Initial Study for the Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Located at Chino Airport, Chino, California

September 2020

Prepared For: City of Chino Development Services Department 13220 Central Avenue Chino, CA 91710

Prepared By: Crable & Associates, Environmental Consultants 765 West Altadena Drive Altadena, California 91001 Table of Contents

Project Description...... 3 Environmental Review of the Project ...... 5 Chino Airport Background and Location ...... 5 Chino Airport Master Plan ...... 6 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...... 7 Determination ...... 7 Lead Agency ...... 7 Aesthetics ...... 9 Agricultural and Forestry ...... 11 Air Quality ...... 13 Biological Resources...... 23 Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources ...... 27 Energy ...... 33 Geology and Soils ...... 35 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...... 39 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...... 41 Hydrology and Water Quality ...... 44 Land Use and Planning ...... 48 Mineral Resources ...... 49 Noise ...... 50 Population and Housing ...... 58 Public Services ...... 59 Recreation Resources ...... 60 Transportation ...... 61 Utilities and Services Systems ...... 65 Wildfire ...... 67 Mandatory Findings of Significance ...... 68

ATTACHMENT 1 – Figures ATTACHMENT 2 – Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)

APPENDIX A— Air Quality/GHG Impact Analysis APPENDIX B— Burrowing Owl Survey APPENDIX C—Cultural Resources Assessment APPENDIX D—Geologic Fault-Rupture Hazard/Soils Evaluation APPENDIX E—Noise Impact Analysis Report APPENDIX F—Phase I Environmental Site Assessment APPENDIX G-1—Preliminary Hydrology Study APPENDIX G-2—Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan APPENDIX H-1—Transportation—Vehicle Miles Travelled Analysis APPENDIX H-2—Transportation—Trip Generation/Distribution Analysis

City of Chino Project Description

1. Project Title: Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park (Proposed Project). 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chino, 13220 Central Avenue, Chino, CA 91710. 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mr. Ryan Murphy, Planner, (909) 334-3525. 4. Project Location: Northeast portion of Chino Airport, 7000 Merrill Avenue, Chino, CA 91710. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Chino Development League, P.O. Box 8397, La Verne, CA 91750. 6. City of Chino General Plan Designation: Public.1 7. County Department of Airports Land Use Designation: Privately Leased Aviation Development Parcel. 8. Zoning: Airport Development.2 9. Project Description: The Eagle’s Nest V (Phase I) and VI (Phase 2) project proposes the development of an approximately 158,490 square-foot (sf) aviation business park generally occupied with executive hangars on an approximately 8.5-acre, unimproved site located in the northeastern quadrant of the Chino Airport (Figure 2—Eagle’s Nest V and VI Development Site).The proposed project hangars will be constructed with concrete tilt-up walls, concrete flooring, metal bi-fold doors, and wood and steel truss roofs. Tenants can construct improvements in compliance with existing code, including upper floors/mezzanines. The hangars are designed to provide the space requirements necessary to store and maintain executive (corporate) and multi-passenger aircraft at the Chino Airport. The proposed project will also include parking, landscaping, curbs, ribbon gutters and hardscape parkway improvements for the frontage street along Merrill Avenue, including a new driveway approach located at the northeasterly end of the proposed development.

The proposed project will be developed in two (2) phases:

Phase I—Eagle’s Nest V proposes the development of Buildings A and B. Building A includes 13 hangars varying in floor area from 3,300 sf to 4,800 sf, totaling 51,868 sf. Building B is a 23,008- sf hangar, including 3,028 sf of office space and mezzanine, and is designed for a commercial aircraft company that would provide services such as avionics update installation. The total area of Eagle’s Nest V is 74,876 sf (see Figure 3). Building A tenants are expected to store one to two aircraft per hangar. The Building B hangar occupant would store multiple aircraft for the duration of required service. Eagle’s Nest V hangar units will be constructed with metal bi-fold hangar doors on both the north and south to provide aircraft access from Taxiways N and R. Also, Eagle’s Nest V tenants will be able to taxi their aircraft (engines on) to their respective hangar doors on both the north and south.

1 City of Chino. General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted July 6, 2010. Revised November 28, 2017. 2 City of Chino. City of Chino Zoning Map. Effective August 20, 2010. Revised November 28, 2017.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 3

City of Chino

Phase 2—Eagle’s Nest VI proposes the development of Buildings C and D. Building C contains six (6), 8,360-sf hangars, and Building D contains a 28,305-sf hangar, including 4,500 sf of mezzanine. The total area of Eagle’s Nest VI is 83,614 sf. Building C tenants are expected to store one corporate, multi-passenger aircraft per hangar. Building D is designed to store one large corporate jet such as a Gulfstream. Eagle’s Nest VI units will be constructed with metal bi-fold doors opening to the south only. Aircraft stored in Eagle’s Nest VI hangars will be required to shut off engines on Taxiway R, then be towed to their respective hangars. 10. Construction: The proposed project will be constructed in two (2) phases of approximately 6 months per phase. The project will be constructed in compliance with applicable municipal development code and building code, and in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403, which requires that contractors implement Best Available Control Technology (BACT) during construction activities.3 11. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: • North (across Merrill Avenue)—agriculture/dairy; currently zoned Business Park • East—aircraft fueling area • South—Eagle’s Nest IV hangars • West—aviation support facility/hangars 12. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required: City of Chino, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Construction Activity General Construction Permit; NPDES Permit).

3 South Coast Air Quality Management District. Rule 403, Fugitive Dust. Adopted May 7, 1976; last Amended June 3, 2005.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 4

City of Chino Environmental Review of the Project

The purpose of this Initial Study (IS) is to evaluate the potential environmental effects of the proposed Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park project (proposed project) at the Chino Airport. This document is being provided as part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documentation for the City of Chino’s consideration. The City of Chino is the Lead Agency for this project in accordance with CEQA Statute and the State CEQA Guidelines. Discretionary actions required by the City for project implementation include certification of the project’s compliance with CEQA.

Based on analysis undertaken to fill out the checklist, the proposed project is not expected to result in any environmental impacts that could not be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through project design or implementation of existing federal, state, or county regulations or standards. Based on this determination, the City of Chino is proposing to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project. This Initial Study document fulfills the environmental review requirements for approvals by the City of Chino and other agencies CEQA Guidelines.

Chino Airport Background and Location

Chino Airport (CNO) is a general aviation reliever airport that serves private, business, and corporate tenants from southern California. It is situated on approximately 1,097 acres and features three runways: a 4,858-foot instrument runway (Runway 8L-26R), a 7,000-foot non-precision runway (Runway 8R-26L), and a 4,419-foot non-precision crosswind runway (Runway 3-21). Chino Airport, originally 375 acres, was established in the early 1940s as Cal Aero Field when the Airport was home to the Cal Aero Cadets.4

The Airport is located in the County of San Bernardino, three miles southeast of downtown Chino and is situated within 20 miles of Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside counties (Figure 1). The Airport is within the Chino City limits; directly north of the Airport is the city of Ontario. The Airport is bordered by Merrill Avenue on the north, Euclid Avenue (State Route 83) on the west, and Kimball Road on the south (Figure 2). Figure 3 depicts the Site Development Plan.

During the years 2000 to 2009, Chino Airport averaged approximately 160,000 annual aircraft operations. From 2014 to 2017, annual aircraft operations increased from 179,811 to 203,090 (CSB Department of Airports, Chino Airport Administration, 2018).

4 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 5

City of Chino Chino Airport Master Plan

The primary objective of the Chino Airport Master Plan is to formulate and maintain a long term development program which will yield a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable air transportation facility. Landside development at the Chino Airport is guided by the 2003 Airport Master Plan (2003 Master Plan),5 and supported by the Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update (2012 Update).6 The goal of Airport land development is to provide revenue for the Airport and to support the economic development of the region.

Chapters 4 and 5 of the 2003 Master Plan discussed the future development of executive aircraft storage hangars at the proposed project site. Also, the 2003 Master Plan noted the need for increased executive hangar space at the Airport based on market trends and projected future demand for executive hangars.

The 2012 Update supports the findings in the 2003 Master Plan, focuses on improvements to the efficiency and safety, and updates the forecast of annual aircraft operations from 206,300 in the horizon year 2025, to 220,800 in the updated horizon year of 2030.

5 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Airport Master Plan for the Chino Airport. December 2003. 6 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 6

City of Chino

Lead Agency

The 2003 Master Plan, the 2012 Update, and all technical support documents are available for review at the agency below:

Lead agency: City of Chino 13220 Central Avenue Chino, CA 91710

Contact person: Mr. Ryan Murphy, Planner Phone No: (909) 334-3525

E-mail: [email protected]

Project Sponsor: Chino Development League P.O. Box 8397 Chino, CA 91710

Use of Earlier Analyses (Tiering). Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:

Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the CEQA checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.

Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.

Impact Discussion. This Initial Study (IS) tiers from and incorporates by reference the following documents:

• County of San Bernardino Department of Airports, Airport Master Plan for Chino Airport. December 2003. • County of San Bernardino Department of Airports, Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012. • County of San Bernardino Department of Airports, Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update Inventory. October 2012.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 7 City of Chino

In addition, this Initial Study relies on the following documents and maps:

• City of Chino, Envision Chino General Plan 2025. July 2010. • City of Chino, General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report. May 21, 2010. • City of Chino, City of Chino Zoning Map. Effective August 20, 2010. Revised November 28, 2017. • City of Chino, General Plan Land Use Map. Adopted July 6, 2010. Revised November 28, 2017. • Ganddini Group. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Trip Generation Analysis. September 2020. • Ganddini Group. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Vehicle Miles Travelled Analysis. September 2020. • ECORP Consulting, Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment. August 2020. (Appendix A). • ECORP Consulting, Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Noise Impact Assessment. August 2020. (Appendix E). • Bargas Environmental, Nesting Season Survey Burrowing Owl. July 2018. (Appendix B). • Material Culture Consulting, Cultural Resources Assessment of the Proposed Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Site. August 2018. (Appendix C). • RMA Group, Geotechnical Investigation Report for Proposed Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park, Chino Airport, 7000 Merrill Avenue, Chino, CA. May 22, 2018. (Appendix D). • Converse Environmental, Report of Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the Proposed Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Site. August 2018. (Appendix F). • Valued Engineering, Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Preliminary Hydrology Study. August 2020. (Appendix G-1). • Valued Engineering, Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park. August 2020. (Appendix G-2).

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 8 City of Chino

Aesthetics

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant with Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

No Impact (a). Although distant views of the San Gabriel Mountains to the north and Chino Hills to the west and south are available from public viewing areas in the project vicinity, no designated scenic vistas or scenic corridors are located in the vicinity of the project site.

The Chino Airport is zoned Airport Development (AD). The purpose of this district is to provide areas for the operation of airport and aviation facilities, services, and administrative uses, as well as incidental office uses. The AD district also provides areas for air freight handling facilities, aircraft hangars and public transportation and related facilities, including aircraft fuel and supply services.7

The proposed aviation business park project proposes to develop T-Hangars for executive and corporate aircraft storage and maintenance at a site shown in the 2003 Master Plan (Chapters 3 and 4; Exhibit 5C) and the 2012 Update (Fig. 4) dedicated for hangar development. The development would be confined to airport property only, and the San Gabriel Mountains and Chino Hills would remain visible in the project vicinity due to the distance between the project site and the mountain features. Therefore, because the project site is not a scenic vista or near a designated scenic resource, and because prominent, scenic views would not be obscured by the project, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?

7 City of Chino Municipal Code. Chapter 20.07-Industrial Zoning Districts. May 22, 2018. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 9 City of Chino

No Impact (b). The project site is not located within or adjacent to a scenic highway corridor and does not contain scenic resources, such as trees of scenic value, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. There are no State-designated or eligible scenic highways within the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a substantial effect on scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway corridor. 8,9

c) In nonurbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?

Less Than Significant Impact (c). The proposed project design and use would conform with existing and planned light-industrial uses on the airport. The project would be compatible with the size, scale, height, and aesthetic qualities of existing aircraft storage facilities in the vicinity of the project site, and would be required to comply with the applicable development standards, policies, and design guidelines contained in the Airport Master Plan, the City of Chino General Plan, and Chino Municipal Code (CMC). Therefore, the project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality, and, consequently, would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings.

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

Less Than Significant Impact (d). The CMC includes design standards for outdoor lighting that apply to all development in the City (CMC §20.10.090). The CMC lighting standards govern the placement and design of outdoor lighting fixtures to ensure adequate lighting for public safety while also minimizing light pollution and glare and precluding public nuisances (e.g., blinking/flashing lights, unusually high intensity or bright lighting). The CMC would regulate lighting for the proposed project such that it would not cause excessive light and glare on adjacent properties. Development of the proposed project in accordance with relevant CMC development guidelines would ensure that the proposed project would not create new sources of light or glare that could adversely affect views in the site vicinity. Therefore, it is not likely the proposed project would create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

In addition, the City of Chino 2025 General Plan determined that any future airport development that fronts on a public thoroughfare surrounding the airport shall comply with the policies of Objective CC- 1.1, Community Character Element, specifically Policy PS, which states “Lighting on private and public property should be designed as to provide safety, while minimizing light spillage to adjacent properties and the night sky.”

8 City of Chino. City of Chino Zoning Map. Effective August 20, 2010. Revised November 28, 2017 9 Caltrans Scenic Highway Program Scenic Highway System Lists: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/scenic_hwy.htm.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 10 City of Chino

Agricultural and Forestry

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Would the project:

a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 11 City of Chino

No Impact (a-e). Land within boundaries of the Chino Airport is designated as “Urban and Built-up Land” according to the San Bernardino County Important Farmland Map 2014.10 Furthermore, review of the San Bernardino County Important Farmland Map 2014 indicates that the proposed project is not located on of land under a Williamson Act contract, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Finally, the proposed project, as zoned and sited in an urban setting characterized as Airport Development, would have no effect on timberland or forest land. Therefore, development of the proposed project would not result in impacts of any kind to agricultural resources, forest land, or timberland resources.

10 California Department of Conservation, Division of Land Resource Protection. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, San Bernardino County Important Farmland 2014, Sheet 2 of 2.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 12 City of Chino

Air Quality

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

The analysis in this section relies on a site-specific Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment (Appendix A).11 Would the project:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

The significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district (SCAQMD) may be relied upon to make the above determinations. According to the SCAQMD, an air quality impact is considered significant if the proposed project would violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The SCAQMD has established thresholds of significance for air quality for construction and operational activities of land use development projects such as that proposed (Ecorp Consulting 2020, Appendix A, Table 2-4).

Less than Significant Impact (a-c):

Conflict with the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan. The proposed project would result in emissions that would be below the SCAQMD regional and localized thresholds during both construction and operations.

11 ECORP Consulting. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment. August 2020. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 13 City of Chino

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations and would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the ambient air quality standards (Ecorp Consulting 2020, Appendix A, Tables 2-6, 2-7. 2-8, and 2-9).

The proposed project would be below the SCAQMD regional thresholds for construction and operations. Therefore, the project would not delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or AQMP emissions reductions.

A project is consistent with regional air quality planning efforts in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment assumptions that were used in the development of the SCAQMD air quality plans. Generally, three sources of data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions in Chino: City of Chino General Plan 2025 (General Plan), SCAG’s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), and SCAG’s 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). The RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional population growth.

The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City of Chino General Plan 2025. As previously stated, the project Site has a General Plan designation of Public, consistent with the entirety of the Chino Airport. The Public General Plan designation provides for major public uses or institutions, including airport-related land uses located at the airport, such as that proposed by the project. Furthermore, the project does not involve any uses that would increase population beyond what is considered in the General Plan and, therefore, would not affect City-wide plans for population growth at the project site. Thus, the proposed project is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan and RCPG. As a result, the project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by SCAQMD to develop the 2016 AQMP. The City’s population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on the local plans and policies applicable to the City; and these are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into their air quality planning efforts, it can be concluded that the proposed project would be consistent with the projections. (SCAG’s latest growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans.) Therefore, the proposed project would be considered consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections utilized in the preparation of SCAQMD’s air quality plans.

The project would be required to comply with emission reduction measures promulgated by the SCAQMD, such as SCAQMD Rules 402, 403, and 1113. SCAQMD Rule 402 prohibits the discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires fugitive dust sources to implement Best Available Control Measures for all sources, and all forms of visible particulate matter are prohibited from crossing any property line. SCAQMD Rule 403 is intended to reduce PM10 emissions from any transportation, handling, construction, or storage activity that has the potential to generate fugitive dust. SCAQMD 1113 requires manufacturers, distributors, and end-users of architectural and industrial

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 14 City of Chino

maintenance coatings to reduce ROG emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the ROG content of various coating categories. As such, the proposed project meets this consistency criterion.

The AQMP contains air pollutant reduction strategies based on SCAG’s latest growth forecasts, and SCAG’s growth forecasts were defined in consultation with local governments and with reference to local general plans. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City’s General Plan and therefore would not exceed the population or job growth projections used by the SCAQMD to develop the AQMP.

In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long-term influence of a project on air quality. The proposed project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet State and Federal air quality standards. The proposed project’s long-term influence would also be consistent with the goals and policies of the SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP.

Regional Significance Analysis. Construction-generated emissions are temporary and short term but have the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. Three basic sources of short-term emissions will be generated through construction of the proposed project: operation of the construction vehicles (i.e., excavators, trenchers, dump trucks), the creation of fugitive dust during clearing and grading, and the use of asphalt or other oil-based substances during paving activities. Construction activities such as excavation and grading operations, construction vehicle traffic, and wind blowing over exposed soils would generate exhaust emissions and fugitive particulate matter emissions that affect local air quality at various times during construction. Effects would be variable depending on the weather, soil conditions, the amount of activity taking place, and the nature of dust control efforts. The dry climate of the area during the summer months creates a high potential for dust generation. Construction activities would be subject to SCAQMD Rule 403, which requires taking reasonable precautions to prevent the emissions of fugitive dust, such as using water or chemicals, where possible, for control of dust during the clearing of land and other construction activities.

Construction-generated emissions associated the proposed project were calculated using the CARB- approved CalEEMod computer program, which is designed to model emissions for land use development projects, based on typical construction requirements. See Attachment A for more information regarding the construction assumptions, including construction equipment and duration, used in this analysis. Predicted maximum daily construction-generated emissions for the proposed project are summarized in the following table.

Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as construction activities occur, but would be considered a significant air quality impact if the volume of pollutants generated exceeds the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 15 City of Chino

Construction-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) Pollutant (pounds per day)

ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5

Eagle’s Nest V (Phase 1) 11.85 74.16 37.77 0.12 11.02 6.58

Eagle’s Nest VI (Phase 2) 11.87 69.08 35.59 0.12 10.8 6.39 1 SCAQMD Regional Significance 75 100 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceed SCAQMD No No No No No No Threshold?

Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stockpiles with tarps; water all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emission projections account for the export of 17,269 cubic yards of soil during site preparation and grading activities. As shown in table above, emissions generated during the construction both Eagle’s Nest V (Phase 1) and Eagle’s Nest VI (Phase 2) would not exceed the SCAQMD’s regional thresholds of significance.

Localized Significance Analysis—Construction. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a residence located approximately 235 feet (72 meters) north of the project site. In order to identify impacts to sensitive receptors, the SCAQMD recommends addressing LSTs for construction. LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). For this project, the appropriate source receptor area (SRA) for the localized significance thresholds is the Southwest San Bernardino Valley source receptor area (SRA 33) as this source receptor area includes the project site. Each project phase of construction (Phase 1 and 2) would disturb between approximately 4.5 and 5 acres each. As previously described, the SCAQMD has produced look-up tables for projects that disturb less than or equal to 5 acres daily. The LST threshold value for a 5-acre construction were sourced from the LST lookup tables.

LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is located 72 meters distant; therefore, LSTs for receptors located at 50 meters were utilized in this analysis. The SCAQMD’s methodology clearly states that “off- site mobile emissions from a project should not be included in the emissions compared to LSTs.” Therefore, for purposes of the construction LST analysis, only emissions included in the CalEEMod “on- site” emissions outputs were considered. The following table presents the results of localized emissions during the site preparation activities associated with each phase of construction (Phase 1 and 2), which is

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 16 City of Chino

the construction activity that disturbs the most acreage daily. The LSTs reflect a maximum disturbance of 5 acres daily at 50 meters for the proposed project.

Construction-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis) Pollutant (pounds per day)

NOX CO PM10 PM2. 5 Project Site Preparation (Phase 1) 45.57 22.06 9.47 6.07

Project Site Preparation (Phase 2) 42.41 21.51 9.28 5.90

SCAQMD Localized 303 2,978 50 12 Significance Threshold

Exceed SCAQMD Threshold? No No No No

Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emission reduction/credits for construction emissions are applied based on the required implementation of SCAQMD Rule 403. The specific Rule 403 measures applied in CalEEMod include the following: properly maintain mobile and other construction equipment; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stockpiles with tarps; water all haul roads daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Reductions percentages from the SCAQMD CEQA Handbook (Tables XI-A through XI-E) were applied. Emission projections account for the loading of 17,269 cubic yards of soil during site preparation and grading activities.

The emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during construction activities.

Regional Operational Significance Analysis. Implementation of the project would result in long-term operational emissions of criteria air pollutants such as PM10, PM2.5, CO, and SO2 as well as ozone precursors such as ROG and NOX. As previously described, the 13 smaller hangars proposed under Phase 1 would be designed for private tenants and are expected to store one to two aircraft per hangar. The larger hangar would store multiple aircraft for the duration of required service. The six smaller hangars proposed under Phase 2 are expected to store one corporate, multi-passenger aircraft per hangar while the larger Phase 2 hangar would be designed to store one large corporate jet such as a Gulfstream.

Based on a capacity of a maximum of 35 aircraft on the project site at a single time, the AEDT model was used to calculate criteria air pollutant emissions from idling and taxiing aircraft as a result of the arrival of 9 aircraft and departure of an additional 6 aircraft in a single day. This level of daily aircraft activity accounts for the maximum amount of potential on-site movement from 35 additional aircraft at the Chino Airport based on current flight operations and schedules. This approach to aircraft-generated emission calculation is conservative as it assumes the proposed project would instigate new aircraft travel to the Chino Airport, as opposed to simply accommodating existing aircraft that already visit the Chino Airport. In other words, this analysis estimates aircraft-generated emissions during on-site idling and taxiing based Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 17 City of Chino

on the assumption that the project could generate 15 new aircraft trips to or from the Chino Airport daily. (Emissions generated during individual, above-ground flight activities are not identified as such emissions would not be generated as a result of the project.) The general types of aircraft modeled include a Gulfstream, Boeing 727, and smaller private aircraft.

Long-term operational emissions attributable to the project are identified in following table and compared to the regional operational significance thresholds promulgated by the SCAQMD.

Operational-Related Emissions (Regional Significance Analysis) Pollutant (pounds per day)

ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5

Summer Emissions

Area 3.85 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

Energy 0.01 0.09 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mobile (automotive) 0.53 3.75 7.18 0.02 1.84 050

Mobile (on-site 0.24 0.13 1.0 0.04 0.00 0.00 idling & taxiing aircraft) Total 4.63 3.69 8.27 0.06 1.84 0.50

SCAQMD Regional 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significance Threshold

Exceed No No No No No No SCAQMD Threshold?

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 18 City of Chino

Winter Emissions

Area 3.85 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

Energy 0.01 0.09 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mobile (automotive) 0.47 3.50 6.21 0.02 1.84 0.05

Mobile (on-site 0.24 0.13 1.0 0.04 0.00 0.00 idling & taxiing aircraft)

Total 4.57 3.72 7.30 0.06 1.84 0.05

SCAQMD Regional Significance 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Exceed SCAQMD No No No No No No Threshold?

Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2; FAA AEDT 2d. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emissions projections account for an automotive Trip Generation Analysis prepared by the Ganddini Group (2019), and aircraft-idling and taxiing times identified by the AEDT 2d model. Emissions generated during individual, above-ground flight activities are not identified as such emissions would not be generated as a result of the project.

As shown in the table above, the project’s emissions would not exceed any SCAQMD thresholds for criteria air pollutants.

Localized Operational Significance Analysis. According to the SCAQMD localized significance threshold methodology, LSTs would apply to the operational phase of a proposed project if the project includes stationary sources or attracts mobile sources that may spend long periods queuing and idling at the site (e.g., warehouse or transfer facilities). The proposed project is unique in that it includes on-site aircraft idling. Therefore, in the case of the proposed project, the operational phase LST protocol is applied. Operational LSTs apply to CO, NO2, PM10, and PM2.5.

The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is a residence located to the north of the project site. LST thresholds are provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. The nearest sensitive receptor to the project site is located 72 meters distant; therefore, LSTs for receptors located at 50 meters were utilized in this analysis.

The appropriate source receptor area (SRA) for the localized significance thresholds is the Southwest San Bernardino Valley area (SRA 33). As described, the SCAQMD has produced look-up tables for projects that disturb 1-acre, 2-acre, and 5-acre. While the proposed project site is approximately 9 acres, the LST threshold value for a 5-acre site was employed from the LST lookup tables. This is conservative since the analysis will only account for the dispersion of air pollutants over 5 acres before reaching sensitive receptors as opposed to accounting for the dispersion of air pollutants over a greater 9-acre area.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 19 City of Chino

For a worst-case scenario assessment, the emissions shown in the following table include all “on-site” project-related stationary (area) sources, as well as on-site idling & taxiing aircraft.

Operational-Related Emissions (Localized Significance Analysis)

Pollutant (pounds per day)

NOX CO PM1 PM2.5

On-Site Emissions (Summer - Winter)

Area Source 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 Mobile (on-site 0.13 1.0 0.00 0.00 idling & taxiing aircraft) Total 0.13 1.02 0.00 0.00 SCAQMD 303 2,978 12 3 Localized Significance Threshold Exceed SCAQMD No No No No Threshold?

Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2; FAA AEDT 2d. Refer to Attachment A for Model Data Outputs. Notes: Emissions projections account for an automotive Trip Generation Analysis prepared by the Ganddini Group (2019), and aircraft-idling and taxiing times identified by the AEDT 2d model. Emissions generated during individual, above-ground flight activities are not identified as such emissions would not be generated as a result of the project.

As shown in the table above, the emissions of these pollutants on the peak day of operations would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, significant impacts would not occur concerning LSTs during operational activities.

Expose Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants—Construction. Sensitive receptors are defined as facilities or land uses that include members of the population that are particularly sensitive to the effects of air pollutants, such as children, the elderly, and people with illnesses. Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers. CARB has identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, athletes, and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis.

Construction-related activities would result in temporary, short-term project-generated emissions of Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 20 City of Chino

diesel particulate matter (DPM) from the exhaust of off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation (e.g., clearing, grading); soil hauling truck traffic; paving; the application of architectural coatings; and other miscellaneous activities. For construction activity, DPM is the primary TAC of concern. Particulate exhaust emissions from diesel-fueled engines (i.e., DPM) were identified as a TAC by the CARB in 1998. The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM, as discussed below, outweighs the potential for all other health impacts (i.e., non-cancer chronic risk, short-term acute risk) and health impacts from other TACs. Accordingly, DPM is the focus of this discussion.

Based on the emission modeling conducted the maximum construction-related annual emissions of PM2.5, considered a surrogate for DPM, would be 2.29 pounds per day (see Attachment A) during construction activity (PM2.5 is considered a surrogate for DPM because more than 90 percent of DPM is less than 1 microgram in diameter and therefore is a subset of particulate matter under 2.5 microns in diameter (i.e., PM2.5), according to CARB. Most PM2.5 derives from combustion, such as use of gasoline and diesel fuels by motor vehicles.) Furthermore, even during the most intense month of construction, emissions of DPM would be generated from different locations on the project site, rather than a single location, because different types of construction activities (e.g., site preparation, building construction) would not occur at the same place at the same time.

The dose to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk (i.e., potential exposure to TAC emission levels that exceed applicable standards). Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the duration of exposure to the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for any exposed receptor. Thus, the risks estimated for an exposed individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to TAC emissions, should be based on a 70-, 30-, or 9-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the proposed project. Consequently, an important consideration is the fact that construction of the proposed project is anticipated to last one year. Furthermore, the use of off-road heavy-duty diesel equipment would be limited to the periods of construction for which most diesel-powered off-road equipment use would occur, which are the site preparation and grading phases of construction, and these construction activities are anticipated to last less than a few months. Therefore, considering the relatively low mass of DPM emissions that would be generated during even the most intense season of construction, the relatively short duration of construction activities (one year) required to develop the site, including just three months of site preparation and grading activities, and the highly dispersive properties of DPM, construction-related TAC emissions would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial amounts of air toxics.

In addition, the project has been evaluated against the SCAQMD’s LSTs for construction. As previously stated, LSTs were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards' Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4) and can be used to assist lead agencies in analyzing localized impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. As shown in Table 2-7 of Appendix A, the emissions of pollutants on the peak day of construction would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 21 City of Chino

Expose Sensitive Receptors to Toxic Air Contaminants—Operation.

Operation of the proposed project would not result in the development of any substantial sources of air toxics. There are no stationary sources associated with the operations of the project. Nor would the project attract mobile sources that spend long periods queuing and idling at the site. While Eagle’s Nest V tenants would be able to taxi their aircraft (engines on) to their respective hangar doors on both the north and south, aircraft stored in Eagle’s Nest VI hangars would be required to shut off engines on Taxiway R, then be towed to their respective hangars. Additionally, project emissions attributable to the movement of aircraft (idling and taxiing) to and around the project site have been calculated with the Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT 2d) model would result in a negligible amount of pollutant emissions emitted at levels well below SCAQMD significance thresholds, which were established by the SCAQMD to protect human health. Furthermore, the project has been evaluated against SCAQMD’s operational phase LST protocol and as previously described, on-site project emissions would not result in significant concentrations of pollutants at nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, the project would not be a source of substantial amounts of TACs and there would be no impact as a result of the project during operations.

d) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

Less Than Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD, land uses commonly considered to be potential sources of obnoxious odorous emissions include agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed project does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors. Therefore, the proposed project would not be expected to create an odor- related impact.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 22 City of Chino

Biological Resources

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state and federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

This section relies on the following technical report: Burrowing Owl Breeding Season Survey Results for the Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project, August 9, 2018.12 Would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?

12 Bargas Environmental Consulting. Burrowing Owl Breeding Season Survey Results for the Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project. August 9, 2018. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 23 City of Chino

Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated (a). A Burrowing Owl (BUOW) Nesting Season Survey was prepared for the proposed project site. In compliance with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) survey guidelines, four (4) breeding season surveys were conducted by biologists with demonstrated experience and knowledge of burrowing owl biology and ecology. The surveys conducted at the site focused on the areas of suitable habitat for burrowing owl on site and within a 500-foot buffer area. While habitat to support burrowing owl was confirmed on the project site, there were no burrowing owl observed onsite during the four surveys. However, burrowing owls were detected occupying one burrow during three (3) out of the four (4) surveys on the eastern side of the proposed site within the 500-foot buffer, and are well established. While surveying the biological survey area (BSA), the biologists detected an additional 18 burrowing owls that were observed beyond the BSA, comprising approximately two to three families that were well established near the buffer and throughout Chino Airport. The habitat outside of the BSA in the grassy fields next to the taxiways and runways support numerous breeding burrowing owls, as it is regularly mowed and supports ground squirrels. No other candidate, sensitive, or special status species were noted during the surveys. However, MM Bio-2 will mitigate potential impacts to less than significant to candidate, sensitive, or special status species identified on site.

Mitigation Measures:

Bio-1. If construction activities associated with proposed projects must occur during the burrowing owl nesting season (February 1 through August 31), burrowing owl surveys shall be conducted per CDFW- recommended burrowing owl protocol to determine whether the action area and its immediate vicinity are occupied by breeding season burrowing owls. Based on CDFW-protocol, focused breeding season surveys and pre-construction surveys may then be necessary. If burrowing owl are determined to occupy the action area or its vicinity, including within a buffer area of 500 feet around the action area, a mitigation and monitoring plan shall be prepared and implemented prior to, during, and after project activities, as necessary.

Bio-2. When possible, the removal of potential nesting vegetation for migratory birds, including the California horned lark, shall occur outside the nesting season. A qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird study if this is not feasible. Surveys should be conducted no more than three days prior to removal date. If active nests are found, buffers shall be established around the vegetation (300 feet for raptors, 50 feet for all other birds). Construction activities impacting the nests shall be postponed until the nest is no longer active.

b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service?

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 24 City of Chino

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state and federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

No Impact (b, c) Riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, are not present on the proposed project site. In addition, federally protected wetlands are not present on the site, nor are Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional waters. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in impacts to ACOE, RWQCB, or CDFW jurisdiction. Permit authorizations or certifications from these governing regulatory agencies will not be required to construct the proposed project.

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated (d). There are no migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites present on the Airport. However, migratory species are known to occasionally move across the Airport. Mitigation measures Bio-1 and Bio-2 will reduce potential impacts to migratory species that may be moving across or nesting at the Airport below a level of significance.

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

No Impact (e) The City of Chino’s Open Space and Conservation Element contains two general objectives for protecting biological resources within the City:

• Objective OSC-1.1 Protect and enhance habitats that could support rare, endangered, or threatened plant and animal species. • Objective OSC-1.2 Locate urban development away from identified sensitive species habitats.

The Airport is not mapped within a Biological Resources Overlay District for the County of San Bernardino. The County’s Conservation Element does state, however, the following overall goal for protecting biological resources:

• GOAL CO 2. The County will maintain and enhance biological diversity and healthy ecosystems throughout the County.

Development of the proposed project site would not conflict with these objectives and goals and their associated policies.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 25 City of Chino

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?

No Impact (f). There are no Habitat Conservation Plans or Natural Community Conservation Plans present on or near the Airport.13

13 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 26 City of Chino

Cultural Resources/Tribal Cultural Resources

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? d) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

This section relies on the technical analyses contained in the Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Resource Assessment of the project site (Appendix C-Cultural Resources Assessment for the Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park).14 The analysis included a CHRIS and Cultural Resources Background Research records search, Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) outreach, background research, and a field pedestrian survey and site visit. Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?

14 Material Culture Consulting. Cultural Resources Assessment of the Proposed Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Site. August 2018.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 27 City of Chino

Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (a-b). The proposed aviation business park project will construct approximately 158,490 sf feet of concrete tilt-up hangars for executive and corporate aircraft storage and maintenance on approximately 8.5 acres of unimproved land designated for airport development in the 2003 Master Plan and Chino Municipal Code.

A Phase I cultural resource assessment of the project area was conducted that included a California Historic Resources Inventory System (CHRIS) and Cultural Resources Background Research records search, Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) outreach, background research, a field pedestrian survey and site visit. The records search results indicated no previously recorded resource within the project Area nor within a 1-mile buffer of the area. During the field survey, no cultural resources were encountered, including historical resources as defined in § 15064.5. Based on the results of the cultural resources search and survey, the proposed project area is considered to have a low sensitivity for presence of prehistoric or historical archaeological deposits or features (Material Culture Consulting 2018, p.32). Although the potential for archaeological and paleontological resources at the project site is low, there is always the chance that unexpected resources could be uncovered during site development. The following mitigation measures will be implemented to ensure that potential impacts to unknown archaeological resources would be less than significant:

Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures:

CR-1. In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground- disturbing activities, an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s professional qualification standards in archaeology shall be retained. Construction activities (e.g., grading, grubbing, vegetation clearing) within 9 meters (25 feet) of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance under the NRHP and the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR). Construction activities could continue in other areas. If the discovery proves to be significant, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted and would be discussed in consultation with the San Bernardino County Museum.

CR-2. For intermediate and long-term development projects where not previously surveyed, field surveys shall be undertaken prior to development to determine the presence of unidentified historic properties or archaeological resources on the Airport. Any findings will be properly documented according to applicable San Bernardino County Museum procedures. If Native American artifacts are uncovered, consultation with representatives of the Native American community shall occur.

CR-3. In the event that unknown paleontological resources are discovered during construction, the San Bernardino County Museum shall be notified immediately. Construction activities (e.g., grading, grubbing, vegetation clearing) within 9 meters (25 feet) of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated.

c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries?

Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (c). Application of mitigation measure CR-4 below would reduce the potential impact disturbing human remains to less than significant.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 28 City of Chino

CR-4. If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during implementation of the proposed project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The MLD may, with the permission of the land owner, or his or her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The MLD shall complete their inspection and make their recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access by the landowner to inspect the discovery. The recommendation may include the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials. Upon the discovery of the Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this mitigation measure, with the MLD regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account the possibility of multiple human remains. The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. Whenever the NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD identified fails to make a recommendation, or the landowner or his or her authorized representative rejects the recommendation of the descendants and the mediation provided for in Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide measures acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her authorized representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with Native American human remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance.

d) cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (d). The provisions of Public Resources Code §21074 were established pursuant to Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52). AB 52 requires meaningful consultation with California Native American Tribes on potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined in Public Resources Code §21074. AB 52 applies to all development projects that have a notice of preparation (NOP) or a notice of negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration filed on or after July 1, 2015. Accordingly, the project is subject to the provisions of AB 52. As part of the AB 52 consultation processes Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 29 City of Chino

required by State law, the City of Chino sent notification of the proposed project to Native American tribes with possible traditional or cultural affiliation to the area.

In accordance with AB 52, a tribe must submit a written request to the relevant lead agency if it wishes to be notified of projects within its traditionally and culturally affiliated area. The lead agency must provide written, formal notification to the tribes that have requested it within 14 days of determining that a project application is complete, or deciding to undertake a project. The tribe must respond to the lead agency within 30 days of receipt of the notification if it wishes to engage in consultation on the project, and the lead agency must begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving the request for consultation. Consultation concludes when either 1): the parties agree to mitigation measures to avoid a significant effect, if one exists, on a tribal cultural resource, or 2) a party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes mutual agreement cannot be reached. AB 52 also addresses confidentiality during tribal consultation per Public Resources Code Section 21082.3(c). Pursuant to the requirements of AB 52, the City sent informational letters about the proposed project and requests for consultation to each tribe on the City’s list of tribes requesting consultation in December of 2018. The Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians—Kizh Nation responded to the City’s AB 52 outreach, writing: Due to the project site being located within and around a sacred village, adjacent to sacred water courses, major traditional trade routes, and is within a sacred landscape for ceremonies and homesites, there is a high potential to impact Tribal Cultural Resources still present within the soil from the thousands of years of prehistoric activities that occurred within and around these Tribal Cultural landscapes. Therefore, to avoid impacting or destroying Tribal Cultural Resources that may be inadvertently unearthed during the project's ground disturbing activities, below is the mitigation language approved by the Kizh Nation Tribal Government for use with this project.

Tribal Cultural Resources Mitigation Measures: CR-5. Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant: The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/consultant who is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, potholing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Resources.

CR -6. Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural and Archaeological Resources: Upon discovery of any archaeological resources, cease construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the find until the find can be assessed. All archaeological resources unearthed by project construction activities shall be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/consultant approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians-Kizh Nation. If the resources are Native American in origin, the Gabrieleño Band of Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 30 City of Chino

Mission Indians-Kizh Nation shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of these resources. Typically, the Tribe will request reburial or preservation for educational purposes. Work may continue on other parts of the project while evaluation and, if necessary, mitigation takes place (CEQA Guidelines Section15064.5 [f]). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource”, time allotment and funding sufficient to allow for implementation of avoidance measures, or appropriate mitigation, must be available. The treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(f) for historical resources and for unique archaeological resources (PRC §21083.2(b)). Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non-profit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County or the Fowler Museum, if such an institution agrees to accept the material. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to a local school or historical society in the area for educational purposes.

CR-7. Unanticipated Discovery of Human Remains and Associated Funerary Objects:

Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. Upon discovery, the tribal and/or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead archaeologist, and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the remains are Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and secure to prevent any further disturbance. If the finds are determined to be Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). If the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects.

CR-8. Treatment Measures:

Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the landowner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. In the case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 31 City of Chino

recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe will work closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, ethically, and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be approved by the Tribe for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure completely recovery of all material. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submitted to the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains.

Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any cultural materials recovered. Therefore, implementation of mitigation measures CR-5 to CR-8 would reduce potential impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources to less than significant.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 32 City of Chino

Energy

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?

Less Than Significant Impact (a). Construction and operation of the proposed project would be in compliance with the City of Chino’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code,15 and the City of Chino’s Green Building Standards Code,16 both of which have adopted by reference the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen).17 The purpose of the CALGreen code is to improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories:18

• Planning and design. • Energy efficiency. • Water efficiency and conservation. • Material conservation and resource efficiency. • Environmental quality.

Compliance with City and State Green Building development standards would ensure potential impacts to the environment due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources would be less than significant.

15 City of Chino Municipal Code. Chapter 15.43-Building Energy Efficiency Standards Code. May 2018. 16 City of Chino Municipal Code. Chapter 15.42-Green Building Standards Code. May 2018. 17 State of California Department of Energy. California Green Building Standards Code, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, Parts 6 and 11. January 2017. 18 California Building Standards Commission. Guide to the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code. January 2017.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 33 City of Chino

b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Less Than Significant Impact (b). CALGreen is the mandatory green building standards code. The California Green Building Standards Commission (CBSC) was directed to develop green building standards in 2007 in an effort to meet the goals of California’s landmark initiative AB 32, which established a comprehensive program of cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases (GHG) to 1990 levels by 2020.19 The Chino Climate Action Plan CAP (2013) is a strategic planning document that identifies sources of GHG emissions within the City’s boundaries, presents current and future emissions estimates, identifies a GHG reduction target for future years, and presents strategic programs, policies, and projects to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation, land use, water use, and waste sectors. The GHG-reduction strategies in the CAP build on inventory results and key opportunities prioritized by City staff and members of the public. The CAP strategies consist of strategies that identify the steps the City will take to support reductions in GHG emissions. The City will achieve these reductions in GHG emissions through a mix of voluntary programs and new strategic standards. All standards presented in the CAP respond to the needs of development, avoiding unnecessary regulation, streamlining new development, and achieving more efficient use of resources.

Both the existing and the projected GHG inventories in the CAP were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City of Chino General Plan 2025. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City of Chino General Plan 2025—the project site is designated by the City’s General Plan as Public, consistent with the entirety of the Chino Airport. The Public General Plan designation provides for major public uses or institutions, including airport-related land uses located at the airport, such as that proposed by the project. Since the project is consistent with the General Plan it is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan. As a result, the project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by the City to develop the CAP. In addition, all development in Chino, including the project, is required to adhere to all City-adopted policy provisions, including those contained in the adopted CAP (also Section 15.45 of the Municipal Code). The City ensures all provisions of the Chino CAP/City Municipal Code are incorporated into projects and their permits through development review and applications of conditions of approval as applicable. Therefore, the project would comply with the Chino CAP, and would not conflict with an applicable plan intended to reduce GHG emissions.

19 Ibid.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 34 City of Chino

Geology and Soils

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

This section relies on the technical analyses contained in a site-specific geotechnical investigation report for the proposed project (Appendix D).20 The purpose of the investigation is to summarize geotechnical and geologic conditions at the site, to assess their potential impact on the proposed development, and to develop geotechnical and engineering geologic design parameters, and to be consistent with the city of Chino Municipal Code regarding new development.

20 RMA Group, Geotechnical Investigation Report for Proposed Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park, Chino Airport, 7000 Merrill Avenue, Chino, CA. May 22, 2018.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 35 City of Chino

Would the project:

a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides?

Less Than Significant Impact (a). The site is located in a seismically active area, as is the case throughout Southern California. At this time, it is not possible to state with certainty when and where future large- magnitude earthquakes will occur, or what the magnitude and intensity of these events will be. However, the site is not located within the boundaries of an Earthquake Fault Zone for fault-rupture hazard as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and no faults are known to pass through the property. The nearest Earthquake Fault Zone is located about 4 miles to the southwest of the site along the Chino fault. The nearest fault is the Central Avenue fault located approximately 3 miles to the southwest). Since the site is not located within the boundaries of an Earthquake Fault Zone and no faults are known to pass through the property, surface fault rupture within the site is considered unlikely (RMA Group 2018).

Strong seismic activity has occurred in this region in the past. The nearest of these earthquakes was the magnitude 5.5 Upland Earthquake of 1990, which was epicentered approximately 11 miles to the north. Research of regional geologic and seismic data did not reveal any known instances of ground failure associated with regional seismic activity within the site. As a mandatory condition of project approval, the City will require the proposed project be constructed in accordance with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), also known as California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 24, and the City Building Code. CALGreen and City Building Code are designed to preclude significant adverse effects associated with strong seismic ground shaking. In addition, application of seismic design requirements contained in the 2019 California Building Code to the construction of the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts from seismic ground shaking (RMA Group 2018).

Seismically induced settlement occurs most frequently in areas underlain by loose, granular sediments. Damage as a result of seismically induced settlement is most dramatic when differential settlement occurs in areas with large variations in the thickness of underlying sediments. Settlement caused by ground shaking is often non-uniformly distributed, which can result in differential settlement. The analysis of the material classification contained in the geotechnical investigation indicates anticipated total and differential seismically induced settlements at the site will be on the order of one-inch and one-half inch, respectively.

There are no upgradient water reservoirs or dams located adjacent to or in the vicinity of the site. Consequently, seismically induced flooding at the site is unlikely.

Liquefaction is a phenomenon where earthquake-induced ground motions increase the pore pressure in Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 36 City of Chino

saturated, granular soils until it is equal to the confining, overburden pressure. When this occurs, the soil can completely lose its shear strength and enter a liquefied state. The possibility of liquefaction is dependent upon grain size, relative density, confining pressure, saturation of the soils, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. In order for liquefaction to occur, three criteria must be met: underlying loose, coarse-grained (sandy) soils, a groundwater depth of less than about 50 feet, and a potential for seismic shaking from nearby large-magnitude earthquake. Liquefaction is considered unlikely at the project site due to the grain size and density for the native soils and the depth to the water table which is in excess of 50 feet (RMA Group 2018, p.6).

Due to the low gradient of the site and surrounding area, land sliding is not a hazard at this property (RMA Group 2018, p.4).

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Less Than Significant Impact (b). Construction activities associated with the project would involve earth movement and the exposure of soil, which would temporarily increase erosion susceptibility. In the long- term, development of the subject property would increase impervious surface cover and permanent landscaping on the project site, thereby reducing the potential for erosion and loss of topsoil that currently occurs. The project would be required to adhere to standard regulatory requirements, including, but not limited to, requirements imposed by the City of Chino’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater Permit (State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010- 0036) and a project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize water pollutants including sedimentation in stormwater runoff. A site- specific WQMP and Hydrology analyses have been prepared for this project (Appendix G). Therefore, the potential impact to soil erosion/loss of topsoil would be less than significant impact with the application of relevant policy and development code.

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?

Less Than Significant Impact (c). See discussions above (a-b).

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?

Less Than Significant Impact (d). Expansion testing indicates near surface soils have a very low expansion potential. Therefore, reinforcement of footings for expansive soil is not required (RMA Group 2018).

e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?

No impact (e) The proposed project would be connected to the city’s existing wastewater system—no septic tank or alternative wastewater system would be required.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 37 City of Chino

f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

No Impact (f). No unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature were noted on or adjacent to the project site during the Phase I Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment (Material Cultural Consulting 2018).

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 38 City of Chino

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

The analysis in this section relies on a site-specific Emissions Assessment (Appendix A). 21 Would the project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Less Than Significant Impact (a)—Construction. Construction-related activities that would generate GHGs include worker commute trips, haul trucks carrying supplies and materials to and from the project site, and off-road construction equipment (e.g., dozers, loaders, excavators). Project construction would result in the generation of approximately 778 metric tons of CO2e over the course of construction (Appendix A, Table 3-2). Once construction is complete, the generation of these GHG emissions would cease. Projected GHGs from construction have been quantified and amortized over the life of the project (30 years). The amortized construction emissions are added to the annual average operational emissions consistent with SCAQMD recommendations.

Operations. Operation of the project would result in GHG emissions predominantly associated with the motor vehicle use predominately associated with worker commutes. Long-term operational GHG emissions attributable to the project are identified in Table 3-3 of Appendix A, and compared to SCAQMD’s interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. Operational- generated emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s interim screening level numeric bright- line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually.

21 ECORP Consulting. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project AQ/GHG Assessment. August 2020. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 39 City of Chino

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

The Chino Climate Action Plan CAP (2013) is a strategic planning document that identifies sources of GHG emissions within the City’s boundaries, presents current and future emissions estimates, identifies a GHG reduction target for future years, and presents strategic programs, policies, and projects to reduce emissions from the energy, transportation, land use, water use, and waste sectors. The GHG-reduction strategies in the CAP build on inventory results and key opportunities prioritized by City staff and members of the public. The CAP strategies consist of strategies that identify the steps the City will take to support reductions in GHG emissions. The City will achieve these reductions in GHG emissions through a mix of voluntary programs and new strategic standards. All standards presented in the CAP respond to the needs of development, avoiding unnecessary regulation, streamlining new development, and achieving more efficient use of resources.

Both the existing and the projected GHG inventories in the CAP were derived based on the land use designations and associated densities defined in the City of Chino General Plan 2025. The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation and development density presented in the City of Chino General Plan 2025. As previously stated, the project site is designated by the City’s General Plan as Public, consistent with the entirety of the Chino Airport. The Public General Plan designation provides for major public uses or institutions, including airport-related land uses located at the airport, such as that proposed by the project. Since the project is consistent with the General Plan it is consistent with the types, intensity, and patterns of land use envisioned for the site vicinity in the General Plan. As a result, the project would not conflict with the land use assumptions or exceed the population or job growth projections used by the City to develop the CAP. In addition, all development in Chino, including the project, is required to adhere to all City-adopted policy provisions, including those contained in the adopted CAP (also Section 15.45 of the Municipal Code). The City ensures all provisions of the Chino CAP/City Municipal Code are incorporated into projects and their permits through development review and applications of conditions of approval as applicable. Therefore, the project would comply with the Chino CAP, and would not conflict with an applicable plan intended to reduce GHG emissions.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 40 City of Chino

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact

Mitigation

Incorporated

Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment

Less Than Significant Impact (a, b). The proposed aviation business park project will develop hangars for executive and corporate aircraft storage and maintenance on parcels designated for airport development. The proposed project, in its operations, may use materials such as fuel, paint products, lubricants, solvents, and industrial types of cleaning products. The Master plan forecasted that, as aircraft operations increase, an increase in the amount of hazardous materials being routinely transported, used, or disposed of in association with the airport would increase as well. However, any business in Chino that handles, uses, generates, or stores hazardous materials is required to submit a “Business Emergency/Contingency

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 41 City of Chino

Plan” to the Hazardous Materials Division of the County of San Bernardino Fire Department. Review and approval of any hazardous material use of or storage is also required by the Chino Valley Independent Fire District (City of Chino Safety Element 2010). The proposed project will comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. In addition, all operators at the Airport must comply with applicable regulations pertaining to the use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials as outlined in FAA Order 1050.10B, Prevention, Control and Abatement of Environmental Pollution at FAA Facilities; Order 1050.15A, Underground Storage Tanks at FAA Facilities; and AC 150/5320-15, Management of Airport Industrial Wastes (CSB Department of Airports 2012, p.34).

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

Less Than Significant Impact (c) The closest school to the proposed project site is Cal Aero Preserve Academy, a K-12 school located over one (1) mile southeast of the project site. No other schools exist or are planned within one-quarter mile from the Airport. However, the project proponent will notify the school of the project application for development to comply with HM-1, Hazards and Hazardous Materials below.

Hazards and Hazardous Mitigation Measures

HM-1. New development on the Airport that is located within one-quarter mile of Cal Aero Preserve Academy shall consult with the school district as required by California Code of Regulations, Section 15186, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.

d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?

Less Than Significant Impact (d) A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted for the proposed project site (Converse 2018, Appendix F).22 This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Property except for the following: the property is located within the boundaries of the Chino Airport which is undergoing remedial activities for two (2) groundwater contamination plumes. However, based on the location of the known plumes (not located on or adjoining to the property site) and known historical uses of the property (agricultural or undeveloped), no further action is warranted at this time (Converse 2018).

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?

22 Converse Consultants. Phase I ESA of the Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park. August 15, 2018.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 42 City of Chino

No Impact (e). The Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUP)23 compatibility map for the Chino Airport shows the project site to be in Compatibility Zone D. Zone D usage intensity criteria permits an average of 150 people per acre, and up to 450 people shall be allowed to occupy any single acre of the site. The proposed aviation business park project would develop aircraft storage hangars in compliance with the ALUP, the city of Chino Municipal Code, and the Chino Airport Master Plan (CSB Department of Airports 2003). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.

f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

Less Than Significant Impact (f). The proposed project is located on an existing airport site and will not result in off-site development. The project will not impair the implementation of, or physically interfere with adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans for San Bernardino or Riverside Counties (CSB Department of Airports 2012).

g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

Less Than Significant Impact (g). The proposed project is located within an area of the City that is identified as “Little or no threat” on the “Wildland Urban Interface Threat to Community” map of the City of Chino’s Safety Element (2010). Therefore, development at the airport would not expose people or structures to a significant risk to wildland fires.

23 Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. October 14, 2004.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 43 City of Chino

Hydrology and Water Quality

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite; iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or iv) impede or redirect flood flows? d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

The analysis in this section relies on a site-specific Preliminary Hydrology Study24 and a Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan25 (Appendices G-1 and G-2).

Would the project:

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?

24 Valued Engineering. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Preliminary Hydrology Study. August 2020. 25 Valued Engineering. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park. August 2020.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 44 City of Chino

Less Than Significant Impact (a). The proposed project consists of the development of multiple hangars, parking, landscape, curbs, gutters, and hardscape improvements. Also, parkway and curb and gutter improvements are proposed for the frontage street along Merrill Avenue. The project improvements also include a new driveway approach located at the westerly end of the Merrill Avenue frontage for this proposed development.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) provides the authority to establish water quality standards, control discharges, develop waste treatment management plans and practices, prevent or minimize the loss of wetlands, and regulate other issues concerning water quality. Water quality concerns related to airport development most often relate to the potential for surface runoff and soil erosion, as well as the storage and handling of fuel, petroleum products, solvents, etc.26

Construction and operation of the proposed project has the potential for surface runoff and soil erosion, as well as the storage and handling of fuel, petroleum products, solvents, etc. However, the proposed project would be required to adhere to standard regulatory requirements, including, but not limited to, requirements imposed by the City of Chino’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater Permit (State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036) and a project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in Appendix G-2 that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize water pollutants including sedimentation in stormwater runoff. To accomplish this, proposed site grading directs the storm water into several drop inlets that connect to an onsite storm drain system which ultimately discharges into the proposed gravity separator and underground chambers. Underground chambers are being used for stormwater capture in order to maintain predevelopment site hydrology and onsite-retention and infiltration of the 2-year, 24-hour storm event. The WQMP exhibit in Section 6.1.A of Appendix G-2 shows the drainage management area delineation. All stormwater runoff from the 7.43 acres of this development will be separate from the overall flows/volume produced by the Chino Airport property.

Therefore, with the use of the structural BMP system to manage water pollution and sedimentation in stormwater runoff, and the application of relevant policy and municipal code, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to water quality standards or waste discharge requirements.

b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?

26 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 45 City of Chino

Less Than Significant Impact (b). The Airport is not located within a groundwater recharge area. Water is provided to the Airport by the City of Chino. To meet demand, the City imports water, draws water from the Chino Groundwater Basin, and uses recycled water that is processed locally by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). Approximately 22 percent of the City water supply comes from recycled water27. In addition, the 2012 Update concluded that airport hangar projects at the Chino Airport would not substantially increase the use of groundwater resources such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level.

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: (i) result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; (ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; (iii) create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; or (iv) impede or redirect flood flows?

d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

Less Than Significant Impact (c through e). A preliminary hydrology study was prepared to quantify the 10-year and 100-year peak storm flow rates for the pre-developed and post-developed site conditions. The study demonstrated that the proposed on-site drainage plan is adequately sized to contain the additional runoff generated in the post developed condition for the 100-year storm; the proposed development will preserve the existing drainage patterns in the area; and the increased flow from development will not hinder the overall master design for the Chino Airport Hydrology (Valued Engineering 2020). In addition, the Chino Airport is not located within either the 100- or 500-year floodplain as mapped on the City of Chino’s Safety Element (2010). It also lies outside of the Prado Dam Flood Inundation Area (City of Chino 2025 General Plan, Safety Element, 2010). A review of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM number 06071C9335H map4, which includes the Airport property, indicates that the majority of the Airport is located within Zone D, an area in which flood hazards are undetermined, but possible. The easternmost portion of the Airport is located within Zone X, which is defined as an area outside of the 100-year and 500-year floodplains. The nearest areas within a known 100-year floodplain are located approximately 0.75-mile to the south and west of Airport property. Therefore, the proposed aviation business park project improvements will not occur within a known 100- year floodplain. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding.

27 City of Chino. Envision Chino General Plan 2025, Public Facilities and Services Element. 2010.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 46 City of Chino

The Chino Airport’s inland location precludes tsunami hazards. There are also no lakes in proximity to the Airport that could result in seiche hazards. The Airport is not within the Prado Dam Flood Inundation Area. Mudflows are not a hazard due to the geography of the area.

The proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. The proposed project would be required to adhere to standard regulatory requirements, including, but not limited to, requirements imposed by the City of Chino’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Stormwater Permit (State Water Resources Control Board Order No. R8-2010-0036) and a project-specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) that includes Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize water pollutants including sedimentation in stormwater runoff.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 47 City of Chino

Land Use and Planning

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established community?

No Impact (a) The proposed project site is located in the Chino Airport, and all applicable land use maps, including the neighboring City of Ontario, identify the Airport as an existing land use. The Chino Airport Master Plan and the city of Chino Municipal Code guide the land development at the airport. The Airport has been an established land use in Chino since 1940 and build-out at the airport, including the proposed project, would not divide any established communities.

b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?

No Impact (b). The proposed project is consistent with the 2003 Master Plan and all applicable overlay and land use maps. The City of Chino 2025 General Plan, Safety Element (2010) addresses the General Plan’s compatibility with the Airport. Chino Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan28 which established airport safety zones, i.e., zones that require certain restrictions on land uses depending on their relationship to the runways.

28 Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission. Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. October 14, 2004. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 48 City of Chino

Mineral Resources

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?

No Impact (a, b). The Airport property is classified as MRZ-3 on the City of Chino 2025 General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element (2010) Mineral Resource Zones map. This map indicates that there may be sand and gravel deposits at the Airport, but there is insufficient data to ascertain whether these mineral deposits are significant. Therefore, it is unlikely that impacts to known mineral resources or locally important mineral recovery sites as shown on a land use plan would occur as a result of the proposed project.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 49 City of Chino

Noise

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project result in: a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

The analysis in this section relies on a site-specific Noise Impact Assessment (Appendix E).29 For purposes of this analysis and where applicable, City of Chino noise standards were used for evaluation of project- related noise impacts to receptors located in the City of Chino. City of Ontario noise standards were used for the assessment of project-related noise impacts to receptors located in the City of Ontario.

Methodology

This analysis of the existing and future noise environments is based on noise prediction modeling and empirical observations. In order to estimate the worst-case construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity, predicted construction noise levels were calculated utilizing the Federal Highway Administration’s Roadway Construction Model (2006). On-site source noise levels attributable to the movement of aircraft (idling and taxiing) to and around the project site have been calculated with the Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT 2d) model, which dynamically models aircraft performance in space and time to produce noise impacts. AEDT is currently used by the U.S. government to consider the interdependencies between aircraft-related fuel burn, noise and emissions. The results of the FAA AEDT model are coupled with the SoundPLAN 3D noise model, which predicts noise levels based on the location, noise level, and frequency spectra of the noise sources as well as the geometry and reflective properties of the local terrain, buildings and barriers.

29 ECORP Consulting. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Noise Impact Assessment. August 2020.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 50 City of Chino

Groundborne vibration levels associated with construction-related activities for the project were evaluated utilizing typical groundborne vibration levels associated with construction equipment, obtained from the Caltrans guidelines set forth above. Potential groundborne vibration impacts related to structural damage and human annoyance were evaluated, taking into account the distance from construction activities to nearby land uses and typically applied criteria for structural damage and human annoyance.

Would the project result in:

a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?

Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (a)—Construction. Noise associated with the construction proposed project would be temporary and would vary depending on the nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with the operation of off-road equipment for on-site construction activities as well as construction vehicle traffic on area roadways. Construction noise typically occurs intermittently and varies depending on the nature or phase of construction (e.g., building construction, paving). Noise generated by construction equipment, including earth movers, material handlers, and portable generators, can reach high levels. Typical operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve 1 or 2 minutes of full power operation followed by 3 to 4 minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources of acoustical disturbance would be random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping large pieces of equipment or the hydraulic movement of machinery lifts). During construction, exterior noise levels could negatively affect sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the construction site.

Nearby noise-sensitive land uses consist of scattered single-family residences associated with dairy operations to the north (in Ontario), the nearest being located at approximately 235 feet from the project site. Other nearby noise-sensitive land uses include a single-family residential neighborhood to the northwest (in Chino), and a single-family residential neighborhood to the south of the airport (in Chino). (See Appendix E, Figure 4.); however, both of these neighborhoods are located over 5,000 feet (0.9 mile) from the project site. It is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to a sensitive receptor.

The proposed project would be constructed in two distinct phases of approximately six months per phase. The project would be constructed with concrete tilt-up walls, concrete flooring, metal bi-fold doors, and wood and steel truss roofs. In addition, tenants can construct improvements in compliance with existing code, including upper floors/mezzanines. In order to estimate the worst-case construction noise levels that may occur at the nearest noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity, the combined construction equipment noise levels were calculated using the Roadway Noise Construction Model for the site preparation, grading, paving, building, and coating phases.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 51 City of Chino

Project construction noise potentially experienced at the residence located approximately 235 feet north of the site, and within the City of Ontario, would equal 74.7 dBA. Noise construction standards for all construction phases would not be exceeded as long as construction is limited to the hours of 7:00 am and 6:00 pm on weekdays, and the hours of 9:00 am and 6:00 pm on weekends, consistent with the City of Ontario’s construction noise standards. Mitigation measure NOI-1 would mitigate construction-generated noise levels for conformance with City of Ontario noise standards by restricting construction activities to the hours of 7:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekends. With mitigation incorporated, construction noise would not exceed any standards and impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1. Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 9:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekdays and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekends. The project’s improvement and building plans shall specify this requirement.

In addition to mitigation measure NOI-1, the City of Chino General Plan Noise Element requires all project construction in the City to adhere to Policy P1, which requires a noise monitoring plan to be prepared and submitted prior to starting all construction projects. The noise monitoring plan, subject to City approval, must identify monitoring locations and frequency, instrumentation to be used, and appropriate noise control measures that will be incorporated during construction. The project would also be required to adhere to Policy P2, which mandates the following construction noise control measures to be included as requirements at construction sites to minimize construction noise impacts:

• Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. • Ensure that during construction, trucks and equipment are running only when necessary. • Shield all construction equipment with temporary noise barriers to reduce construction-related noise impacts. • Locate stationary noise-generating equipment as far as possible from sensitive receptors when sensitive receptors adjoin or are near a construction area. • Utilize “quiet” air compressors and similar equipment, where available.

Construction noise associated with the proposed project would be temporary and would vary depending on the nature of the activities being performed. Noise generated would primarily be associated with the operation of off-road equipment for on-site construction activities as well as construction vehicle traffic on area roadways.

The ambient noise levels recorded in the vicinity of the project site range from 53.2 dBA to 68.1 dBA. The ambient recorded noise level at the site itself was measured at 53.2 dBA. Project construction noise levels forecasted for the proposed construction work would result in noise increases at the residential sensitive receptor to the north of the project. This receptor could be exposed to construction noise levels as high as 74.7 dBA (an increase of 21.5 dBA). It should be noted however, that any increase in noise levels at off-

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 52 City of Chino

site receptors during construction would be temporary, and project construction would not generate continuously high noise levels, although occasional single-event disturbances from construction are possible. In addition, the construction noise during the initial periods of construction (i.e., grading work and paving) would be typically reduced in the later construction periods (such as interior building construction at the proposed buildings), as the structures would break the line-of-sight noise transmission from the construction area to the nearby sensitive receptor.

A 3-dBA change in the existing ambient noise environment is just-perceivable to the average human ear outside of the laboratory. A change in level of at least 5 dBA is required before any noticeable change in community response would be expected. A 10-dBA change is subjectively heard as an approximate doubling in loudness and would almost certainly cause an adverse change in community response. Therefore, an increase in the ambient noise environment of 21.5 dBA, even though temporary, would be considered a substantial increase and mitigation measure NOI-2 is recommended. Mitigation measure NOI-2 contains best management practices for reducing construction-generated noise.

The City of Chino is a developing urban community and construction noise is general accepted by urban residents as a reality within the urban environment. Furthermore, as previously noted, with mitigation incorporated, project construction noise would not exceed any numeric noise thresholds. Additionally, mitigation measure NOI-2 would further reduce temporary construction noise. For these reasons, the impact is less than significant.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2. The following best management practices shall be incorporated during project construction.

• Noise and groundborne vibration construction activities whose specific location on the project Site may be flexible (e.g., operation of compressors and generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) shall be conducted as far as possible from the nearest off-site land uses. • When possible, construction activities shall be scheduled so as to avoid operating several pieces of equipment simultaneously, which causes high noise levels. • Flexible sound control curtains shall be placed around all drilling apparatuses, drill rigs, and jackhammers when in use. • The project contractor shall use power construction equipment with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices. • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected around heavy equipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximum extent feasible during construction. • All construction truck traffic shall be restricted to truck routes approved by the City, which shall avoid residential areas and other sensitive receptors to the extent feasible.

A construction notice shall be prepared and shall include the following information: job site address, permit number, name and phone number of the contractor and owner or owner’s agent, hours of construction allowed by code or any discretionary approval for the site, and City telephone numbers

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 53 City of Chino

where violations can be reported. The notice shall be posted and maintained at the construction site prior to the start of construction and displayed in a location that is readily visible to the public and approved by the City.

Less Than Significant Impact (a)—Operation. Project Land Use Compatibility. The City of Chino promulgates a land use compatibility strategy that provides the City with a tool to gauge the compatibility of new land uses relative to existing noise levels. This table, presented as Table 4, identifies normally acceptable, conditionally acceptable, and clearly unacceptable noise levels for various land uses, including industrial land uses such as those proposed by the project. In the case that the noise levels identified at a proposed project site fall within levels considered normally acceptable, the project is considered compatible with the existing noise environment. Acceptable existing noise levels for locating industrial uses is 50-75 dBA CNEL/Ldn (Ecorp Consulting 2019, Table 4).

The noise environment in the proposed project area is impacted by various noise sources. The Chino Airport is an obvious source of noise in the project vicinity. The Airport Master Plan for the Chino Airport contains noise contours for the Airport, and as depicted by these noise contours, the 65-dB noise contour does not extend beyond the Chino Airport boundaries, or even on to the project site, which is located along the northern boundary of the Airport. Additionally, in order to quantify existing ambient noise levels in the project area ECORP conducted four short-term noise measurements on August 9, 2018. The noise measurement sites were representative of typical existing noise exposure within and immediately adjacent to the project site and are considered representative of the noise levels throughout. The ambient recorded noise level on the project site was recorded at 53.2 dBA near the project site. As these noise ranges are below 75 dBA, the project site is considered an appropriate noise environment to locate proposed industrial land uses (Ecorp Consulting 2018, Table 3).

Noise-sensitive land uses are locations where people reside or where the presence of unwanted sound could adversely affect the use of the land. Residences, schools, hospitals, guest lodging, libraries, and some passive recreation areas would each be considered noise-sensitive and may warrant unique measures for protection from intruding noise. The nearest noise sensitive land use to the project include scattered single-family residences associated with dairy operations to the north (in Ontario), the nearest being located at approximately 235 feet from the project site. Other nearby noise-sensitive land uses include a single-family residential neighborhood to the northwest (in Chino), and a single-family residential neighborhood to the south of the airport in Chino (Figure 4).

Operational Off-Site Traffic Noise. Project operation would also result in additional traffic on adjacent roadways, thereby increasing vehicular noise in the project vicinity. According to the Trip Generation "Analysis prepared by the Ganddini Group, the proposed project would generate an average of 198 automobile worker trips daily, and the majority of automobiles visiting the Chino Airport would arrive via Merrill Avenue. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013), doubling of traffic on a roadway would result in an increase of 3 dB (a barely perceptible increase). The proposed project’s average daily trips (198 total) would be nominal compared to the current vehicle capacity of Merrill Avenue. As previously discussed,

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 54 City of Chino

according to the Chino Airport Master Plan, planned growth associated with the Chino Airport is expected to result in 28,438 average daily automobile trips to and from the Airport by the year 2025 (County of San Bernardino 2011). In the case that only two percent of this projection has been fulfilled at the time of this analysis, the project would still fail to result in a perceptible increase in traffic noise levels. Traffic noise impacts associated with the project would be less than significant.

On-Site Aircraft Movement Noise. The City of Chino’s regulations with respect to noise are included in Chapter 9.40 of the Municipal Code, also known as the Noise Ordinance. As depicted in Table 6, the City promulgates exterior noise level limits of 55 dBA from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm and 50 dBA from 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m. for residential properties. The “standards” included Table 6 are not to be exceeded for a cumulative period of more than thirty (30) minutes in any hour; the standard plus 5 dBA for a cumulative period of more than fifteen (15) minutes in any hour; and the standard plus 10 dBA for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour the standard plus 15 dBA for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour. The standard exterior noise level shall not be exceeded by 20 dBA for any period of time. The City of Ontario’s regulations with respect to noise are included in Chapter 29 of the City of Ontario Municipal Code. Ontario promulgates exterior noise level limits of 65 dBA from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm and 45 dBA from 10:00 p.m.to 7:00 a.m. for residential properties.

The 13 smaller hangars proposed under Phase 1 would be designed for private tenants and are expected to store one to two aircraft per hangar. The larger hangar would store multiple aircraft for the duration of required service. The six smaller hangars proposed under Phase 2 are expected to store one corporate, multi-passenger aircraft per hangar while the larger Phase 2 hangar would be designed to store one large corporate jet such as a Gulfstream. The proposed Phase 1 units, which would be positioned at the northern portion of the site adjacent to Merrill Avenue, would be constructed with metal bi-fold doors opening to the south only. Aircraft stored in Eagle’s Nest VI hangars will be required to shut off engines on Taxiway R, then be towed to their respective hangars.

Based on a capacity of a maximum of 35 aircraft on the project site at a single time, the AEDT model was used to calculate noise levels at the project site as a result of the arrival of 9 aircraft and departure of an additional 6 aircraft in a single day. This level of daily aircraft activity accounts for the maximum amount of potential movement from 35 additional aircraft at the Chino Airport based on current flight operations and schedules. This approach to project noise calculation is conservative as it assumes the proposed capacity of the project would instigate new aircraft travel to the Chino Airport, as opposed to simply accommodating existing aircraft that already visit the Chino Airport. In other words, this analysis estimates noise levels based on the assumption that the project could generate 15 new aircraft trips to or from the Chino Airport daily. The general types of aircraft modeled include a Gulfstream, Boeing 727, and smaller private aircraft.

According to the FAA AEDT model, the instigation of 15 additional aircraft movements at the Chino Airport, including from landings, takeoffs, idling, and taxiing, would result in a noise level of 78.8 dBA Leq at the loudest (occurring at the central-west portion of the Chino Airport, adjacent to 2 runways. For the purpose of this analysis, this 78.8 dBA noise level is applied as if originating from the project site

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 55 City of Chino

exclusively, using the SoundPLAN 3D noise model, which predicts noise levels based on the location, noise level, and frequency spectra of the noise sources as well as the geometry and reflective properties of the local terrain, buildings, and barriers. As previously stated, sound spreads (propagates) uniformly outward in a spherical pattern, and the sound level decreases (attenuates) at a rate of approximately 6 dB for each doubling of distance from a stationary source. Additionally, noise levels are reduced by intervening structures and barriers, which can provide a substantial reduction in the nuisance effect in some cases. To be effective, a noise barrier must completely break the line of sight between the noise source and the receptors, must be free of degrading holes or gaps, and must not be flanked by nearby reflective surfaces.

A review of the project Site Plan (Figure 2) depicts a site design intended to reduce project noise levels to the maximum extent feasible. For instance, the proposed Phase 2 units, which would be positioned at the northern portion of the site adjacent to Merrill Avenue, would be constructed with metal bi-fold doors opening to the south only, in the opposite direction of the residences to the north. Aircraft stored in Eagle’s Nest VI hangars (Phase 2) would be required to shut off engines on Taxiway R, then be towed to their respective hangars. Noise originating on the project site would be buffered by Phase 1 and Phase 2 units, as well as by the numerous buildings flanking the site to the south and west. Predicted project noise levels resulting from the generation of up to 78.8 dBA at the project site are shown in the impact assessment report in Appendix E (Ecorp Consulting 2019, Figure 5) shows the. As shown, on-site noise associated with the project would not reach levels beyond the existing ambient noise currently experienced. For instance, the residence to the north of the site, the closest sensitive noise receptor, would be expected to experience approximately 30 dBA from project operations. This level is below the ambient recorded noise level ranges of 53.2 dBA to 68.1 dBA near the project site (Ecorp Consulting 2019, Figure 3), and below the noise limit thresholds promulgated by both the cities of Chino and Ontario. Traffic noise impacts associated with the onsite aircraft movement would be less than significant.

b) Generation of excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels?

Less Than Significant Impact (b)—Construction. Excessive groundborne vibration impacts result from continuously occurring vibration levels. Once operational, the project would not be a source of groundborne vibration. Increases in groundborne vibration levels attributable to the proposed project would be primarily associated with short-term construction-related activities. Construction on the project site would have the potential to result in varying degrees of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved. Ground vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance.

Construction-related ground vibration is normally associated with impact equipment such as pile drivers, jackhammers, and the operation of some heavy-duty construction equipment, such as dozers and trucks. Vibration decreases rapidly with distance and it is acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to sensitive receptors.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 56 City of Chino

The nearest off-site structures to the project site are approximately 65 feet to the south and west. Ground vibration generated by heavy-duty equipment used during construction would not be anticipated to exceed approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet (Ecorp Consulting 2018, Table 9). Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts associated with buildings 65 feet distant would be considered less than significant during project construction.

Less Than Significant Impact (b)—Operation. Project operations would not include the use of any stationary equipment that would result in excessive vibration levels. While the project would accommodate aircraft in the proposed hangars, the project would not noticeably increase the existing amount of taxiing aircraft currently operating at the Airport. All aircraft entering the project site would do so by either taxiing or being towed at slow speeds on smooth surfaces designed to accommodate aircraft movements. Therefore, the project would result in less than significant groundborne vibration impacts during operations.

c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

Less Than Significant Impact (c)—Airport Noise. The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. In addition, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a division of the US Department of Health and Human Services, identifies a worker-related noise level threshold based on the duration of exposure to the source. The worker-related noise level threshold starts at 85 dBA for more than 8 hours per day; for every 3 dBA increase, the exposure time is cut in half. This reduction results in noise level thresholds of 88 dBA for more than 4 hours per day, 92 dBA for more than 1 hour per day, 96 dBA for more than 30 minutes per day, and up to 100 dBA for more than 15 minutes per day. The Chino Airport contains noise contours for the Airport, and as depicted by these noise contours, the 65- dBA noise contour does not extend beyond the Chino Airport boundaries, or even on to the project site, which is located along the northern boundary of the Airport. As previously described, environmental noise levels are generally considered low when the 24-hour day-night average is below 60 dBA, moderate in the 60 to 70 dBA range, and high above 70 dBA. Furthermore, the 65-dBA noise level is below NIOSH’s worker- related noise level threshold of 85 dBA for an 8-hour period.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 57 City of Chino

Population and Housing

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

Would the project:

a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?

Less Than Significant Impact (a). The proposed project consists of the development of multiple hangars, parking, landscape, curbs, gutters, and hardscape improvements, including a new driveway approach located on Merrill Avenue.

The objective of the project is to provide hangar storage space for executive aircraft at the Chino Airport. Hangar development at this location was analyzed in the 2003 Master Plan and 2012 Update. In addition, the 2012 Update found that planned development at the airport would have a less than significant effect on population growth, and road and infrastructure development would occur onsite only. Therefore, planned development at the Airport would not be considered growth-inducing to the region.

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

No Impact (b). The proposed project site is vacant and has been unimproved since the mid-1930’s. The project would not displace housing or people.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 58 City of Chino

Public Services

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact

Impact with Impact

Mitigation XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES: Incorporated Would the project: a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks? Other public facilities?

Would the project:

a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

• Fire protection? • Police protection? • Schools? • Parks? • Other public facilities?

Less Than Significant Impact (a) The proposed project represents new development regulated by the city of Chino Municipal Code and General Plan. As such, it would be required to comply with provisions of the City’s Development Impact Fee Ordinance (DIF).30 The DIF ordinance requires a fee payment that the City that applies to the funding of public facilities, including fire and police protection facilities, schools, parks, libraries, and other public facilities. Mandatory compliance with the Development Impact Fee Ordinance would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Therefore, impacts to public services would be mitigated by ordinance, and would be less than significant.

30 City of Chino. Chino Municipal Code, Ch. 3.40-Development Impact Fees. May 2018. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 59 City of Chino

Recreation Resources

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

Would the project:

a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

No Impact (a, b). The proposed project, development of hangars for aircraft storage and maintenance, represents planned build-out at the airport under the 2003 Master Plan, and will not generate additional demand for parks and other recreational facilities within the City or the region. In addition, no recreational facilities are included in the proposed project nor in the current Airport Master Plan. Therefore, the project as proposed would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, nor include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 60 City of Chino

Transportation

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

The information in this section relies on an automobile trip generation/trip distribution analysis for the proposed project (Appendix H-1),31 and a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis (Appendix H-2).32 The purpose of this trip generation and trip distribution analysis was to document the number of trips forecast to be generated and distributed by the proposed project.

Would the project:

a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?

No Impact (a). The proposed project is part of the Chino Airport’s planned growth for executive hangar space identified in the 2003 Master Plan and the 2012 Update. According to the 2012 Update, the Airport Master Plan is consistent with the City’s planned growth and related transportation policies. In addition, the City’s General Plan Environmental Impact Report stated, with regard to the Airport, “the policies of the Proposed General Plan and the Focused Growth Plan are internally consistent and are consistent with other adopted plans and programs supporting the provision of aviation facilities or services in the City of Chino.” Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, or conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.

31 Ganddini Group. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Trip Generation Analysis. September 2020. 32 Ganddini Group. Eagle’s Nest Aviation Business Park Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis. September 2020.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 61 City of Chino

b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)—criteria for analyzing traffic impacts?

Less than Significant (b). The proposed project’s potential traffic impacts were estimated using Trip Generation and VMT analyses.

TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS

Table 1 in Appendix H-1 shows the project trip generation forecast based on trips per acre and trips per based aircraft. The trip generation rates were obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition, 2012) and Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), April 2002). The trip generation rates were evaluated, and it was determined that the trip generation rates per based aircraft provided by SANDAG provide a more conservative forecast; therefore, the SANDAG rates were used for this analysis. Trip generation rates were determined for daily trips and AM/PM peak hour trips for the proposed land use. The number of trips forecast to be generated by the proposed project is determined by multiplying the trip generation rates by the land use quantity.

It is noted that trip generation rates from the ITE Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017) were also reviewed; however, the 10th Edition Trip Generation Manual only contains trip rates per employee for the general aviation land use and were not used for this analysis since such information is not known at this time.

As shown in Table 1, the proposed project is forecast to generate approximately 198 daily trips, including 17 trips during the AM peak hour and 30 trips during the PM peak hour. Figure 3 in Appendix H shows the forecast project trip distribution patterns based on review of surrounding land uses and roadway facilities in the project vicinity.

Criteria for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Analyses

This analysis relies on the City of Chino General Plan Transportation Element (2013) and traffic study guidelines from the County of San Bernardino Congestion Management Program [CMP] (2016 Update, Appendix B). Based on the criteria established in the San Bernardino County CMP, the City of Chino typically requires development projects to prepare a traffic impact analysis if the project satisfies one or more of the following conditions:

• The project is forecast to generate and contribute more than 50 two-way peak hour trips to a key intersection (generally defined as the intersection of two streets with Collector or higher classification). • If the project is located within 300 feet of the intersection of two streets designated as Collector or higher in the City of Chino Master Plan. • The project creates safety or operational concerns.

If a project generates less than 50 trips without consideration of pass‐by trips during any peak hour, a focused study may still be required if there are special concerns. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 62 City of Chino

Trip Generation Analysis Conclusion

The proposed project is forecast to generate fewer than 50 peak hour trips and it is located more than 300 feet from the nearest intersection. Assuming roadway improvements shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department, there are no apparent safety or operational concerns with implementation of the project. Therefore, per the trip generation analysis, further traffic analysis does not appear to be necessary for the proposed project.

VMT ANALYSIS

The City of Chino adopted VMT Impact Thresholds through Resolution No. PC2020-0019 on June 16, 2020 (Appendix H-2, Exhibit A). Exhibit A includes a matrix of VMT thresholds and methodologies for various project types. These thresholds and methodologies, while specific to the City of Chino, were chosen for the substantial evidence supporting these decisions and the similarity to all other San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) member agencies ensuring regional consistency.

Project Type Screening

The City-established thresholds include project type screening for local serving retail projects (less than 50,000 square feet). As noted in the OPR Technical Advisory, new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips. By adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving proximity, local-serving retail tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT.

The proposed project is planned to be constructed in accordance with the Chino Airport Master Plan to maintain a long-term development program for a safe, efficient, economical, and environmentally acceptable air transportation facility. Although the proposed project is not perfectly defined as retail use, it has similar VMT-reducing characteristics based on limited existing similar facilities in the region.

The 2003 Chino Airport Master Plan and related 2012 Update document the future development of executive aircraft storage hangars at the project in response to increase need based on market trends and projected future demand. The Chino Airport Annual Aircraft Operations (arrivals and departures) increased from 145,491 in 2001 to 203,090 in 2017 (CSB Department of Airports, Chino Airport Administration, 2018). Since most based aircraft owners prefer to base their aircraft close to their residence or business (2003 Chino Airport Master Plan, p. 2-15), the proposed project would fill a need for hangar space that is expected to continue growing as regional population and the economy grow.

Without the proposed project, demand for such hanger space will have to be filled by other existing hangar facilities in the region, which would extend the travel distance for those users that are currently within the Chino Airport market area. To further illustrate this point, Figure 1 shows a map of the three- mile radius around existing airports in the region. As shown on Figure 1, there are no alternative options for hangar space within a three-mile radius of the project site (Chino Airport). Therefore, the proposed project would improve the proximity of aircraft storage opportunities within the region, thereby shortening travel distances and reducing VMT.

It is also noted that 50,000 square feet of retail is estimated to generate approximately 1,888 daily trips

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 63 City of Chino

based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Edition, 2017) rate for Shopping Center (Land Use Code 820). For comparison, the proposed project is estimated to generate between 50 and 198 daily trips depending on the trip rate generation rate used, as noted in the Project TGA. Using the lower end trip estimate, the project would also qualify for the “small project” screening criteria for projects that generate less than 110 daily trips.

VMT Analysis Conclusion

The proposed project is presumed to result in a less than significant VMT impact based on consistency with the Chino Airport Master Plan, fewer daily trips generated than a local-serving retail use, and similar VMT- reducing effect on the region as local-serving retail use.

c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

No Impact (c). The proposed project’s design will comply with current road safety standards, subject to review by the City of Chino Department of Engineering; therefore, it will not result substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. Also, the proposed project has been sited and designed in compliance with existing airport land use regulations and planning documents, and, therefore, would not result in an unplanned change in air traffic patterns.32

d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

No Impact (d). No impacts to emergency access will occur as a result of the planned land uses on the Airport, including the proposed project. Access to the City’s street and roadway network is subject to review by the appropriate City of Chino Engineering and/or Planning departments. Access to various interior portions of the Airport is subject to FAA review and standards.33

32 County of San Bernardino Department of Airports. Initial Study for the Chino Airport Master Plan Update. October 2012, p.52. 33 Ibid. Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 64 City of Chino

Utilities and Services Systems

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project: a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demanding addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Would the project:

a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments? d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 65 City of Chino

Less Than Significant Impact (a-e). The construction and occupancy of the proposed aviation business park project would be accompanied with permitted entitlements for utilities and services systems, and would not result in significant impacts of existing potable water, wastewater, sewer, and storm infrastructure. In addition, the proposed project site would comply with local, state, and federal policies and ordinances relating to recycling and solid waste disposal, and energy efficiency, and comply with all applicable conditions of development.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 66 City of Chino

Wildfire

Potentially Less Than Less Than No If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very Significant Significant Significant high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

Would the project:

a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?

No Impact (a through d) The proposed project is not located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. In fact, the proposed project is located within an area of the City that is identified as “Little or no threat” on the “Wildland Urban Interface Threat to Community” map of the City of Chino’s Safety Element (2010). Therefore, development of the proposed project at the Chino Airport would not expose people or structures to a significant risk to wildfire.

In addition, access to the City’s street and roadway network is subject to review by the appropriate City of Chino Engineering and/or Planning departments. Furthermore, access to most internal portions of the Airport is subject to FAA review and safety standards. Therefore, no impacts to emergency access would occur as a result of the planned land uses on the Airport, including the proposed project.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 67 City of Chino

Mandatory Findings of Significance

Potentially Less Than Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact with Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare o endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples o the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (a) As outlined in the discussions for biological and cultural resources, the construction and occupancy of the proposed project would not have the potential to significantly affect fish or wildlife habitat, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.

b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?

No Impact (b) The proposed project is consistent with local and regional land use planning policies contained in the 2003 Master Plan and the Chino General Plan 2025, and does not present impacts that are cumulatively considerable.

c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated (c) The proposed project would not result in significant impacts after mitigation; therefore, the project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings.

Eagle’s Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project Initial Study 68 ATTACHMENT 1

Figures Size of printing extent and margins differs with printer settings, please adjust margins if necessary. NOTE: This map is set up in NAD 1983 California Teale Albers. Please Change to Define Your Local State Plane or UTM Coordinate System. Source: County of San Bernardino. 2012. Chino Airport Master Plan Initial Study Initial Plan Master Airport Chino 2012. Bernardino. San of County Source:

Figure 1. Regional Project Location 2018-134 Chino Eagle's Nest V & VI Proposed Project Location

Date: 2016 Scale: 1" to 600'

Figure 2-Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Location Source: Google Earth Approx Center: 33.98261 / -117.6332

ATTACHMENT 2

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Biological Resources: Construction

MM BIO-1. Burrowing Owl Surveys During Construction. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract If construction activities associated with proposed projects must occur during the burrowing owl nesting season (February 1 through August 31), burrowing specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction on BUOW. The contractor(s) shall submit an Environmental Compliance Monitoring and owl surveys shall be conducted per CDFW-recommended burrowing owl Reporting: protocol to determine whether the action area and its immediate vicinity are Plan for review and approval by the City of Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino County Department of CDSD occupied by breeding season burrowing owls. Based on CDFW-protocol, focused breeding season surveys and pre-construction surveys may then be Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan necessary. If burrowing owl are determined to occupy the action area or its vicinity, including within a buffer area of 500 feet around the action area, a throughout construction phases. mitigation and monitoring plan shall be prepared and implemented prior to, during, and after project activities, as necessary.

MM BIO-2. Nesting Bird Surveys. Timing: During specified construction phases When possible, the removal of potential nesting vegetation for migratory Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract Implementation: birds, including the California horned lark, shall occur outside the nesting specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction CDSD, SBCDA season. A qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird study if this is not on Nesting Birds. The contractor(s) shall submit an Environmental feasible. Surveys should be conducted no more than three days prior to Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of Chino Monitoring and removal date. If active nests are found, buffers shall be established around Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino Reporting: the vegetation (300 feet for raptors, 50 feet for all other birds). Construction County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any CDSD activities impacting the nests shall be postponed until the nest is no longer construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and active. Compliance Plan throughout construction phases.

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-1. Archaeological Resources. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract In the event that archaeological resources (artifacts or features) are exposed during ground-disturbing activities, an archaeologist who meets the Secretary specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction on archaeological resources. The contractor(s) shall submit an Monitoring and of the Interior’s professional qualification standards in archaeology shall be Reporting: retained. Construction activities (e.g., grading, grubbing, vegetation clearing) Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the CDSD and the SBCDA prior to beginning any construction activity. The contractor CDSD/NAHC within 9 meters (25 feet) of the discovery shall be halted while the resources are evaluated for significance under the NRHP and the California Register of shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. Historic Resources (CRHR). Construction activities could continue in other areas. If the discovery proves to be significant, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted and would be discussed in consultation with the San Bernardino County Museum.

MM CR-2. Paleontological Resources. Timing: During specified construction phases Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract In the event that unknown paleontological resources are discovered during specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction Implementation: construction, the San Bernardino County Museum shall be notified on paleontological resources . The contractor(s) shall submit an CDSD, SBCDA immediately. Construction activities (e.g., grading, grubbing, vegetation Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of clearing) within 9 meters (25 feet) of the discovery shall be halted while the Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino Monitoring and resources are evaluated. County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any Reporting: construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and CDSD/NAHC Compliance Plan throughout construction phases.

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-3. Human Remains. the possibility of multiple humans remains. The landowner shall discuss and Implementation: confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the CDSD, SBCDA If human remains are encountered unexpectedly during implementation of descendants' preferences for treatment. Whenever the NAHC is unable to the proposed project, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires identify a MLD, or the MLD identified fails to make a recommendation, or Monitoring and that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the the landowner or his or her authorized representative rejects the Reporting: necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section recommendation of the descendants and the mediation provided for in CDSD/NAHC 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide measures the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her authorized Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD may, with the Native American human remains with appropriate dignity on the property in permission of the land owner, or his or her authorized representative, inspect a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance. the site of the discovery of the Native American remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and any associated grave goods. The MLD shall complete their inspection Timing: During specified construction phases and make their recommendation within 48 hours of being granted access by Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract the land owner to inspect the discovery. The recommendation may include specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction the scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and on Cultural Resources/human remains. The contractor(s) shall submit an items associated with Native American burials. Upon the discovery of the Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of Native American remains, the landowner shall ensure that the immediate Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino vicinity, according to generally accepted cultural or archaeological standards County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any or practices, where the Native American human remains are located, is not construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and damaged or disturbed by further development activity until the landowner Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. has discussed and conferred, as prescribed in this mitigation measure, with the MLD regarding their recommendations, if applicable, taking into account 3

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program September 2020 Eagle's Nest V and VI Project

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Tribal Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-4. Retain Native American Monitor/Consultant. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract Retain a Native American Monitor/Consultant: The Project Applicant shall be required to retain and compensate for the services of a Tribal monitor/ specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction Monitoring and consultant who is both approved by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians- on Tribal Cultural Resources. The contractor(s) shall submit an Reporting: Kizh Nation Tribal Government and is listed under the NAHC’s Tribal Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of CDSD/NAHC Contact list for the area of the project location. This list is provided by the Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino NAHC. The monitor/consultant will only be present on-site during the County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction phases that involve ground disturbing activities. Ground construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and disturbing activities are defined by the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians- Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. Kizh Nation as activities that may include, but are not limited to, pavement removal, potholing or auguring, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching, within the project area. The Tribal Monitor/consultant will complete daily monitoring logs that will provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring Implementation: shall end when the project site grading and excavation activities are CDSD, SBCDA completed, or when the Tribal Representatives and monitor/consultant have indicated that the site has a low potential for impacting Tribal Cultural Monitoring and Resources. Reporting: CDSD/NAHC

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 4 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Tribal Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-5. Tribal Cultural Resources. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract The landowner shall discuss and confer with the descendants all reasonable options regarding the descendants' preferences for treatment. Whenever the specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction Monitoring and NAHC is unable to identify a MLD, or the MLD identified fails to make a on Tribal Cultural Resources. The contractor(s) shall submit an Reporting: recommendation, or the landowner or his or her authorized representative Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of CDSD/NAHC rejects the recommendation of the descendants and the mediation provided Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino for in Subdivision (k) of Section 5097.94, if invoked, fails to provide County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any measures acceptable to the landowner, the landowner or his or her authorized construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and representative shall inter the human remains and items associated with Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. Native American human remains with appropriate dignity on the property in a location not subject to further and future subsurface disturbance.

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 5 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Tribal Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-6. Tribal Cultural Resources. historic times, Tribal Traditions included, but were not limited to, the burial Implementation: of funerary objects with the deceased, and the ceremonial burning of human CDSD, SBCDA Native American human remains are defined in PRC 5097.98 (d)(1) as an inhumation or cremation, and in any state of decomposition or skeletal remains. These remains are to be treated in the same manner as bone Monitoring and completeness. Funerary objects, called associated grave goods in PRC fragments that remain intact. Associated funerary objects are objects that, as Reporting: 5097.98, are also to be treated according to this statute. Health and Safety part of the death rite or ceremony of a culture, are reasonably believed to CDSD/GBMI- Code 7050.5 dictates that any discoveries of human skeletal material shall be have been placed with individual human remains either at the time of death KN immediately reported to the County Coroner and excavation halted until the or later; other items made exclusively for burial purposes or to contain coroner has determined the nature of the remains. If the coroner recognizes human remains can also be considered as associated funerary objects. the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and PRC 5097.98 shall be followed. Upon discovery, the tribal and/ Timing: During specified construction phases or archaeological monitor/consultant/consultant will immediately divert work at minimum of 150 feet and place an exclusion zone around the burial. Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract The monitor/consultant(s) will then notify the Tribe, the qualified lead specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction archaeologist, and the construction manager who will call the coroner. Work on Tribal Cultural Resources. The contractor(s) shall submit an will continue to be diverted while the coroner determines whether the Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of remains are Native American. The discovery is to be kept confidential and Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino secure to prevent any further disturbance. If the finds are determined to be County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any Native American, the coroner will notify the NAHC as mandated by state construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and law who will then appoint a Most Likely Descendent (MLD). If the Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation is designated MLD, the following treatment measures shall be implemented. To the Tribe, the term “human remains” encompasses more than human bones. In ancient as well as

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 6 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Tribal Cultural Resources: Construction

MM CR-7. Tribal Cultural Resources. using opaque cloth bags. All human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects Implementation: and objects of cultural patrimony will be removed to a secure container on CDSD, SBCDA Prior to the continuation of ground disturbing activities, the land owner shall arrange a designated site location within the footprint of the project for the site if possible. These items should be retained and reburied within six Monitoring and respectful reburial of the human remains and/or ceremonial objects. In the months of recovery. The site of reburial/repatriation shall be on the project Reporting: case where discovered human remains cannot be fully documented and site but at a location agreed upon between the Tribe and the landowner at a CDSD/GBMI- recovered on the same day, the remains will be covered with muslin cloth site to be protected in perpetuity. There shall be no publicity regarding any KN and a steel plate that can be moved by heavy equipment placed over the cultural materials recovered. excavation opening to protect the remains. If this type of steel plate is not available, a 24-hour guard should be posted outside of working hours. The Tribe will make every effort to recommend diverting the project and keeping the remains in situ and protected. If the project cannot be diverted, it may be determined that burials will be removed. The Tribe will work closely with the qualified archaeologist to ensure that the excavation is treated carefully, Timing: During specified construction phases ethically and respectfully. If data recovery is approved by the Tribe, Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract documentation shall be taken which includes at a minimum detailed specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction descriptive notes and sketches. Additional types of documentation shall be on Tribal Cultural Resources. The contractor(s) shall submit an approved by the Tribe for data recovery purposes. Cremations will either be Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of removed in bulk or by means as necessary to ensure completely recovery of Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino all material. If the discovery of human remains includes four or more burials, County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any the location is considered a cemetery and a separate treatment plan shall be construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and created. Once complete, a final report of all activities is to be submitted to Compliance Plan throughout construction phases. the Tribe and the NAHC. The Tribe does NOT authorize any scientific study or the utilization of any invasive diagnostics on human remains. Each occurrence of human remains and associated funerary objects will be stored

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 7 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Hazardous Materials: Outreach

MM HM-1. Outreach. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract New development on the Airport that is located within one-quarter mile of Cal Aero Preserve Academy shall consult with the school district as required specifications prior to all construction work to reduce the impact of construction on the Cal Aero Preserve Academy. The contractor(s) shall Monitoring and by California Code of Regulations, Section 15186, pursuant to the California Reporting: Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. submit an Environmental Compliance Plan for review and approval by the City of Chino Development Services Department (CDSD) and The San CDSD Bernardino County Department of Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan throughout construction phases.

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 8 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Noise/Vibration: Construction

MM NOI-1. Noise During Construction. Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours of 9:00 am to 6:00 pm Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract on weekdays and 9:00 am to 6:00 pm on weekends. The project’s specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction Monitoring and improvement and building plans shall specify this requirement. on Noise. The contractor(s) shall submit an Environmental Compliance Plan

for review and approval by the City of Chino Development Services Reporting: MM NOI-2. Noise During Construction. Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino County Department of CDSD

The following best management practices shall be incorporated during Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction activity. The contractor shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan project construction: • throughout construction phases. Noise and groundborne vibration construction activities whose specific location on the project Site may be flexible (e.g., operation

of compressors and generators, cement mixing, general truck idling) shall be conducted as far as possible from the nearest off-site land

uses. Timing: During specified construction phases • When possible, construction activities shall be scheduled so as to Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract Implementation: avoid operating several pieces of equipment simultaneously, which specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction CDSD, SBCDA causes high noise levels. on Noise. The contractor(s) shall submit an Environmental Compliance Plan • Flexible sound control curtains shall be placed around all drilling for review and approval by the City of Chino Development Services Monitoring and apparatuses, drill rigs, and jackhammers when in use. Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino County Department of Reporting: • The project contractor shall use power construction equipment Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction activity. The CDSD with state-of-the-art noise shielding and muffling devices. contractor shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan • Barriers such as flexible sound control curtains shall be erected throughout construction phases. around heavy equipment to minimize the amount of noise on the surrounding land uses to the maximum extent feasible during construction. • All construction truck traffic shall be restricted to truck routes approved by the City, which shall avoid residential areas and other sensitive receptors to the extent feasible (cont).

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 9 September 2020

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Eagle's Nest V and VI Aviation Business Park Project

Responsible Mitigation Measure, Lease Measure or Standard Condition of Approval Timing and Methods Parties

Noise/Vibration: Construction

MM NOI-2. Noise During Construction (cont). Timing: During specified construction phases Implementation: CDSD, SBCDA A construction notice shall be prepared and shall include the following Methods: This measure shall be incorporated into the contract information: job site address, permit number, name and phone number of specifications for all construction work to reduce the impact of construction the contractor and owner or owner’s agent, hours of construction allowed on Noise. The contractor(s) shall submit an Environmental Compliance Plan Monitoring and by code or any discretionary approval for the site, and City telephone for review and approval by the City of Chino Development Services Reporting: numbers where violations can be reported. The notice shall be posted and Department (CDSD) and The San Bernardino County Department of CDSD maintained at the construction site prior to the start of construction and Airports (SBCDA) prior to beginning any construction activity. The displayed in a location that is readily visible to the public and approved by contractor shall adhere to these specifications and Compliance Plan the City. throughout construction phases.

Eagle's Nest V and VI Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10 September 2020