses are considered to be sensitive to excessive amounts of light and glare because light trespass can interfere with sleep and other nighttime activities. Poorly designed lighting can also affect the nighttime vision of drivers due to glare. Residential uses are located approximately 250 feet east of the Project site. The proposed Project would have safety and security lighting. Lighting levels will not exceed 1.0 candle/foot measured at ground level throughout the parking area as required per the Specific Plan and Municipal Code Section New lighting would also be reviewed by the City to ensure conformance with the 2013 California Building Code, Title 24 (California Code of Regulations), as well as the 2013 California Green Building Standard Code (Part 11 of Title 24, California Code of Regulations) such that only the minimum amount of lighting is used and no light spillage occurs. For these reasons, lighting and glare impacts from the proposed Project are not significant. Accordingly, no new impacts relative to adverse aesthetic impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Final EIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR None identified in the Final EIR. Conclusion No significant impacts to aesthetics are identified in the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be designed consistent with the guidelines and standards within the Specific Plan. Therefore, no new and/or modified mitigation measures are required for issues related to aesthetics. Overall Aesthetics Impact Conclusion With regard to CEQA Section and the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to aesthetics. Therefore, the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis is not warranted. Renaissance Specific Plan 21 Renaissance East

26 This page intentionally left blank. Renaissance Specific Plan 22 Renaissance East

27 4.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources Threshold (a) Threshold (b) Threshold (c) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use; and Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract; and Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No agricultural resources exist on or adjacent to the Project site, nor is the Project site zoned for agricultural uses. Additionally, the Project site has not historically been utilized for agricultural purposes. No Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide or Local Importance is mapped in the Project vicinity; the Project site is designated Farmland of Local Potential 3. Furthermore, the Project site is not the subject of a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, the property does not include forest resources, including timberlands. No impacts related to the loss of farmland would occur. No significant impacts to agricultural resources are identified in the Final EIR relative to any property within the Specific Plan area, including the Project site. Accordingly, no new impact relative to agricultural resources or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact evaluated in the Final EIR would occur. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would impact the prior finding of no significant impact. Mitigation Program Mitigation Measures from the Final EIR None identified in the Final EIR. Overall Agricultural Resources Impact Conclusion No significant impacts to agricultural resources are identified in the Final EIR. The proposed Project is located within the boundaries of the Specific Plan; therefore, no new and/or refined mitigation measures are required for issues related to agricultural resources. With regard to CEQA Section and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the changes proposed by the Project would not result in any new impacts, or increase the severity of the previously identified impacts, with respect to agricultural resources. Therefore, preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis is not warranted. 3 (accessed July 3, 2017) Renaissance Specific Plan 23 Renaissance East

28 This page intentionally left blank. Renaissance Specific Plan 24 Renaissance East

29 4.3 Air Quality The Renaissance Specific Plan Final EIR identifies the potential for air quality impacts as a result of Specific Plan implementation. An Air Quality Technical Report was prepared by Scientific Resources Associated (SRA, August 2017) for the proposed Project. For purpose of this Addendum, the technical study evaluates construction and operational impacts associated with the proposed Project relative to impacts identified in the Final EIR. The Air Quality Technical Report is included in this Addendum as Appendix B and the results are summarized herein. Threshold (a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (air basin) which includes parts of San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Riverside counties and all of Orange County. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) monitor air quality within the air basin. Air quality plans describe air pollution control strategies and measures to be implemented by a city, county, region, and/or air district. The primary purpose of an air quality plan is to bring an area that does not attain federal and State air quality standards into compliance with the requirements of the federal Clean Air Act and California Clean Air Act. In addition, air quality plans are developed to ensure that an area maintains a healthful level of air quality based on the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS). The Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) is prepared by SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The AQMP provides policies and control measures that reduce emissions to attain both State and federal ambient air quality standards. The SCAQMD s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Handbook, as updated in 2015, identifies two key indicators of consistency with the AQMP: 1. Whether a project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. 2. Whether a project will exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the year of project buildout and phase. The Final EIR concluded that without mitigation, development of the Renaissance Specific Plan area would exceed the following SCAQMD regional emission significance thresholds during construction and operation and would therefore conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP: Construction: volatile organic compounds (VOC) reactive organic gases (ROG), nitric oxide (NO x ), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM 10 ), and particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5 ); Operations: VOC (ROG), NO x, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5 ; and Combined Construction and Operations: VOC, NO x, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5. The Final EIR identified impacts during construction as a significant and unavoidable impact on air quality. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-14 were identified in the Final EIR to reduce air emissions from implementation of the Renaissance Specific Plan. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-9 would reduce emissions from construction to the extent feasible. Renaissance Specific Plan 25 Renaissance East

30 Construction Emissions Emissions from the construction phase were estimated based on information from the Applicant for construction equipment requirements and schedule. It was assumed that construction would commence in January 2018 and require approximately 14 months to complete. Site preparation includes the mass grading of the Project site and utilities installation, as well as off-site improvements. Following site preparation activities, activities would include the construction of buildings, architectural coatings application, and the paving of the parking areas. For conservative purposes, it is assumed that the entire Project would be constructed in one phase following initial site preparation activities. The construction emissions were evaluated using the CalEEMod Model (Version ), which is the SCAQMD s recommended model for evaluating air quality impacts from land use projects. Table 3: Construction Emissions Without Mitigation, provides a summary of the emission estimates for construction of the proposed Project without the implementation of mitigation measures, including standard fugitive dust control measures. All construction emissions would be below the SCAQMD maximum daily threshold significance criteria. The maximum simultaneous daily emissions for the proposed Project are within the levels identified in the Final EIR. The Final EIR identifies impacts associated with the construction of the Renaissance Specific Plan Project as significant and unavoidable. Mitigation measures are identified in the Final EIR to reduce emissions from construction activities to the extent feasible. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-9 are applicable to development projects within the Renaissance Specific Plan area, including the proposed Project. Table 4: Construction Emissions With Mitigation, identifies emissions associated with construction activities with the implementation of fugitive dust control measures (Mitigation Measure AQ-1) and Tier II equipment (Mitigation Measure AQ-9). Construction emissions would be below the SCAQMD maximum daily threshold significance criteria. The Final EIR identified air quality construction impacts associated with the Renaissance Specific Plan as significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-9 were identified that would reduce construction emissions to the extent feasible. The proposed Project would be required to implement these mitigation measures during construction operations. Renaissance Specific Plan 26 Renaissance East

31 Table 3: Construction Emissions Without Mitigation Emission Source ROG NOx CO SOx PM 10 PM 2.5 Total Construction Emissions, lbs/day Grading Fugitive Dust Offroad Diesel Onroad Diesel Worker Trips TOTAL Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Trenching/Utilities Offroad Diesel Worker Trips TOTAL Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Building Construction Building Construction Heavy Equipment Exhaust Building Construction Vendor Trips Building Construction Worker Trips TOTAL Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Architectural Coatings Application Architectural Coatings Emissions Architectural Coatings Heavy Equipment Exhaust Architectural Coatings Worker Trips TOTAL Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Paving Paving Offroad Diesel Paving Worker Trips TOTAL Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Maximum Simultaneous Daily Emissions Significance Criteria Significant? No No No No No No Final EIR Maximum Daily Construction Emissions , ROG: Reactive Organic Gases; NOx: nitrogen oxides; CO: carbon monoxide; SOx: sulfur oxides; PM10: particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5: particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter. Source: SRA Renaissance Specific Plan 27 Renaissance East