HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/28/2021 PRC Agenda - Regular Meeting PARKS & RECREATION
COMMISSION
AGENDA
January 28, 2021
6:30 PM
CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNOR’S LATEST EXECUTIVE ORDER TO STAY AT
HOME, AVOID GATHERINGS AND MAINTAIN SOCIAL DISTANCING, THIS MEETING
WILL BE CONDUCTED TELEPHONICALLY AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION
AND STAFF WILL BE PARTICIPATING VIA TELECONFERENCE. THERE WILL BE NO
PHYSICAL MEETING LOCATION.
https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1933471818250438928
Audio: 1 (562) 247-8422
Chair Aaron Salo
Commissioner Tommy Orona
Commissioner Raphael Plunkett
Commissioner Stephen Qiu
Commissioner Manisha Sulakhe
Written materials distributed to the Parks and Recreation Commission within 72 hours of
the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting are available for public inspection
immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar,
California, during normal business hours.
Copies of staff reports or other written documentation relating to agenda items are on file in
the Community Services Office, located at 21810 Copley Drive, and are available for public
inspection. If you have question s regarding an agenda item, please call 909.839.7060
during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
of 1990, the City of Diamond Bar requires that any person in need of any ty pe of special
equipment, assistance or accommodation(s) in order to communicate at a City pu blic
meeting must inform the Community Services Department at 909.839.7060 a minimum of 72
hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
Please refrain from smoking, eating or
drinking in the Windmill Community Room
The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled
paper and encourages you to do the same
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING RULES
Welcome to the meeting of the Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Commission. Meetin gs are
open to the public.
PUBLIC INPUT
Members of the public may address the Commission on any item of business on the agenda
during the time the item is taken up by the Commission. In addition, members of the public
may, during the Public Comment period, address the Commission on any item or any matter not
on the agenda and within the Commission’s subject matter jurisdiction. Persons wishing to
speak should submit a speaker slip to the meeting clerk. Any material to be submitted to the
Commission at the meeting should be submitted through the meeting clerk.
Speakers are limited to five minutes per agenda item, unless determined otherwise. The
Commissioners may adjust this time limit depending on the number of people wishing to speak,
the complexity of the matter, the length of the agenda, the hour and any other relevant
consideration. Speakers may address the Commission only once on an agenda item, except
during public hearings, when the applicant/appellant may be afforded a rebuttal.
Public comments must be directed to the Commission. Behavior that disrupts the orderly
conduct of the meeting may result in the speaker being removed from the Commission
chambers.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION
Agendas for regular Commission meetings are available 72 hours prior to the meeting and are
posted in the City’s regular posting locations, and on the City’s website at
www.diamondbarca.gov. A full agenda packet is available for review during the meeting, in the
foyer. The Commission may take action on any item listed on the agenda.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE DISABLED
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot
access the podium in order to make a public comment. Sign language interpretation is available
by providing the City Clerk three business days’ notice in advance of a meeting. Please
telephone (909) 839-7010 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 7:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Fridays.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of agendas, rules of the Commission, Cassette tapes of meetings: (909) 839-7060.
Computer access to agendas: www.diamondbarca.gov
General information: (909) 839-7060.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AGENDA
Thursday, January 28, 2021
Consistent with the Governor’s latest Executive Order to Stay at Home, avoid
gatherings and maintain social distancing, this meeting will be conducted
telephonically and Members of the Commission and staff will be participating via
Teleconference. There will be no physical meeting location.
MISSION STATEMENT: The Mission of the Parks and Recreation Commission is to:
❑ Provide –
❑ Advice to the City Council.
❑ A quality parks system that is safe, properly maintained and equally
accessible to all residents of the City of Diamond Bar.
❑ Quality recreational programs for all ages.
❑ Have vision and flexibility to meet the ever-changing interests of our diverse,
multi-cultural community.
❑ Be open and actively responsive to input from individuals and community
organizations.
❑ Develop facilities that will accommodate the needs of our active and growing
community.
City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Commission
Approved May 27, 1999
CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
ROLL CALL: Parks and Recreation Commissioners: Orona,
Plunkett, Qiu, Sulakhe , and Chair Salo
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE:
JANUARY 28, 2021 PAGE 2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
This time is reserved on each agenda to provide an opportunity for members of the
public to directly address the Commission on items or matters of interest to the public
that are not already scheduled for consideration on this agenda. Those who wish to
speak on Agenda Subjects or Matters from the Audience may complete voluntary
Speaker's Cards at the desk of the Commission Secretary. Speakers are limited to five
(5) minutes.
CALENDAR OF EVENTS:
Tuesday, February 2, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING – 6:30pm
Monday, February 15, 2021 CITY OFFICES CLOSED – In observance
of President’s Day
Tuesday, February 16, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING – 6:30pm
Tuesday, March 2, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING – 6:30pm
Tuesday, March 16, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING – 6:30pm
Thursday, March 25, 2021 PARKS AND RECREATION
COMMISSION MEETING – 6:30pm
1. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1.1. Approval of Minutes for the September 24, 2020 Regular Meeting
2. INFORMATION ITEMS:
1. January Recreation Program Update
Recommended Action: Receive and file.
2. January Maintenance Report
Recommended Action: Receive and File
3. Canyon Loop Trail Project Update
Recommended Action: Receive and file.
3. OLD BUSINESS: NONE
4. NEW BUSINESS: NONE
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
JANUARY 28, 2021 PAGE 3 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
Commissioners may briefly respond to public comments, make
announcements, ask a question of staff, and make a b rief report on their
activities, request staff to return with information at a future meeting or request
that a matter of business be placed on a future agenda.
6. ADJOURNMENT:
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MINUTES OF THE PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 24, 2020
CONSISTENT WITH THE GOVERNOR’S LATEST EXECUTIVE ORDER TO STAY AT
HOME, AVOID GATHERINGS, AND MAINTAIN SOCIAL DISTANCING, THIS
MEETING WAS CONDUCTED TELEPHONICALLY AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMISSION AND STAFF PARTICIPATED VIA TELECONFERENCE. THERE WAS
NO PHYSICAL MEETING LOCATION.
CALL TO ORDER:
Chair/Orona called the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Commissioner Liu led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: Commissioners Present: Stan Liu, Tommy Orona, Aaron Salo, Manisha
Sulakhe, Sandra Ybanez
Staff Present: Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director; Christy Murphey,
Recreation Superintendent; Anthony Jordan, Maintenance Superintendent; Debbie
Gonzales, Administrative Coordinator, Robin Crawford, Administrative Assistant.
SELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR:
C/Salo nominated himself to serve as Chair. C Liu nominated himself to serve as Chair.
C/Orona seconded C/Salo’s nomination. There were no other nominations offered.
C/Salo was selected to serve as Chairperson of the Parks and Recreati on Commission
by the following Roll Call vote:
C/Liu Aye
C/Orona Aye
C/Salo Aye
C/Sulakhe Aye
C/Ybanez Aye
C/Ybanez nominated herself to serve as Vice Chair. Chair/Salo seconded the
nomination. C/Ybanez was selected to serve as Vice Chair by the follo wing Roll Call
vote:
C/Liu Aye
C/Orona Aye
Chair/Salo Aye
C/Sulakhe Aye
C/Ybanez Aye
MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE: None
1.1
Packet Pg. 6 Communication: Approval of Minutes for the September 24, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR:)
SEPTEMBER 24, 2020 PAGE 2 P&R COMMISSION
CALENDAR OF EVENTS: PRD/Wright
1. CONSENT CALENDAR:
1.1 Approval of Minutes for the January 23, 2020 Regular Meeting.
Chair/Salo moved, C/Sulakhe seconded, to approve the Minutes for the
January 23, 2020 regular Meeting. Motion carried by the following Roll
Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Orona, Sulakhe, Chair/Salo
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Liu, VC/Ybanez
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
2.1 SEPTEMBER RECREATION PROGRAM UPDATE - RS/Murphey
C/Sulakhe said she understood the Senior Resource Bag drive was very
successful and asked whether staff was seeking additional dollars or
items for future drives. RS/Murphey said that staff is open to any items in
quantities of 100 to 400 such as those listed in her report.
2.2 SEPTEMBER 2020 MAINTENANCE REPORT – MS/Jordan
Chair/Salo noticed a number of downed trees and MS/Jordan said tha t
due to high temperatures, there has been a lot of limb drop.
3. OLD BUSINESS: None
4. NEW BUSINESS:
4.1 COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULE (November meeting) – PRD/Wright
Following discussion, Chair/Salo moved, VC/Ybanez seconded, to adjourn
tonight’s meeting to January 28, 2021. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Liu, Orona, Sulakhe, VC/Ybanez,
Chair/Salo
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
5. ANNOUNCEMENTS:
VC/Ybanez thanked staff for their reports and handouts.
C/Sulakhe welcomed the new Commissioners and complimented staff on an
1.1
Packet Pg. 7 Communication: Approval of Minutes for the September 24, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR:)
SEPTEMBER 24, 2020 PAGE 3 P&R COMMISSION
excellent job during the pandemic, especially with the Senior Resource Bag and
handout information on the website.
C/Liu thanked staff for their efforts toward making things safe for the kids.
C/Orona welcomed the new Commissioners and thanked staff for their excellent
work and for tonight’s meeting.
Chair/Salo thanked staff for all they have been doing for the community during
the past few months and was glad to be back with C/Sulakhe and C/Orona and
new Commissioners Liu and Ybanez.
ADJOURNMENT: With no one objecting and no further business before the Parks and
Recreation Commission, Chair/Salo adjourned the meeting at 7:06 p.m. to January 28,
2021.
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of , 2021.
Respectfully Submitted,
RYAN WRIGHT, SECRETARY
Attest:
AARON SALO, CHAIRPERSON
1.1
Packet Pg. 8 Communication: Approval of Minutes for the September 24, 2020 Regular Meeting (CONSENT CALENDAR:)
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
2.1
MEETING DATE:
January 28, 2021
TO:
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Parks
and Recreation Commission
FROM: Christy Murphey, Recreation Superintendent
SUBJECT: January Recreation Program Update
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
Virtual Recreation Center
Virtual Recreation Videos
In the past few months, recreation staff has continued producing and filming content for
the City’s Virtual Recreation page. The page focuses on activities that Diamond Bar
residents can do from the safety of their own home. Popular videos included learning
how to make bath fizzies, dog treats, and a paper pencil cup holder.
However, the highlight was “Story Time with Santa”. In December, Santa read three
holiday books for boys and girls in Diamond Bar. The three stories read were:
1. If You Take a Mouse to the Movies by Laura Numeroff
2. The Night Before Christmas by Clement C. Moore (Author)and Barbara Reid
(Illustrator)
3. Memoirs of an Elf by Devin Scillian
Community Recreation Guide
Fall Recreation Guide
The Fall guide was delivered to Diamond Bar residents in early September and was
available on the City’s website September 1. The guide covered activities September –
November. We continue to adapt program safety procedures to align with Los Angeles
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7060 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
2.1
Packet Pg. 9
County guidelines. The health and safety of our participants is of the upmost
importance.
Recreation Registration
Recreation staff have made a number of adaptations to the activity re gistration process
to ease and increase accessibility for program participants during the pandemic. There
are three safe and socially distanced ways to register:
1. Online at www.DiamondBar.CA.gov/recregistration
2. Mail to City Hall, 21810 Copley Drive
3. Drop Box at the Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Avenue
Monday-Friday 8 a.m. to noon.
The Virtual Recreation Center on the City’s website has interactive trial classes, tutorial
videos and more! Senior services staff have gone the extra mile for those less tech
savvy. Staff provide over the phone assistance with setting up accounts and walking
them through the online registration process in addition to the How To tutorial videos
online.
Administrative staff work on weekly RecConnects, informative emails, emailed to
current and past participants, highlighting upcoming programs and providing direct links
to those programs on the registration page.
In December, an interactive Recreation Guide was introduced on the City’s website.
The Guide includes direct links to each program on the online registration pages.
https://www.diamondbarca.gov/210/Community-Recreation-Guide
Contract Classes
Recreation staff collaborated with Contract Class Instructors to provide virtual recreation
opportunities and in-person class modifications to provide safe programming at City
facilities. Social distancing and COVID-19 protocols remained in place for all in-person
classes including a health screening questionnaire and temperature checks for all
participants, instructors and staff, each day before class. All participants, instructors,
coaches, and staff who have attended class this season have cleared their screenings.
The fall season of Contract Classes was scheduled to run August 30 through December
18. However, with further COVID-19 closures due to the Los Angeles County Health
Officials Stay at Home Order, some in-person classes were cut short, concluding on
November 24. A total of 169 in-person and 43 live online led classes were offered this
fall. There was a total of 201 participants enrolled in classes held outdoors at various
City parks and facilities. This included CYSC Cheerleading and two art classes at
Sycamore Canyon Park, Tennis Anyone, B.E.S.T. Sports Multi-Sports and Soccer at
Ronald Reagan Park, and Line Dancing and Jazzercise at the Diamond Bar Center.
Tennis Anyone’s semi-private tennis lessons lead in-person enrollment with 124
participants. There were an additional 21 participants enrolled in live online led courses
such as, Zoom Kidz Love Soccer, Game Development and Design, Royal Icing Basics,
Fondant FUNdamentals and Parent and Me Cupcakes for the Holidays.
2.1
Packet Pg. 10
The Winter/Spring Recreation Guide hit homes December 28. The season began
January 4 and will run through May 22. In-person class enrollment has been postponed
due to the extension of the Southern California Regional Stay at Home Order. However,
there are several educational and enrichment online classes now open for enrollment.
Recreation staff will continue to monitor State and County guidelines for updates and
guidance to evaluate when it may be safe for in-person programming to resume.
As a New Year begins and classes start up again, others have come to an end. Staff
said goodbye to one of the program’s long-time Instructors, Connie Lillie. The
Jazzercise instructor has retired after 20 years of service. She hosted her final class at
the Diamond Bar Center with her loyal students on Halloween morning. She will be
missed by all.
Senior Programs
Senior How to Videos
With help from the Public Information team, staff finished two videos of the “How To”
series for seniors. The videos in this series focused on how to use Zoom and how to
register for Recreation programs. Staff hope the series has provided technical support
to those unfamiliar with online platforms and further hope it encourages more
participation in virtual senior activities.
Drive Thru Canned Food Drive
The City Sponsored Canned Food Drive took place at the Diamond Bar Center on
Friday, November 13 from 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Recreation staff saw over 65 cars and
received about 800 lbs. of packaged food items. The donations were graciously
received by two local food pantries; the Pomona Food Pantry and Shepherd’s Pantry
in Glendora.
Senior Resource Bag Donations
In November, the Sunshine Senior Club and Walnut Valley Water District donated to the
Senior Resource Bag program. The donations from the Sunshine Senior Club went
towards the Santa Stocking Giveaway in December 2020. Donations from Walnut
Valley Water District will be utilized in the Free Spring Surprise in March 2021.
Sunshine Senior Donations:
• 300 Stockings
• 300 Emergen-C
• 300 Hand sanitizers
• 300 Glucerna
• 300 Airborne packets
Walnut Valley Water District donations:
• 300 Reusable Bags
• 300 Jar Openers
2.1
Packet Pg. 11
• 300 Notepads
• 300 Pens
• 300 Silicone Phone Wallets
Senior Holiday Stocking
Due to the stay-at-home orders released by Los Angeles County Health Officials on
November 30, stockings were delivered in lieu of the pick-up event originally scheduled
for December 9. Staff delivered 300 stockings to 175 Diamond Bar residents who had
pre-registered for the drive thru giveaway. The stockings were left at th e front door,
practicing contactless methods. Stockings included masks, gloves, hand sanitizer, hand
crafted holiday cards made by Diamond Bar Girl Scout Troop 1434 and donated items
from the Sunshine Senior Club! Though it was a fast change from pick -up to delivery
seniors have commented on how appreciative they are of staff to make sure they still
got their stocking in time for the holidays! Thank you to DB Girl Scout Troop 1434, the
Sunshine Seniors Club, and dedicated Recreation staff for spreading the holiday joy!
Senior Virtual Bingo
18 seniors enrolled for the first Virtual Bingo held on Friday, December 18. Created with
seniors in mind, this great new activity can be enjoyed from home. Virtual Bingo will be
offered at 10 a.m. the third Friday of each month. Four games will be played with
various prizes awarded after each round. There is no fee to participate, but pre -
registration is required to receive a printable Bingo card and the Zoom link to join the
live, online game. Currently, there are 26 seniors enrolled for the second game
scheduled for January 15.
Senior Program Survey
Diamond Bar staff continue to conduct weekly wellness calls and surveys to gather
more information on the specific needs of Diamond Bar Senior Program participants.
They also continue to share and survey other organizations and neighboring cities for
their successes and recommendations for distance programing. Regular research and
surveying allow staff the opportunity to check in with seniors at home, while gathering
useful information to continue offering resources and wellness programs to meet the
needs of the City’s aging community.
Facility Rentals
Diamond Bar Center
The Diamond Bar Center rentals for September through December 2020 were
cancelled due to the Los Angeles County Stay at Home Order prohibiting large indoor
gatherings. Of the 60 reservations, 21 events have been postponed, 37 refunded and 2
are pending a decision.
While indoor facilities remained closed, Los Angeles County reopening guidelines for
car parades permitted drive thru events. On Sunday September 13, the Diamond Bar
Center hosted its first rental in 6 months. City staff had the opportunity to collaborate
with a local non-profit organization in providing a space to celebrate their participants’
2.1
Packet Pg. 12
achievements. In lieu of their end of year banquet, Pacific Crest Drum and Bugle Corps
rented the Diamond Bar Center’s parking lot to host a drive through celebration. A total
of 75 cars drove through the parking lot, stopping at 4 different stations. Sta tions
included an opportunity to receive their certificate, medal, goodie bag, and a photo.
Masks and safety protocols were followed, with 4 different time slots to limit crowding.
The outdoor drive through event was a huge success! Using this concept, DBC staff
hope to host more events like this in the future.
Diamond Bar rental facilities remain closed until further notice and all rentals have been
canceled through March 2021. Los Angeles County had published guidelines that
allowed for events to occur but were unfortunately reversed due to the surge in COVID-
19 cases. Staff continue to work on reopening guidelines for small outdoor gatherings to
be prepared once Los Angeles County permits them.
Social media plays a huge part in party planning and the DBC is gearing up to launch its
own Instagram page. The account will include pictures of previous rental events and
marketing opportunities for City events, such as the Corporate Showcase and the
biennial Bridal Show. With more and more people researching and shopping online, this
page will be a chance for the DBC to bring in more clients with a simple click of a finger.
Inquiries have been non-stop during the 10 months of the pandemic. Milestone events
do not stop occurring which in turn has people inqu iring and booking their events as far
out as 2022. A total of 17 new reservations have been booked since mid -March 2020.
Healthy Diamond Bar
Relaxation Sensation
In September, Healthy DB challenged participants to focus on improving their mind,
body and spirit. Activities included lessons on stress relief, the uses of essential oils,
and the benefits of meditation. Also, fun de-stressing coloring pages for all ages. A total
of 20 participants registered for the September Healthy DB challenge.
Furry Friends & Fitness
In October, Healthy DB focused on participants and their furry friends. Activities
consisted of walking challenges, exercise ideas, and spending quality time with their
animals. A total of 19 participants registered for the October Healthy DB challenge.
Eat Good, Feel Good
During November, Healthy DB participants were provided healthier food options and
alternatives recipes to prepare for the holidays. A recipe resource sheet was available
for download the entire month of November and a total of 27 participants registered for
the November Healthy DB challenge.
Youth Programs
Kinder Skills
2.1
Packet Pg. 13
Kinder Skills Virtual Workshop launched the first session on Tuesday, September 22.
Kinder Skills is a 4-week one hour virtual lesson hosted Tuesdays and Thursdays on
Zoom. The first session had a total of 17 participants registered. Parents were given a
weekly work packet with activities, worksheets, and crafts to do during class and at
home. The September lesson focused on writing and learning about different lines.
Students also listened to stories and sang songs about lines.
Kinder Skills concluded the first session on October 15 and started up the second
session on Tuesday, October 27. The second session had a total of 18 participants
registered. Lessons focused on learning the alphabet, spelling their names, and
learning shapes. Participants also played spelling games, cut out and learned the
different shapes, and listened to several stories.
Kinder Skills wrapped up the second session on Thursday, November 19. Participants
continued their lessons on the alphabet, spelling their names, and learning their shapes.
This session, each participant created an interactive work folder, in which, they placed
all their completed work in. At the end of the session, students got the opportunity share
their folders with the class and review the great work they accomplished throughout
each lesson.
Kinder Skills Holiday Mini Session December
Kinder Skills hosted a 3-week Holiday Mini Session beginning Tuesday, December 1
and concluding Thursday, December 17, with a total of 25 students enrolled. This
session continued the Kinder Skills lessons with a focus on the upcoming holiday
season. Participants were given a weekly work packet with holiday crafts, spelling
activities, and worksheets. Participants were able to build their own gingerbeard men,
snowmen, and santa. They followed along with stories and learned some new holiday
songs. On the final class meeting, participants were visited by Santa and given the
opportunity to share their handwritten Christmas letters.
DB 4Youth
September – DB 4Youth continues to meet virtually on a monthly basis. This month’s
meeting was hosted on Tuesday, September 29 with 21 members in attendance.
Memebers discussed how they are adjustnig to virtual schooling, their thoughts on the
new Teen Talks program, and what they would like to see from the program for the
remainder of the year. Members put together ideas of challenges to help teens during
this unique time. Teens were also encouraged to sign up for virtual programs such as
tutor time and the next Teen Talk program.
October – The teens met virtually on Tuesday, October 27 with a total of 18 members in
attendance for their monthly meeting. The evening started with an ice breaker activity
and lead into group discusions. Members who attended the last Teen Talks, discussed
their thoughts of the program’s guest speakers and shared possible stress management
tools with the group. At the end of the meeting, members were given the task of
developing new ideas for the 2021 year.
November – The group met virtually on Tuesday, November 1 with 16 members in
2.1
Packet Pg. 14
attendance. The meeting once again began with an ice breaker and open discussion.
As the year comes to an end, members discussed their ideas for the upcoming year and
decided that the group will continue to meet completely virtual throughout the school
year reguardless of uplifting mandates to come. Members also planned a virtual holiday
party for December.
December – DB 4Youth hosted a virtual holiday party on Thursday, December 17 with a
total of 18 members in attendance. The party included virtal games, such as holiday
Bingo, holiday trivia, a virtual escape room, and playng the game “Amoung Us.”
Members in attendance were entered into a raffle for attending and able to win more
raffle tickets throughout the party. Members also had a Holiday Outfit Contest where
they were able to compete in categories such as Most Festive, Morst Creative, and
Funniest Outfit. Raffles and prizes for the games and contests winners were given out
at the end of the celebration.
Teen Talks
Teen Talks launched it’s first virtual meeting on Thursday, October 22 with a total of 14
youth in attendance. This month’s topic was Self Care and Stress Management. The
City partnered with Diamond Bar High School’s (DBHS) Peer Counseling team to host
the meeting. Peer Counselors from DBHS lead a detailed discussion on what stress is,
how it is caused, tips on managing it, and how to help others who are or may seem
stressed. Participants were asked to share their personal experience with stress and
whether they had any management techniques they practiced themselves.
Teen Talks topic for November was Saftey Tips for Stayin at Home Alone. Teen s met
on Thursday, November 19 with six youths in attendance. This month, the City
partnered with Los Angeles County Sheriff Deputy Aaron Scheller to lead the discussion
on Safety. Deputy Scheller and Recreation staff lead a detailed discussion on staying
connected, outdoor safety, internet safety, and cooking safety. Paricipants engaged in
a discussion on personal experiences and had the opportunity to ask each other and
Deputy Scheller some questions.
Youth and Adult Sports
Esports
The City of Diamond Bar began registration for another season of Esports for the game
Rocket League, September 12 – October 17. Community members of all ages could
participate in the program and could compete from the comfort of their own home.
Partnered with GGLeagues, participants could play as a team or as a solo player in
different divisions based on age and skill level. The hope is to expand the Esports
program to other games and connect with other local agencies and organizations to
create an area recreational Esports program.
There were no registrations for the Esports program in September. The Parks and
Recreation Department are continually trying to find the right combination of game
choice and game time. The next season of Esports will feature a new game: NBA 2k2 1
2.1
Packet Pg. 15
which may draw more interest. The next season is scheduled for January 16 – February
20, 2021.
Game Time November
The City advertised for a new virtual program, Game Time, for children ages 6 -12 years
old. This program offers a variety of games that can be played virtually, and participants
could interact with other participants within their community. Games offered were Bingo,
Kahoots, Trivia, Zoom games, and more. Participants were also given the chance to win
prizes at the end of each session. This program is planned to take place the last
Wednesday of every month starting in January 2021.
Field Allocations
September - With the Los Angeles County Public Health’s Re -Opening Youth Sports
protocols released in August, allowing skill-based and strength training (no games,
tournaments, or inter-squad scrimmages), three established Youth Sports Organizations
were approved for allocated field space. Those organizations included: AYSO, Diamond
Bar Soccer League, and Cal Thunder. These organizations went through the re-opening
Youth Sports application process that required each organization to submit a re -opening
plan that showed in detail how they will implement the Los Angeles County protocols. In
addition, each organization was asked to resubmit a new Field Allocation application to
help determine their field space needs, and a signed copy of the Los Angeles County
Public Health Youth Sports protocols.
October - By the end of October, six established Youth Sports Organizations were
approved for allocated field space, those organizations were: AYSO, Diamond Bar Girls
Softball, Pony Baseball, Diamond Bar Soccer League, MVP Flag Football, and Cal
Thunder. These organizations ran skill-based trainings and workouts per Los Angeles
County Public Health protocols. In addition, there were no games, inter-organization
scrimmage, or tournaments allowed.
November - Organizations continued to use City fields for skill-based trainings and
strength and conditioning workouts. There were no updates on County policies since
October. The new allocation application was sent out to User Groups to apply for the
January 1 – April 30, 2021 allocation.
December - Peterson Park fields were closed December 14, 2020 – February 12, 2021
for its annual field renovation. Allocated users will return for use on February 15. The
current allocation period ended December 31, 2020.
Special Events
Halloween Costume Contest
The Halloween Costume contest was open to all ages and pets in Diamond Bar.
Participants entered the contest by summitting a photo for one of the five categories. A
total of 51 submissions were summited amongst the five categories with the best kids
costume category having the most submissions at 21. Winners in each category
2.1
Packet Pg. 16
received an E-gift card to Target and had their photos displayed on the City's social
media pages.
Five categories
Best kid’s costume 12 years old or younger
Best teen’s costume 13 to 17 years of age
Best adult’s costume 18 years or older
Best family/group costume Two or more participants
Best pet’s costume All animals welcomed
Pumpkin Decorating Contest
The Pumpkin Decorating contest opened on October 1 and concluded November 1. A
total of 27 photo entries were summited from Diamond Bar residents. The best kids'
pumpkin category led the way with 13 total submissions. Winners in each category
received an E-gift card to Target and had their entries displayed on the City's social
media pages.
Three categories
Best kid’s pumpkin 12 years old or younger
Best teen’s pumpkin 13 to 17 years of age
Best adult’s pumpkin 18 years or older
Veterans Celebration
The City of Diamond Bar celebrated our veterans the whole month of November. This
year’s celebration consisted of a Veterans Tribute Video of past Honorees on DBTV,
special social media posts of military photos, American flags and Veterans yard signs
posted throughout the City, and a personal video message from Diamond Bar City
Council.
Veterans Sign Drive-Up Event
On Thursday, November 5, recreation staff set up at Sycamore Canyon Park from 3 to 6
p.m. for residents to pick up a "Proud of Our Veterans" lawn sign. Signs were given out
on a first-come, first-serve basis. A total of 52 lawn signs were given out to residents.
Holiday Home Decorating Contest
The City's Holiday Home Decorating Contest kicked off November 16 and closed for
entries December 16 for Diamond Bar residents. Several submissions were received,
for the three categories with judging taking place on Monday, December 21. Winners in
each category received a "Holiday Home Decorating Contest Winner" sign to display in
their yard, and had their entries displayed on the City's social media pages.
Three categories
Best Home Light Display
Best Lawn Display
Best Overall Home Display
2.1
Packet Pg. 17
Gingerbread House Decorating Contest
The City of Diamond Bar, held a Gingerbread House Decorating Contest beginning
December 1 and concluding January 4. Participants could choose between one of two
categories to participate in a Homemade or Pre-Made gingerbread house. A total of 20
participants entered and Winners received an E-gift card to Target and had their entries
displayed on the City's social media pages.
Holiday Movie at Home
The Holiday Movie at Home offered families an opportunity to enjoying a holiday classic,
How the Grinch Stole Christmas with fun activities. All activities were available for
download the whole month of December on the City website. Activities included grinch
themed crafts, puzzles, math problems and snack recipes for all to enjoy.
2.1
Packet Pg. 18
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
2.2
MEETING DATE:
January 28, 2021
TO:
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Parks
and Recreation Commission
FROM: Anthony Jordan, Parks & Maintenance
Superintendent
SUBJECT: January Maintenance Report
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and File
During the previous months, the Public Works Maintenance staff has been working on
various tasks throughout the City. The following is a brief recap of key maintenance
items completed:
Diamond Bar Center
• Diagnosed and repaired generator problem.
• Inspected roof for possible leaks.
• Repaired Maple room door lock.
• Re-lamped two (2) light fixtures and replaced one (1) ballast.
• Installed new American, Californian and Diamond Bar City flags at the memorial
circle.
• Reinstalled counter top edge banding.
• Repaired damaged bird deterrent wires.
• Painted building columns in the motor court.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7060 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
2.2
Packet Pg. 19
• Installed new memorial bench at the trailhead.
• Reinstalled trailhead signs.
• Repaired damaged lodge pole fence.
• Repaired handicap stall door in women’s restroom.
• Sprayed for ants.
• Unclogged two (2) sinks in women’s restroom.
• Performed preventative maintenance on hallway and kitchen door hardware.
• Performed weekly test on wheelchair lift.
• Performed monthly emergency generator test and regularly scheduled
maintenance.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Diamond Canyon Park
• Fabricated and installed new galvanized bollards with 3/8 chain to delineate the
end of walking path.
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Grandview Trail
• Backfilled erosion in trail head near gazebo.
• Removed trash receptacle from the gazebo and installed new “Please Pack Out
Your Trash” signs. Trash cans are only located at trailheads now.
Heritage Park
• Installed new American flag.
• Cleared clogged drinking fountain drain line.
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Larkstone Park
2.2
Packet Pg. 20
• Removed graffiti from park benches.
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Treated park for weed control (BV).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Longview North Park
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Longview South Park
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Lorbeer Middle School
• Inspected field lights and security lights for proper operation.
• Treated for weed control.
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed gopher control (APM).
Maple Hill Park
• Removed and replaced malfunctioning hand dryer.
• Replaced one (1) tennis net and two (2) top caps.
• Replaced metering valve in men’s restroom sink.
• Treated for gopher control (BV/APM).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Pantera Park
• Removed trash receptacle from the gazebo and installed new “Please Pack Out
Your Trash” signs. Trash cans are only located at trailheads now.
• Removed damaged and installed new baby changing table in the women’s
restroom.
2.2
Packet Pg. 21
• Fabricated, painted and installed a protective cage in the plumbing alley to
protect new tankless water heater and associated piping.
• Checked and adjusted sports field, walkway and court lighting.
• Cleared clogged men’s room urinal.
• Treated for weed control (BV).
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed gopher control (APM).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Paul C. Grow
• Repaired stuck sink faucet in the women’s restroom.
• Repaired leaking drinking fountain.
• Installed new soap dispenser in the women’s restroom.
• Treated for weed control (BV).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Peterson Park
• Removed and replaced damaged 2”x10” bench plank. Installed missing hardware
on various site furnishings.
• Painted all wooden benches.
• Painted electrical switchgear cabinets.
• Checked all lights for proper operation. Adjusted timers and repaired as needed.
• Repaired damaged chain-link fence.
• Removed damaged and installed new fascia boards on the restroom building.
• Cleared clogged urinal drain in the men’s restroom.
2.2
Packet Pg. 22
• Retrofit security light along walkway with LED unit.
• Treated for broadleaf weeds (BV).
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Ronald Reagan Park
• Replaced one (1) damaged tennis net.
• Retrofit and upgraded drinking fountain push button actuator. Repaired clogged
water line in the drinking fountain.
• Cleared clogged urinal drain in the men’s restroom.
• Reset lighting control timers.
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Treated for rodent control (BV/APM).
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Silvertip Park
• Unclogged drinking fountain.
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Stardust Mini-Park
• Performed park/playground inspections.
Starshine Park
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Steep Canyon Trailhead
• Repaired six (6) rails along the lodgepole fencing on the trail.
2.2
Packet Pg. 23
Summitridge Park
• Treated for weed control (BV).
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed park inspections.
Sycamore Canyon Park
• Removed trash and debris adjacent to the storage yard. Trimmed exterior trees
along the fence lines. Removed poison oak.
• Repaired damaged restroom stall partition in the men’s restroom.
• Re-tied chain-link fence at various locations.
• Installed new trash can.
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Treated for gopher control (BV/APM).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
Washington Park
• Performed irrigation PMI (BV).
• Performed park/playground inspections.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
City Hall/Library
• Installed new batteries in panic bar for door alarm.
• Re-lamped two (2) lighting fixtures.
• Replaced wax ring and O-ring in men’s room urinal.
• Replaced flush handle actuator on the men’s room toilet sloan valve.
• Cleaned monument sign and bollards. Sprayed for spiders and insects.
• Performed monthly emergency generator test and regularly scheduled
2.2
Packet Pg. 24
maintenance.
• Performed monthly carpet cleaning in City Hall and Library spaces (DFS).
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance (Best).
• Performed quarterly upholstery cleaning (DFS).
Citywide
• Removed hanging limb from tree and picked up felled limb along Diamond Bar
Bl.
• Prepped utility body for installation on new maintenance truck.
• Reinstalled “Playground Closed” signs. Installed COVID-19 rules signs.
• Inspected all parks for sidewalk displacements. Scheduled grinding and repairs
as needed.
• Replaced sign post at Diamond Bar Bl. and Cold Spring Lane.
• Repaired crack in the sidewalk at 2133 Evergreen Springs.
• Repaired pothole at 21556 Barbi Lane.
• Re-installed signs on light pole that was damaged by a car on Grand Ave. at
Shotgun.
• Installed new “No Outlet” sign on Quail Summ it at Diamond Bar Bl.
• Installed three (3) Texas dots on Maple Hill in front of the park.
• Replaced W3-1 (Stop Ahead) sign at 1579 Kiowa Crest.
• Replaced W2-2 (T-Intersection) sign at 22610 Mountain Laurel.
• Removed downed limb from 24279 Seagreen.
• Removed downed limb from Grand Ave. and Summitridge.
• Removed basketball goal from Damietta Drive.
• Ground down sidewalk displacement on High Country at Autumn Lane.
• Repainted red curbs for Area 1 pavement rehab.
• Completed Area 2 white legend repaint.
2.2
Packet Pg. 25
• Replaced sign post at Cliffside and Peaceful Hills.
• Replaced all road pavement markers (RPM) along Lycoming.
• Repaired thirty (30) potholes on Brea Canyon Rd.
• Repaired nine (9) potholes on Golden Springs.
• Repaired sink hole on S. El Encino.
• Repaired six (6) potholes on Diamond Bar Bl.
• Repaired three (3) potholes on Pathfinder.
• Repaired trip hazard (manhole collar) on Diamond Bar and Cold Spring.
• Removed dumped paint cans at 22757 Happy Hollow.
• Replaced sign post on Brea Canyon at the 57 freeway south.
• Rototill playground sand, clean barbeque pits, clean gazebos and prep softball
fields as needed (BV).
• Clean v-ditches at all City parks as needed.
• Washed, fueled and serviced City vehicles.
• Inspected fire extinguishers and first aid kits at all City facilities.
• Re-stocked pet bags throughout the City. Serviced trash cans at trailheads.
• Performed monthly exterior lighting maintenance along Brea Canyon Rd.
walkway (Best).
2.2
Packet Pg. 26
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
2.3
MEETING DATE:
January 28, 2021
TO:
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Parks
and Recreation Commission
FROM: Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Canyon Loop Trail Project Update
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
PROJECT HISTORY
The Parks and Recreation Department has been developing a conceptual design for the
Canyon Loop Multi-Use Trail, which is a 1.29-mile trail loop within the City’s Open
Space Zone. The goal of this conceptual plan is to provide safe, convenient pedestrian
and bicyclist access for recreation, exercise, and enjoyment of the natural environment.
The Canyon Loop Trail is located within the center of the Summitridge Park Trail system
comprised of nearly five miles of trail adjacent to the Diamond Bar Center. This system
currently consists of five trails and three trailheads. An area of focus for this project
includes identifying deficiencies and rendering it more accessible. The project will
realign the trail, stabilize the path, provide water diverts, cobblestone swales, and
landscape tie steps or steps within steep grades where necessary. To better inform
residents and trail users, updated interpretive and directional signage wi ll be included.
In addition, the design will include the creation of rest areas, and amenities such as
benches, shade structures, and trash receptacles.
Since August 2019, the City has contracted with landscape architect Richard Fisher
Associates (RFA). RFA has extensive experience designing and developing park and
trail projects throughout southern California. RFA provides the technical expertise and
support while providing the City with potential trail design and amenity options, followed
by final construction plans, specifications, and cost estimates.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ~ 21810 COPLEY DRIVE ~ DIAMOND BAR, CA 91765 ~ TEL. (909) 839-7060 ~ FAX (909) 861-3117
2.3
Packet Pg. 27
On September 26, 2019, staff elicited feedback from the Parks and Recreation
Commission regarding potential trail improvements. On October 15, 2019 City Council
also provided design feedback during a City Council Study Session which was then
implemented by the landscape architect. Since that time, the City was made aware of
potential environmental impacts that may need to be mitigated based on the location of
the project. In order to properly identify environmental impacts and meet California
Environmental Quality Act requirements, the City Council approved a contract with
Michael Baker International (MBI) on May 5, 2020 to complete the Initial Study/Mitigated
(IS/MND) Negative Declaration. This in-depth environmental assessment was
completed in early January 2021.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
This Project has been reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Based on that assessment, the City prepared a Draft Initial Study
and filed a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project with
the Office of Planning and Research and the Los Angeles County Clerk on November
16, 2020. Pursuant to CEQA Section 15105, a 30-day public review period for the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration began on October 16, 2020, and ended
November 16, 2020.
The Initial Study (IS) is a detailed analysis to determine whether a Negative Declaration
(ND), Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), or Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is
the appropriate environmental document for a project. If the IS concludes that the
potential impacts from a proposed project can be mitigated less-than-significant levels
pursuant to CEQA, an MND may be prepared. As stated, a n MND was prepared for the
Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project.
Among the most notable findings in the IS/MND is documentation the project site
supports habitat for, and is populated by the coastal California gnatcatcher, a Federally
Threatened Species and California Species of Special Concern, and the coastal cactus
wren, a Southern California bird experiencing habitat decline.
During the 30-day public review period, the City received written comments from the
California Department of Fish & Wildlife (CDFW), the Diamond Bar-Pomona Valley
Sierra Club Task Force, and Hamilton Biological, Inc. on behalf of a consortium of
Diamond Bar residents. The Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
(attached) includes the comments received, the City’s responses to the comments, and,
where warranted, revisions to the proposed mitigation measures to address the
comments.
The Final IS/MND identifies potentially significant impacts in the categories of
Aesthetics, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources (non-tribal), Geology/Soils, Noise
and Tribal Cultural Resources. The Initial Study further identified 11 mitigation
measures that would reduce those impacts to less-than-significant levels. To mitigate
2.3
Packet Pg. 28
for removal of gnatcatcher and cactus wren habitat, habitat restoration/replacement at
ratios of up to 5:1, either on-or off-site.
The Final IS/MND also includes a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which
sets forth the manner in which the mitigation measures shall be implemented. The
Program identifies the project milestones that trigger specific mitigation measures and
identifies the parties responsible for monitoring compliance with the mitigation
measures. An accompanying checklist is included in the Program to track monitoring
progress.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Assembly Bill 52 requires lead agencies to request consultation with all Native American
tribes that have ancestral ties to the area in which a project subject to CEQA is located.
The Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation responded to the City’s request,
and a formal consultation between the City and Kizh Nation representatives took place
via teleconference on August 6, 2020. As a result of this consultation, the IS/MND
includes mitigation measures requiring the IS/MND the City to retain a culturally-
affiliated Native American monitor to observe ground-disturbing construction activities
for the purpose of identifying the potential presence of any significant historic or
prehistoric tribal cultural resources.
NEXT STEPS
City staff will share the project’s status with City Council on Tuesday, February 2 at
6:30pm and request approval for both the conceptual plan and IS/MND. Pending City
Council approval, City staff will continue to work with the landscape architect to finaliz e
plans and specifications adhering to the IS/MND. These plans may need to be modified
or phased in order to meet the project’s budget. If Parks and Recreation Commissioners
or members of the public are so inclined, they may attend the virtual City Counci l
meeting on February 2 to share their input during public comments.
Attachments:
1. Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021
2.3
Packet Pg. 29
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 i Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PART II RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
PART III MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 ii Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 iii Table of Contents
IS/MND and Technical Appendices on CD
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 iv Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
PART I – INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
FINAL INITIAL STUDY/
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project
SCH# 2020100291
LEAD AGENCY:
City of Diamond Bar
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Contact: Mr. Ryan Wright
909.839.7061
PREPARED BY:
Michael Baker International
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500
Santa Ana, CA 92707
Contact: Mr. Alan Ashimine
949.472.3505
January 2021
JN 178669
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 i Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 Statutory Authority and Requirements ............................................................................................ 1-1
1.2 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Consultation ................................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4 Incorporation by Reference ............................................................................................................ 1-2
2.0 Project Description ..................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.1 Project Location .............................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.2 Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2.1 Existing General Plan Designation and Zoning ............................................................ 2-1
2.2.2 Surrounding Land Uses ................................................................................................ 2-1
2.3 Project Background ........................................................................................................................ 2-5
2.4 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................................... 2-5
2.5 Construction/Phasing ..................................................................................................................... 2-6
2.6 Permits and Approvals ................................................................................................................... 2-6
3.0 Initial Study Checklist ................................................................................................................................ 3-1
3.1 Background .................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................................................... 3-2
3.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................. 3-2
4.0 Environmental Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 4.1-1
4.1 Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................... 4.1-1
4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ............................................................................................ 4.2-1
4.3 Air Quality ................................................................................................................................... 4.3-1
4.4 Biological Resources ................................................................................................................... 4.4-1
4.5 Cultural Resources ...................................................................................................................... 4.5-1
4.6 Energy ................................................................................................................................... 4.6-1
4.7 Geology and Soils ....................................................................................................................... 4.7-1
4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................................ 4.8-1
4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .............................................................................................. 4.9-1
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................................... 4.10-1
4.11 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................. 4.11-1
4.12 Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................................... 4.12-1
4.13 Noise ......................................................................................................................................... 4.13-1
4.14 Population and Housing ............................................................................................................ 4.14-1
4.15 Public Services .......................................................................................................................... 4.15-1
4.16 Recreation ................................................................................................................................. 4.16-1
4.17 Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 4.17-1
4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .......................................................................................................... 4.18-1
4.19 Utilities and Service Systems .................................................................................................... 4.19-1
4.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................. 4.20-1
4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................................................... 4.21-1
4.22 References ................................................................................................................................ 4.22-1
4.23 Report Preparation Personnel ................................................................................................... 4.23-1
5.0 Inventory of Mitigation Measures .............................................................................................................. 5-1
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 ii Table of Contents
6.0 Consultant Recommendation .................................................................................................................... 6-1
7.0 Lead Agency Determination ...................................................................................................................... 7-1
APPENDICES
Appendix A Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas/Energy Data
Appendix B Biological Resources Reports
Appendix C Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix D Noise Data
Appendix E AB 52 Documentation
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 iii Table of Contents
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 2-1 Regional Vicinity ............................................................................................................................. 2-2
Exhibit 2-2 Site Vicinity ..................................................................................................................................... 2-3
Exhibit 2-3 Summitridge Park Trail System ...................................................................................................... 2-4
Exhibit 2-4 Conceptual Trail Improvement Plan ............................................................................................... 2-7
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.3-1 Maximum Short-Term Construction Emissions ........................................................................... 4.3-5
Table 4.3-2 Localized Significance of Emissions ............................................................................................ 4.3-8
Table 4.6-1 Construction Energy Consumption .............................................................................................. 4.6-3
Table 4.6-2 Project Energy Use General Plan Consistency Analysis ............................................................. 4.6-4
Table 4.8-1 Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions ....................................................................................... 4.8-5
Table 4.8-2 Project CAP Consistency Analysis .............................................................................................. 4.8-6
Table 4.13-1 Noise and Land Use Compatibility ............................................................................................ 4.13-2
Table 4.13-2 General Plan Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix .................................................................. 4.13-3
Table 4.13-3 Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment ............................................... 4.13-6
Table 4.13-4 Construction Noise Levels by Construction Activity ................................................................... 4.13-6
Table 4.13-5 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment ................................................................ 4.13-8
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 iv Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 v Table of Contents
INITIAL STUDY AND APPENDICES
ON CD
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 vi Table of Contents
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 1-1 Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The proposed Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project (herein referenced as the “project”) involves the addition of trail
improvements along the Canyon Loop Trail within the Summitridge Park Trail System; refer to Section 2.0, Project
Description. Following a preliminary review of the proposed project, the City of Diamond Bar (City) has determined
that it is subject to the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15378, a “project” is defined as the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in
either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the
environment, and that is any of the following:
An activity directly undertaken by any public agency, including, but not limited to, public works construction
and related activities clearing or grading of land, improvements to existing public structures, enactment and
amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements
thereof pursuant to Government Code Sections 65100-65700;
An activity undertaken by a person which is supported in whole or in part through public agency contacts,
grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies; or
An activity involving the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for
use by one or more public agencies.
This Initial Study addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the project, as proposed.
1.1 STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Sections 15051 and 15367 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), the City is identified as
the Lead Agency for the proposed project. Under CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000-21177) and pursuant
to Section 15063 of the CCR, the City is required to undertake the preparation of an Initial Study to determine if the
proposed project would have a significant environmental impact. If, as a result of the Initial Study, the Lead Agency
finds that there is evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant environmental effect, the Lead Agency
shall further find that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is warranted to analyze project-related and cumulative
environmental impacts. Alternatively, if the Lead Agency finds that there is no evidence that the project, either as
proposed or as modified to include the mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study, may cause a significant effect
on the environment, the Lead Agency shall find that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the
environment and shall prepare a Negative Declaration (or Mitigated Negative Declaration). Such determination can be
made only if “there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the Lead Agency” that such impacts
may occur (Section 21080[c], Public Resources Code).
The environmental documentation, which is ultimately selected by the City in accordance with CEQA, is intended as
an informational document undertaken to provide an environmental basis for subsequent discretionary actions upon
the project. The resulting documentation is not, however, a policy document and its approval and/or certification neither
presupposes nor mandates any actions on the part of those agencies from whom permits, and other discretionary
approvals would be required.
1.2 PURPOSE
CEQA Guidelines Section 15063 identifies specific disclosure requirements for inclusion in an Initial Study. Pursuant
to those requirements, an Initial Study shall include:
A description of the project, including the location of the project;
Identification of the environmental setting;
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 1-2 Introduction
Identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method, provided that entries on
a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to support the entries;
Discussion of ways to mitigate significant effects identified, if any;
Examination of whether the project is compatible with existing zoning, plans, and other applicable land use
controls; and
The name(s) of the person(s) who prepared or participated in the preparation of the Initial Study.
1.3 CONSULTATION
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(g), as soon as the Lead Agency (in this case, the City) has determined
that an Initial Study would be required for the project, the Lead Agency is directed to consult informally with all
Responsible Agencies and Trustee Agencies that are responsible for resources affected by the project, in order to
obtain the recommendations of those agencies as to whether an EIR or Negative Declaration should be prepared for
the project. Following receipt of any written comments from those agencies, the Lead Agency considers any
recommendations of those agencies in the formulation of the preliminary findings. Following completion of this Initial
Study, the Lead Agency initiates formal consultation with these and other governmental agencies as required under
CEQA and its implementing guidelines.
1.4 INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE
The following references were utilized during preparation of this Initial Study and are incorporated into this document
by reference. These documents are available for review at the City of Diamond Bar, located at 21810 Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California 91765.
Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (December 2019). The Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (General Plan) is
a dynamic policy document intended to guide the long-term development within Diamond Bar. The General
Plan reflects the community’s values and desires, as expressed in a broad vision for the future through 2040,
and addresses important issue, such as land use and urban design, economic development, circulation,
resource conservation, public facilities and services, safety, public health, and sustainability. The General
Plan consists of the following elements: Land Use and Economic Development; Community Character and
Placemaking; Circulation; Resource Conservation; Public Facilities and Services; Public Safety; and
Community Health and Sustainability.
Diamond Bar Environmental Impact Report 2040 (State Clearinghouse No. 2018051066) (November 2019).
The Diamond Bar Environmental Impact Report 2040 (General Plan EIR) evaluates the environmental
impacts associated with the adoption of the General Plan. The General Plan EIR concluded that the General
Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, historic resources, parks and
recreation, and transportation (vehicle miles traveled). All other environmental impacts would not involve
significant and unavoidable impacts following implementation of recommended mitigation, Diamond Bar
Municipal Code requirements, and relevant General Plan policies.
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (codified through Ordinance No. 01(2019), enacted January 15, 2019). The
Diamond Bar Municipal Code (Municipal Code) includes the City’s regulatory, penal, and administrative
ordinances. Municipal Code Title 22, Development Code (Development Code), is the City’s main tool to
implement the General Plan. The purpose of the Development Code is to implement the policies of the
General Plan by classifying and regulating the uses of land and structures within the City. In addition, the
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 1-3 Introduction
Development Code is adopted to protect and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of
residents, and preserve and enhance the aesthetic quality of Diamond Bar.
Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master Plan (July 2011). The Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master
Plan (Park Master Plan) updates the previous 1998 Park Master Plan and provides a conceptual master plan
for Summitridge Park that outlines opportunities for the development of future facilities within the park. The
Park Master Plan acts as the planning tool for City staff to reference when making recommendations for future
growth and implementation strategies associated with the City’s parks and recreational facilities. Overall, the
Parks Master Plan provides direction to continue the orderly and consistent planning, acquisition,
development, and administration of the parks and recreation programming in the City.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 1-4 Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-1 Project Description
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
Regionally, the project site is located within the City of Diamond Bar (City), in the southeastern portion of Los Angeles
County; refer to Exhibit 2-1, Regional Vicinity. Surrounding jurisdictions include the cities of Industry and Walnut and
the unincorporated community of Rowland Heights to the west, Pomona to the north, Chino Hills to the east, and Brea
and unincorporated Los Angeles County to the south.
The project site is the existing Canyon Loop Trail situated within the central portion of the City and is part of the
Summitridge Park Trail System. The 1.29-linear mile trail is located within Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 8701-
059-904; refer to Exhibit 2-2, Site Vicinity. Regional access to the project site is provided via State Route 60 (SR-60)
and State Route 57 (SR-57) to the west.
2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As shown on Exhibit 2-3, Summitridge Park Trail System, the Summitridge Park Trail System encompasses three trail
routes: the Ridge Route, Canyon Loop Trail, and Grand View Route. The Canyon Loop Trail is located in the central
portion of the trail system with Ridge Route to the north and Grand View Route to the south. The Canyon Loop Trail
can be further distinguished into the North Canyon and South Canyon Loops that make up the full loop trail. The trail
is currently unpaved with two existing benches located along the eastern end of the North Canyon Loop and one bench
on the eastern end of the South Canyon Loop. Trailhead and wayfinding signs are located on the east and west sides
of the loop. A Southern California Edison easement and three towers with overhead wires traverse the North Canyon
Loop.
The trail undergoes varying topography, ranging in elevation from approximately 970 to 1,275 feet above mean sea
level (amsl), sloping uphill from west to east with the highest elevation located along the easternmost portion of the
South Canyon Loop. The Summitridge Park Trail System area is characterized by undeveloped open space dominated
by Venturan coastal sage scrub, oak woodland, and walnut woodland plant communities. Prickly pear cactus is also
present throughout the area and sightings of special-status coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica
californica) and cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus) have been documented in the immediate vicinity of
the Canyon Loop Trail.
Trail users of the Summitridge Park Trail System are able to access the three trails, including the Canyon Loop Trail,
via two trailhead access points at Summit Ridge Park to the south or via access points on the eastern and western end
of the trail system from residential neighborhood roadways, including Peak Court, Wynnewood Drive, Dare Court, and
Clear Creek Canyon Road.
2.2.1 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING
Based on the Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (General Plan) and City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map (Zoning Map), the
project site is designated Open Space and zoned Low Density Residential (RL).
2.2.2 SURROUNDING LAND USES
Surrounding land uses in proximity to the project site are primarily comprised of open space and residential uses as
described below.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit 2-1
Regional Vicinity
08/20 JN 178669
NOT TO SCALE
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
O
C
E
A
N
USMC
Camp Pendleton
SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
ORANGE
COUNTY
101
395
405
405
605
105
210
210
710
110
215
215
5
5
5
15
15
15
15
10
10
10
73
55
57
9191
90
60
71
83
66
91
60
38
18
18
22
1
2
14
18
18
138
138 173
247
74
74
1
1
133
261
241
330
241
Victorville
Adelanto
Hesperia
Apple Valley
SanBernardino
LakeArrowhead
RunningSprings
Riverside
Fontana
OntarioPomona
RanchoCucamonga
Chino
Rialto
Corona
Norco
LakeElsinore
Hemet
Beaumont
Redlands
Temecula
Fallbrook
Oceanside
Murrieta
Palmdale
Lancaster
SanFernando
Pasadena
WestCovina
Whittier
Burbank
Glendora
LosAngeles
Torrance
LongBeach
NewportBeach
HuntingtonBeach
SanClemente
DanaPoint
LagunaBeach San JuanCapistrano
SantaAna
CostaMesa
GardenGrove
Fullerton
YorbaLinda
Irvine
MorenoValley
SunCity
Perris
Project Site
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit 2-2
Site Vicinity
Source: Google Earth Pro, 2020.SUMMITRIDGE DRBROOKWOOD DRDIAMOND BAR BLVDCLEAR CREEK CANYON DRGRAND AVE
GOLDEN NUGGET AVE
MEANDERING CREEK DR
S T E EP CANYO
N
R
D
Ca nyon Loop Trail
Ridge Route
Grand Vie
w
R
o
u
t
e
MONUMEN T C A N Y O N D R
08/20 JN 178669
NOT TO SCALE
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit 2-3
Summitridge Park Trail System
Source: City of Diamond Bar, 2011.
08/20 JN 178669
NOT TO SCALE
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-5 Project Description
North: Ridge Route and open space, including steep undeveloped hillsides are present to the north of the
project site. These areas are designated Open Space and zoned RL.
East: Open space and single-family residential uses are located to the east of the Canyon Loop Trail. These
areas are designated Open Space and Low Density Residential and zoned RL.
South: Grand View Route, open space, and recreational uses (Diamond Bar Center and Summit Ridge Park)
are located to the south of the project site. These areas are designated Open Space, Public Facility, and
Park, and zoned RL.
West: Single-family and multifamily residential and commercial uses are located to the west of the Canyon
Loop Trail. These areas are designated Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and General
Commercial, and zoned Low Medium Density Residential, Medium High Density Residential, and Regional
Commercial.
2.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) serves as a plan for the provision of public improvements, special
projects, and ongoing maintenance programs, including park improvements. As part of the CIP, the Diamond Bar City
Council appropriated funds to improve the existing Canyon Loop Trail with the intent to realign the trail, improve
drainage, re-grade cross slopes, and provide recreational amenities. Consistent with the General Plan Public Facilities
and Services Element and Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master Plan (PMP), the project is intended to provide
enhanced recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. The PMP details recommended improvements in the
Summitridge Park Trail System, including trailhead access points and signage, benches and trash receptacles, stairs,
and footbridges. Improvements desired by the community include level pads and benches at scenic viewpoints along
the three trails within the Summitridge Park Trail System. As detailed below, the project proposes several of the
recommended and desired trail improvements along the Canyon Loop Trail.
On July 16, 2019, the City Council awarded a contract to a landscape architecture firm, Richard Fisher Associates
(RFA), for the conceptual design of such improvements. In October 2019, RFA provided the City with a conceptual
trail improvement plan that includes trail realignment, stairs, retaining walls, and small shade shelters with benches
primarily along the South Canyon Loop of the trail.
2.4 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
As shown on Exhibit 2-4, Conceptual Trail Improvement Plan, the project proposes several trail improvement features
along the Canyon Loop Trail. Existing amenities along the trail are limited to two benches along the North Canyon
Loop and one bench on the eastern end of the South Canyon Loop. Proposed improvements include the following:
The existing trail along most of the South Canyon Loop would be widened to approximately five feet and
remain a natural, unpaved surface;
Gabion retaining walls would be provided in five areas along the South Canyon Loop to stabilize soils and
reduce erosion;
Stairs with handrails and cobblestone swales would be provided in six areas along the South Canyon Loop to
facilitate ease of access and safety and improve drainage;
Six drainage crossings are proposed along the South Canyon Loop to improve drainage and reduce erosion;
Two shade structures with benches and trash receptacles would be provided along the South Canyon Loop
and one shade structure with benches and trash receptacles would be provided along the North Canyon Loop
at identified view points;
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-6 Project Description
Lodge pole fences with “Trail Closed” signs mounted on the fences would be installed in five areas along the
South Canyon Loop to restrict trail users from entering informal trail areas off the existing Canyon Loop trail;
A perforated bench is proposed on the west end of the South Canyon Loop;
A wayfinding sign would be installed on the eastern and western end of the Canyon Loop Trail;
Interpretive signage in various locations that promote awareness of the presence of sensitive biological habitat
and species (including the coastal California gnatcatcher and cactus wren), and indicate that the trail was
implemented in a manner to minimize impacts to biological resources; and
Long-term, routine maintenance of the project components above.
Most of the trail improvements would occur along the South Canyon Loop with minor improvements along the North
Canyon Loop; refer to Exhibit 2-4.
2.5 CONSTRUCTION/PHASING
Construction of the proposed trail improvements is anticipated to occur in a single phase with a duration of four months,
beginning in spring 2021.
2.6 PERMITS AND APPROVALS
The City and other applicable agency approvals required for project implementation would include, but are not limited
to, the following:
City of Diamond Bar
California Environmental Quality Act Clearance
Approval of Conceptual Design Plan
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Incidental Take Permit
Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Exhibit 2-4
Conceptual Trail Improvement Plan
Source: Richard Fisher Associates, 2020.
08/20 JN 178669
NOT TO SCALE
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-8 Project Description
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 3-1 Initial Study Checklist
3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST
3.1 BACKGROUND
1. Project Title: Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Diamond Bar
Parks and Recreation Department
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
3. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Mr. Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director
909.839.7061
4. Project Location: The project site is the existing Canyon Loop Trail situated within the central portion of
the City and is part of the Summitridge Park Trail System. The 1.29-linear mile trail is located within
Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 8701-059-904.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:
City of Diamond Bar
Parks and Recreation Department
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
6. General Plan Designation: The project site is designated Open Space by the Diamond Bar General
Plan 2040.
7. Zoning: The project site is zoned Low Density Residential (RL) by the City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map.
8. Description of the Project:
Refer to Section 2.4, Project Characteristics.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Refer to Section 2.2.2, Surrounding Land Uses.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or
participation agreement).
Refer to Section 2.6, Permits and Approvals.
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area
requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a
plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to
tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
In compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the City distributed letters to applicable Native American tribes
to notify tribes of the opportunity to consult with the City regarding the proposed project. The letters were
distributed by certified mail on July 2, 2020. The tribes had 30 days to respond to the City’s request for
consultation. Refer to Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 3-2 Initial Study Checklist
3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact
that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated,” as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Mineral Resources
Agriculture and Forestry Resources Noise
Air Quality Population and Housing
Biological Resources Public Services
Cultural Resources Recreation
Energy Transportation
Geology and Soils Tribal Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Utilities and Service Systems
Hazards and Hazardous Materials Wildfire
Hydrology and Water Quality Mandatory Findings of Significance
Land Use and Planning
3.3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
This section analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The issue areas
evaluated in this Initial Study include:
Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire
The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the Initial Study Checklist recommended by the CEQA
Guidelines and used by the City of Diamond Bar in its environmental review process. For the preliminary environmental
assessment undertaken as part of this Initial Study’s preparation, a determination that there is a potential for significant
effects indicates the need to more fully analyze the development’s impacts and to identify mitigation.
For the evaluation of potential impacts, the questions in the Initial Study Checklist are stated and an answer is provided
according to the analysis undertaken as part of the Initial Study. The analysis considers the long-term, direct, indirect,
and cumulative impacts of the development. To each question, there are four possible responses:
No Impact. The development will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 3-3 Initial Study Checklist
Less Than Significant Impact. The development will have the potential for impacting the environment,
although this impact will be below established thresholds that are considered to be significant.
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. The development will have the potential to
generate impacts which may be considered as a significant effect on the environment, although mitigation
measures or changes to the development’s physical or operational characteristics can reduce these impacts
to levels that are less than significant.
Potentially Significant Impact. The development will have impacts which are considered significant, and
additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to less than
significant levels.
Where potential impacts are anticipated to be significant, mitigation measures will be required, so that impacts may be
avoided or reduced to insignificant levels.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 3-4 Initial Study Checklist
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.1-1 Aesthetics
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The following is a discussion of potential project impacts as identified in the Initial Study/Environmental Checklist.
Explanations are provided for each item.
4.1 AESTHETICS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
c. In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public views of the site and
its surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from 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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A scenic vista is generally defined as a view of
undisturbed natural lands exhibiting a unique or unusual feature that comprises an important or dominant portion of
the viewshed.1 Scenic vistas may also be represented by a particular distant view that provides visual relief from less
attractive views of nearby features. Other designated Federal and State lands, as well as local open space or
recreational areas, may also offer scenic vistas if they represent a valued aesthetic view within the surrounding
landscape of nearby features.
According to the General Plan EIR, scenic vistas in the City include those afforded from the circulation network as well
as of and from open spaces, local hillsides and ridges, and distant views of the San Gabriel Mountains. Based on this
definition, City-designated scenic resources encompass the project site and its surrounding open space area (i.e.,
Summitridge Park and Summitridge Park Trail System). The Canyon Loop Trail is visible from other trails within the
Summitridge Park Trail System, including Ridge Route to the north and Grand View Route to the south, trail access
points in local residential neighborhoods to the east and west, and the Diamond Bar Center located north of
Summitridge Park. The project site is not located adjacent to any major circulation roadways. The nearest major
roadway identified in Figure 4-1, Circulation Diagram, of the General Plan is Diamond Bar Boulevard, located
approximately 0.3-mile west of the project site. Views of the existing trail from Diamond Bar Boulevard are obstructed
by existing hills, residences, and elevation changes.
During project construction, vegetation removal, clearing, grading, and trail widening activities would be visible to
viewers from nearby trails, however, would likely be obstructed from surrounding land uses given the elevational
changes in the hillside and existing tree lines. Although views towards the project site may be temporarily altered by
1 A viewshed is the geographical area which is visible from a particular location.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.1-2 Aesthetics
construction activities, project construction would occur over a short duration (approximately four months) and would
not result in any significant public view blockage of other City-designated scenic resources in the area, including the
entire Summitridge Park Trail System. To further reduce short-term impacts to visual character and quality, the project
would be required to implement Mitigation Measure AES-1. Mitigation Measure AES-1 would require project
construction materials, heavy-duty equipment, and debris piles be staged in designated construction staging areas.
Compliance with Mitigation Measure AES-1 would ensure the project’s construction-related impacts to scenic vista are
reduced to less than significant levels.
At project completion, the Canyon Loop Trail would be improved with new trail amenities and features, such as widened
paths, gabion retaining walls, stairs with handrails and cobblestone swales, drainage crossings, shade structures with
benches, signs, and lodge pole fences. The project would enhance the existing visual character and quality of the
Canyon Loop Trail and would not adversely impact scenic vistas in the project area. Long-term project impacts would
be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures:
AES-1 To minimize construction-related impacts to scenic vistas and the visual character and quality of the
project area, the project contractor shall ensure that all construction materials, heavy-duty equipment,
and debris piles are staged and screened from public view in a designated construction staging area.
Staging areas shall be approved and subject to periodic field inspections by the City of Diamond Bar
Parks and Recreation Department, or responsible designee(s).
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
No Impact. According to the General Plan EIR, there are no adopted State scenic highways within Diamond Bar.
Although a portion of State Route 57 (SR-57) within the City’s planning area is eligible for official scenic highway
designation, the site is not visible from SR-57 due to elevational changes and obstructing residential and commercial
structures. Thus, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from 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 With Mitigation Incorporated. While the Canyon Loop Trail is adjacent to nearby
urban uses (i.e., residential neighborhoods, Diamond Bar Center, and Summitridge Park), the Summitridge Park Trail
System, including the project site, can be characterized as a non-urbanized area given its existing trails, hillsides, and
natural open space areas. As such, the following analysis evaluates the project’s potential to substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings.
Public views of the project site include those afforded from public sidewalks within the nearby residential communities,
adjacent trails in the Summitridge Park Trail System (Ridge Route to the north and Grand View Route to the south),
and the Diamond Bar Center and Summitridge Park to the south.
Construction-Related Impacts
Short-term construction activities along the trail would be visible from neighboring residential uses to the east and west
of the project site. However, intervening topography would screen neighboring uses from the majority of the project’s
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.1-3 Aesthetics
proposed construction activities and construction-related visual impacts would be temporary. The project would also
implement Mitigation Measure AES-1 to further reduce temporary construction-related impacts to visual character and
quality. Mitigation Measure AES-1 requires project construction materials, heavy-duty equipment, and debris piles be
staged and screened in designated staging areas. Compliance with Mitigation Measure AES-1 would ensure
construction-related impacts to visual character/quality of the project area are reduced to less than significant levels.
Operational Impacts
On a long-term (operational) basis, a project is generally considered to have a significant visual/aesthetic impact if it
substantially changes the character of the project site such that it becomes visually incompatible or visually unexpected
when viewed in the context of its surroundings. As noted above in Response 4.1(a), the proposed trail improvements
would enhance the visual character of the existing trail with gabion retaining walls, stairs, drainage crossings, shade
structures with benches, signs, and lodge pole fences. Additionally, these improvements are typical amenities of
recreational trails and would facilitate access and safety, improving drainage, and reducing erosion in the project area.
Thus, the project’s potential to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site
and its surroundings would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measure AES-1.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
No Impact. There are two primary sources of light: light emanating from building interiors that pass through windows
and light from exterior sources (i.e., street lighting, parking lot lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and
landscape lighting). Light introduction can be a nuisance to adjacent uses and diminish the view of the clear night sky.
There are no existing lighting sources along the Canyon Loop Trail. Light and glare in the project vicinity are primarily
associated with adjacent residential neighborhoods, including vehicular headlights, street lights, and private
residences.
Project construction could involve temporary glare impacts as a result of construction equipment and materials.
However, based on the project’s limited construction duration and scope of activities, these sources of glare would not
be substantial. Further, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.12.720, Construction Noise, all construction activities
associated with the proposed project shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and
on Saturdays. As such, construction activities would not occur during nighttime and would not require nighttime lighting.
The project does not include light fixtures that could generate new sources of lighting along the trail. No new sources
of light or glare would occur at project completion. Thus, long-term impacts in this regard would not occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.1-4 Aesthetics
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.2-1 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources
are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may
refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would
the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency,
to 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
122220(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 forest land to non-
forest use?
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?
No Impact. Based on the California Department of Conservation’s Important Farmland Finder, the project site is not
mapped as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance.1 The project site is currently
utilized as a recreational trail and no active agricultural uses occur on-site. Project implementation would improve
existing amenities on the trail and would not change the site’s current land use. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
No Impact. The project site is zoned Low Density Residential (RL) and is not covered under an existing Williamson
Act contract.2 Thus, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
1 California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, California Important Farmland Finder,
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, accessed May 22, 2020.
2 California Department of Conservation, State of California Williamson Act Contract Land, 2017.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.2-2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources
Code section 122220(g)), timberland as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The project site is zoned RL and is not occupied or used for forest land, timberland, or timberland
production. Further, project implementation would not result in the rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland
zoned timberland production. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. Refer to Response 4.2(c). No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. Refer to Responses 4.2(a) through 4.2(d). No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-1 Air Quality
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by
the applicable air quality management district or air
pollution control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-
attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient
air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (Basin), which is governed by
the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The Federal Clean Air Act requires the SCAQMD to
reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment: ozone (O3), coarse particulate matter
(PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5).1 O3, PM10, and PM2.5 are considered criteria pollutants, since they are three
of several prevalent air pollutants known to be hazardous to human health.
The SCAQMD prepared the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin (2016 AQMP) to reduce
emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in non-attainment. The 2016 AQMP was adopted by the SCAQMD
Governing Board on March 3, 2017 and incorporates the latest scientific and technical information and planning
assumptions, including the latest applicable growth assumptions, Southern California Association of Governments’
(SCAG’s) 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS), and
updated emission inventory methodologies for various source categories. According to SCAQMD’s 1993 CEQA Air
Quality Handbook (CEQA Air Quality Handbook), the following two main criteria must be addressed in order to
determine consistency with the 2016 AQMP.
Criterion 1:
With respect to the first criterion, SCAQMD methodologies require that an air quality analysis for a project include
forecasts of project emissions in relation to contributing to air quality violations and delay of attainment.
a) Would the project result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations?
Since the consistency criteria identified under the first criterion pertain to pollutant concentrations, rather than to
total regional emissions, an analysis of the project’s pollutant emissions relative to localized pollutant
concentrations is used as the basis for evaluating project consistency. As discussed in Response 4.3(c), localized
concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOX), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) would
be less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity
of existing air quality violations. Because reactive organic gasses (ROG) are not a criteria pollutant, there is no
1 An area designated as “nonattainment” for an air pollutant is an area that does not achieve national and/or State ambient air
quality standards for that pollutant.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-2 Air Quality
ambient standard or localized threshold for ROGs. Due to the role ROG plays in O3 formation, it is classified as a
precursor pollutant and only a regional emissions threshold has been established.
b) Would the project cause or contribute to new air quality violations?
As discussed in Response 4.3(b), the proposed project would result in emissions that are below SCAQMD
thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would not have the potential to cause or affect a violation of the
ambient air quality standards and would result in a less than significant impact.
c) Would the project delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions
specified in the AQMP?
As discussed in Response 4.3(c), the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts with regard to
localized concentrations during project construction. Further, the project would not generate additional operational
emissions compared to the existing conditions. As such, the proposed project would not delay the timely
attainment of air quality standards or AQMP emissions reductions.
Criterion 2:
With respect to the second criterion for determining consistency with SCAQMD and SCAG air quality policies, it is
important to recognize that air quality planning within the Basin focuses on attainment of ambient air quality standards
at the earliest feasible date. Projections for achieving air quality goals are based on assumptions regarding population,
housing, and growth trends. Thus, the SCAQMD’s second criterion for determining project consistency focuses on
whether or not the proposed project exceeds the assumptions utilized in preparing the forecasts presented in the
AQMP. Determining whether or not a project exceeds the assumptions reflected in the AQMP involves the evaluation
of the three criteria outlined below. The following discussion provides an analysis of each of these criteria.
a) Would the project be consistent with the population, housing, and employment growth projections
utilized in the preparation of the AQMP?
A project is consistent with the AQMP in part if it is consistent with the population, housing, and employment
assumptions that were used in the development of the AQMP. In the case of the 2016 AQMP, three sources of
data form the basis for the projections of air pollutant emissions: Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (General Plan),
SCAG’s Growth Management Chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG), and SCAG’s
2016-2040 RTP/SCS. The 2016-2040 RTP/SCS also provides socioeconomic forecast projections of regional
population growth. As a part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the project would improve the
existing Canyon Loop Trail by realigning and widening the trail, improving drainage, and providing additional
recreation amenities; refer to Section 2.0, Project Description. The proposed Canyon Loop Trail improvements
would not change the site’s existing General Plan land use designation and zoning; therefore, the proposed project
would be consistent the General Plan; refer to Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning. 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 county-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 RCPG. The
population, housing, and employment forecasts, which are adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council, are based on
the local plans and policies applicable to the County; these are used by SCAG in all phases of implementation and
review. Additionally, as the SCAQMD has incorporated these same projections into the 2016 AQMP, it can be
concluded that the proposed project would be consistent with the projections.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 69 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-3 Air Quality
b) Would the project implement all feasible air quality mitigation measures?
The proposed project would result in less than significant air quality impacts. Compliance with all feasible emission
reduction measures identified by the SCAQMD would be required as identified in Response 4.3(b). As such, the
proposed project meets this AQMP consistency criterion.
c) Would the project be consistent with the land use planning strategies set forth in the AQMP?
The project proposes several trail improvements features along the existing Canyon Loop Trail, refer to Exhibit 2-
4, Conceptual Trail Improvement Plan. The project would not conflict with the General Plan land use assumptions.
According to the General Plan and City of Diamond Bar Zoning Map, the project site is designated Open Space
and zoned Low Density Residential (RL). The proposed project is consistent with these designations, and project
implementation would not induce substantial population growth either directly or indirectly; refer to Section 4.14,
Population and Housing. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the 2016 AQMP and impacts would
be less than significant in this regard.
In conclusion, the determination of AQMP consistency is primarily concerned with the long-term influence of a project
on air quality in the Basin. The proposed project would not result in a long-term impact on the region’s ability to meet
State and Federal air quality standards. As discussed above, the proposed project’s long-term influence would also
be consistent with the goals and policies of the 2016 AQMP and is, therefore, considered consistent with the
SCAQMD’s 2016 AQMP.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact.
Criteria Pollutants
Carbon Monoxide (CO). Carbon monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless toxic gas that is emitted by mobile and
stationary sources as a result of incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons or other carbon-based fuels. In cities,
automobile exhaust can cause as much as 95 percent of all CO emissions. CO replaces oxygen in the body’s red
blood cells. Individuals with a deficient blood supply to the heart, patients with diseases involving heart and blood
vessels, fetuses (unborn babies), and patients with chronic hypoxemia (oxygen deficiency) as seen in high altitudes
are most susceptible to the adverse effects of CO exposure. People with heart disease are also more susceptible to
developing chest pains when exposed to low levels of CO.
Ozone (O3). O3 occurs in two layers of the atmosphere. The layer surrounding the earth’s surface is the troposphere.
The troposphere extends approximately 10 miles above ground level, where it meets the second layer, the
stratosphere. The stratospheric (the “good” O3 layer) extends upward from about 10 to 30 miles and protects life on
earth from the sun’s harmful ultraviolet rays. “Bad” O3 is a photochemical pollutant, and needs volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), NOX, and sunlight to form; therefore, VOCs and NOX are O3 precursors. To reduce O3
concentrations, it is necessary to control the emissions of these O3 precursors. Significant O3 formation generally
requires an adequate amount of precursors in the atmosphere and a period of several hours in a stable atmosphere
with strong sunlight. High O3 concentrations can form over large regions when emissions from motor vehicles and
stationary sources are carried hundreds of miles from their origins.
While O3 in the upper atmosphere (stratosphere) protects the earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation, high
concentrations of ground-level O3 (in the troposphere) can adversely affect the human respiratory system and other
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-4 Air Quality
tissues. O3 is a strong irritant that can constrict the airways, forcing the respiratory system to work hard to deliver
oxygen. Individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with pre-existing lung disease such as asthma and
chronic pulmonary lung disease are considered to be the most susceptible to the health effects of O3. Short-term
exposure (lasting for a few hours) to O3 at elevated levels can result in aggravated respiratory diseases such as
emphysema, bronchitis and asthma, shortness of breath, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung
tissue, increased fatigue, as well as chest pain, dry throat, headache, and nausea.
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2). Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), often used interchangeably with NOX, is a reddish-brown gas that can
cause breathing difficulties at elevated levels. NOX are a family of highly reactive gases that are a primary precursor to
the formation of ground-level O3 and react in the atmosphere to form acid rain. Peak readings of NO2 occur in areas
that have a high concentration of combustion sources (e.g., motor vehicle engines, power plants, refineries, and other
industrial operations). NO2 can irritate and damage the lungs and lower resistance to respiratory infections such as
influenza. The health effects of short-term exposure are still unclear. However, continued or frequent exposure to NO2
concentrations that are typically much higher than those normally found in the ambient air may increase acute
respiratory illnesses in children and increase the incidence of chronic bronchitis and lung irritation. Chronic exposure
to NO2 may aggravate eyes and mucus membranes and cause pulmonary dysfunction.
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10). PM10 refers to suspended particulate matter, which is smaller than 10 microns or
ten one-millionths of a meter. PM10 arises from sources such as road dust, diesel soot, combustion products,
construction operations, and dust storms. PM10 scatters light and significantly reduces visibility. In addition, these
particulates penetrate into lungs and can potentially damage the respiratory tract. On June 19, 2003, the California Air
Resources Board (CARB) adopted amendments to the Statewide 24-hour particulate matter standards based upon
requirements set forth in the Children’s Environmental Health Protection Act (Senate Bill 25).
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5). Due to recent increased concerns over health impacts related to fine particulate matter
(particulate matter 2.5 microns in diameter or less), both State and Federal PM2.5 standards have been created.
Particulate matter impacts primarily affect infants, children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing cardiopulmonary
disease. In 1997, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new PM2.5 standards. Industry groups
challenged the new standard in court and the implementation of the standard was blocked. However, upon appeal by
the EPA, the United States Supreme Court reversed this decision and upheld the EPA’s new standards. On January
5, 2005, the EPA published a Final Rule in the Federal Register that designates the Basin as a nonattainment area for
Federal PM2.5 standards. On June 20, 2002, CARB adopted amendments for Statewide annual ambient particulate
matter air quality standards. These standards were revised/established due to increasing concerns by CARB that
previous standards were inadequate, as almost everyone in California is exposed to levels at or above the current
State standards during some parts of the year, and the Statewide potential for significant health impacts associated
with particulate matter exposure was determined to be large and wide-ranging. Lastly, on March 7, 2017, CARB
released its revised 2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan (State SIP Strategy), describing the
proposed commitment to achieve the reductions necessary from mobile sources, fuels, and consumer products to meet
federal ozone and PM2.5 standards over the next 15 years.
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). Sulfur dioxide (SO2) is a colorless, irritating gas with a rotten egg smell; it is formed primarily by
the combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. Sulfur dioxide is often used interchangeably with sulfur oxides (SOX).
Exposure of a few minutes to low levels of SO2 can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics.
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). Volatile organic compounds (VOC’s) are hydrocarbon compounds (any
compound containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms) that exist in the ambient air. VOCs
contribute to the formation of smog through atmospheric photochemical reactions and/or may be toxic. Compounds of
carbon (also known as organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; that is, they do not react at the same
speed or do not form O3 to the same extent when exposed to photochemical processes. VOCs often have an odor,
and some examples include gasoline, alcohol, and the solvents used in paints. Exceptions to the VOC designation
include: carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-5 Air Quality
VOCs are a criteria pollutant since they are a precursor to O3, which is a criteria pollutant. The SCAQMD uses the
terms VOC and ROG (see below) interchangeably.
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG). Similar to VOC, reactive organic gases (ROG) are also precursors in forming O3 and
consist of compounds containing methane, ethane, propane, butane, and longer chain hydrocarbons, which are
typically the result of some type of combustion/decomposition process. Smog is formed when ROG and nitrogen
oxides react in the presence of sunlight. ROGs are a criteria pollutant since they are a precursor to O3, which is a
criteria pollutant. As stated, the SCAQMD uses the terms ROG and VOC interchangeably.
Short-Term (Construction) Emissions
Construction Emissions
Primary components of the construction process would involve grading of the trail to widen it and construction of the
retaining walls, staircase, drainage crossings, and shade structures. Construction of the proposed project is anticipated
to commence in Spring 2021 and last for approximately four months, ending in August 2021. Soil would be balanced
on-site during the construction activities. Table 4.3-1, Construction Air Emissions, provides the construction emissions
associated with the project. Emitted pollutants would include ROG, CO, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5. Exhaust emissions
from construction activities include emissions associated with the transport of machinery and supplies to and from the
project site, emissions produced on-site as the equipment is used, and emissions from trucks transporting materials to
and from the site. Exhaust emission factors for typical diesel-powered heavy equipment are based on the California
Emissions Estimator Model version 2016.3.2 (CalEEMod) program defaults. Variables factored into estimating the
total construction emissions include the level of activity, length of construction period, number of pieces and types of
equipment in use, site characteristics, weather conditions, number of construction personnel, and the amount of
materials to be transported on- or off-site. The analysis of daily construction emissions has been prepared utilizing
CalEEMod. Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas/Energy Data, for the CalEEMod outputs and results.
Table 4.3-1
Maximum Short-Term Construction Emissions
Emissions Source Pollutant (pounds/day)1,2
ROG NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Construction Emissions
Year 1 2.06 17.25 16.15 0.03 2.71 1.75
Maximum Daily Emissions 2.06 17.25 16.15 0.03 2.71 1.75
SCAQMD Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Is Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: ROG = reactive organic gas; NOx = nitrous oxide; CO = carbon monoxide; SO2 = sulfur dioxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter;
PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
1. Emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, version 2016.3.2.
2. Modeling assumptions include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 which requires: properly maintain mobile and other construction
equipment; replace ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; water exposed surfaces three times daily; cover stock piles with tarps; water
all haul roads twice daily; and limit speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
Source: Refer to Appendix A for detailed model input/output data.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-6 Air Quality
As depicted in Table 4.3-1, construction-related emissions would not exceed the established SCAQMD thresholds for
criteria pollutants. During construction activities, the project would also be required to comply with standard SCAQMD
regulations, such as Rule 402 and 403. A less than significant construction impact would occur.
Fugitive Dust Emissions
Construction activities are a source of fugitive dust emissions that may have a substantial, temporary impact on local
air quality. In addition, fugitive dust may be a nuisance to those living and working in the project area. Fugitive dust
emissions are associated with land clearing, ground excavation, cut-and-fill, and truck travel on unpaved roadways
(typically during demolition and construction activities). Fugitive dust emissions vary substantially from day to day,
depending on the level of activity, specific operations, and weather conditions. Fugitive dust from grading, excavation
and construction is expected to be short-term and would cease upon project completion. These short-term impacts,
however, would not be significant for the reasons discussed below.
Dust (larger than 10 microns) generated by such activities usually becomes more of a local nuisance than a serious
health problem. Of particular health concern is the amount of PM10 generated as a part of fugitive dust emissions.
PM10 poses a serious health hazard alone or in combination with other pollutants. PM2.5 is mostly produced by
mechanical processes. These include automobile tire wear, industrial processes such as cutting and grinding, and re-
suspension of particles from the ground or road surfaces by wind and human activities such as construction or
agriculture. PM2.5 is mostly derived from combustion sources, such as automobiles, trucks, and other vehicle exhaust,
as well as from stationary sources. These particles are either directly emitted or are formed in the atmosphere from
the combustion of gases such as NOX and SOX combining with ammonia. PM2.5 components from material in the
earth’s crust, such as dust, are also present, with the amount varying in different locations.
The project would implement all required SCAQMD dust control techniques (i.e., daily watering) and adhere to
SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 (which require watering of inactive and perimeter areas, track out requirements, etc.), to
reduce PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations. As provided in Table 4.3-1, total PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would not exceed
the SCAQMD thresholds during construction.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos
Asbestos is a term used for several types of naturally occurring fibrous minerals that are a human health hazard when
airborne. The most common type of asbestos is chrysotile, but other types such as tremolite and actinolite are also
found in California. Asbestos is classified as a known human carcinogen by State, Federal, and international agencies
and was identified as a toxic air contaminant by CARB in 1986.
Asbestos can be released from serpentinite and ultramafic rocks when the rock is broken or crushed. At the point of
release, the asbestos fibers may become airborne, causing air quality and human health hazards. These rocks have
been commonly used for unpaved gravel roads, landscaping, fill projects, and other improvement projects in some
localities. Asbestos may be released to the atmosphere due to vehicular traffic on unpaved roads, during grading for
development projects, and at quarry operations. All of these activities may have the effect of releasing potentially
harmful asbestos into the air. Natural weathering and erosion processes can act on asbestos bearing rock and make
it easier for asbestos fibers to become airborne if such rock is disturbed. According to the Department of Conservation
Division of Mines and Geology, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas More Likely to
Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos Report (August 2000), serpentinite and ultramafic rocks are not known to occur
within the project area. Thus, there would be no impact in this regard.
Long-Term (Operational) Emissions
The project proposes several trail improvements features along the existing Canyon Loop Trail, refer to Exhibit 2-4,
Conceptual Trail Improvement Plan. The project would not generate additional traffic trips when compared to existing
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-7 Air Quality
conditions or create additional operational emissions. Further, the project is anticipated to result in beneficial long-term
air quality effects, as it would result in improved connectivity in the project area for alternative modes of transportation
and would promote the City’s General Plan goal of maintaining open space. As a result, the project would not generate
substantial operational emissions. Thus, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Air Quality Health Impacts
Adverse health effects induced by criteria pollutant emissions are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected
variables (e.g., cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, and the number and
character of exposed individual [e.g., age and gender]). In particular, O3 precursors, VOCs and NOX, affect air quality
on a regional scale. Health effects related to O3 are therefore the product of emissions generated by numerous sources
throughout a region. Existing models have limited sensitivity to small changes in criteria pollutant concentrations, and,
as such, translating project-generated criteria pollutants to specific health effects or additional days of nonattainment
would produce meaningless results. In other words, the project’s less than significant increases in regional air pollution
from criteria air pollutants would have nominal or negligible impacts on human health.
As noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the SCAQMD (April 6, 2015) for the Sierra Club vs. County of Fresno, the
SCAQMD acknowledged it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible to quantify health impacts of criteria pollutants
for various reasons including modeling limitations as well as where in the atmosphere air pollutants interact and form.
Further, as noted in the Brief of Amicus Curiae by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD)
(April 13, 2015) for the Sierra Club vs. County of Fresno, SJVAPCD has acknowledged that currently available
modeling tools are not equipped to provide a meaningful analysis of the correlation between an individual development
project’s air emissions and specific human health impacts.
The SCAQMD acknowledges that health effects quantification from O3, as an example is correlated with the increases
in ambient level of O3 in the air (concentration) that an individual person breathes. SCAQMD’s Brief of Amicus Curiae
states that it would take a large amount of additional emissions to cause a modeled increase in ambient O3 levels over
the entire region. The SCAQMD states that based on their own modeling in the SCAQMD’s 2012 Air Quality
Management Plan, a reduction of 432 tons (864,000 pounds) per day of NOX and a reduction of 187 tons (374,000
pounds) per day of VOCs would reduce O3 levels at highest monitored site by only nine parts per billion. As such, the
SCAQMD concludes that it is not currently possible to accurately quantify O3-related health impacts caused by NOX or
VOC emissions from relatively small projects (defined as projects with regional scope) due to photochemistry and
regional model limitations. Thus, as the project would not exceed SCAQMD thresholds for construction emissions,
and operational air emissions would not change from existing conditions, the project would have a less than significant
impact for air quality health impacts.
Conclusion
As summarized above, the project’s short-term construction emissions would be below the SCAQMD thresholds and
would result in a less than significant impact. Furthermore, the project would not result in significant long-term air
quality impacts, as emissions would not change from existing conditions. Thus, the project’s construction and
operational emissions would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable air quality impact for nonattainment criteria
pollutants in the Basin. Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. 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
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-8 Air Quality
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. The nearest residential property is located approximately 80 feet west of the proposed project
construction limits.
Localized Significance Thresholds
Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) were developed in response to SCAQMD Governing Boards’ Environmental
Justice Enhancement Initiative (I-4). The SCAQMD provided the Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology
(dated June 2003 [revised 2008]) for guidance. The LST methodology assists lead agencies in analyzing localized
impacts associated with project-specific level proposed projects. The SCAQMD provides the LST lookup tables for
one, two, and five-acre projects emitting CO, NOX, PM2.5, or PM10. The LST methodology and associated mass rates
are not designed to evaluate localized impacts from mobile sources traveling over the roadways. The project is located
within Sensitive Receptor Area (SRA) 10, Pomona/Walnut Valley.
Based off the CalEEMod results, the project would disturb less than an acre over 45 days (less than an acre per day);
therefore, the LST thresholds for one acre were conservatively utilized for the construction LST analysis. It is noted
that an operational LST analysis was not prepared, as the project operational emissions would not change from existing
emissions. As noted above, the closest sensitive receptor to the project site is a residential property located
approximately 80 feet (or 24 meters) to the west of the project’s construction limits. This sensitive land uses may be
potentially affected by air pollutant emissions generated during on-site construction activities. LST thresholds are
provided for distances to sensitive receptors of 25, 50, 100, 200, and 500 meters. As the nearest sensitive use is
approximately 24 meters away, the LST values of 25 meters were conservatively utilized. Table 4.3-2, Localized
Significance of Emissions, shows the construction-related emissions for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 compared to the
LST’s for SRA 10, Pomona/Walnut Valley. As shown in Table 4.3-2, the short term (approximately four months)
construction emissions would not exceed the LST’s for SRA 10. Therefore, localized significance impacts from
construction would be less than significant.
Table 4.3-2
Localized Significance of Emissions
Source1 Emissions (pounds/day)1
NOX CO PM10 PM2.5
Year 12 11.00 10.70 0.32 0.60
Maximum Daily Emissions 11.00 10.70 0.32 0.60
SCAQMD Localized Significance
Threshold3 103 612 4 3
Thresholds Exceeded? No No No No
Notes: NOx = nitrous oxide; CO = carbon monoxide; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter
1. Modeling assumptions include compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 which requires properly maintaining mobile and other construction
equipment; replacing ground cover in disturbed areas quickly; watering exposed surfaces three times daily; covering stockpiles with tarps;
watering all haul roads twice daily; and limiting speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour.
2. Year 1 (2021) grading phase emissions present the worst-case scenario for PM10, and PM2.5 and building construction phase emissions
present the worst-case scenario for NOX, CO
3. The Localized Significance Threshold was determined using Appendix C of the SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significant Threshold
Methodology guidance document for NOX, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. The Localized Significance Threshold was based on the anticipated daily
acreage disturbance for construction (the thresholds for one acre was utilized), the distance to sensitive receptors (25 meters), and Source
Receptor Area 10.
Source: Refer to Appendix A for detailed model input/output data.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 75 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-9 Air Quality
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
CO emissions are a function of vehicle idling time, meteorological conditions, and traffic flow. Under certain extreme
meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near a congested roadway or intersection may reach unhealthful levels
(i.e., adversely affecting residents, school children, hospital patients, the elderly, etc.). The SCAQMD requires a
quantified assessment of CO hotspots when a project increases the volume-to-capacity ratio (also called the
intersection capacity utilization [ICU]) by 0.02 (two percent) for any intersection with an existing level of service LOS D
or worse. Because traffic congestion is highest at intersections where vehicles queue and are subject to reduced
speeds, these hot spots are typically produced at intersections.
The project proposes several trail improvements features along the existing Canyon Loop Trail. These improvements
would not alter the existing use and would not add additional vehicle trips when compared to existing conditions. Thus,
the project would not increase the ICU of nearby intersections and therefore would not warrant a CO hotspot analysis.
A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Localized Air Quality Health Impacts
As evaluated above, the project’s air emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD’s LST thresholds and CO hotpots
would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Therefore, the project would not exceed the most stringent
applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standards for emissions of CO, NOX, PM10, or PM2.5. It should be noted
that the ambient air quality standards are developed and represent levels at which the most susceptible persons
(children and the elderly) are protected. In other words, the ambient air quality standards are purposefully set in a
stringent manner to protect children, elderly, and those with existing respiratory problems. Thus, the project would not
result in localized air quality health impacts.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with
odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical
plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. The proposed project involves improvements
to the existing Canyon Loop Trail and does not include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with
odors.
Construction activities associated with the project may generate detectable odors from heavy-duty equipment exhaust.
However, construction-related odors would be short-term in nature and cease upon project completion. In addition,
the project would be required to comply with the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 13, sections 2449(d)(3)
and 2485, which minimizes the idling time of construction equipment either by shutting it off when not in use or by
reducing the time of idling to no more than five minutes. This would reduce the detectable odors from heavy-duty
equipment exhaust. Any project odor impacts to the existing adjacent land uses and the closest nearby sensitive
receptors (80 feet to the west) would be short-term and not substantial as these odors would quickly dissipate due to
the prevailing meteorology, the volatility of the emissions, and the distance to nearby sensitive receptors. Furthermore,
any construction or project odors would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402. As such, the project would
not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 76 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.3-10 Air Quality
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 77 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-1 Biological Resources
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species identified as
a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community identified in local or
regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on State or Federally
protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
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?
The information presented in this analysis is based on the following technical studies; refer to Appendix B, Biological
Resources Reports:
Michael Baker International, Results of a Biological Resources Assessment of the Canyon Loop Trail
Improvement Project – City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California (Biological Resources
Assessment), dated July 10, 2020; and
Michael Baker International, Results of Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Surveys
for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California
(Focused Bird Survey Report), dated August 7, 2020.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. A Biological Resources Assessment was prepared for
the project and included a habitat assessment to survey existing biological conditions on and surrounding the project
site. In addition to the habitat assessment, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 78 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-2 Biological Resources
Diversity Database (CNDDB) Rarefind 5 and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and
Consultation (IPaC) database were queried for reported locations of listed and special-status plant and wildlife species
as well as special-status vegetation communities in the U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute Baldwin Park, San
Dimas, Ontario, La Habra, Yorba Linda, and Prado Dam quadrangles. The California Native Plant Society (CNPS)
Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants supplied information regarding the distribution and habitats of plants in the
project vicinity. The habitat assessment assessed the ability of the plant communities found on-site to provide suitable
habitat for relevant special-status plant and wildlife species. According to the Biological Resources Assessment, the
survey area, defined as the project site plus a 500-foot buffer, generally consists of natural vegetation with relatively
undisturbed soils.
Further, a Focused Bird Survey Report was prepared for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica
californica; a Federally Threatened Species and CDFW Species of Special Concern [SSC]) and cactus wren
(Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus). The surveys were conducted between May 26 and July 1, 2020 in accordance
with the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines and
survey guidelines for cactus wren. A total of six surveys were conducted in patches of suitable habitat for these species
within 500 feet of the project site, similar to the habitat assessment, with the goal of mapping occurrences and territories
of coastal California gnatcatchers and cactus wrens and, if possible, mapping nesting locations.
Special-Status Plant Species
A total of 41 special-status plant species have been recorded in the USGS Baldwin Park, San Dimas, Ontario, La
Habra, Yorba Linda, and Prado Dam, California 7.5-minute quadrangles by the CNDDB, IPaC, and CNPS Online
Inventory. One special-status plant species was observed during the field survey, southern California black walnut
(Juglans californica).
Based on the results of the field survey and a review of specific habitat preferences, distributions, and elevation ranges,
it was determined that the survey area has a moderate potential to support Catalina mariposa-lily (Calochortus
catalinae); and a low potential to support chaparral sand-verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita), California androsace
(Androsace elongata ssp. acuta), western spleenwort (Asplenium vespertinum), Braunton’s milk-vetch (Astragalus
brauntonii), Nevin’s barberry (Berberis nevinii), Plummer’s mariposa-lily (Calochortus plummerae), intermediate
mariposa-lily (Calochortus weedii var. intermedius), Lewis’ evening-primrose (Camissoniopsis lewisii), Parry’s
spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi), paniculate tarplant (Deinandra paniculata), many-stemmed dudleya
(Dudleya multicaulis), mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. puberula), Robinson’s pepper-grass (Lepidium virginicum
var. robinsonii), aparejo grass (Muhlenbergia utilis), Hubby’s phacelia (Phacelia hubbyi), south coast branching
phacelia (Phacelia ramosissima var. austrolitoralis), Brand’s star phacelia (Phacelia stellaris), white rabbit-tobacco
(Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum), Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii), and Coulter’s matilija poppy (Romneya
coulteri). All remaining special-status plant species identified by the CNDDB, IPaC, and CNPS databases are not
expected to occur within the survey area.
To ensure proper avoidance of special-status plant species, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 requires a qualified botanist to
conduct a focused rare plant survey in areas with suitable habitat to determine presence or absence of special-status
plant species prior to construction and during the appropriate blooming periods. If individual or populations of special-
status plant species are found within the areas proposed for disturbance, measures to avoid and minimize impacts
would be required in accordance with 2018 CDFW and/or 2001 CNPS guidelines. Although not expected, if State-
and/or Federally-listed plant species are present and avoidance is infeasible, consultation with the CDFW and/or
USFWS would be required and Incidental Take Permits (ITPs) from the CDFW and/or USFWS would be required prior
to the commencement of project activities.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-3 Biological Resources
Special-Status Wildlife Species
A total of 66 special-status wildlife species have been recorded in the USGS Baldwin Park, San Dimas, Ontario, La
Habra, Yorba Linda, and Prado Dam, California 7.5-minute quadrangles by the CNDDB and IPaC. Four special-status
wildlife species were observed during the habitat assessment and subsequent focused bird surveys: Cooper’s hawk
(Accipiter cooperii; a CDFW Watch List (WL) species), southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps
canescens; a CDFW WL species), coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri; a CDFW SSC), and coastal California
gnatcatcher (a Federally Threatened Species and CDFW SSC).
Based on the results of the field surveys and a review of specific habitat preferences, occurrence records, known
distributions, and elevation ranges, it was determined that the survey area has a high potential to support sharp-shinned
hawk (Accipiter striatus; a CDFW WL species), red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber; a CDFW SSC), and American
peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum; a CDFW Fully Protected (FP) Species); a moderate potential to support
merlin (Falco columbarius; a CDFW WL species); and a low potential to support southern California legless lizard
(Anniella stebbinsi; a CDFW SSC), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos; a CDFW FP and WL species), California glossy
snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis; a CDFW SSC), long-eared owl (Asio otus; a CDFW SSC), orange-throated
whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra; a CDFW WL species), Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii; a State Candidate
Endangered species), Vaux’s swift (Chaetura vauxi; a CDFW SSC), northern harrier (Circus hudsonius; a CDFW SSC),
white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus; a CDFW FP species), willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii; a State Endangered
species), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus; a Federally and State Endangered species),
California horned lark (Eremophila alpestris actia; a CDFW WL species), western mastiff bat (Eumops perotis
californicus; a CDFW SSC), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus; a CDFW SSC), western red bat (Lasiurus
blossevillii; a CDFW SSC), San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida intermedia; a CDFW SSC), coast horned lizard
(Phrynosoma blainvillii; a CDFW SSC), summer tanager (Piranga rubra; a CDFW SSC), coast patch-nosed snake
(Salvadora hexalepis virgultea; a CDFW SSC), and yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia; a CDFW SSC). Some of
these species, including Vaux’s swift, willow flycatcher, southwestern willow flycatcher, and yellow warbler would only
potentially occur as migrants briefly stopping over on their way north or south. All remaining special-status wildlife
species identified by the CNDDB and IPaC are not expected to occur within the survey area.
Because the project proposes to widen much of the South Canyon Loop to a width of five feet, vegetation removal of
habitat that could be suitable for special-status wildlife species with the potential to occur in the survey, or in some
cases is already known to support (i.e., coastal California gnatcatcher), can occur. Due to regional significance, coastal
California gnatcatcher and cactus wren are described in further detail below.
Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN)
CAGN is a Federally threatened species with restricted habitat requirements, being an obligate resident of sage scrub
habitats, particularly, those that are dominated by California sagebrush. This species generally occurs below 750 feet
elevation in coastal regions and below 1,500 feet inland. It ranges from Ventura County south to San Diego County
and northern Baja California and is less common in sage scrub with a high percentage of tall shrubs. CAGN prefers
habitat with more low-growing vegetation. California gnatcatchers breed between mid-February and the end of August,
with peak activity from mid-March to mid-May. Population estimates indicate that there are approximately 1,600 to
2,290 pairs of California gnatcatcher remaining. Declines are attributed to loss of sage scrub habitat due to
development, as well as cowbird nest parasitism. While Federally-designated Critical Habitat for CAGN is not located
within or directly adjacent to the survey area (refer to Biological Resources Assessment Figure 7, Critical Habitat), the
survey area provides abundant suitable habitat for CAGN, with known populations occurring in the area. In addition,
multiple breeding pairs of CAGNs are known to be present within the survey area.
As detailed in the Focused Bird Survey Report, CAGN is a rare and local resident in the coastal slope of Los Angeles
and San Bernardino counties. Populations are somewhat widespread but persistent in the project vicinity in Los
Angeles County, spanning across the Chino Hills, San Jose Hills, and Puente Hills. In San Bernardino County, which
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-4 Biological Resources
is located immediately to the east of the project site, CAGN persists in only four or five populations in the entire county,
including in Chino Hills State Park. Farther to the south, CAGN is reasonably common in the foothills of the Santa Ana
Mountains in Orange County. However, as stated, the project site is not located within USFWS-designated Critical
Habitat for CAGN.
Results of the Focused Bird Survey Report mapped a minimum of five CAGN territories within the biological study area;
refer to Figure 4, Coastal California Gnatcatcher Results, of the Focused Bird Survey Report. Four nests were found
in two of the territories, one of which successfully led to chicks fledging. Of the minimum five territories, four territories
(Territories 1, 3, 4, and 5) had chicks fledge in them. The boundaries of Territories 3 and 5 expanded over time due to
post-breeding dispersal, with Territory 5 potentially undergoing two separate instances of dispersal to two areas where
no CAGN had been previously detected. Refer to Focused Bird Survey Report Table 2, CAGN Survey Results, for a
more detailed summary of CAGN activity in each territory during the surveys.
Coastal Cactus Wren (CCACW)
Cactus wren is a somewhat common avian species found within arid and semi-arid regions of southern California. The
subspecies coastal cactus wren (C. b. sandiegensis), or CCACW, is found within a very limited range of southern
California and is designated by CDFW as a SSC. CCACW have a range that extends from extreme northwestern Baja
California north at least through the coastal lowlands of San Diego County. The actual northern limit of its range is
uncertain because of the lack of specimens from northwestern San Diego County and most of Orange County.
However, observations made in the field based on differences in song and visual assessments suggest southern
Orange County to approximately the vicinity of State Route 74 (Ortega Highway) is the northern limit of CCACW.
CCACW are mainly restricted to thickets of chollas (Cylindropuntia prolifera) or prickly-pear cacti (i.e., Opuntia littoralis,
O. oricola) large enough to protect from predation. Suitable habitat conditions are normally found on south-facing
slopes, at bases of hillsides, or in dry washes. Territories have been recorded as occurring at elevations below 1,500
feet and averaging three acres in size. The survey area provides an abundance of undisturbed coast prickly pear scrub
habitat that is essential nesting habitat for this species. Although multiple territories of cactus wren were observed on-
site, the survey area is well outside the known range for the coastal sandiegensis subspecies, which ends around State
Route 74 based on CDFW mapping. As such, this local subspecies found on-site is likely C. b. anthonyi.
Similar to CAGN, cactus wren is a rare and local resident on the coastal slope of Los Angeles and San Bernardino
counties. In Los Angeles County, the species is better off but declining, with populations known from the Chino Hills,
San Jose Hills, Puente Hills, and foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. In adjacent San Bernardino County, the only
known populations are in the upper Santa Ana River wash near Redlands/Mentone/Highland and near the confluence
of Cajon and Lytle Creeks, both far from the survey area. This species is much more common in Orange County in
the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains and less so in the San Joaquin Hills. Cactus wren in Los Angeles County are
considered to be of the non-sensitive subspecies C.b. anthonyi, although it should be noted that many of the birds on
the coast, including the ones in the survey area, show characteristics, such as the extent of white barring in the tail
feathers, typically associated with the sensitive CCACW.
According to the Focused Bird Survey Report, a total of five cactus wren territories were mapped during the focused
surveys; refer to Figure 5, Cactus Wren Results, of the Focused Bird Survey Report. No attempts were made to find
cactus wren nests, although one nest was incidentally found outside of any apparently active territories. Although no
nests were found in the territories, all five territories fledged young. Of these, Territory 5 is the only one that had an
obvious instance of post-breeding dispersal into a new area during the surveys, with all other families utilizing the same
territories that they had evidently nested in. Refer to Focused Bird Survey Report Table 3, Cactus Wren Survey
Results, for a more detailed summary of cactus wren activity in each territory during the surveys.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-5 Biological Resources
Conclusion
Based on the results of the Focused Bird Survey Report, at least five CAGN and five cactus wren territories were found
to be present within the 500-foot survey area. Four CAGN pairs and all five cactus wren pairs successfully fledged
young in 2020 as evidenced by firsthand observations during the surveys. Many of the territories were directly adjacent
to, crossed over, or were at least in close proximity to proposed trail improvement areas. Of the nests that were found,
the closest nest (CAGN Territory 2, Nest 1) was approximately 70 feet from the Canyon Loop Trail.
Of the various proposed trail improvements, the project proposes to widen segments of the South Canyon Loop in the
southern half of the survey area. This would result in loss of suitable habitat for sensitive species, particularly for
CAGN. Based on the project plans, the proposed trail widening segment is approximately 1,942 feet (or approximately
0.4-mile). Based on field observations, this segment of the South Canyon Loop would be widened an additional one
to two feet from its current width to a total of five feet.
As stated, the cactus wren observed on-site is not believed to be the sensitive CCACW protected by the CDFW as a
SSC. However, loss of vegetation directly supporting known populations of CAGN would constitute “take” under
Section 9 of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and would require an ITP under Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Federal ESA. As such, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires the City to obtain an ITP and submit a low-effect habitat
conservation plan (HCP) to the USFWS to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used by CAGN on-site.
Avoidance and minimization measures that may be required in a low-effect HCP for this project, subject to consultation
with the USFWS, include, but are not limited to, preconstruction nesting surveys for CAGN and avoidance of any active
nests or scheduling of work outside of the gnatcatcher nesting season, environmental training of all personnel who
would be removing vegetation, biological monitoring during initial vegetation removal, closing and restoration of any
extraneous trail sections to recreational use, and on-site restoration and preservation of coastal sage scrub
communities within the survey area (i.e. in the vicinity of the impacts).
To avoid indirect impacts and take of CAGN or cactus wren, it is recommended that all project-related construction
occur outside of the general CAGN and cactus wren breeding season (February 15 – September 15). Timing project-
related construction activities to be outside of this window of time would avoid impacts to CAGN or cactus wren nests.
If it is not possible to construct the project outside of this time period, Mitigation Measure BIO-3 would require a nesting
bird clearance survey be conducted within seven days prior to the start of construction activities within a 500-foot buffer
from the project site. The survey should be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable experience identifying
CAGN and cactus wren nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who has been approved by the USFWS to conduct
CAGN surveys. If an active nest is found during the survey, no project-related construction would be allowed within
500 feet of an active CAGN nest or 300 feet of an active cactus wren nest, or within an alternative safe distance as
determined by the qualified biologist, until the nest is no longer active.
Further, to reduce potential impacts to other nesting birds, Mitigation Measure BIO-4 would require a pre-construction
nesting bird survey if construction cannot occur outside of the general avian nesting season (January 1 through August
31). If an active nest is found, a “no-disturbance” buffer is required around the active nest. The size of the “no-
disturbance” buffer should be determined based on the judgement of the qualified biologist and level of activity and
sensitivity of the species. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under
natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur following an additional survey by the
qualified biologist to search for any new nests in the restricted area.
Upon implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2 through BIO-4, impacts to special-status wildlife species would be
less than significant.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-6 Biological Resources
Mitigation Measures:
BIO-1 Prior to construction and during the appropriate blooming periods for special-status plant species with the
potential to occur within the survey area, a qualified botanist shall conduct a focused rare plant survey in
areas with suitable habitat to determine presence or absence of special-status plant species. The surveys
shall be floristic in nature (i.e., identifying all plant species to the taxonomic level necessary to determine
rarity), and shall be inclusive of, at a minimum, the areas proposed for trail improvements and those
immediately surrounding those areas. The results of the survey shall be documented in a letter report.
If individual or populations of special-status plant species are found within the areas proposed for
disturbance, measures to avoid and minimize impacts shall be recommended. The surveys and reporting
shall follow 2018 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or 2001 California Native Plant
Society guidelines.
Although not expected, if State- and/or Federally-listed plant species are present and avoidance is
infeasible, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW shall be required
and an Incidental Take Permit(s) from the USFWS and/or CDFW shall be obtained prior to the
commencement of project activities.
BIO-2 In consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the City of Diamond Bar Parks and
Recreation Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare a low-effect habitat
conservation plan (HCP) to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used by sensitive wildlife species,
particularly coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica californica) known to occur on-site.
Avoidance and minimization measures that may be required in a low-effect HCP for the proposed project,
subject to consultation with the USFWS, include, but are not limited to, preconstruction nesting surveys
for coastal California gnatcatcher and avoidance of any active nests or scheduling of work outside of the
gnatcatcher nesting season, environmental training for all construction personnel, biological monitoring
during initial vegetation removal, closing and restoration of any extraneous trail sections or breeding
habitat to recreational use, provisions for pets (leashed pets, removal of pet waste), locations of trash
receptacles, and on-site restoration and preservation of coastal sage scrub communities within the survey
area (i.e., in the vicinity of the impacts).
BIO-3 Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground disturbance activities, and
vegetation removal shall be completed outside the avian breeding season. The City of Diamond Bar shall
not perform any project construction or activities or remove or otherwise disturb vegetation on the project
site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31, and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts
to breeding/nesting birds and raptors. However, if avoidance of the avian breeding season is infeasible
and if project-related construction activities are initiated during the nesting season for coastal California
gnatcatcher (CAGN; Polioptila californica californica) and cactus wren (CACW; Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus) (February 15th through September 15th), a nesting bird clearance survey shall be
conducted within seven days prior to the start of construction within a 500-foot buffer of the project site.
The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable experience identifying CAGN
and CACW nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who has been approved by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conduct a CAGN survey. If an active CAGN or CACW nest is found during
the survey, no project-related construction shall be allowed within 500 feet of an active CAGN nest or
300 feet of an active CACW nest, or within an alternative safe distance as determined by the qualified
biologist based on topography, visual shielding, nest progress, and the type of construction and
associated disturbance, until the active nest has been determined by the qualified biologist to have failed
or to have successfully gone to completion (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on
the nest). Results of the nesting bird clearance survey, shall be compiled in a memorandum and
submitted to the City and the USFWS for project records.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-7 Biological Resources
BIO-4 The City of Diamond Bar shall protect special-status wildlife resources during construction. A qualified
biologist shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey prior to any ground disturbance and/or
vegetation removal to search for special-status wildlife resources that may be present within the
construction area. The biologist shall be thoroughly familiar with the habitat requirements and life histories
of special-status species that could occur. The biologist shall submit survey results, including negative
results, to CDFW following the survey and prior to the start of construction.
If project-related activities are to be initiated during the general avian nesting season (January 1st through
August 31st), a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted within a 500-foot radius
of the project footprint by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of any vegetation
removal or ground-disturbing activities. The qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat at
appropriate nesting times within the project’s development footprint, and areas within a biologically-
defensible buffer zone surrounding the project’s development footprint. If no active nests are detected
during the clearance survey, project activities may begin, and no additional avoidance and minimization
measures would be required.
If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, surveys
shall be repeated before work can resume.
If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified and a “no-disturbance” buffer shall be
established around the active nest. Buffers shall be clearly delineated and marked around the active nest
site as directed by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be 300 feet around active passerine (perching
birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor nests, and 0.5-mile around active
California Endangered Species Act (CESA)-listed bird nests. The qualified biologist shall advise workers
of the sensitivity of the buffered areas, and workers shall not work, trespass, or engage in activities that
would disturb nesting birds near or inside the buffer. The qualified biologist shall periodically monitor any
active nests to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-disturbance” buffer disturb
the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the
nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance”
buffer may occur following an additional survey by the qualified biologist to search for any new nests in
the restricted area.
A qualified biological monitor approved by CDFW shall be present during vegetation removal or grubbing
activities. Any special-status wildlife that is found within the construction area shall be encouraged to
move elsewhere or shall be physically moved out of harm’s way by the biologist if necessary. The
biological monitor shall have the necessary state and/or federal permits or letters of permission from the
wildlife agencies to relocate wildlife as necessary.
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to the Biological Resources Assessment,
the CNDDB identified seven special-status vegetation communities recorded within the vicinity of the survey area. Two
of the seven special-status vegetation communities were observed during the field survey: California walnut woodland
and southern coast live oak riparian forest. As shown on Figure 5, Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses, of
the Biological Resources Assessment, Disturbed California Walnut Groves habitat is located within the northern portion
of the survey area, and Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest habitat is located in the central, eastern, and southern
portions of the survey area. The proposed trail improvements would occur on or directly adjacent to the existing trail
path and thus, would not substantially impact these sensitive vegetation communities in the survey area. Further,
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-8 Biological Resources
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-4 would require a qualified biologist to conduct focused rare plant surveys and
nesting bird clearance surveys, and the City to prepare and implement a low-effect HCP and obtain an ITP from the
USFWS prior to project construction to ensure project activities do not adversely impact special-status plant, wildlife,
and/or vegetation communities. Thus, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-4.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or Federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
No Impact. There are three agencies that regulate activities within inland streams, wetlands, and riparian areas in
California. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Regulatory Division regulates activities pursuant to Section 404
of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA). Of the State agencies, the CDFW regulates activities under Sections 1600 et
seq. of the CFGC, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) regulates activities pursuant to
Section 401 of the CWA and/or Section 13263 of the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act.
One jurisdictional drainage feature is situated near the center of the survey area, in the canyon between the two loops
of the existing Canyon Loop Trail that are proposed for improvements; refer to Figure 5, Vegetation Communities and
Other Land Uses, of the Biological Resources Assessment. This feature is ephemeral, likely carrying flows only during
rain events. It crosses the trail system twice but only as sheet flow, with no culvert passage evident under the trails.
Some sparse mulefat (Baccharis salicifolia), which grows near a water source, is present on the western end of the
drainage before it crosses the trail and flows down a pipe riser. However, the drainage is otherwise generally a dry
ditch flowing under a coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) canopy, with a weedy understory. This drainage does not
qualify as waters of the U.S. under the Corps but would still qualify as waters of the State under the regulatory authority
of the Regional Board and as a jurisdictional streambed under CDFW. Nevertheless, since no trail improvements are
proposed to occur within the drainage feature, regulatory permits from these agencies are not required, and no impacts
would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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 Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Wildlife corridors and linkages are key features for
wildlife movement between habitat patches. Wildlife corridors are generally defined as those areas that provide
opportunities for individuals or local populations to conduct seasonal migrations, permanent dispersals, or daily
commutes, while linkages generally refer to broader areas that provide movement opportunities for multiple
keystone/focal species or allow for propagation of ecological processes (e.g., for movement of pollinators), often
between areas of conserved land.
The survey area is not located within any wildlife corridors, habitat conservation plans, reserves, or preserves according
to the Los Angeles County General Plan or the Diamond Bar General Plan 2040. The survey area is surrounded by a
mixture of developed and undeveloped land on all sides and is located in relatively close proximity to major regional
open space areas including the Chino Hills, Puente Hills, and Tonner Canyon. Wildlife movement into or out of the
site is likely reduced by the presence of residential development surrounding the survey area, but it is still possible that
mammals may use the survey area minimally to move between local open spaces such as those mentioned above.
Additionally, the survey area contains suitable habitat, such as coast live oaks, walnut groves, chaparral, and shrubs,
including the bare ground and disturbed areas, to support a variety of nesting bird species. Potentially occurring
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-9 Biological Resources
common native birds are not protected by the Federal or California ESA, however many native species are protected
under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and Fish and Wildlife Code
Sections 3503, 3503.5, 3511, and 3513, which prohibit take, possession, or destruction of birds, their nests, or eggs
(in particular, raptor species). Construction activities associated with the project could potentially impact nesting birds,
including CAGN and CACW, within the project’s development footprint and immediate vicinity, which could result in a
potentially significant impact. Therefore, implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-3 and BIO-4 would require pre-
construction nesting bird clearance surveys if construction cannot occur outside of the general avian nesting season
(January 1st through August 31st) or CAGN and CACW-specific nesting season (February 15th through September
15th). In the event that active nests are discovered, a “no-disturbance” buffer would be required under such active
nests and no construction would be allowed to occur within the buffer until a qualified biologist has determined the nest
is no longer active. Project impacts in this regard would be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation
incorporated.
Mitigation Measures: Refer to Mitigation Measures BIO-3 and BIO-4.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Less Than Significant Impact. Chapter 22.38, Tree Preservation and Protection, of the Municipal Code protects
native oak, walnut, sycamore, and willow trees; trees of significant historical value; any trees required to be preserved
or relocated as a condition of approval for a discretionary permit; any tree required to be planted as a condition of
approval for a discretionary permit; and a stand of trees, the nature of which makes each tree dependent upon the
others for survival.
Both coast live oak and southern California black walnuts located on-site are protected under Chapter 22.38 of the
Municipal Code. If the proposed trail improvements would require removal or pruning of any on-site coast live oak or
southern California black walnuts, an application for a tree removal and/or tree pruning permit would be required prior
to construction activities, which may also require the preparation and submittal of an arborist report. Thus, compliance
with Chapter 22.38 of the Municipal Code would ensure the project does not conflict with the City’s tree preservation
policies, and impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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. According to the Biological Resources Assessment, the project site is not located within the boundaries
of any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would
not conflict with any conservation plans and no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.4-10 Biological Resources
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.5-1 Cultural Resources
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
§15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of
an archaeological resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
§15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
The information presented in this analysis is based on the Cultural Resources Assessment for the Canyon Loop Trail
Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California (Cultural Resources Assessment), prepared by Cogstone
(dated July 2020); refer to Appendix C, Cultural Resources Assessment.
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines §15064.5?
No Impact. The Cultural Resources Assessment included a field survey and a record search of the California Historical
Resources Inventory System (CHRIS) at the South Central Coast Information Center (SCCIC). The CHRIS record
search was conducted to identify previously recorded cultural resources and previously conducted cultural resources
studies within a 0.5-mile radius of the project site. Sources of the record search include the National Register of Historic
Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Historical Landmarks (CHL), and
California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI). A search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) was also requested through
the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). Additionally, the record search included a review of available
historic-era maps and aerial photographs.
The results of the record search indicated that nine studies have been completed previously within the project site, and
ten additional cultural resource investigations have been completed previously within a 0.5-mile radius of the project
site. The project site is also within the study area of five overview reports that discuss large portions of Los Angeles
County. The results of these studies indicate that two cultural resources have been previously recorded within a 0.5-
mile radius. However, no cultural resources have been previously recorded within the project site. The two cultural
resources include P-19-002805/CA-LAN-2805, a prehistoric lithic site located between 0.25- and 0.5-mile from the
project area, and P-19-101010, a prehistoric isolate consisting of a mano located 0.25-mile from the project area.
Additionally, the pedestrian field survey consisted of walking the Canyon Loop Trail and observing conditions on either
side of the trail where accessible. One cultural isolate (2020-07-02-LF-01) was observed during the field survey,
consisting of remnants of an automobile along the eastern portion of the trail. The resource is two sections of the same
vehicle spread about 60 meters apart. The first section, located further downslope to the northwest, is most of the
vehicle chassis with the car dashboard still intact. The chassis extends to the rear bumper, which is also intact, however
the car’s cabin has been detached and is located upslope approximately 60 yards to the southwest. The dashboard
consists of a portion of the steering column (no steering wheel), the glove box port and other instrumentation port, and
chrome dashboard accent. A portion of the front vehicle frame extends downslope into existing vegetation; it is unclear
whether the hood and front bumper are still intact. Part of the body is visible and is painted a dull, baby blue color.
The rear bumper is present and has a slightly rusted chrome plating. The second half of the vehicle consists of the
rear portion of the cabin and trunk. Visible portions of the body have the same dull, baby blue paint color. The trunk
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.5-2 Cultural Resources
lid is rusted, but mostly intact and slightly ajar. The rest of the body section not obscured by vegetation appears to be
the passenger side rear quarter panel and possibly the passenger side panel as well. Surrounding vegetation growth
indicates the vehicle has been there for an extended period of time. Based on the shape of the rear quarter panel
fender and style of the dashboard and glove box, it is likely an early 1950s Chevrolet Deluxe. Refer to Figures 10,
Automobile trunk and rear quarter panel/fender, view east, and Figure 11, Dashboard remnants of vehicle, facing
northeast, of the Cultural Resources Assessment for photographs of the cultural isolate.
Cultural isolates are rarely significant. In this case, the isolate consists of two large portions of an automobile with
associated smaller fragments. Given that Chevrolet Deluxe were mass produced in the 1950s, there are examples of
this vehicle in working condition today, and this example has lost its original integrity, this cultural isolate does not yield
important new information to the historical understanding of the project area or cultural isolate. The resource was
documented in a California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 series forms and is included in Appendix
E, DPR 523 Form, of the Cultural Resources Assessment. However, this cultural isolate (2020-07-02-LF-01) is
recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR, and no further cultural resources evaluation is
warranted.
As such, given that no historic resources are located within the project site, project implementation would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. As detailed in the Cultural Resources Assessment, no
archaeological remains or prehistoric cultural resources were identified within the project site during the field survey.
However, based on the results of the records search, the project site is anticipated to have moderate sensitivity for
archaeological resources.
Primary components of the proposed trail improvements involve grading of the trail to widen it and construction of
several retaining walls, staircases, drainage crossings, and shade structures. Thus, project construction has the
potential to adversely impact previously undiscovered archaeological resources along and adjacent to the existing trail.
In the unlikely event that archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing construction activities,
Mitigation Measure CUL-1 would require all project construction efforts to halt until an archaeologist examines the find,
evaluates the archaeological significance of the find, and recommends a course of action. With implementation of
Mitigation Measure CUL-1, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, and impacts would be reduced to less
than significant levels.
Mitigation Measures:
CUL-1 If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in
the immediate area shall halt and a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology, shall be contacted by the
City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Director, or designated designee, immediately to evaluate the
find. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing
for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. If the discovery proves to be eligible for
the CRHR and cannot be avoided by project activities, additional work, such as data recovery excavation,
may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts to historical resources. In the event that an identified
cultural resource is of Native American origin, the qualified archaeologist shall consult with the City of
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.5-3 Cultural Resources
Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department staff to implement Native American consultation
procedures.
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is an existing, unpaved trail within the Summitridge Park Trail System,
and is surrounded predominantly by undeveloped open space. The trail undergoes varying topography, ranging in
elevation from approximately 970 to 1,275 feet above mean sea level, sloping uphill from west to east. Given the
topography and existing use, it is not anticipated that human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries, would be encountered during ground-disturbing activities. Nevertheless, if human remains are found,
those remains would require proper treatment, in accordance with applicable laws. State of California Public Resources
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5-7055 describe the general provisions for human remains. Specifically, Health
and Safety Code Section 7050.5 describes the requirements if any human remains are accidentally discovered during
excavation of a site. As required by State law, the requirements and procedures set forth in Section 5097.98 of the
California Public Resources Code would be implemented, including notification of the County Coroner, notification of
the Native American Heritage Commission and consultation with the individual identified by the Native American
Heritage Commission to be the “most likely descendant.” If human remains are found during ground-disturbing
activities, activities must stop in the vicinity of the find and any area that is reasonably suspected to overlay adjacent
remains until the County Coroner has been called out, and the remains have been investigated and appropriate
recommendations have been made for the treatment and disposition of the remains. Following compliance with existing
State regulations, which detail the appropriate actions necessary in the event human remains are encountered, impacts
in this regard would be considered less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.5-4 Cultural Resources
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-1 Energy
4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due
to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project construction or
operation?
b. Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Diamond Bar General Plan 2040
The Community Health and Sustainability Element of the Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (General Plan) addresses
the ways in which the City’s physical environment can influence the long-term health and sustainability of the
community, including the topics of environmental justice, active lifestyles, social connection, public health and human
services, and climate change. The Community Health and Sustainability Element of the General Plan focuses on the
relationship between the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) and subsequent General Plan goals and policies to meet
the City’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals. Included in the General plan and CAP GHG reduction goals are
goals to help the City promote energy efficiency and conservation within the community. The following goals and
policies from the General Plan Community Health and Sustainability Element would be applicable to the project:
Goals
CHS-G-13 Promote energy efficiency and conservation in the community.
Policies
CHS-P-35 Use the City’s CAP as a platform when outlining and implementing measures to improve energy
conservation and increase renewable energy use in existing and new development.
CHS-P-40 Require the inclusion, where feasible, of provisions for energy-efficient modes of transportation and
fixed facilities that establish public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes as safe, efficient, and
desirable alternatives.
CHS-P-43 Explore participating in new high efficiency technology programs such as LED lighting for City
facilities, safety lighting in parks and other public spaces, and LED street lighting conversion for all
City-owned street lights.
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
CEQA Guidelines Appendix F
Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines is an advisory document that assists environmental document preparers in
determining whether a project will result in the inefficient, wasteful, and unnecessary consumption of energy. The
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-2 Energy
analysis in Response 4.6(a) relies upon Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines, which includes the following criteria to
determine whether this threshold of significance is met:
Criterion 1: The project’s energy requirements and its energy use efficiencies by amount and fuel type for
each stage of the project including construction, operation, maintenance and/or removal. If appropriate, the
energy intensiveness of materials may be discussed.
Criterion 2: The effects of the project on local and regional energy supplies and on requirements for additional
capacity.
Criterion 3: The effects of the project on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of
energy.
Criterion 4: The degree to which the project complies with existing energy standards.
Criterion 5: The effects of the project on energy resources.
Criterion 6: The project’s projected transportation energy use requirements and its overall use of efficient
transportation alternatives.
Quantification of the project’s energy usage is presented and addresses Criterion 1. The discussion on construction-
related energy use focuses on Criteria 2, 4, and 5. The discussion on operational energy relates to Criteria 2 through
6.
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.
Project-Related Sources of Energy Consumption
This analysis focuses on three sources of energy that are relevant to the proposed project: electricity, natural gas, and
transportation fuel for vehicle trips associated with new development and for project construction. The analysis of
operational electricity/natural gas usage is based on the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2016.3.2
(CalEEMod) modeling results for the project, which quantifies energy use for occupancy. The results of the CalEEMod
modeling are included in Appendix A, Air Quality/GHG/Energy Data. The amount of construction fuel consumption
was estimated using the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB’s) Emissions Factor 2017 (EMFAC2017) computer
program which provides projections for typical daily fuel usage in Los Angeles County. The estimated construction fuel
consumption is based on the project’s construction equipment list timing/phasing and hours of duration for construction
equipment, as well as vendor, hauling, and construction worker trips.
The proposed project would widen the South Canyon Loop of the existing Canyon Loop Trail, as well as construct
improvements such as retaining walls, stairs, draining crossings, wayfinding sings, shade structures, and benches.
The project would not result in increased vehicle trips to and from the project site and therefore would not result in
operational vehicle-related energy consumption. The project’s primary source of energy consumption (i.e., vehicle fuel
consumption) would occur from the use of construction equipment on-site and mobile trips to and from the project site
by construction workers and vendors during construction. The project’s estimated construction energy consumption is
summarized in Table 4.6-1, Construction Energy Consumption. As shown in Table 4.6-1, the project’s construction
fuel consumption would increase Los Angeles County’s consumption by 0.0008 percent (CEQA Appendix F –
Criterion 1).
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 93 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-3 Energy
Table 4.6-1
Construction Energy Consumption
Energy Type Project Annual
Energy Consumption1,2
Los Angeles County
Annual Energy
Consumption3
Percentage
Increase Countywide3
Fuel Consumption
Construction (Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle) Fuel
Consumption4 4,185 gallons 535,546,509 gallons 0.0008%
Notes:
1. As modeled in CalEEMod version 2016.3.2.
2. The project would not involve new buildings, increased vehicular trips, and result in minimal electricity and natural gas consumption
compared to existing conditions. As such, the project would not result in annual energy, natural gas, or operational fuel consumption.
3. The project increases in automotive fuel consumption are compared with the projected Countywide fuel consumption in 2021, as
calculated from the California Air Resources Board EMFAC2017.
4. Project fuel consumption calculated based on CalEEMod results.
Refer to Appendix A for assumptions used in this analysis.
Construction-Related Energy Consumption
Project construction would consume energy in two general forms: (1) the fuel energy consumed by construction
vehicles and equipment; and (2) bound energy in construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and
manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.
Fossil fuels used for construction vehicles and other energy-consuming equipment would be used during site clearing,
grading, and construction. Fuel energy consumed during construction would be temporary and would not represent a
significant demand on energy resources. As indicated in Table 4.6-1, the project’s fuel consumption from construction
would be approximately 4,185 gallons, which would increase fuel use in the County by 0.0008 percent. As such,
construction would have a nominal effect on the local and regional energy supplies (CEQA Appendix F – Criterion
2).
Some incidental energy conservation would occur during construction through compliance with State requirements that
equipment not in use for more than five minutes be turned off. Project construction equipment would also be required
to comply with the latest U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and California Air Resources Board (CARB)
engine emissions standards. These emissions standards require highly efficient combustion systems that maximize
fuel efficiency and reduce unnecessary fuel consumption. Due to increasing transportation costs and fuel prices,
contractors and owners have a strong financial incentive to avoid wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption
of energy during construction (CEQA Appendix F – Criterion 4).
Significant reductions in energy inputs for construction materials can be achieved by selecting green building materials
composed of recycled materials that require less energy to produce than non-recycled materials.1 The integration of
green building materials can help reduce environmental impacts associated with the extraction, transport, processing,
fabrication, installation, reuse, recycling, and disposal of these building industry source materials.2 The project-related
incremental increase in the use of energy bound in construction materials such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes and
manufactured or processed materials (e.g., lumber and gas) would not substantially increase demand for energy
compared to overall local and regional demand for construction materials. It is noted that construction fuel use is
temporary and would cease upon completion of construction activities. There are no unusual project characteristics
that would necessitate the use of construction equipment that would be less energy-efficient than at comparable
1 California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Green Building Materials,
https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/greenbuilding/materials#Material, accessed July 8, 2020.
2 Ibid.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 94 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-4 Energy
construction sites in the region or State. Therefore, fuel energy and construction materials consumed during
construction would not represent a significant demand on energy resources (CEQA Appendix F - Criterion 5).
Therefore, construction fuel consumption would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other similar
development projects of this nature. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Operational Energy Consumption
As a trail improvement project, project operations would not involve new buildings or uses which would introduce new
permanent stationary or mobile sources of emissions within the project area compared to existing conditions. The
project would not result in increased vehicular trips to and from the project site and would not generate new operational
emissions. The project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or any consumption of building energy. A less than
significant impact would occur in this regard (CEQA Appendix F – Criterion 2 through Criterion 6).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. The City’s Community Health and Sustainability Element of the General Plan lists
goals and policies to help the City reduce its energy usage. Table 4.6-2, Project Energy Use General Plan Consistency
Analysis, shows the project’s consistency with the applicable General Plan energy efficiency Goals and Policies. As
shown in Table 4.6-2, the project would be consistent with the General Plan Goal CHS-G-13; as well as Policies CHS-
P-35, CHS-P-40, and CHS-P-43. Therefore, the project would help promote the energy efficiency Goal and Policies
found within the General Plan and would not conflict with State or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Further, As discussed in Response 4.6(a), project operations would not result in increased operational electricity,
natural gas, or operational fuel consumption compared to existing conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would
result in a less than significant impacts associated with renewable energy or energy efficiency plans.
Table 4.6-2
Project Energy Use General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis
Goal CHS-G-13: Promote energy efficiency and conservation in the community.
Policy CHS-P-35: Use the City’s CAP as a platform when
outlining and implementing measures to improve energy
conservation and increase renewable energy use in existing
and new development.
Consistent. As discussed in Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, the project would be consistent with the City’s CAP
Policies and Actions. As such, the project would be consistent
with this General Plan Policy.
Policy CHS-P-40: Require the inclusion, where feasible, of
provisions for energy-efficient modes of transportation and
fixed facilities that establish public transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian modes as safe, efficient, and desirable
alternatives.
Consistent. The project consists of trail improvements to the
Canyon Loop Trail. These improvements include widening the
trail, improving draining, and providing recreational amenities
(shade structures, staircase, etc.); refer to Section 2.0. The
widening of the trail, shade structures, and staircase would help
the Canyon Loop Trail become more walkable and would
incentivize nearby residents to utilize the trail. These trail
improvements would help the City promote energy-efficient
modes of transportation and thus would be consistent with this
General Plan Policy.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-5 Energy
Table 4.6-2 [cont’d]
Project Energy Use General Plan Consistency Analysis
General Plan Goals and Policies Consistency Analysis
Policy CHS-P-43: Explore participating in new high efficiency
technology programs such as LED lighting for City facilities,
safety lighting in parks and other public spaces, and LED
street lighting conversion for all City-owned street lights.
Consistent. The project consists of trail improvements to the
Canyon Loop Trail. These improvements include shade
structures, benches, signs, and stairs with handrails; refer to
Section 2.0. The project improvements to the Canyon Loop
Trail would not conflict with the City’s goal of incorporating high
efficiency safety lighting in parks and other public places. As
such, the project would be consistent with this General Plan
Policy.
Source: City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar General Plan 2040, adopted December 17, 2019.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.6-6 Energy
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 97 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-1 Geology and Soils
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
1) 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.
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
4) 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 California Building Code (2001), creating substantial
direct or indirect risks to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of
septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste
water?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geological feature?
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving:
1) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
No Impact. Southern California, including the project area, is subject to the effects of seismic activity due to the active
faults that traverse the area. Active faults are defined as those that have experienced surface displacement within
Holocene time (approximately the last 11,000 years) and/or are in a State-designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zone. According to the General Plan EIR, there are no active faults within the City and the project site is not situated
within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. As such, the proposed trail improvements would not increase the
potential for human loss, injury, or death as a result of fault rupture. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-2 Geology and Soils
2) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less Than Significant Impact. The southern California region has numerous active seismic faults that can result in
potential earthquake and seismic-related hazards. Seismic activity poses two types of potential hazards for people
and structures, categorized either as primary or secondary hazards. Primary hazards are caused by the direct
interaction of seismic energy with the ground. Examples include ground rupture, ground shaking, ground displacement,
subsidence, and uplift from earth movement. Secondary hazards are consequences of the shaking, such as ground
failure (lurch cracking, lateral spreading, and slope failure), liquefaction, water waves (seiches), movement on nearby
faults (sympathetic fault movement), dam failure, and fires.
According to the General Plan EIR, although there are no active faults within the City, there are four potentially active
local faults in the area, including the Whittier-Elsinore, San Jose, Central Avenue, and Walnut Creek faults, which have
the potential to cause local hazardous damage in Diamond Bar. Further, the Whittier-Elsinore fault, located
approximately six miles southwest of the project site, is classified as an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and is
capable of generating substantial ground shaking (e.g., earthquakes with a magnitude of 7 or higher).
The proposed project involves trail improvements along an existing trail and would not affect subsurface geology or
the probability of a seismic event, nor would it include the development of any habitable structures or other facilities
that could experience substantial hazards during a seismic event. Additionally, the design and construction of the
proposed trail improvements would be required to comply with the California Building Code and Title 15, Building and
Construction Safety, of the Municipal Code. Compliance with the existing seismic safety requirements of the California
Building Code and Title 15 of the Municipal Code, would minimize risks pertaining to seismic ground shaking the event
of an earthquake. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
No Impact. Liquefaction and seismically-induced settlement or ground failure is generally related to strong seismic
shaking events where the groundwater table occurs at a relatively shallow depth (generally within 50 feet of the ground
surface) or where lands are underlain by loose, cohesionless deposits. Liquefaction generally results in the loss of
shear strength of a soil, which occurs due to the increase of pore water pressure caused by the rearrangement of soil
particles induced by shaking or vibration. During liquefaction, soil strata typically behave similar to a heavy fluid.
According to Figure 3.6-4, Liquefaction and Landslide Hazards, of the General Plan EIR, the project site is not located
within a liquefaction zone. As such, no impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
4) Landslides?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to the Figure 3.6-4, Liquefaction and Landslide Hazards, of the General
Plan EIR, a small portion of the project site is located within an earthquake-induced landslide zone. However, the
proposed project would involve trail improvements and would not involve the construction of habitable structures or a
change in land use that could result in substantial risks to landslides. Rather, the proposed improvements include
retaining walls, cobblestone swales, and drainage crossings, which would help stabilize soils and reduce soil erosion,
thereby decreasing landslide hazards in the project area. As such, less than significant impact would occur in this
regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-3 Geology and Soils
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities could potentially result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil due to
ground-disturbing activities required to install the trail improvements. However, due to the scope and duration (four
months) of project construction, substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil is not anticipated. Further, the proposed
improvements include retaining walls, cobblestone swales, and drainage crossings, which would help stabilize soils
and reduce erosion compared to existing conditions.
The project would also be subject to the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Construction General Permit, which would require preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for
approval by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to construction. The SWPPP would require
implementation of best management practices (BMPs) to minimize sedimentation from stormwater runoff and winds;
refer to Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality. Further, the project would also be subject to the South Coast Air
Quality Management District’s (SCAQMD) Rule 403, which establishes requirements for dust control during
construction activities. Thus, following conformance with NPDES Construction General Permit requirements and
SCAQMD Rule 403, impacts concerning substantial soil erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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 an on-site or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses 4.7(a)(3), 4.7(a)(4), and 4.7(d) regarding project impacts related
to liquefaction, landslides, and expansive soils.
Lateral Spreading
The General Plan EIR defines lateral spreading as lateral displacement of gently sloping, saturated soil masses as a
result of earthquake-induced liquefaction. The magnitude of lateral spreading displacement depends on earthquake
magnitude, distance between the site and the seismic event, thickness of the liquefied layer, ground slope, average
particle size of the materials comprising the liquefied layer, and the standard penetration rates of the materials.
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, the project site is underlain by Gaviota Chumash Rock
outcrop complex (20 to 55 percent slopes), with minimal (five percent) clay content.1 As the project site mainly consists
of steep slopes and sandy soil, lateral spreading is not anticipated to occur on-site.
Subsidence
Subsidence occurs when a large portion of land is displaced or compressed vertically, typically due to human activities,
such as the withdrawal of groundwater, oil, or natural gas. No groundwater, oil, or natural gas extraction occurs on-
site or in the project vicinity. Thus, the potential for subsidence to occur on-site is low.
Collapse
Soil collapse is a phenomenon where the soils undergo a significant decrease in volume upon increase in moisture
content, with or without an increase in external loads. Buildings, structures, and other improvements may be subject
to excessive settlement-related distress when compressible soils or collapsible soils are present. As stated above, the
1 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey,
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed July 10, 2020.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-4 Geology and Soils
project site mainly consists of sandy soil with minimal clay content and is currently a hard packed unpaved trail. The
potential for soil collapse is low.
Additionally, the project would not involve the construction of habitable structures or a change in land use that could
result in substantial geologic risks associated with lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. The proposed trail
improvements are minimal and would not exacerbate any existing geologic hazards in the project area. Further, the
proposed trail improvement features design and construction would comply with the California Building Code and Title
15 of the Municipal Code regulations pertaining to grading and construction. Compliance with these regulations would
minimize the potential for hazards due to lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse. Given that the proposed project
consists of a trail improvements and would not introduce new habitable structures, impacts related to unstable soils
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating direct or indirect substantial risks to life or property?
Less Than Significant Impact. Expansive soils are those that undergo volume changes as moisture content
fluctuates, swelling substantially when wet or shrinking when dry. Soil expansion can damage structures by cracking
foundations, causing settlement, and distorting structural elements. According to the United States Department of
Agriculture, the project site is underlain by Gaviota Chumash Rock outcrop complex (20 to 55 percent slopes).
Components of this soil type are generally “very low” in water storage and “high” in drainage and runoff; thus, it is not
typically considered expansive. Further, construction of the proposed trail improvements would be required to comply
with the California Building Code and Title 15 of the Municipal Code. Compliance with these regulations would minimize
the potential for hazards due to expansive soils. Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems would be constructed as part of the project. No impacts
would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. According to the General Plan EIR, there is one
vertebrate fossil locality within the City, located approximately 2.8 miles northeast of the project site. Further, according
to the General Plan, shallow excavations into younger Quaternary Alluvium deposits (mainly in low lying terrain areas
such as Brea Canyon and San Jose Creek) are not likely to yield paleontological resources, and deeper excavations
that extend down into older Quaternary deposits or into the Puente Formation would have the potential to encounter
paleontological resources. The proposed trail improvements would involve grading to minimal depths, primarily for the
trail widening along the South Canyon Loop and installation of stairs and gabion retaining walls. As the project would
not involve substantial grading, paleontological resources are not expected to be encountered during construction.
Nonetheless, in the unlikely event that paleontological resources are encountered during project construction,
Mitigation Measure GEO-1 would require all project construction activities to halt until a paleontologist identifies the
paleontological significance of the find and recommends a course of action. Thus, following implementation of
Mitigation Measure GEO-1, impacts would be less than significant.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-5 Geology and Soils
Mitigation Measures:
GEO-1 If evidence of subsurface paleontological resources is found during construction, excavation and other
construction activity in that area shall cease and the construction contractor shall contact the City of
Diamond Bar Community Development Director. With direction from the Community Development
Director, a paleontologist certified by the County of Los Angeles shall evaluate the find prior to resuming
grading in the immediate vicinity of the find. If warranted, the paleontologist shall prepare and complete
a standard Paleontological Resources Mitigation Program for the salvage and curation of the identified
resources.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.7-6 Geology and Soils
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulations
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE
California is a substantial contributor of global greenhouse gases (GHGs), emitting over 420 million metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) per year.1 Methane (CH4) is also an important GHG that potentially contributes
to global climate change. GHGs are global in their effect, which is to increase the earth’s ability to absorb heat in the
atmosphere. As primary GHGs have a long lifetime in the atmosphere, accumulate over time, and are generally well-
mixed, their impact on the atmosphere is mostly independent of the point of emission. Every nation emits GHGs and
as a result makes an incremental cumulative contribution to global climate change; therefore, global cooperation will
be required to reduce the rate of GHG emissions enough to slow or stop the human-caused increase in average global
temperatures and associated changes in climatic conditions.
The impact of human activities on global climate change is apparent in the observational record. Air trapped by ice
has been extracted from core samples taken from polar ice sheets to determine the global atmospheric variation of
CO2, CH4, and nitrous oxide (N2O) from before the start of industrialization (approximately 1750), to over 650,000 years
ago. For that period, it was found that CO2 concentrations ranged from 180 to 300 parts per million (ppm). For the
period from approximately 1750 to the present, global CO2 concentrations increased from a pre-industrialization period
concentration of 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005, with the 2005 value far exceeding the upper end of the pre-industrial
period range. As of March 2020, the highest monthly average concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere was recorded
at 416 ppm.2
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Federal
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) constructed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed
to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts. It concluded that a stabilization of GHGs at 400 to 450
ppm carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)3 concentration is required to keep global mean warming below 2 degrees
Celsius (ᵒC), which in turn is assumed to be necessary to avoid dangerous climate change.
1 California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017,
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2017/ghg_inventory_trends_00-17.pdf, accessed July 8, 2020.
2 Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Carbon Dioxide Concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory,
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/, accessed July 8, 2020.
3 Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO2e) – A metric measure used to compare the emissions from various greenhouse gases based
upon their global warming potential.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
State
Various Statewide and local initiatives to reduce the State’s contribution to GHG emissions have raised awareness
that, even though the various contributors to and consequences of global climate change are not yet fully understood,
global climate change is under way, and there is a real potential for severe adverse environmental, social, and
economic effects in the long term.
Assembly Bill 32 (California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006). California passed the California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500 - 38599). AB 32
establishes regulatory, reporting, and market mechanisms to achieve quantifiable reductions in GHG emissions and
establishes a cap on Statewide GHG emissions. AB 32 requires that Statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990
levels by 2020. AB 32 specifies that regulations adopted in response to AB 1493 should be used to address GHG
emissions from vehicles. However, AB 32 also includes language stating that if the AB 1493 regulations cannot be
implemented, then the California Air Resources Board (CARB) should develop new regulations to control vehicle GHG
emissions under the authorization of AB 32.
Executive Order S-3-05. Executive Order S-3-05 set forth a series of target dates by which Statewide emissions of
GHGs would be progressively reduced, as follows:
By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and
By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels.
Senate Bill 32. Signed into law on September 2016, SB 32 codifies the 2030 GHG reduction target in Executive Order
B-30-15 (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030). The bill authorizes CARB to adopt an interim GHG emissions level
target to be achieved by 2030.
CARB Scoping Plan. On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan), which
functions as a roadmap to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32 through subsequently enacted
regulations. The Scoping Plan contains the main strategies California will implement to reduce GHG emissions by 174
million metric tons (MT), or approximately 30 percent, from the State’s projected 2020 emissions level of 596 million
MT CO2e under a business as usual (BAU)4 scenario. This is a reduction of 42 million MT CO2e, or almost ten percent,
from 2002 to 2004 average emissions, but requires the reductions in the face of population and economic growth
through 2020.
The Scoping Plan calculates 2020 BAU emissions as the emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of
any GHG reduction measures. The 2020 BAU emissions estimate was derived by projecting emissions from a past
baseline year using growth factors specific to each of the different economic sectors (e.g., transportation, electrical
power, commercial and residential, industrial, etc.). CARB used three-year average emissions, by sector, for 2002 to
2004 to forecast emissions to 2020. The measures described in the Scoping Plan are intended to reduce the projected
2020 BAU to 1990 levels, as required by AB 32.
AB 32 requires CARB to update the Scoping Plan at least once every five years. CARB adopted the first major update
to the Scoping Plan on May 22, 2014. The updated Scoping Plan identifies the actions California has already taken to
reduce GHG emissions and focuses on areas where further reductions could be achieved to help meet the 2020 target
established by AB 32. The Scoping Plan update also looks beyond 2020 toward the 2050 goal, established in Executive
4 “Business as Usual” refers to emissions that would be expected to occur in the absence of GHG reductions; refer to
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/bau.htm. Note that there is significant controversy as to what BAU means. In determining the GHG
2020 limit, CARB used the above as the “definition.” It is broad enough to allow for design features to be counted as reductions.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Order S-3-05, and observes that “a mid-term statewide emission limit will ensure that the State stays on course to meet
our long-term goal.”
In December 2017, CARB approved the California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2017 Scoping Plan): The
Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. This update focuses on implementation of a 40
percent reduction in GHGs by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. To achieve this, the updated 2017 Scoping Plan draws
on a decade of successful programs that addresses the major sources of climate changing gases in every sector of
the economy.
Regional
South Coast Air Quality Management District Thresholds
At this time, there is no absolute consensus in the State of California among CEQA lead agencies regarding the analysis
of global climate change and the selection of significance criteria. In fact, numerous organizations, both public and
private, have released advisories and guidance with recommendations designed to assist decision-makers in the
evaluation of GHG emissions given the current uncertainty regarding when emissions reach the point of significance.
Lead agencies may elect to rely on thresholds of significance recommended or adopted by State or regional agencies
with expertise in the field of global climate change.
The SCAQMD has formed a GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group (Working Group) to provide guidance
to local lead agencies on determining significance for GHG emissions in their CEQA documents. As of the last Working
Group meeting (Meeting No. 15) held in September 2010, the SCAQMD is proposing to adopt a tiered approach for
evaluating GHG emissions for development projects where SCAQMD is not the lead agency.5
With the tiered approach, the project is compared with the requirements of each tier sequentially and would not result
in a significant impact if it complies with any tier. Tier 1 excludes projects that are specifically exempt from SB 97 from
resulting in a significant impact. Tier 2 excludes projects that are consistent with a GHG reduction plan that has a
certified final CEQA document and complies with AB 32 GHG reduction goals. Tier 3 excludes projects with annual
emissions lower than a screening threshold. For all non-industrial projects, the SCAQMD is proposing a screening
threshold of 3,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year. SCAQMD concluded that projects with
emissions less than the screening threshold would not result in a significant cumulative impact.
Tier 4 consists of three options. Under the Tier 4 first option, the SCAQMD initially outlined that the project would be
excluded if design features and/or mitigation measures resulted in emissions 30 percent lower than business as usual
emissions. However, the Working Group did not provide a recommendation for this approach. Under the Tier 4 second
option, the Working Group folded this into the third option. Under the Tier 4 third option, the project would be excluded
if it was below an efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population (SP) per year or 3.0 MTCO2e per
SP for post-2020 projects.6 Tier 5 would exclude projects that implement off-site mitigation (GHG reduction projects)
or purchase offsets to reduce GHG emission impacts to less than the proposed screening level.
5 The most recent SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group meeting was held on September 2010.
6 The project-level efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 MTCO2e per SP per year is relative to the 2020 target date. The SCAQMD
has also proposed efficiency-based thresholds relative to the 2035 target date to be consistent with the GHG reduction target date of SB 375.
GHG reductions by the SB 375 target date of 2035 would be approximately 40 percent. Applying this 40 percent reduction to the 2020 targets
results in an efficiency threshold for plans of 4.1 MTCO2e per SP per year and an efficiency threshold at the project level of 3.0 MTCO2e/year.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Local
Diamond Bar General Plan 2040
The Community Health and Sustainability Element of the City of Diamond 2040 General Plan (General Plan) describes
the City’s goals in reducing the rapid effects of climate change. The Community Health and Sustainability Element of
the General Plan focuses on the relationship between the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) and subsequent General
Plan Goals and Policies to meet the City’s GHG reduction goals. The following Goals and Policies from the Community
Health and Sustainability Element would be applicable to the project:
Goals
CHS-G-11 Promote initiatives that enhance sustainability by reducing the community’s greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, protecting natural open spaces which provide CO2 sequestration, and fostering green
development patterns, buildings, sites, and landscapes.
Policies
CHS-P-55 Encourage the protection and enhancement of areas identified as healthy functioning ecosystems
that provide the ecological, cultural, public health and safety, and economic value of ecosystem
services, or benefits.
CHS-P-57 Encourage water conservation, drought-tolerant landscaping and the use of greywater and reclaimed
and recycled water, where appropriate, with a view to reducing water use.
City of Diamond Bar Climate Action Plan
The City’s CAP was adopted on December 17, 2019 and is designed to provide discrete actions to operationalize the
General Plan policies that help with GHG reduction. The CAP outlines Diamond Bar’s overall strategy to reduce GHG
emissions and identifies specific implementation measures the City will undertake and quantifies their impacts, in order
to comply with State directives for reducing GHGs. AB 32 and the 2017 Scoping Plan seek to bring California to a low
carbon future, reducing emissions to no more than six MTCO2e per capita by 2030 and no more than two MTCO2e per
capita by 2050. The AB 32 Scoping Plan also directs local governments to assist the state in meeting California’s
emissions goals.
The GHG emission targets proposed for the City’s CAP are based on the goals established by EO S-3-05 and SB 32,
following the CAP guidelines established in the 2017 Scoping Plan. The horizon year for analysis in the proposed CAP
is 2040, corresponding with the General Plan update horizon. Thus, the CAP will include targets of six MTCO2e per
capita per year by 2030 and four MTCO2e per capita per year by 2040 (derived from the Scoping Plan target of two
MTCO2e per capita per year in 2050). It provides a community-based policy framework to address community-wide
GHG emissions sources. Specifically, the CAP is designed to:
Translate high-level objectives and quantified goals into a realistic, understandable set of implementation
actions;
Demonstrate that significant reductions in GHG emissions are attainable through local actions;
Inspire community members to work collectively to achieve these reductions;
Dovetail with General Plan policies that are required to address climate change impacts and adaptation,
including those for land use, transportation, building design, and infrastructure; and
Provide a predictable approach to mitigation strategies for the compliance of future development projects with
CEQA.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-5 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
To be conservative, the City’s adopted CAP target threshold of four MTCO2e per capita (i.e. service population for
projects) per year for the year 2040 was adopted for this analysis. This threshold was adopted to show project
compliance with the General Plan buildout year of 2040 and is the lowest threshold listed in the CAP.
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact
on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project-related GHG emissions would include emissions from construction activities.
Construction-related emissions have been quantified and compared to the CAP GHG threshold. The project’s
anticipated GHG emissions are identified in Table 4.8-1, Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions. GHG emissions for
the proposed project were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2016.3.2 software
(CalEEMod). CalEEMod is a statewide model designed to quantify GHG emissions from land use projects. The model
quantifies direct GHG emissions from construction and operation as well as indirect GHG emissions, such as GHG
emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation, and water use.
Table 4.8-1
Estimated Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Source
CO2 N2O CH4 Total
Metric
Tons of
CO2e
Metric
tons/year
Metric
tons/year
Metric
tons of
CO2e1,2
Metric
tons/year
Metric
tons of
CO2e1,2
Construction Emissions2,4
Year 1 53.09 0.01 0.33 0.00 0.00 53.42
Total Emissions)2 53.09 0.01 0.33 0.00 0.00 53.42
Total Emissions (amortized over 30
years)2,5 2.79 <0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 2.81
Project Emissions per Capita/year3 2.81 MTCO2e per capita/year
CAP Threshold 4.0 MTCO2e per capita/year
Is Threshold Exceeded? No
Notes:
1. CO2 Equivalent values calculated using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Website, Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator,
https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator, accessed October 11, 2018.
2. Totals may be slightly off due to rounding. Due to rounding, the results given by the equation calculations used in the Greenhouse Gas
Equivalencies Calculator may not return the exact results shown in CalEEMod.
3. The project consists of trail improvements to the Canyon Loop Trail. Since it is unknown how many individuals would access this trail in a
year, an extremely conservative service population of one was selected. It is anticipated that more than one individual would use the canyon
loop trail within a year and thus project emissions would be lower than the calculated 1.78 MTCO2e per capita/year.
4. The project consists of many trail improvements; refer to Section 2.0, Project Description. These trail improvements would not change or
increase the existing operational emissions, as the improvements would not include additional water, solid waste, energy, or mobile sources
or uses.
5. The project construction emissions were amortized over a 19-year period (2021 to 2040) to show the yearly project emissions in correlation
with the General Plan Horizon year 2040 and the 2040 CAP Threshold.
Source: Refer to Appendix A, Air Quality/GHG/Energy Data for detailed model input/output data.
Construction of the project would emit GHG emissions as indicated in Table 4.8-1. In total, project construction would
result in approximately 53.42 MTCO2e (2.81 MTCO2e over 19 years). It was conservatively assumed that the service
population or “capita” of the project is one individual. Thus, the project would emit 2.81 MTCO2e per capita per year
(2.81 MTCO2e divided by one individual). This is highly conservative as significantly more than one individual is likely
to use the Canyon Loop trail within a year, which would lower the project’s yearly per capita emissions. As such, the
project would not exceed the CAP’s threshold of four MTCO2e per capita per year for the year 2040.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The trail improvements would not include additional operational area, water, solid waste, or energy uses. Furthermore,
the trail improvements would not cause an increase of mobile trips compared to existing conditions. Therefore,
operational GHG emissions generated by the project over the long-term would be nominal. Overall, GHG emissions
generated by construction and operation of the project would be minimal and less than the City’s CAP threshold.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. On December 17, 2019, the City adopted it’s 2040 General Plan and CAP. The City’s
CAP includes community-wide policies and actions to reduce the City’s GHG emissions; in-line with the 2017 Scoping
Plan. This includes emission thresholds to help the City meet the 2017 Scoping Plan GHG emission targets for the
years 2030 and 2040. Table 4.8-2, Project CAP Consistency Analysis, discusses how the project would comply with
the goals and policies found within the City’s CAP. In addition, the CAP GHG reduction policies and actions are directly
correlated with the General Plan Goals and Policies. Therefore, a project’s compliance with the CAP would mean the
project complies with the General Plan, and vice versa. Furthermore, as described above, the project would not exceed
the CAP’s 2040 GHG threshold. As shown in Table 4.8-2 the project would be consistent with the City’s CAP Policies
and Goals. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Table 4.8-2
Project CAP Consistency Analysis
Policies and Actions Consistency Analysis
Pedestrian Improvements and Increased Connectivity
While most streets in the City have sidewalks, the suburban
layout with winding roads and high-speed arterials with narrow
sidewalks and spread out crossings can present a difficult
pedestrian environment. The General Plan includes policies
that create more walkable, livable neighborhoods by
expanding the multi-modal transportation system and creating
a safe, pedestrian-oriented environment
Consistent. The project consists of trail improvements to the
Canyon Loop Trail. These improvements include widening the
trail, improving draining, and providing recreational amenities
(shade structures, staircase, etc.); refer to Section 2.0. The
widening of the trail, shade structures, and staircase would
help the Canyon Loop Trail become more walkable and would
incentive nearby residents to utilize the trail. Thus, the project
would meet the CAP and General Plan goal of becoming more
walkable, with livable neighborhoods, and creating a safe,
pedestrian-oriented environment.
The General Plan provides strategies for maximizing multi-
modal accessibility to and connectivity within mixed use areas,
including the Metrolink Station and new Town Center.
Components of the strategy serve to improve connectivity
between the proposed mixed use areas and the City’s existing
neighborhoods; provide new jobs, housing, and entertainment
opportunities in compact, walkable environments; support
multiple modes of transit, car travel, walking and bicycling; and
increase accessibility to and from surrounding cities. The
General Plan also includes a number of other improvements
to enhance connectivity for bicycles, pedestrians, and transit
in Diamond Bar
Consistent. As described above, the project would include
improvements to the Canyon Loop trail which would incentive
nearby residents of the City to utilize the trail. These
improvements would enhance connectivity for pedestrians by
providing a wider trail with more shade structures and would
allow individuals to traverse a portion of the City (from
Meandering Creek Drive on the western side to Peak Court on
the eastern side), without the reliance of automobiles. Thus,
the project would be consistent with this goal.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-2 [cont’d]
Project CAP Consistency Analysis
Policies and Actions Consistency Analysis
Bikeway System Improvements
The City has made an effort to expand the ease of alternative
transportation options for residents, recognizing both health and
environmental benefits. The General Plan recommends the
enhancement of the existing bicycle network with the
implementation of 1.76 miles of new Class I and II, 22.95 miles
of new Class III bike paths, and 22.95 miles of new Class IV bike
paths. In total, the recommended enhancements will create a
total of 45.58 miles of new bike paths, to result in a total of 48.3
miles of bike paths.
Consistent. The project would be consistent with this goal
as the widening of the Canyon Loop Trail would allow for
more bicycles to access the trail in a safe manner.
Furthermore, the project would help promote the City’s
General Plan Goal CHS-G-11 by protecting a natural open
space which provides CO2 sequestration and is also a
usable landscape for residents to cycle along.
Traffic Calming
The General Plan includes policies for “calming” traffic to make
streets safer and more comfortable for pedestrian travel. Traffic
calming devices include roundabouts, corner bulb-outs, speed
cushions, surface textures, raised pavement, road narrowing,
and other devices that encourage people to drive more slowly or
to walk or bike instead of using a vehicle, especially for short
trips in and around residential neighborhoods.
Consistent. The project would not include any additional
mobile trips nor require additional roadway features to be
created. As such the project would not conflict with the traffic
calming goals found within the CAP. The project would also
allow individuals to traverse a portion of the City (from
Meandering Creek Drive on the western side to Peak Court
on the eastern side), without the reliance of automobiles.
Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
The General Plan recommends that the City establish
requirements to provide dedicated parking and charging stations
for electric vehicles and support the use of clean fuel and
“climate friendly” vehicles by residents, businesses, and City
government activities. The General Plan recommends Diamond
Bar to seek funding opportunities for the installation of electric
vehicle charging stations throughout the City and to convert the
City fleet to zero emissions vehicles over time.
Consistent. The project would not include any additional
parking or mobile trips and thus would not conflict with this
CAP goal.
Parking Facilities and Policies
To promote “right sizing” of parking facilities, the General Plan
calls for the amendment of parking regulations in the Municipal
Code to require lower parking minimums for developments with
a mix of uses with different peak parking needs, as well as
developments that implement enforceable residential parking
demand reduction measures, such as parking permit and car
share programs. Additional strategies recommended by the
General Plan include consolidation of parking lots, preferential
carpool parking, park-n-ride facilities, parking pricing, and
bicycle parking. General Plan policies also encourage designing
parking facilities to minimize impacts on pedestrian, bicycles,
and transit.
Consistent. The project would not include any additional
parking or mobile trips and thus would not conflict with this
CAP goal.
Transportation Improvements
Transit service can provide an alternative to automobile travel
and is a critical mode of transportation for those who cannot
drive (such as the elderly, youth, or disabled) or do not have
access to a vehicle. Given that the majority of Diamond Bar is
of a suburban, low-density character, the General Plan
prioritizes providing high-quality service between employment
Consistent. The project consists of trail improvements to
the Canyon Loop Trail, which does not include additional
vehicle trips, and thus would not conflict with the
transportation improvement goals found within the CAP.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.8-8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 4.8-2 [cont’d]
Project CAP Consistency Analysis
Policies and Actions Consistency Analysis
centers and mixed-use destinations along the spines of the City,
supplemented with features such as park-n-rides and pedestrian
and bicycle infrastructure to create multi-modal transportation
nodes.
This Chapter’s policies also support Metrolink ridership by
improving bus, bicycle, and pedestrian connections to the station
and by introducing Transit-Oriented Mixed-Use development
around the station. Coordination with Metrolink and Union
Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to provide more frequent service to
increase Metrolink’s convenience and ridership amongst
Diamond Bar residents would further increase transit ridership
and reduce GHG emissions associated with automobile usage.
Source: City of Diamond Bar, Climate Action Plan 2040, adopted December 17, 2019.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.9-1 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan 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, either directly or indirectly, 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Short-term construction activities for the proposed project would not involve the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. With the exception of utilizing gasoline, diesel fuels, and solvents
for construction equipment, no other hazardous materials would be transported to or from the project site, or be utilized
in the construction process. Fuels and solvents for construction would be stored and utilized pursuant to existing
regulatory requirements. Therefore, short-term construction impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
As a recreational trail facility, the project would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials
during long-term operations. Project implementation would improve existing amenities on the trail and would not
change the project site’s current land use. No habitable structures or new land uses requiring hazardous materials
would be constructed. Thus, implementation of the proposed project would result in less than significant impact in this
regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.9-2 Hazards and 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.
Short-Term Construction Impacts
One of the means through which human exposure to hazardous substances could occur is through accidental release.
Incidents that result in an accidental release of hazardous substances into the environment can cause contamination
of soil, surface water, and groundwater, in addition to any toxic fumes that might be generated. Human exposure of
contaminated soil, soil gas, or water can have potential health effects based on a variety of factors, such as the nature
of the contaminant and the degree of exposure.
During project construction, there is a possibility of accidental release of hazardous substances such as petroleum-
based fuels or hydraulic fluid used for construction equipment. The level of risk associated with the accidental release
of hazardous substances is not considered significant due to the small volume and low concentration of hazardous
materials anticipated during construction. The construction contractor would be required to use standard construction
controls and safety procedures that would avoid and minimize the potential for accidental release of such substances
into the environment. Standard construction practices would be observed such that any materials released are
appropriately contained and remediated as required by local, State, and Federal law. Upon compliance with all
applicable regulations, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Long-Term Operational Impacts
As noted in Response 4.9(a), project implementation would improve existing amenities on the Canyon Loop Trail and
would not change the project site’s current land use. Therefore, the project would not involve a change in use which
would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Long-term impacts in this regard
would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. There are no existing or proposed schools located within 0.25-mile of the project site. The nearest school
is the Pantera Elementary School, located approximately 0.5-mile to the northeast at 801 Pantera Drive. As such, no
impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and
State Water Resources Control Board to compile and update a regulatory sites listing (per the criteria of the Section).
The California Department of Health Services is also required to compile and update, as appropriate, a list of all public
drinking water wells that contain detectable levels of organic contaminants and that are subject to water analysis
pursuant to Section 116395 of the Health and Safety Code. Section 65962.5 requires the local enforcement agency,
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.9-3 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
as designated pursuant to Section 18051 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), to compile, as
appropriate, a list of all solid waste disposal facilities from which there is a known migration of hazardous waste.
The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5.1 As such, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. The closest public airport to the project site is the Brackett Field Airport, located approximately 5.8 miles
to the north in the City of La Verne. According to the Brackett Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, the Brackett
Field Airport influence area extends approximately 2.7 miles from the airport runways.2 Given the distance to the
project site, no impacts associated with airport safety or noise hazards would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The proposed trail improvement project would not impair emergency access in the site vicinity. Similar to
existing conditions, emergency access to the site at project completion would be provided via multiple points of access
within the Summitridge Park Trail System and via adjacent roadways in the residential neighborhoods to the east and
west of the Canyon Loop Trail. Through widening and improvement of the trail, access and mobility would be improved,
resulting in a beneficial impact in this regard. As such, project implementation would not substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The project involves trail improvement features, such as widening trail segments, installing shelters and
benches, and constructing retaining walls, fences, stairs, and drainage crossings, and would not introduce any new
habitable structures or facilities that could expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
1 California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List Data Resources, http://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/,
accessed June 1, 2020.
2 Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission, Brackett Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan,
http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/brackett_alucp_final.pdf, December 9, 2015.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.9-4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.10-1 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface
or groundwater quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site
or area, including through the alteration of the course of
stream or river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
3) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned storm water
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
4) 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?
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. As authorized by the Clean Water Act, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into
waters of the United States. The NPDES permit program is administered by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). There are nine RWQCBs, which are responsible for development and enforcement of water
quality objectives and implementation plans. The project site is located in the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB.
Impacts related to water quality typically range over three different periods: 1) during the earthwork and construction
phase, when the potential for erosion, siltation, and sedimentation would be the greatest; 2) following construction,
prior to the establishment of ground cover, when the erosion potential may remain relatively high; and 3) following
completion of the project, when impacts related to sedimentation would decrease markedly, but those associated with
urban runoff would increase.
Short-Term Construction
The proposed project involves trail improvements along the existing Canyon Loop Trail. Construction activities
associated with the project have the potential to produce minimal quantities of typical pollutants such as nutrients,
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.10-2 Hydrology and Water Quality
heavy metals, toxic chemicals, and waste materials. Impacts to stormwater quality may occur from construction, and
increased pollutant loadings could occur immediately off-site.
The proposed project would be required to comply with the requirements of a Construction General Permit under the
NPDES program. A Construction General Permit requires the development and implementation of a Storm Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP is required to contain a site map that depicts the construction site
perimeter, existing and proposed buildings, lots, roadways, storm water collection and discharge points, general
topography both before and after construction, and drainage patterns across the project site. The SWPPP is also
required to include best management practices (BMPs) proposed to minimize stormwater runoff and overall water
quality.
The project’s construction activity would be subject to the NPDES General Construction Permit, as discussed above,
because it involves vegetation removal, clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground, and a construction site with
soil disturbance greater than 1.0 acre. The project would be required to obtain applicable permits from the Los Angeles
RWQCB pertaining to waste discharge requirements. More specifically, as part of project’s compliance with NPDES
requirements, the City would be required to submit a Notice of Intent to the Los Angeles RWQCB providing notification
of intent to comply with the General Construction Permit. The SWPPP is required to outline the erosion, sediment, and
non-stormwater BMPs proposed to minimize the discharge of pollutants at the construction site. These BMPs would
include measures to contain runoff from vehicle washing at the construction site, prevent sediment from disturbed
areas from entering the storm drain system using structural controls (e.g., sand bags at inlets), and cover and contain
stockpiled materials to prevent sediment and pollutant transport. Implementation of the BMPs would ensure runoff and
discharges during the project’s construction activities do not violate applicable water quality standards. Compliance
with NPDES requirements would reduce short-term construction-related impacts in this regard to a less than significant
level.
Long-Term Operations
The project site is unpaved and generally drains from east to west into Diamond Bar Creek, which drains into the San
Jose Creek, then San Gabriel River, San Pedro Bay, and ultimately, the Pacific Ocean. The project proposes
improvements such as gabion retaining walls, stairs with handrails and cobblestone swales, and drainage crossings,
all of which would help reduce soil erosion and loss of topsoil along the trail compared to existing conditions. The
project would maintain the trail in its natural surface condition, and no substantive change in the amount of impervious
surface would occur. Therefore, the project would reduce stormwater runoff and improve associated water quality.
Long-term operational impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No Impact. The project involves trail improvements along an existing trail and would not introduce any new uses that
would substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. At project
completion, the existing trail would remain unpaved and groundwater recharge and percolation into the earth would
continue to occur, similar to existing conditions. As such, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.10-3 Hydrology and Water Quality
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would:
1) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not result in a substantial alteration to existing drainage
patterns. As stated in Response 4.10(a), the project would comply with the requirements of the Construction General
Permit under the NPDES program, which would require the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP and
associated BMPs to minimize erosion and siltation during construction activities.
Further, at project completion, the trail would be improved with gabion retaining walls, stairs with cobblestone swales,
and drainage crossings, among other improvements, which would stabilize soils, reduce erosion, and improve drainage
in the project area. As such, project implementation would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern on-site
in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Impacts would be less than significant in
this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses 4.10(a) and 4.10 (c)(1).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
3) 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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses 4.10(a) and 4.10(c)(1). The project does not propose any new
uses that could create or contribute runoff water into existing stormwater drainage systems in the project area. Similar
to existing conditions, the trail would remain unpaved at project completion. Impacts would be less than significant in
this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
4) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Responses 4.10(a), 4.10 (c)(1), and 4.10(c)(3).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.10-4 Hydrology and Water Quality
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact.
Flood Hazard
According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for the project
area, the project site is located outside of the 100-year flood hazard area.1 As such, no impacts would occur in this
regard.
Tsunami
A tsunami is a great sea wave, commonly referred to as a tidal wave, produced by a significant undersea disturbance
such as tectonic displacement of a sea floor associated with large, shallow earthquakes. The project site is located
approximately 26 miles inland from the Pacific Ocean and is approximately 1,000 feet above mean sea level so as not
to be subject to tsunami impacts. As such, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Seiche
A seiche is a standing wave in an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water. The project site is not located near
any lakes or other major bodies of enclosed water. As such, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. As stated, the project site is located within the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles RWQCB.
The Water Quality Control Plan – Los Angles Region (Basin Plan) establishes water quality standards for water quality
standards for compliance in the Los Angeles Basin, including the City, and is the basis for the Los Angeles RWQCB’s
regulatory programs. As discussed in Response 4.10(a), the project’s impacts associated with water quality would be
less than significant. As such, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan.
The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires local public agencies and groundwater
sustainability agencies in high- and medium-priority basins to develop and implement groundwater sustainability plans
(GSPs) or prepare an alternative to a GSP. The project site is not located within a SGMA-designated priority basin.2
Therefore, there is no groundwater sustainability plan applicable for the project. As indicated in Response 4.10(b), the
proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. As
such, the project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan.
Impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
1 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map #06071C9330H, August 28, 2008,
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor, accessed July 14, 2020.
2 California Department of Water Resources, SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard, https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp2018-
dashboard/p1/, accessed July 14, 2020.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.11-1 Land Use and Planning
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Physically divide an established community?
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict
with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
a) Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The proposed project involves trail improvements along the existing Canyon Loop Trail within the
Summitridge Park Trail System. The improvements would facilitate on-site access/mobility and safety, improve
drainage, and reduce erosion. No new land uses would be introduced that could have the potential to physically divide
an established community. Nearby established residential communities to the east and west of the Canyon Loop Trail
would not be impacted by the trail improvements. As such, development of the proposed project would not physically
divide an established community, and no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. The project site is designated and zoned by the General Plan and Zoning Map as Open Space and Low
Density Residential (RL), respectively. As the project would not change the use on-site, the project would be consistent
with the site’s existing land use designation and zoning, and would not cause a significant environmental impact due
to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. No impacts would result in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.11-2 Land Use and Planning
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.12-1 Mineral Resources
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important
mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
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?
No Impact. The California Department of Conservation’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA)
identifies a range of Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs) within California based on geologic and economic factors that
identify the potential importance of mineral deposits in a particular area. According to the California Geological Survey,
the project site is identified as MRZ-3, which identifies areas containing mineral deposits, the significance of which
cannot be evaluated from available data.1 Based on the General Plan EIR, no mineral resources are identified in the
City’s planning area. No mineral extraction operations currently occur at or nearby the project site. As such, no impacts
would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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. Refer to Response 4.12(a), above.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
1 California Geological Survey, Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Portland Cement Concrete-Grade Aggregate in the
Claremont-Upland Production -Consumption (P-C) Region, Los Angeles and San Bernardino Counties, California, Special Report 202 – Plate
1, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sr/SR_202/, 2007.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.12-2 Mineral Resources
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-1 Noise
4.13 NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in in the vicinity of the
project 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?
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium such as air and is characterized
by both its amplitude and frequency (or pitch). The human ear does not hear all frequencies equally. In particular, the
ear deemphasizes low and very high frequencies. To better approximate the sensitivity of human hearing, the A-
weighted decibel scale (dBA) has been developed. On this scale, the human range of hearing extends from
approximately 3 dBA to around 140 dBA.
Noise is generally defined as unwanted or excessive sound, which can vary in intensity by over one million times within
the range of human hearing; therefore, a logarithmic scale, known as the decibel scale (dB), is used to quantify sound
intensity. Noise can be generated by a number of sources, including mobile sources such as automobiles, trucks, and
airplanes, and stationary sources such as construction sites, machinery, and industrial operations. Noise generated
by mobile sources typically attenuates (is reduced) at a rate between 3 dBA and 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. The
rate depends on the ground surface and the number or type of objects between the noise source and the receiver.
Hard and flat surfaces, such as concrete or asphalt, have an attenuation rate of 3 dBA per doubling of distance. Soft
surfaces, such as uneven or vegetated terrain, have an attenuation rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance.
Noise generated by stationary sources typically attenuates at a rate between 6 dBA and about 7.5 dBA per doubling
of distance.
There are a number of metrics used to characterize community noise exposure, which fluctuate constantly over time.
One such metric, the equivalent sound level (Leq), represents a constant sound that, over the specified period, has the
same sound energy as the time-varying sound. Noise exposure over a longer period of time is often evaluated based
on the Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn). This is a measure of 24-hour noise levels that incorporates a 10-dBA penalty for
sounds occurring between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The penalty is intended to reflect the increased human sensitivity
to noises occurring during nighttime hours, particularly at times when people are sleeping and there are lower ambient
noise conditions.
Two of the primary factors that reduce levels of environmental sounds are increasing the distance between the sound
source to the receiver and having intervening obstacles such as walls, buildings, or terrain features between the sound
source and the receiver. Factors that act to increase the loudness of environmental sounds include moving the sound
source closer to the receiver, sound enhancements caused by reflections, and focusing caused by various
meteorological conditions.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-2 Noise
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State
The State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) General Plan Noise Element Guidelines (2017) include
recommended exterior and interior noise level standards for local jurisdictions to identify and prevent the creation of
incompatible land uses due to noise. Table 4.13-1, Noise and Land Use Compatibility, shows the compatibility of
various land uses with a range of environmental noise levels in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).
Table 4.13-1
Noise and Land Use Compatibility
Land Use Category
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL, dBA)
Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential - Low Density, Single-Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes 50 - 60 55 - 70 70-75 75-85
Residential - Multiple Family 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 75 70 – 85
Transient Lodging - Motel, Hotels 50 - 65 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 – 85
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes 50 - 70 60 - 70 70 - 80 80 – 85
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters NA 50 - 70 NA 65 – 85
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports NA 50 - 75 NA 70 – 85
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 50 - 70 NA 67.5 - 75 72.5 – 85
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries 50 - 70 NA 70 - 80 80 – 85
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional 50 - 70 67.5 - 77.5 75 - 85 NA
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 50 - 75 70 - 80 75 - 85 NA
NA: Not Applicable
Normally Acceptable – Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without
any special noise insulation requirements.
Conditionally Acceptable – New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made
and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air
conditioning, will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable – New construction or development should be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of
the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Source: State of California Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, October 2017.
Local
Diamond Bar General Plan 2040
The Diamond Bar General Plan 2040 (General Plan) Public Safety Element includes the following goals and policies
applicable to the proposed project:
Goals
PS-G-10: Protect public health and welfare by enforcing the City’s noise ordinance, and impose mitigation
measures on future development and uses to prevent significant degradation of the future acoustic
environment.
Policies
PS-P-45: Use the noise and land use compatibility matrix (Table 7-1; Table 4.13-2) and Projected Noise
Contours map (Figure 7-12) as criteria to determine the acceptability of a given proposed land use,
including the improvement/construction of streets, railroads, freeways, and highways.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-3 Noise
PS-P-48: Maintain interior and exterior noise-related development standards through the Diamond Bar Noise
Control Ordinance.
PS-P-49: Ensure that detailed site-specific noise analysis, including the identification of noise mitigation
measures, be prepared for all development proposals located where project noise exposure would
be other than normally or conditionally acceptable as specified in Table 7-1 (Table 4.13-2). With
mitigation, development should meet the allowable exterior and interior noise exposure standards
established in the Noise Control Ordinance.
PS-P-50: Evaluate the land use compatibility of any proposed development project prior to approval to avoid
locating loud developments near noise sensitive receptors. When walls over six feet in height are
necessary to mitigate noise, a berm/ wall combination with heavy landscaping, a terraced wall heavily
landscaped, or other similar innovative wall design technique shall be used to minimize visual
impacts.
Table 4.13-2, General Plan Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix, identifies the General Plan’s acceptable interior and
exterior noise standards for various land use categories within the City.
Table 4.13-2
General Plan Land Use/Noise Compatibility Matrix
Land Use Categories
Maximum Exterior Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) or Day-Night Level (Ldn), dB1 Maximum
Interior
CNEL Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Rural, Single-Family, Multiple Family
Residential 50 - 55 55 – 65 65 – 75 75 - 85 40
School Classrooms 50 - 55 55 – 65 65 – 75 75 - 85 40
School Playgrounds 50 – 60 N/A 60 – 75 75 – 85 N/A
Libraries 50 – 60 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 40
Hospitals, Convalescent Facilities Living
Areas 50 – 60 60 – 70 70 – 80 80 – 85 40
Hospitals, Convalescent Facilities
Sleeping Areas 50 – 60 60 – 65 65 – 75 75 – 85 35
Recreation: Quiet, Passive Areas 50 – 55 55 – 65 65 – 85 N/A 40
Recreation: Noisy, Active Areas 50 – 65 N/A 65 – 75 75 - 85 N/A
Commercial and Industrial 50 – 65 65 – 70 70 – 80 80 - 85 N/A
Office Areas 50 – 65 65 – 70 70 – 80 80 - 85 45
N/A: Not Applicable
Normally Acceptable – Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction,
without any special noise insulation requirements. Outdoor areas are suitable for normal outdoor activities for this land use.
Conditionally Acceptable – New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made
and needed noise insulation features included in the design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air-
conditioning, will normally suffice.
Normally Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed
analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Clearly Unacceptable – New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
Nature of the Noise environment where the CNEL or Ldn level is:
Below 55 dB: relatively quiet suburban or urban areas, no arterial streets within 1 block, no freeways within ¼ mile.
55-65 dB: most somewhat noisy urban areas, near but not directly adjacent to high volumes of traffic.
65-75 dB: very noisy urban areas near arterials, freeways or airports.
75+ dB: extremely noisy urban areas adjacent to freeways or under airport traffic patterns. Hearing damage with constant exposure outdoors.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-4 Noise
Table 4.13-2 [cont’d]
General Plan Community Noise Compatibility Matrix
Land Use Categories
Maximum Exterior Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) or Day-Night Level (Ldn), dB1 Maximum
Interior
CNEL Normally
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable
Normally
Unacceptable
Clearly
Unacceptable
Notes: N/A: Not Applicable
1. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and Day-Night Noise Level (Ldn) are measures of the 24-hour noise environment. They represent the
constant A-weighted noise level that would be measured if all the sound energy received over the day was averaged. In order to account for the greater
sensitivity of people to noise at night, the CNEL weighting includes a 5-decibel penalty on noise between 7:00 pm and 10:00 pm and a 10-decibel penalty on
noise between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am of the next day. The Ldn includes only the 10-decibel weighting for late-night noise events. For practical purposes, the
two measures are equivalent for typical urban noise environments.
Source: City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar General Plan 2040, adopted December 17, 2019.
Diamond Bar Municipal Code
The Diamond Bar Municipal Code (Municipal Code) regulations with respect to noise are included in Municipal Code
Section 8.12, Division 3, Noise Control. Applicable noise restrictions are discussed below:
Section 8.12.380(4) – Exemption from exterior noise standards. The following activities are exclusively regulated
by the prohibitions of subdivision III of this division:
a. Construction;
b. Stationary nonemergency signaling devices;
c. Emergency signaling devices;
d. Refuse collection vehicles;
e. Residential air conditioning or refrigeration equipment; and
f. Forced-air blowers.
Subdivision III. – Specific Noise Restrictions
Section 8.12.720. – Construction Noise
(a) Operating or causing the operation of any tools or equipment used in construction, drilling, repair,
alteration or demolition work between weekday hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., or at any time on
Sundays or holidays, such that the sound therefrom creates a noise disturbance across a residential
or commercial real-property line, except for emergency work of public service utilities or by variance
issued by the health officer is prohibited.
(b) Noise restrictions at affected structures. The contractor shall conduct construction activities in such
a manner that the maximum noise levels at the affected buildings will not exceed those listed in the
following schedule:
(1) At residential structures, the following:
a. Mobile equipment. Maximum noise levels for nonscheduled, intermittent, short-
term operation (less than ten days) of mobile equipment:
Single-family Residential Multifamily Residential Semi-residential/Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and
legal holidays, 7:00 a.m. to
8:00 p.m.
75 dBA 80 dBA 85 dBA
Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
and all day Sunday and legal
holidays
60 dBA 64 dBA 70 dBA
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-5 Noise
b. Stationary equipment. Maximum noise level for repetitively scheduled and
relatively long-term operation (periods of ten days or more) of stationary
equipment:
Single-family Residential Multifamily Residential Semi-residential/Commercial
Daily, except Sundays and
legal holidays, 7:00 a.m. to
8:00 p.m.
60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
Daily, 8:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
and all day Sunday and legal
holidays
50 dBA 55 dBA 60 dBA
(c) All mobile or stationary internal-combustion-engine powered equipment or machinery shall be
equipped with suitable exhaust and air-intake silencers in proper working order.
Municipal Code regulations associated with vibrations are included in Municipal Code Section 8.12.840, Vibration.
Section 8.12.840 – Vibration. Operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates vibration which is
above the vibration perception threshold of any individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on
private property, or at 150 feet (46 meters) from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way is prohibited.
The perception threshold shall be a motion velocity of 0.01 in/sec over the range of one to 100 Hertz.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is designated as Open Space in the General Plan. Surrounding sensitive receptors in proximity of the
project site include single-family residential uses located to the east and west. The nearest residential property is
located approximately 80 feet west of the proposed project construction limits. The existing noise environment is
predominately characterized by neighborhood noise and vehicle traffic.
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in in the
vicinity of the project 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. It is difficult to specify noise levels which are
acceptable to everyone, what is annoying to one individual may be acceptable to another. However, standards usually
address the needs of most of the general population and can be based on documented complaints in response to
documented noise levels or based on studies of the ability of people to sleep, talk, or work under various noise
conditions. All such studies recognize that individual responses vary considerably.
Short-Term (Construction) Impacts
Construction activities are generally temporary and have a short duration, resulting in periodic increases in the ambient
noise environment. The project’s construction activities would span a four-month period, beginning spring 2021.
Typical noise levels generated by construction equipment are shown in Table 4.13-3, Maximum Noise Levels
Generated by Construction Equipment. Operating cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one
or two minutes of full power operation followed by three to four minutes at lower power settings. Other primary sources
of acoustical disturbance would be due to random incidents, which would last less than one minute (such as dropping
large pieces of equipment).
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-6 Noise
Table 4.13-3
Maximum Noise Levels Generated by Construction Equipment
Type of Equipment Acoustical Use Factor1 Lmax at 50 Feet (dBA)
Concrete Saw 20 90
Concrete Mixer Truck 40 79
Concrete Saw 20 90
Backhoe 40 78
Dozer 40 82
Truck 40 88
Paver 50 77
Roller 20 80
Tractor 40 84
Note:
1. Acoustical Use Factor (percent): Estimates the fraction of time each piece of construction equipment
is operating at full power (i.e., its loudest condition) during a construction operation.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054),
January 2006.
The proposed project would widen the South Canyon Loop of the existing Canyon Loop Trail, as well as construct
improvements such as retaining walls, stairs, draining crossings, wayfinding sings, shade structures, and benches.
Residential properties are located to the east and west of the project site. The closest residential uses, located on
Meandering Creek Drive, are situated approximately 80 feet from construction of the wayfinding sign, 230 feet from
grading activities associated with retaining wall/stair improvements, and 280 feet from grading activities associated
with trail widening. The remaining proposed improvements (i.e., retaining walls, stairs, draining crossings, wayfinding
sings, shade structures, and benches) would occur further than 280 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor. It is
anticipated that the wayfinding sign would be installed with hand tools (e.g., shovel and clamshell digger). As such,
construction activities associated with installation of the wayfinding sign would not generate perceptible noise levels at
the nearest sensitive receptor. Construction noise modeling was performed using the Roadway Construction Noise
Model (RCNM) developed by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). This program enables the prediction of
construction noise levels for a variety of construction operations. This program was used to identify construction noise
levels at nearby sensitive uses. Table 4.13-4, Construction Noise Levels by Construction Activity, shows the highest
noise levels generated during each phase of construction.
Table 4.13-4
Construction Noise Levels by Construction Activity
Construction Activity Distance from
Construction Activity1
Estimated Noise Level at
Nearest Receptor (dBA)2
Grading 230 56.8
Grading 280 55.1
Notes:
1. Distance from nearest residential use to proposed construction activities are based on site plans.
2. Estimated noise levels account for the existing solid masonry walls at the nearby residential receptors.
Source: Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054),
January 2006; refer to Appendix D, Noise Data.
As shown in Table 4.13-4, the highest noise levels are predicted to occur during the grading phase when construction
noise levels could reach 56.8 dBA at the nearest residential uses. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 8.12.720, the
City prohibits construction noise exceeding 60 dBA during daytime hours (i.e., between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-7 Noise
p.m. on weekdays and Saturday, and at no time on Sundays or Federal holidays) for single-family residential uses.1
As depicted in Table 4.13-4, construction noise levels would not exceed 60 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptors.
Further, the construction duration would be short-term in nature (i.e., 4 months) and would not occur over an extended
period of time. Notwithstanding, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would ensure that construction-related
noise levels at nearby residents are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 requires
several best practices to reduce construction noise levels at nearby receptors, including requiring construction
equipment to be furnished with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State-required noise attenuation
devices, among others. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Long-Term (Operational) Impacts
Operation of the proposed project would not introduce any new noise-generating sources. Under existing conditions,
employees visit the site to perform inspections and maintenance. Following project construction, the routine
maintenance and inspection visits would continue. There would not be an increase in vehicular trips to the project area
beyond what currently occurs. Therefore, no long-term noise impacts would result with implementation of the proposed
project.
Mitigation Measures:
NOI-1 Prior to the initiation of construction, the City of Diamond Bar Director of Public Works, or authorized
agents (such as the City’s Public Works Manager/Assistant City Engineer) acting within the scope of the
particular duties delegated to them, shall ensure that all project plans and specifications stipulate that:
All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and
maintained mufflers and other State-required noise attenuation devices.
A construction notice shall be mailed to residents within a 500-foot radius of the project and shall
indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a City of Diamond
Bar staff contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the
construction process and register complaints.
Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise sensitive uses to the maximum extent
feasible (e.g., residences etc.).
During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise
is directed away from sensitive noise receivers.
Construction equipment staging areas shall be located away from adjacent sensitive receptors.
Pursuant to City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.12.720, all construction activities
associated with the proposed project shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m. on weekdays and on Saturdays. Construction on Sundays and Federal holidays shall be
prohibited.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration,
depending on the construction equipment used and the type of activity. Construction equipment operation would
1 Although Municipal Code Section 8.12.720 allows nighttime construction noise levels up to 50 dBA for single-family residential
uses, the project does not propose nighttime construction.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-8 Noise
generate groundborne vibrations which decrease with distance from the source. The effect on buildings located near
the construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver
building(s). The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low
rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Ground-borne
vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment
operations. The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage. Human
annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the threshold of human perception for extended
periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Consistent with the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration
Impact Assessment Manual (September 2018), Municipal Code Section 8.12.840 has stipulated that no ground vibration
shall be allowed that produces a peak particle velocity (PPV) greater than or equal to 0.01 inches-per-second
(inch/second) at or beyond the property boundary of the source. Table 4.13-5, Typical Vibration Levels for Construction
Equipment, identifies typical vibration levels for construction equipment.
Table 4.13-5
Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment Approximate peak particle velocity
at 230 feet (inch/second)
Approximate peak particle velocity
at 280 feet (inch/second)
Loaded trucks 0.0032 0.0020
Small bulldozer/Tractors 0.0001 0.0001
Notes:
1. Calculated using the following formula:
PPV equip = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
where: PPV (equip) = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance
PPV (ref) = the reference vibration level at 25 feet in in/sec
D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
As illustrated in Table 4.13-5, based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment
operations that would be used during project construction range from 0.0001 to 0.0032 inch/second PPV at 230 feet
from the source of activity and 0.0001 to 0.0020 inch/second PPV at 280 feet from the source of activity. As such,
vibration levels during project construction would not exceed the City’s 0.01 inch/second PPV threshold.
In addition, according to the FTA’s Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual (September 2018), ground-
borne noise occurs when vibration radiates through a building interior and creates a low-frequency sound, often described
as a rumble. The proposed project does not include train operations or equipment with the potential to generate
groundborne vibration. A less than significant impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such
a plan has not been adopted, within 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?
No Impact. The project is not located within an airport land use plan and there are no public or private airports or
airstrips within two miles of the project site. The nearest airport to the project site is the Brackett Field Airport, located
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-9 Noise
approximately 5.8 miles to the north in the City of La Verne. Thus, project implementation would not expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.13-10 Noise
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.14-1 Population and Housing
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Induce substantial population unplanned growth in an
area, either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
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)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not involve the construction of any homes, businesses,
or other uses that would result in direct or indirect population growth. Short-term temporary construction jobs would
be created during construction and installation of the proposed trail improvements. However, given the temporary
nature of the construction process and limited duration of construction (up to four months), it is anticipated that local
construction workers would be employed and no new workers would relocate to Diamond Bar. Routine maintenance
of the trail during project operations would also be conducted by existing City park staff and/or hired landscaping
contractors. As such, less than significant impacts pertaining to unplanned population growth would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As no housing is present on-site, the project would not displace residents or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.14-2 Population and Housing
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.15-1 Public Services
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
1) Fire protection?
2) Police protection?
3) Schools?
4) Parks?
5) Other public facilities?
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:
1) Fire protection?
No Impact. The Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) provides fire and emergency medical services for
the City. The LACoFD has three fire stations within Diamond Bar; the project site is served by Station 120 located at
1051 Grand Avenue, approximately 0.6-mile west of the site. The proposed trail improvements would not increase
demand for fire protection and emergency medical services and thus, would not result in adverse physical impacts
associated with the construction of any new or physically altered fire protection facilities. Additionally, no habitable
structures or other land uses capable of substantially increasing the need for fire protection services are proposed. As
such, no impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2) Police protection?
No Impact. The City contracts with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) for police protection services.
The LASD has more than 20 full-time personnel assigned to serve Diamond Bar. The Walnut/Diamond Bar Sheriff's
Station is located approximately 2.65 miles to the northeast of the project site at 21695 East Valley Blvd in the City of
Walnut. The proposed trail improvements would not increase the need for additional police protection services or
involve construction of any new or physically altered police protection facilities. Further, no habitable structures or
other land uses capable of substantially increasing the need for police protection services are proposed. As such, no
impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.15-2 Public Services
3) Schools?
No Impact. The project site is located within the Walnut Valley Unified School District (WVUSD). Implementation of
the proposed project would not result in an increase in residential population and thus, would not impact existing
capacities and resources at WVUSD schools and facilities; refer to Section 4.14, Population and Housing. As such,
no impact is anticipated in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
4) Parks?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Summitridge Park is located approximately 0.3-mile south of the project site. The
proposed trail improvements along the Canyon Loop Trail could attract new recreational users to the trail and
Summitridge Park. However, as the project would not result in a direct increase in population, any increased use of
park facilities from new recreational users to the Summitridge Park Trail System would be nominal; refer to Section
4.14. Further, the proposed trail improvement project would enhance the existing Canyon Loop Trail by providing
enhanced and new amenities for trail users. Proposed trail improvements, including shelters and benches, retaining
walls, drainage crossings, fencing, and signage, would improve soil stability, reduce erosion, improve drainage,
facilitate ease of access and safety, and reduce disturbance to informal trail areas. As such, a less than significant
impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
5) Other public facilities?
No Impact. As detailed above in Responses 4.15(a)(1) through 4.15(a)(4), the proposed project would not result in
any potentially significant impacts related to public services. The project does not involve construction of any new or
physically altered public facilities, and no other public facilities are anticipated to be affected by the project. No impacts
would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.16-1 Recreation
4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require
the construction or expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. Refer to Response 4.15(a)(4). Impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. As detailed in Section 2.4, Project Characteristics, proposed trail improvements along
the Canyon Loop Trail include widening portions of the trail; constructing retaining walls, stairs, drainage crossings,
and fences; and installing new shade structures with benches and trash receptacles, perforated benches, and
wayfinding signs. The proposed improvements would improve soil stability, reduce erosion, improve drainage, facilitate
ease of access and safety, and reduce disturbance to informal trail areas. The project’s potential environmental
impacts associated with the proposed trail improvements are analyzed throughout this Initial Study. Compliance with
applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations would ensure project impacts are reduced to less than significant levels
in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.16-2 Recreation
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.17-1 Transportation
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access?
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed trail improvements would occur along the existing Canyon Loop Trail
and would not impact nearby roadways, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities.
Roadways
Construction activities would occur over approximately four months and include short-term traffic trips associated with
the transfer of construction equipment, construction worker trips, and hauling trips for soil and construction material.
Although construction traffic may have the potential to impact the local circulation system, the scope of construction
activity at the site is expected to be limited and a relatively limited number of construction deliveries would occur. As
detailed in Appendix A, Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas/Energy Data, grading activities would require approximately 10
worker trips per day and construction activities would require approximately 20 worker and vendor trips per day. Thus,
short-term construction traffic associated with the project would not adversely impact the local roadway network.
Construction activities also would not require any temporary lane closures on adjacent roadways. As such, impacts in
this regard would be less than significant.
At project completion, the trail would be improved with new amenities but would operate similar to existing conditions.
No new land uses are proposed that would generate additional vehicle trips. Therefore, long-term operational impacts
would be less than significant.
Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
Given that the project site is an existing trail within the Summitridge Park Trail System, there are no transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian (i.e., sidewalks) in the project area. As stated, the temporary construction activities would generate a
nominal number of trips associated with construction worker trips and vendors trips, and would not require any lane
closures that could impact adjacent transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. At project completion, the trail would
continue to operate similar to existing conditions and also would not impact transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities on
adjacent roadways. Overall, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.17-2 Transportation
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less Than Significant Impact. In accordance with Senate Bill 743, the City recently adopted the City of Diamond
Bar VMT Baselines and Thresholds of Significance (VMT Thresholds) on July 21, 2020 per City Council Resolution
No. 2020-30. The Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Thresholds establish screening criteria and thresholds of significance
in determining when a project would result in a significant transportation impact under CEQA. Based on the VMT
Thresholds, land use projects with a VMT rate that exceeds 15 percent below the applicable baseline VMT rate would
result in a significant project impact.
Short-term construction trips and associated VMT would be nominal, and primarily be limited to those associated with
construction worker trips and vendor trips traveling to and from the project site. Due to the limited scope and duration
of construction, it is not expected that significant impacts related to VMT would occur. As such, impacts in regard to
short-term construction would be less than significant in this regard.
The proposed improvements along the Canyon Loop Trail would not involve any new land uses that would generate
new vehicle trips and associated VMT. Additionally, the project would not generate any new trips for maintenance
activities beyond existing conditions. Thus, operational impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Overall,
the project would not conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves improvements along an existing trail and would not result in
hazards on surrounding roadways due to geometric design features or incompatible uses. Further, no new land uses
are proposed that would be incompatible with its existing use as a recreational trail. Thus, impacts would be less than
significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. Refer to Response 4.9(f).
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.18-1 Tribal Cultural Resources
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site,
feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
1) 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
2) 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.
As of July 1, 2015, California Assembly Bill 52 (AB 52) was enacted and expanded CEQA by establishing a formal
consultation process for California tribes within the CEQA process. The bill specifies that any project may affect or
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource would require a lead agency to
“begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditional and culturally affiliated with the geographic
area of the proposed project.” Section 21074 of AB 52 also defines a new category of resources under CEQA called
“tribal cultural resources.” Tribal cultural resources are defined as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred
places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe” and is either listed on or eligible for the
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or a local historic register, or if the lead agency chooses to treat
the resource as a tribal cultural resource.
On February 19, 2016, the California Natural Resources Agency proposed to adopt and amend regulations as part of
AB 52 implementing Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations, CEQA Guidelines, to include
consideration of impacts to tribal cultural resources pursuant to Government Code Section 11346.6. On September
27, 2016, the California Office of Administrative Law approved the amendments to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines,
and these amendments are addressed within this Initial Study.
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
1) 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).
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.18-2 Tribal Cultural Resources
No Impact. According to the Cultural Resources Assessment, no historic resources listed or eligible for listing in a
State or local register of historic resources are located within the project site. Thus, no impacts related to historic tribal
cultural resources defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k) would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2) 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. In compliance with AB 52, the City distributed letters
notifying each tribe that requested to be on the City’s list for the purposes of AB 52 of the opportunity to consult with
the City regarding the proposed project; refer to Appendix E, AB 52 Documentation. The letters were distributed by
certified mail on July 2, 2020. The tribes had 30 days to respond to the City’s request for consultation. The Gabrieleno
Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation responded on July 16, 2020 stating that the project is within the tribe’s ancestral
tribal territory and requested consultation. No other tribes responded within the 30 days.
Members of the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, and City staff consulted on August 6, 2020. During
the consultation, the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation provided confidential information relevant to
tribal cultural resources that may exist within the project area, and identified concerns that the project may affect such
resources during ground disturbing activities.
Based on feedback provided by the Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation, the City developed a range of
mitigation measures (TCR-1 through TCR-3) to minimize impacts to potential tribal cultural resources. With
implementation of these mitigation measures, impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
TCR-1 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activity at the project site, the City of Diamond Bar
shall retain a Native American monitor. The Native American monitor shall be selected from a tribe that
has requested that a monitor be present, and in which the project site is within their ancestral region of
occupation. The Native American monitor shall only be present on-site during the construction phases
that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined as activities that may
include, but are not limited to, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
The Native American monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that shall provide descriptions of the
day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the project site are completed, or
when the Native American monitor has indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the
project site have little to no potential for impacting tribal cultural resources.
TCR-2 In the event tribal cultural resources are discovered during project construction, construction activities
shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 50 feet) until the find can
be assessed. All tribal cultural resources unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the Native
American monitor and a qualified archaeologist if one is present. If the resources are Native American in
origin, the affected tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the tribe deems appropriate, for
educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. Work may continue in other parts of the project site while
evaluation and any required recovery activities take place. Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the
preferred manner of treatment. If preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may include
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.18-3 Tribal Cultural Resources
implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to remove the resource along with
subsequent laboratory processing and analysis.
TCR-3 In the event human remains are encountered during project construction, said remains shall require
proper treatment in accordance with Health and Safety Code 7050.5, which 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, the
coroner shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission and Public
Resources Code (PRC) 5097.98 shall be followed. PRC 5097.98 requires identification of the “most likely
descendent,” and that remains are investigated and that appropriate recommendations are made for
treatment of the remains.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.18-4 Tribal Cultural Resources
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.19-1 Utilities and Service Systems
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of new
or expanded water, wastewater treatment, or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunication 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?
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 telecommunication, the
construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. The project proposes trail improvements along the Canyon Loop Trail. The project does not propose any
new land uses that would result in increased demand for water, wastewater treatment, storm drain, or dry utility services
nor would it require the relocation or construction of new or expanded facilities. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?
No Impact. The proposed trail improvements would not substantially increase water demand during construction or
operational activities. Although a nominal amount of water may be used during construction (e.g., for dust control),
these activities would be minimal and temporary in nature and would have no impact on the City’s overall water
supplies. No impact would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.19-2 Utilities and Service Systems
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?
No Impact. The project would not introduce a new land use that could generate additional wastewater beyond existing
conditions. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes trail improvements and does not introduce any new
land uses capable of generating solid waste beyond existing conditions. The project may require the disposal of debris
during construction activities; however, construction debris associated with the project’s trail improvements would be
one-time and would not have the capability to substantially affect the capacity of regional landfills. Further, the
proposed trash receptacles along the Canyon Loop Trail would improve litter collection along the trail and would not
adversely impact the capacity of regional landfills. Thus, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
e) Comply with Federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related
to solid waste?
No Impact. As stated, the project may generate a nominal amount of solid waste during construction activities,
however, the proposed trail improvements would not generate any additional solid waste beyond existing conditions.
As such, no impacts regarding conflict with Federal, State, and local solid waste management and reduction regulations
would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.20-1 Wildfire
4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would
the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
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?
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The California Department of Forestry and Fire identifies the project site as a Very
High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA).1
Pursuant to the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), the Los Angeles County 2019 All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
(AHMP) was developed by the Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Management (OEM) to emphasize the need
for State, tribal, and local entities to closely coordinate hazard mitigation planning and implementation efforts. Hazard
mitigation efforts include identifying and profiling hazards, analyzing the people and facilities at risk, and developing
mitigation actions to reduce or eliminate hazard risk. Implementation of the mitigation actions in the AHMP would
include short- and long-term strategies that may involve planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other
activities. Although the AHMP planning area is for unincorporated Los Angeles County, the AHMP’s risk assessment
includes Supervisorial Districts 1 through 5, which includes the City of Diamond Bar (Supervisorial District 4).
Further, the Los Angeles County Operational Area designates disaster routes within the County, including Diamond
Bar. According to the Disaster Route Maps, disaster routes in the City include State Route 60, State Route 57, Diamond
Bar Boulevard, and Golden Springs Drive.2
As discussed in Response 4.9(f), the proposed trail improvement project would not impair emergency access in the
site vicinity. Similar to existing conditions, emergency access to the site at project completion would be provided via
multiple points of access within the Summitridge Park Trail System and via adjacent roadways in the residential
neighborhoods to the east and west of the Canyon Loop Trail. As such, project implementation would not substantially
impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant
impact.
1 California Department of Forestry and Fire, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA As Recommended by CAL FIRE,
Diamond Bar, September 2011, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5815/diamond_bar.pdf, accessed May 28, 2020.
2 Los Angeles County Public Works, Disaster Route Maps – City of Diamond Bar,
https://dpw.lacounty.gov/dsg/DisasterRoutes/map/Diamond%20Bar.pdf, July 7, 2008.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.20-2 Wildfire
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project involves trail improvements, such as widening trail segments, installing
shelters and benches, and constructing retaining walls, fences, stairs, and drainage crossings, and would not introduce
any new habitable structures or facilities that could expose occupants to pollutant concentrations from wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Existing slopes, prevailing winds, and other factors associated with wildfire risks also
would not be exacerbated by project implementation. Thus, impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
No Impact. The project involves trail improvement features and does not propose the installation or maintenance of
infrastructure that could exacerbate existing fire risks. No impacts would occur in this regard.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project would not introduce any new habitable structures or facilities that could
expose people or structures to significant risks related to downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Rather, the
project involves constructing retaining walls, drainage crossings, and stairs with cobblestone swales along the Canyon
Loop Trail, among other trail amenities, that would stabilize soils, reduce erosion, and improve drainage on-site. As
such, impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.21-1 Mandatory Findings of Significance
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
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. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources,
the project site generally consists of natural vegetation with relatively undisturbed soils. The proposed project has the
potential to impact special-status plant and wildlife species, special-status vegetation communities, and wildlife
migratory corridors. As such, Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-4 would reduce such impacts to less than
significant levels. Specifically, these mitigation measures would require a qualified biologist to conduct focused rare
plant surveys and nesting bird clearance surveys, and the City to prepare and implement a low-effect habitat
conservation plan and obtain an Incidental Take Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to project
construction to ensure project activities do not adversely impact biological resources. Upon implementation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-4, the project is not anticipated to 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, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.
Additionally, as analyzed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, and Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, no historic,
archaeological, or tribal cultural resources occur on-site. Should previously undiscovered cultural or tribal cultural
resources or human remains be uncovered during project ground-disturbing activities, implementation of Mitigation
Measures CUL-1 and TCR-1 through TCR-3 would reduce the project’s potential effects to less than significant levels.
Thus, the project would not eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory, and
impacts in this regard would be less than significant.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.21-2 Mandatory Findings of Significance
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects,
and the effects of probable future projects)?
Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Cumulative impacts can occur as a result of the
interactions of environmental changes from multiple projects that affect the same resources, transportation network,
watershed, air basin, noise environment, or other environmental conditions. Such impacts could be short-term and
temporary from overlapping construction impacts, or long-term due to permanent land use changes.
As noted in Section 2.3, Project Background, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Public Facilities
and Services Element and the Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which details recommended
improvements in the Summitridge Park Trail System. As such, the project would result in beneficial impacts in regard
to recreational opportunities, safety, and access within the project area. The project would not result in substantial
population growth within the area, either directly or indirectly; refer to Section 4.14, Population and Housing. While
other projects and development in the project area (including further improvements in the Summitridge Park Trail
System) are considered probable and foreseeable, environmental analysis of these future projects would be conducted
on a project-by-project basis in accordance with CEQA. Although the project may incrementally affect other resources
that were determined to be less than significant, the project’s contribution to these effects is not considered
“cumulatively considerable,” in consideration of the relatively nominal project impacts and required mitigation
measures.
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. This Initial Study reviewed the proposed project’s
potential impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, geology and soils, greenhouse gases, hydrology/water quality, noise,
hazards and hazardous materials, traffic, among other disciplines. As concluded in this Initial Study, the proposed
project would result in less than significant impacts with implementation of the recommended mitigation measures.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in environmental impacts that would cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.22-1 References
4.22 REFERENCES
The following references were utilized during preparation of this IS/MND. These documents are available for review
at the City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department, 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California 91765, or
accessed at the indicated web page.
1. California Air Resources Board, California Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2000 to 2017,
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000_2017/ghg_inventory_trends_00-17.pdf, accessed
July 8, 2020.
2. California Department of Conservation, A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California – Areas
More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos, August 2000.
3. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, California Important
Farmland Finder, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, accessed May 22, 2020.
4. California Department of Conservation, State of California Williamson Act Contract Land, 2017.
5. California Department of Forestry and Fire, Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA As Recommended
by CAL FIRE, Diamond Bar, September 2011, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5815/diamond_bar.pdf,
accessed May 28, 2020.
6. California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, Green Building Materials,
https://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/greenbuilding/materials#Material, accessed July 8, 2020.
7. California Department of Water Resources, SGMA Basin Prioritization Dashboard,
https://gis.water.ca.gov/app/bp2018-dashboard/p1/, accessed July 14, 2020.
8. California Environmental Protection Agency, Cortese List Data Resources,
http://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/, accessed June 1, 2020.
9. California Geological Survey, Updated Mineral Land Classification Map for Portland Cement Concrete-Grade
Aggregate in the Claremont-Upland Production -Consumption (P-C) Region, Los Angeles and San Bernardino
Counties, California, Special Report 202 – Plate 1, ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dmg/pubs/sr/SR_202/, 2007.
10. City of Diamond Bar, Climate Action Plan 2040, December 17, 2019.
11. City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar Environmental Impact Report 2040 (State Clearinghouse No.
2018051066), November 2019.
12. City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar General Plan 2040, December 2019.
13. City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar Municipal Code, codified through Ordinance No. 01(2019), enacted
January 15, 2019.
14. City of Diamond Bar, Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master Plan, July 2011.
15. Cogstone, Cultural Resources Assessment for the Canyon Loop Trail Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los
Angeles County, California, July 2020.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.22-2 References
16. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Map #06071C9330H, August 28, 2008,
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search#searchresultsanchor, accessed July 14, 2020.
17. Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model (FHWA-HEP-05-054), January 2006.
18. Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.
19. Los Angeles County Airport Land Use Commission, Brackett Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan,
http://planning.lacounty.gov/assets/upl/project/brackett_alucp_final.pdf, December 9, 2015.
20. Los Angeles Cunty Public Works, Disaster Route Maps – City of Diamond Bar,
https://dpw.lacounty.gov/dsg/DisasterRoutes/map/Diamond%20Bar.pdf, July 7, 2008.
21. Michael Baker International, Results of a Biological Resources Assessment of the Canyon Loop Trail
Improvement Project – City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California, July 10, 2020.
22. Michael Baker International, Results of Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Focused Surveys
for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project in the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County, California,
August 7, 2020.
23. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Carbon Dioxide Concentration at Mauna Loa Observatory,
https://scripps.ucsd.edu/programs/keelingcurve/, accessed July 8, 2020.
24. State of California Office of Planning and Research, General Plan Guidelines, October 2017.
25. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey,
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx, accessed July 10, 2020.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.23-1 Report Preparation Personnel
4.23 REPORT PREPARATION PERSONNEL
City of Diamond Bar (Lead Agency)
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
909.839.7070
Greg Gubman, AICP, Community Development Director
Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director
Michael Baker International
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 500
Santa Ana, California 92707
949.472.3505
Richard Beck, Principal-in-Charge
Alan Ashimine, Project Manager
Frances Yau, AICP, Senior Environmental Analyst
Winnie Woo, Environmental Analyst
Pierre Glaize, Air Quality/GHG/Noise/Energy Specialist
Ryan Winkleman, CSE, Senior Biologist
Faye Stroud, Graphic Artist
Cogstone Resource Management, Inc.
1518 West Taft Avenue
Orange, California, 92865
714.974.8300
Molly Valasik, MA, RPA, CFO/Principal Archaeologist
Holly Duke, Supervisor/Archaeologist
John Gust, PhD, RPA, Principal Investigator
Logan Freeberg, GIS Supervisor
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 4.23-2 Report Preparation Personnel
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 5-1 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
5.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES
AESTHETICS
AES-1 To minimize construction-related impacts to scenic vistas and the visual character and quality of the
project area, the project contractor shall ensure that all construction materials, heavy-duty equipment,
and debris piles are staged and screened from public view in a designated construction staging area.
Staging areas shall be approved and subject to periodic field inspections by the City of Diamond Bar
Parks and Recreation Department, or responsible designee(s).
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1 Prior to construction and during the appropriate blooming periods for special-status plant species with the
potential to occur within the survey area, a qualified botanist shall conduct a focused rare plant survey in
areas with suitable habitat to determine presence or absence of special-status plant species. The surveys
shall be floristic in nature (i.e., identifying all plant species to the taxonomic level necessary to determine
rarity), and shall be inclusive of, at a minimum, the areas proposed for trail improvements and those
immediately surrounding those areas. The results of the survey shall be documented in a letter report.
If individual or populations of special-status plant species are found within the areas proposed for
disturbance, measures to avoid and minimize impacts shall be recommended. The surveys and reporting
shall follow 2018 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or 2001 California Native Plant
Society guidelines.
Although not expected, if State- and/or Federally-listed plant species are present and avoidance is
infeasible, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW shall be required
and an Incidental Take Permit(s) from the USFWS and/or CDFW shall be obtained prior to the
commencement of project activities.
BIO-2 In consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the City of Diamond Bar Parks and
Recreation Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare a low-effect habitat
conservation plan (HCP) to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used by sensitive wildlife species,
particularly coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica californica) known to occur on-site.
Avoidance and minimization measures that may be required in a low-effect HCP for the proposed project,
subject to consultation with the USFWS, include, but are not limited to, preconstruction nesting surveys
for coastal California gnatcatcher and avoidance of any active nests or scheduling of work outside of the
gnatcatcher nesting season, environmental training for all construction personnel, biological monitoring
during initial vegetation removal, closing and restoration of any extraneous trail sections or breeding
habitat to recreational use, provisions for pets (leashed pets, removal of pet waste), locations of trash
receptacles, and on-site restoration and preservation of coastal sage scrub communities within the survey
area (i.e., in the vicinity of the impacts).
BIO-3 Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground disturbance activities, and
vegetation removal shall be completed outside the avian breeding season. The City of Diamond Bar shall
not perform any project construction or activities or remove or otherwise disturb vegetation on the project
site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31, and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts
to breeding/nesting birds and raptors. However, if avoidance of the avian breeding season is infeasible
and if project-related construction activities are initiated during the nesting season for coastal California
gnatcatcher (CAGN; Polioptila californica californica) and cactus wren (CACW; Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus) (February 15th through September 15th), a nesting bird clearance survey shall be
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 5-2 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
conducted within seven days prior to the start of construction within a 500-foot buffer of the project site.
The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable experience identifying CAGN
and CACW nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who has been approved by the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conduct a CAGN survey. If an active CAGN or CACW nest is found during
the survey, no project-related construction shall be allowed within 500 feet of an active CAGN nest or
300 feet of an active CACW nest, or within an alternative safe distance as determined by the qualified
biologist based on topography, visual shielding, nest progress, and the type of construction and
associated disturbance, until the active nest has been determined by the qualified biologist to have failed
or to have successfully gone to completion (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on
the nest). Results of the nesting bird clearance survey, shall be compiled in a memorandum and
submitted to the City and the USFWS for project records.
BIO-4 The City of Diamond Bar shall protect special-status wildlife resources during construction. A qualified
biologist shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey prior to any ground disturbance and/or
vegetation removal to search for special-status wildlife resources that may be present within the
construction area. The biologist shall be thoroughly familiar with the habitat requirements and life histories
of special-status species that could occur. The biologist shall submit survey results, including negative
results, to CDFW following the survey and prior to the start of construction.
If project-related activities are to be initiated during the general avian nesting season (January 1st through
August 31st), a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted within a 500-foot radius
of the project footprint by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of any vegetation
removal or ground-disturbing activities. The qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat at
appropriate nesting times within the project’s development footprint, and areas within a biologically-
defensible buffer zone surrounding the project’s development footprint. If no active nests are detected
during the clearance survey, project activities may begin, and no additional avoidance and minimization
measures would be required.
If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, surveys
shall be repeated before work can resume.
If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified and a “no-disturbance” buffer shall be
established around the active nest. Buffers shall be clearly delineated and marked around the active nest
site as directed by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be 300 feet around active passerine (perching
birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor nests, and 0.5-mile around active
California Endangered Species Act (CESA)-listed bird nests. The qualified biologist shall advise workers
of the sensitivity of the buffered areas, and workers shall not work, trespass, or engage in activities that
would disturb nesting birds near or inside the buffer. The qualified biologist shall periodically monitor any
active nests to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-disturbance” buffer disturb
the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the
nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance”
buffer may occur following an additional survey by the qualified biologist to search for any new nests in
the restricted area.
A qualified biological monitor approved by CDFW shall be present during vegetation removal or grubbing
activities. Any special-status wildlife that is found within the construction area shall be encouraged to
move elsewhere or shall be physically moved out of harm’s way by the biologist if necessary. The
biological monitor shall have the necessary state and/or federal permits or letters of permission from the
wildlife agencies to relocate wildlife as necessary.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 5-3 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
CULTURAL RESOURCES
CUL-1 If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in
the immediate area shall halt and a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology, shall be contacted by the
City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Director, or designated designee, immediately to evaluate the
find. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing
for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. If the discovery proves to be eligible for
the CRHR and cannot be avoided by project activities, additional work, such as data recovery excavation,
may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts to historical resources. In the event that an identified
cultural resource is of Native American origin, the qualified archaeologist shall consult with the City of
Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department staff to implement Native American consultation
procedures.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
GEO-1 If evidence of subsurface paleontological resources is found during construction, excavation and other
construction activity in that area shall cease and the construction contractor shall contact the City of
Diamond Bar Community Development Director. With direction from the Community Development
Director, a paleontologist certified by the County of Los Angeles shall evaluate the find prior to resuming
grading in the immediate vicinity of the find. If warranted, the paleontologist shall prepare and complete
a standard Paleontological Resources Mitigation Program for the salvage and curation of the identified
resources.
NOISE
NOI-1 Prior to the initiation of construction, the City of Diamond Bar Director of Public Works, or authorized
agents (such as the City’s Public Works Manager/Assistant City Engineer) acting within the scope of the
particular duties delegated to them, shall ensure that all project plans and specifications stipulate that:
All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and
maintained mufflers and other State-required noise attenuation devices.
A construction notice shall be mailed to residents within a 500-foot radius of the project and shall
indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a City of Diamond
Bar staff contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the
construction process and register complaints.
Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise sensitive uses to the maximum extent
feasible (e.g., residences etc.).
During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise
is directed away from sensitive noise receivers.
Construction equipment staging areas shall be located away from adjacent sensitive receptors.
Pursuant to City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.12.720, all construction activities
associated with the proposed project shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00
p.m. on weekdays and on Saturdays. Construction on Sundays and Federal holidays shall be
prohibited.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 5-4 Inventory of Mitigation Measures
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
TCR-1 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activity at the project site, the City of Diamond Bar
shall retain a Native American monitor. The Native American monitor shall be selected from a tribe that
has requested that a monitor be present, and in which the project site is within their ancestral region of
occupation. The Native American monitor shall only be present on-site during the construction phases
that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined as activities that may
include, but are not limited to, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching.
The Native American monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that shall provide descriptions of the
day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The
on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the project site are completed, or
when the Native American monitor has indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the
project site have little to no potential for impacting tribal cultural resources.
TCR-2 In the event tribal cultural resources are discovered during project construction, construction activities
shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 50 feet) until the find can
be assessed. All tribal cultural resources unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the Native
American monitor and a qualified archaeologist if one is present. If the resources are Native American in
origin, the affected tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the tribe deems appropriate, for
educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. Work may continue in other parts of the project site while
evaluation and any required recovery activities take place. 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.
TCR-3 In the event human remains are encountered during project construction, said remains shall require
proper treatment in accordance with Health and Safety Code 7050.5, which 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, the
coroner shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission and Public
Resources Code (PRC) 5097.98 shall be followed. PRC 5097.98 requires identification of the “most likely
descendent,” and that remains are investigated and that appropriate recommendations are made for
treatment of the remains.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 6-1 Consultant Recommendation
6.0 CONSULTANT RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information and environmental analysis contained in the Initial Study, we recommend that the City of
Diamond Bar prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project. We find that
the proposed project could have a significant effect on a number of environmental issues, but that mitigation measures
have been identified that reduce such impacts to a less than significant level. We recommend that the second category
be selected for the City’s determination (see Section 7.0, Lead Agency Determination).
October 2020
Date Alan Ashimine, Project Manager
Michael Baker International
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 6-2 Consultant Recommendation
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 7-1 Lead Agency Determination
7.0 LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed use COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
_
I find that although the proposal could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described in Section 4 have been added. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposal MAY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
_
I find that the proposal MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment,
but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a “potentially significant
impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated.” An ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
_
Signature:
Title: Community Development Director
Printed Name: Greg Gubman, AICP
Agency: City of Diamond Bar
Date:
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 7-2 Lead Agency Determination
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
PART II – RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-1 Responses to Comments
2.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS
During the public review period, correspondence was received on the IS/MND from a number of public agencies and
interested parties. The following is a list of the agencies and parties that submitted correspondence related to the
IS/MND during the public review period:
Comment
Letter No. Person, Firm, or Agency Letter Dated
1 Erinn Wilson-Olgin, Environmental Program Manager I
California Department of Fish and Wildlife November 13, 2020
2 C. Robin Smith
Sierra Club November 16, 2020
3 Robert A. Hamilton, President
Hamilton Biological, Inc. November 16, 2020
Although the CEQA Guidelines do not require a Lead Agency to prepare written responses to comments received (see
CEQA Guidelines Section 15088), the City has elected to prepare the following written responses with the intent of
conducting a comprehensive and meaningful evaluation of the proposed project. The number designations in the
responses below are correlated to the bracketed and identified portions of each comment letter.
Responses may include text changes to clarify/amplify or correct information in the Draft IS/MND, as requested by the
Lead Agency or due to environmental points raised in the comments. A response to a comment requiring revisions to
the Draft IS/MND presents the relevant Draft IS/MND text in a box, with new text indicated by underlining and deleted
text indicated by strike through, as shown in the following example.
Deleted text Added text
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-2 Responses to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director
South Coast Region
3883 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123
(858) 467-4201
www.wildlife.ca.gov
November 13, 2020
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
RWright@DiamondBarCA.gov
Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement
Project, City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County
Dear Mr. Wright:
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has reviewed the above-referenced
Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project (Project).
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and recommendations regarding those
activities involved in the Project that may affect California fish and wildlife. Likewise, we
appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding those aspects of the Project that
CDFW, by law, may be required to carry out or approve through the exercise of its own
regulatory authority under the Fish and Game Code.
CDFW’s Role
CDFW is California’s Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources and holds those resources
in trust by statute for all the people of the State [Fish & Game Code, §§ 711.7, subdivision (a) &
1802; Public Resources Code, § 21070; California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, § 15386, subdivision (a)]. CDFW, in its trustee capacity, has jurisdiction over the
conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants, and habitat necessary
for biologically sustainable populations of those species (Id., § 1802). Similarly, for purposes of
CEQA, CDFW is charged by law to provide, as available, biological expertise during public
agency environmental review efforts, focusing specifically on projects and related activities that
have the potential to adversely affect state fish and wildlife resources.
CDFW is also submitting comments as a Responsible Agency under CEQA (Public Resources
Code, § 21069; CEQA Guidelines, § 15381). CDFW expects that it may need to exercise
regulatory authority as provided by the Fish and Game Code, including lake and streambed
alteration regulatory authority (Fish & Game Code, § 1600 et seq.). Likewise, to the extent
implementation of the Project as proposed may result in “take”, as defined by State law, of any
species protected under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) (Fish & Game Code, §
2050 et seq.), or state-listed rare plant pursuant to the Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA; Fish
& Game Code, §1900 et seq.), CDFW recommends the Project proponent obtain appropriate
authorization under the Fish and Game Code.
COMMENT LETTER 1
1-1
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 2 of 19
Project Description and Summary
Objective: The City of Diamond Bar’s Parks and Recreational Department (City) proposes
several trail improvement features along the approximately 1.29-mile Canyon Loop Trail within
the Summitridge Park Trail system in Diamond Bar. Over the course of four months, the
following Project components are planned:
x The existing trail along most of the South Canyon Loop would be widened to
approximately five feet and remain a natural, unpaved surface. The southern portion of
the Canyon Loop trail is roughly 1,942 feet. This Project proposes widening that
segment by 1-2 feet from its current width;
x Gabion retaining walls would be provided in five areas along the South Canyon Loop to
stabilize soils and reduce erosion;
x Stairs with handrails and cobblestone swales would be provided in six areas along the
South Canyon Loop to facilitate ease of access and safety and improve drainage;
x Six drainage crossings are proposed along the South Canyon Loop;
x Two shade structures with benches and trash receptacles would be provided along the
South Canyon Loop and one shade structure with benches and trash receptacles would
be provided along the North Canyon Loop at identified view points;
x Lodge pole fences with “Trail Closed” signs mounted on the fences would be installed in
five areas along the South Canyon Loop to restrict trail users from entering informal trail
areas off the existing Canyon Loop trail;
x A perforated bench is proposed on the west end of the South Canyon Loop;
x A wayfinding sign would be installed on the eastern and western end of the Canyon
Loop Trail;
x Interpretive signage in various locations that promote awareness of the presence of
sensitive biological habitat and species (including the coastal California gnatcatcher and
cactus wren), and indicate that the trail was implemented in a manner to minimize
impacts to biological resources; and
x Long-term, routine maintenance of the project components above.
Location: The Project site is the existing Canyon Loop Trail, which is part of the Summitridge
Park Trail System. Summitridge Park is bounded by residential developments to the east and
west, Grand Ave. to the south, and open space to the north. It is situated within the central
portion of the City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs)
associated with the Project are: 8701-059-904.
Comments and Recommendations
CDFW offers the comments and recommendations below to assist the City in adequately
identifying, avoiding and/or mitigating the Project’s significant, or potentially significant, direct
and indirect impacts on fish and wildlife (biological) resources.
1-1
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 3 of 19
Project Description and Related Impact Shortcoming
Comment #1: Impacts from increased trail usage
Issue: The Project is being proposed as a result of increased hiking traffic on the Summitridge
Trail System. With improved facilities and a widened trail, capacity is expected to increase.
Specific Impacts: Project activities, such as trail widening and the installation of benches or
shade structures, are likely to accommodate (and subsequently lead to) increased hiker
frequency and duration on the Canyon Loop Trail.
Why impacts would occur: Elevated hiker usage is likely to create direct and indirect impacts
to local wildlife species through the loss of potential habitat. An increase in the number of hikers
has potential to impact sensitive wildlife species and their habitat through a variety of ways:
x increased numbers of people and dogs using the trail system
x loss of habitat due to erosion from footpaths
x increased noise levels
x increased trash or pet waste
x introduction of unnatural food sources via trash and trash receptacles
x introduction of invasive species from other sites
The area of influence that the trail has upon the surrounding habitat is being increased.
Evidence impacts would be significant: Outdoor recreation has the potential to disturb
wildlife, resulting in energetic costs, impacts to animals’ behavior and fitness, and avoidance of
otherwise suitable habitat. Studies have shown that outdoor recreation is the second leading
cause of the decline of federally threatened and endangered species on public lands (Losos et
al. 1995), and fourth leading cause on all lands (Czech et al. 2000). As a result, natural resource
managers are becoming increasingly concerned about impacts of recreation on wildlife (Knight
and Gutzwiller 1995).
Recreational trails can fragment the habitat that they pass through. Clearing additional
vegetation to widen a thin (0.5-2 m) trail may have further negative impacts on wildlife (Holmes
2005). These negative impacts generally result from the expansion of the area of influence that
a trail has on its surrounding open space. Trails can create artificial boundaries or areas of
avoidance for wildlife as they bring outsiders into areas that would otherwise be unvisited. Along
with these perceived outsiders, in this case hikers, comes a new set of perceived threats to local
wildlife in the form of visual, auditory, and olfactory cues that remain along the trail well after
recreational usage.
If habitat is available, wildlife may move to areas farther from trails, beyond the areas of
influence, to avoid recreation-related disturbance (Reed et al. 2019). However, the greater the
proportion of a protected area occupied by trails, the fewer options there are for wildlife to move
outside of those areas of influence. There are simply fewer opportunities for wildlife to retreat
from nearby recreational users in an already shrinking habitat.
1-2
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 4 of 19
The higher the level of recreation in protected areas, the greater the potential there is for the
effects of trails and their use to extend beyond habitat loss and individual-level effects
(behavioral and physiological) on wildlife. This may transition into population- and community-
level effects, including depletion of floral and faunal populations, alteration of the trophic
community structures, and reduction of biodiversity (CDFW 2015).
With increased recreational usage of trails through open spaces, comes increased exposure of
wildlife to humans. Habituated urban wildlife is less likely to avoid contact with humans, which
may increase the probability of human-wildlife conflicts and of attraction to anthropogenic food
sources; both are considered problematic in many urban areas (Whittaker and Knight 1998;
George and Crooks 2006). Wildlife habituation to humans may also increase wildlife aggression
toward humans, or render wildlife more vulnerable to predators, poaching, or roadkill (Whitaker
and Knight 1998; George and Crooks 2006; Marzano and Dandy 2012). Furthermore,
habituation of wildlife may impact their reproductive success. Habituation of adult individuals
may also be associated with negative consequences for their offspring as habituation of adults
does not necessarily lead to immediate habituation of juveniles (Reilly et al. 2017).
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1: CDFW recommends setting aside conserved acreage of sensitive
vegetation communities in a manner that is isolated and free from influence by recreational
usage. These conserved areas should be oriented to provide refugia for species that may be
flushed or relocated by the presence of trails.
For proposed preservation and/or restoration, the environmental document should include
measures to protect the targeted habitat values in perpetuity from direct and indirect negative
impacts. The objective should be to offset the Project-induced qualitative and quantitative losses
of wildlife habitat values. Issues that should be addressed include, but are not limited to,
restrictions on access, proposed land dedications, monitoring and management programs,
control of illegal dumping, water pollution, and increased human intrusion. An appropriate non-
wasting endowment should be provided for the long-term monitoring and management of
mitigation lands. CDFW recommends that mitigation occur at a state-approved bank or via an
entity that has been approved to hold and manage mitigation lands pursuant to Assembly Bill
1094 (2012), which amended Government Code sections 65965-65968. Under Government
Code section 65967(c), the lead agency must exercise due diligence in reviewing the
qualifications of a governmental entity, special district, or nonprofit organization to effectively
manage and steward land, water, or natural resources on mitigation lands it approves.
Mitigation Measure #2: Educational materials and signage should be made available to trail
users to keep aware of the impacts that human disturbance brings to open spaces. Hikers
should be made aware of the impacts that they have on surrounding habitat (such as noise or
smells), particularly during breeding seasons.
Mitigation Measure #3: CDFW recommends the City install appropriate public information
signage at trailheads to: 1) educate and inform the public about wildlife present in the area; 2)
advise on proper avoidance measures to reduce human-wildlife conflicts; 3) advise on proper
use of open space trails in a manner respectful to wildlife; and, 4) provide local contact
information to report injured or dead wildlife. Signage should be written in the language(s)
understandable to all those likely to recreate and use the trails. Signage should not be made of
1-2
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 5 of 19
materials harmful to wildlife such as spikes or glass. The City should provide a long-term
maintenance plan to repair and replace the signs.
Mitigation Measure #4: Restrictions on types of activities allowed in some areas, such as
prohibiting dogs or restricting use to trails near active breeding habitat, will aid in minimizing
disturbance. Pets should be kept on leash and on trails at all times. Hikers should be
encouraged to clean up after their dogs and discourage animal waste as it tends to lead to
wildlife avoidance.
Mitigation Measure #5: Trash receptacles should be placed only at trailheads to avoid creating
an unnatural food source that may attract nuisance wildlife and to minimize waste in core habitat
areas.
Recommendation #1: Understanding wildlife responses to recreation and the area of influence
of human activities may help managers judge whether wildlife populations are experiencing
stress due to interactions with humans, and may aid in tailoring recreation plans to minimize
long-term effects to wildlife from disturbance. In an environmental document, CDFW
recommends including an analysis of recreational usage of the Summitridge trail system in
which current levels of traffic (hiker, biker, and dog) is compared to the expected increase in
traffic as a result of trail improvements.
Recommendation #2: People are often not aware of how their activities affect wildlife, even if
they see animals respond to their actions (Stalmaster and Kaiser 1998). By emphasizing how
human activities affect wildlife, people can associate their actions with either benefitting or
harming animal populations and begin to develop a conservation ethic (Miller et al. 2001). With
improved educational materials and outreach efforts, recreational users are more likely to
support restrictions if they understand how wildlife will benefit.
Comment #2: Impacts to Sensitive Vegetation Communities
Issue: Figure 5: Vegetation Communities and Other Land Uses from the MND is a map of the
vegetation communities found on the Project site. It shows that the Canyon Loop Trail runs
through the following Sensitive Natural Communities, including their respective rarity rankings
according to California Native Plant Society (CNPS):
x Coast Live Oak Woodland and Forest (Quercus agrifolia) – S4
x California sagebrush – black sagebrush scrub (Artemisia californica – Salvia
mellifera) – S3
x Coast prickly pear scrub (Opuntia littoralis) – S3
x Black sage scrub (Salvia mellifera) – S4
x Scrub oak chapparal (Quercus berberidifolia) – S4
Specific impacts: The Project proposes work along the Canyon Loop Trail through Sensitive
Natural Communities but does not include the potential acreage of impacts resulting from
Project activities. The expansion of the southern portion of the Canyon Loop Trail by 1-2 feet in
width from currently condition is estimated to be about 0.4 miles long. With a lack of specificity
regarding acres impacted, potential loss of a sensitive vegetation community not previously
known or identified in the Project site may occur.
1-2
Cont.
1-3
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 6 of 19
Why impacts would occur: Project implementation includes grading, vegetation clearing, trail
construction, trail maintenance, and other activities. This may result in permanent loss and
potentially decline or local extirpation of a sensitive plant community.
Evidence impacts would be significant: CDFW considers plant communities, alliances, and
associations with a statewide ranking of S1, S2, S3 and S4 as sensitive and declining at the
local and regional level (Sawyer et al. 2008). An S3 ranking indicates there are 21 to 80
occurrences of this community in existence in California, S2 has 6 to 20 occurrences, and S1
has less than 6 occurrences. Impacts to sensitive vegetation communities should be considered
significant under CEQA unless they are clearly mitigated below a level of significance.
Inadequate avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures for impacts to sensitive plant
species will result in the Project continuing to have a substantial adverse direct, indirect, and
cumulative 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 CDFW or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1: CDFW recommends mapping vegetation communities. Surveys should
be conducted by a qualified botanist with appropriate experience and knowledge of southern
California flora. Surveys should follow CDFW's Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts
to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018).
Surveys should be completed prior to implementing Project related ground disturbing activities.
Mitigation Measure #2: If the Project cannot feasibly avoid impacts to sensitive vegetation
communities, either during Project activities or over the life of the Project, the City should
mitigate for impacts at no less than 5:1 for impacts to S3 ranked communities and 7:1 for S2
communities.
Recommendation #1: In 2007, the State Legislature required CDFW to develop and maintain a
vegetation mapping standard for the state (Fish & G. Code, § 1940). This standard complies
with the National Vegetation Classification System, which utilizes alliance and association-
based classification of unique vegetation stands. CDFW utilizes vegetation descriptions found in
the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) (CNPS 2020; Sawyer et al. 2008). To determine the
rarity ranking of vegetation communities on the Project site, the MCV alliance/association
community names should be provided as CDFW only tracks rare natural communities using this
classification system. This would allow CDFW to appropriately comment on potential impacts to
sensitive plants and vegetation communities.
Comment #3: Impacts to Nesting Birds
Issue: Page 4.4-5 of the MND summarizes the results of the focused bird surveys conducted for
the Project. The results indicate that this particular open space is actively used, high quality
habitat for multiple listed bird species. Within the study area are observations of coastal
California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica, CAGN) and coastal cactus wren
(Campylorhynchus brunneicappilus sandiegensis), both California Species of Special Concern
(SSC). Page 4.4-5 states, “[b]ased on the results of the Focused Bird Survey Report, at least
five CAGN and five cactus wren territories were found to be present within the 500-foot survey
1-3
Cont.
1-4
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 7 of 19
area. Four CAGN pairs and all five cactus wren pairs successfully fledged young in 2020 as
evidenced by firsthand observations during the surveys.”
Specific impact: Project construction and related activities may result in increased nesting
mortality due to nest abandonment or decreased feeding frequency. The Project may result in
temporal or permanent loss of bird nesting habitat.
Why impacts would occur: Construction activities, continued usage of trails, and routine
maintenance during the breeding season for nesting birds could result in the loss of fertile eggs
or nestlings or otherwise lead to nest abandonment. Impacts could result from noise
disturbances, increased human activity, dust, ground disturbing activities (e.g., staging, access,
excavation, and grading), and vibrations caused by heavy equipment. The Project as proposed
would clear vegetation that could provide bird nesting habitat (e.g., ground cover and shrubs).
The temporal or permanent loss of vegetation may substantially impact birds that could return to
the Project site year after year (Figueira et al. 2020; Haas 1998). Site fidelity exhibited across
the avian taxa reflects the benefits associated with previous knowledge of a particular location,
likely improving territory acquisition, foraging efficiency, potential breeding partners, and
predator avoidance (Figueira et al. 2020).
Evidence impacts would be significant: Nests of all birds and raptors are protected under
State laws and regulations, including Fish and Game Code, sections 3503 and 3503.5. Take or
possession of migratory nongame birds designated in the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of
1918 (Code of Federal Regulations, Title 50, § 10.13) is prohibited under Fish and Game Code
section 3513. The loss of occupied habitat or reductions in the number of sensitive and special
status bird species, either directly or indirectly through nest abandonment or reproductive
suppression, would constitute a significant impact absent appropriate mitigation.
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1: CDFW recommends modifying Mitigation Measure BIO-3 in the MND
to fully avoid impacts to nesting birds by conditioning the environmental document to provide the
following language: “Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground
disturbance activities, and vegetation removal should be completed outside the avian breeding
season. The City should not perform any Project construction or activities or remove or
otherwise disturb vegetation on the project site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to
August 31, and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts to breeding/nesting birds and raptors.”
Mitigation Measure #2: If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified biologist should complete a
survey for nesting bird activity within a 500-foot radius of the Project footprint. Surveys should
begin no more than 14 days prior to the start of Project ground disturbing activities and should
be repeated for the duration of Project activities that occur during the bird nesting season.
Nesting bird surveys should be conducted at appropriate nesting times and concentrate on
potential roosting or perch sites. If Project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7
days during the breeding season, surveys should be repeated before work can resume.
Mitigation Measure #3: If nesting birds or raptors are identified, a qualified biologist should
determine the nesting status and set up species-appropriate no-work buffers for construction
activities. CDFW recommends the following minimum no-disturbance buffers be implemented:
300 feet around active passerine (perching birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active
1-4
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 8 of 19
non-listed raptor nests and 0.5 mile around active CESA-listed bird nests. No Project activities
should be allowed inside these buffers until the qualified biologist has determined that the birds
have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. These buffers
should be increased if needed to protect the nesting birds. Buffers should be clearly delineated
and marked around the active nest site as directed by the qualified biologist. Temporary fencing
and signage should be maintained for the duration of the Project as determined by the qualified
biologist. A qualified biologist should advise workers of the sensitivity of the buffered areas.
Workers should be advised not to work, trespass, or engage in activities that would disturb
nesting birds near or inside the buffer.
Comment #4: Impacts to Reptiles
Issue: According to page 4.4-3 of the MND, coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis tigris stejnegeri) and
red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber), both SSC, were found on the Project site during
habitat assessments and focused surveys. These observations are supported by a review of
California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which shows a cluster of historic records of
these species throughout the southern half of the Project site.
Specific impact: Project ground disturbing activities such as grading and grubbing may result
in habitat destruction, causing the death or injury of adults, juveniles, eggs, or hatchlings. In
addition, the Project may remove habitat by eliminating vegetation that may support foraging
and breeding habitat.
Why impact would occur: Project implementation includes grading, vegetation clearing, and
other activities that may result in direct mortality, population declines, or local extirpation of
Special Status reptile species.
Evidence impact would be significant: CEQA provides protection not only for state and
federally listed species, but for any species including but not limited to SSC which can be shown
to meet the criteria for State listing. These SSC meet the CEQA definition of rare, threatened or
endangered species (CEQA Guidelines, § 15065). Take of SSC could require a mandatory
finding of significance by the Lead Agency, (CEQA Guidelines, § 15065).
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1: Due to potentially suitable habitat within the Project site, prior to
vegetation removal and/or grading, qualified biologists familiar with the reptile species behavior
and life history should conduct specialized surveys to determine the presence/absence of SSC.
Surveys should be conducted during active season when the reptiles are most likely to be
detected. Survey results, including negative findings, should be submitted to CDFW prior to
initiation of Project activities.
Mitigation Measure #2: To further avoid direct mortality, CDFW recommends that a qualified
biological monitor approved by CDFW be on-site during ground and habitat disturbing activities
to move out of harm’s way special status species that would be injured or killed by grubbing or
Project-related grading activities. It should be noted that the temporary relocation of on-site
wildlife does not constitute effective mitigation for the purposes of offsetting Project impacts
associated with habitat loss. If the Project requires species to be removed, disturbed, or
1-4
Cont.
1-5
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 9 of 19
otherwise handled, we recommend that the Project clearly identify that the designated entity
should obtain all appropriate state and federal permits.
Comment #5: Impacts to Streams
Issue: Page 4.4-7 of the MND acknowledges the ephemeral nature of the on-site drainage,
likely carrying flows during rain events, and recognizes that the streambed is “jurisdictional
streambed under CDFW”. The trail system crosses this drainage a number of times and six
drainage crossings are proposed along the South Canyon Loop to improve drainage and reduce
erosion. Project related activities have the potential to impact riparian resources and are likely
subject to notification for a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSA).
Specific impacts: The Project may result in the loss of streams and associated watershed
function and biological diversity. Grading and construction activities will likely alter the
topography, and thus the hydrology, of the Project site.
Why impacts would occur: Ground disturbing activities from grading and filling, water
diversions and dewatering would physically remove or otherwise alter existing streams or their
function and associated riparian habitat on the Project site. Downstream streams and
associated biological resources beyond the Project development footprint may also be impacted
by Project related releases of sediment and altered watershed effects resulting from Project
activities.
Evidence impacts would be significant: The Project may substantially adversely affect the
existing stream pattern of the Project site through the alteration or diversion of a stream, which
absent specific mitigation, could result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site of the
Project.
Recommended Potentially Feasible Mitigation Measure(s):
Mitigation Measure #1: The Project may result in the alteration of streams. For any such
activities, the Project applicant (or “entity”) must provide written notification to CDFW pursuant
to section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code. Based on this notification and other
information, CDFW determines whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSA) with
the applicant is required prior to conducting the proposed activities. A notification package for a
LSA may be obtained by accessing CDFW’s web site at www.wildlife.ca.gov/habcon/1600.
CDFW’s issuance of an LSA for a project that is subject to CEQA will require CEQA compliance
actions by CDFW as a Responsible Agency. As a Responsible Agency, CDFW may consider
the CEQA document of the Lead Agency for the Project. However, the DEIR does not meet
CDFW’s standard at this time. To minimize additional requirements by CDFW pursuant to
section 1600 et seq. and/or under CEQA, the CEQA document should fully identify the potential
impacts to the stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation,
monitoring and reporting commitments for issuance of the LSA.
Mitigation Measure #2: Any LSA permit issued for the Project by CDFW may include additional
measures protective of streambeds on and downstream of the Project. The LSA may include
further erosion and pollution control measures. To compensate for any on-site and off-site
impacts to riparian resources, additional mitigation conditioned in any LSA may include the
1-5
Cont.
1-6
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 10 of 19
following: avoidance of resources, on-site or off-site creation, enhancement or restoration,
and/or protection and management of mitigation lands in perpetuity.
Filing Fees
The Project, as proposed, would have an impact on fish and/or wildlife, and assessment of filing
fees is necessary. Fees are payable upon filing of the Notice of Determination by the Lead
Agency and serve to help defray the cost of environmental review by CDFW. Payment of the fee
is required in order for the underlying Project approval to be operative, vested, and final. (Cal.
Code Regs, tit. 14, § 753.5; Fish & Game Code, § 711.4; Pub. Resources Code, § 21089).
Conclusion
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Project to assist the City of Diamond Bar in
adequately analyzing and minimizing/mitigating impacts to biological resources. CDFW requests
an opportunity to review and comment on any response that the City has to our comments and
to receive notification of any forthcoming hearing date(s) for the Project [CEQA Guidelines; §
15073(e)]. If you have any questions or comments regarding this letter, please contact Andrew
Valand, Environmental Scientist, at Andrew.Valand@wildlife.ca.gov or (562) 342-2142.
Sincerely,
Erinn Wilson-Olgin
Environmental Program Manager I
Ec: CDFW
Victoria Tang, Los Alamitos – Victoria.Tang@wildlife.ca.gov
Andrew Valand, Los Alamitos – Andrew.Valand@wildlife.ca.gov
Felicia Silva, Los Alamitos – Felicia.Silva@wildlife.ca.gov
Ruby Kwan-Davis, Los Alamitos – Ruby.Kwan-Davis@wildlife.ca.gov
Frederic Rieman, Los Alamitos – Frederic.Rieman@wildlife.ca.gov
Susan Howell, San Diego – Susan.Howell@wildlife.ca.gov
CEQA Program Coordinator, Sacramento – CEQAcommentletters@wildlife.ca.gov
State Clearinghouse – State.Clearinghouse@opr.ca.gov
1-6
Cont.
1-7
1-8
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 11 of 19
References:
California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW]. 2015. California State Wildlife Action Plan,
2015 Update: A Conservation Legacy for Californians. Edited by Armand G. Gonzales and
Junko Hoshi, PhD. Prepared with assistance from Ascent Environmental, Inc.,
Sacramento, CA.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife [CDFW]. March 20,2018. Protocols for Surveying and
Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities
(see https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Plants).
Czech, B., P. R. Krausman, and P. K. Devers. 2000. Economic associations among causes of
species endangerment in the United States. BioScience 50:593–601.
Dyett & Bhatia. September 2019. Diamond Bar Environmental Impact Report 2040. Public
Review Draft. September 2019.
Figueira L. et al. 2020. Effects of breeding and molt activity on songbird site fidelity, The
Auk, https://doi.org/10.1093/auk/ukaa053.
George, S.L., and K. R. Crooks. 2006. Recreation and large mammal activity in an urban nature
reserve. Biological Conservation 133.1 (2006):107–117.
Haas, C. 1998. Effects of Prior Nesting Success on Site Fidelity and Breeding Dispersal: An
Experimental Approach, The Auk, Volume 115, Issue 4, 1 October 1998, Pages 929–936.
Hamilton, Robert. February 2019. Biological Resources Report for Open Space & Conservation
Element Diamond Bar General Plan Update.
Holmes, Aaron L.; Geupel, Geoffrey R. 2005. Effects of trail width on the densities of four
species of breeding birds in chaparral. In: Ralph, C. John; Rich, Terrell D., editors 2005.
Bird Conservation Implementation and Integration in the Americas: Proceedings of the
Third International Partners in Flight Conference. 2002 March 20-24; Asilomar, California,
Volume 1 Gen. Tech. Rep. PSW-GTR-191. Albany, CA: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest
Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station: p. 610-612.
Knight, R. L., and K. J. Gutzwiller, editors. 1995. Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through
management and research. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
Losos, E., J. Hayes, A. Phillips, D. Wilcove, and C. Alkire. 1995. Taxpayer-subsidized resource
extraction harms species. BioScience 45:446–455.
Lucas, E. 2020. A review of trail-related fragmentation, unauthorized trails, and other aspects of
recreation ecology in protected areas. California Fish and Wildlife, Recreation Special
Issue; 95-125.
Marzano, M., and N. Dandy. 2012. Recreationist behaviour in forests and the disturbance to
wildlife. Biodiversity and Conservation 21: 2967–2986.
1-9
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
November 13, 2020
Page 12 of 19
Miller, S. G., R. L. Knight, and C. K. Miller. 1998. Influence of recreational trails on breeding bird
communities. Ecological Applications 8(1): 162-169.
National Research Council. 1995. Science and the Endangered Species Act. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/4978
Reed, S. E., C. L. Larson, and K. R. Crooks. 2019. Effects of human use of NCCP Reserves on
reptile and mammal species in San Diego. Wildlife Conservation Society Agreement No /
LAG #: P1582100.
Reilly, M. L., M. W. Tobler, D. L. Sonderegger, and P. Beier. 2017. Spatial and temporal
response of wildlife to recreational activities in the San Francisco Bay ecoregion. Biological
Conservation 207:117–126.
Sawyer, J.O., Keeler Wolf, T., and Evens J.M. 2008. A manual of California Vegetation, 2nd ed.
ISBN 978 0 943460 49 9.
Stalmaster, M. V., and J. L. Kaiser. 1998. Effects of recreational activity on wintering bald
eagles. Wildlife Monographs 137.
Taylor, A. R., and R. L. Knight. 2003. Wildlife responses to recreation and associated visitor
perceptions. Ecological Applications 13(4): 951-963.
Whittaker, D., and R. L. Knight. 1998. Understanding wildlife responses to humans. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 26:312–317.
1-9
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
State of California – Natural Resources Agency GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTON H. BONHAM, Director South Coast Region 3883 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 (858) 467-4201 www.wildlife.ca.gov CDFW recommends the following language to be incorporated into a future environmental document for the Project. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure Timing Responsible Party MM-BIO-1 – Sensitive Vegetation Avoidance The City shall set aside conserved acreage of sensitive vegetation communities in a manner that is isolated and free from influence by recreational usage. These conserved areas shall be oriented to provide refugia for species that may be flushed or relocated by the presence of trails. For proposed preservation and/or restoration, the final environmental document shall include measures to protect the targeted habitat values in perpetuity from direct and indirect negative impacts. The objective shall be to offset the Project-induced qualitative and quantitative losses of wildlife habitat values. Issues that shall be addressed include, but are not limited to, restrictions on access, proposed land dedications, monitoring and management programs, control of illegal dumping, water pollution, and increased human intrusion. An appropriate non-wasting endowment shall be provided for the long-term monitoring and management of mitigation lands. Off-site mitigation shall occur at a state-approved bank or via an entity that has been approved to hold and manage mitigation lands pursuant to Assembly Bill 1094 (2012), which amended Government Code sections 65965-65968. Under Government Code section 65967(c), the lead agency must exercise due diligence in reviewing the qualifications of a governmental entity, special district, or nonprofit organization to effectively manage and steward land, water, or natural resources on mitigation lands it approves. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar
1-102.3.aPacket Pg. 180Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 14 of 19 MM-BIO-2 – Educational Materials Educational materials and signage shall be made available to trail users to keep aware of the impacts that human disturbance brings to open spaces. Hikers shall be made aware of their impacts to surrounding habitat (such as noise or smells), particularly during breeding seasons. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-3 – Informational Signage The City shall install appropriate public information signage at trailheads to: 1) educate and inform the public about wildlife present in the area; 2) advise on proper avoidance measures to reduce human-wildlife conflicts; 3) advise on proper use of open space trails in a manner respectful to wildlife; and, 4) provide local contact information to report injured or dead wildlife. Signage shall be written in the language(s) understandable to all those likely to recreate and use the trails. Signage shall not be made of materials harmful to wildlife such as spikes or glass. The City shall provide a long-term maintenance plan to repair and replace the signs. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-4 – Pet Policy Pets shall be kept on leash and on trails at all times. Hikers shall be encouraged to clean up after their dogs and discourage animal waste as it tends to lead to wildlife avoidance. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-5 – Placement of Trash Receptacles Trash receptacles shall be placed only at trailheads to avoid creating an unnatural food source that may attract nuisance wildlife and to minimize waste in core habitat areas. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-6 – Sensitive Vegetation Surveys Vegetation surveys shall be conducted by a qualified botanist with appropriate experience and knowledge of southern California flora. Surveys shall follow CDFW's Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities (CDFW 2018). Surveys shall be completed prior to implementing Project related ground disturbing activities. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 181Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 15 of 19 MM-BIO-7 – Sensitive Vegetation Replacement If the Project cannot feasibly avoid impacts to sensitive vegetation communities, either during Project activities or over the life of the Project, the City shall mitigate for impacts at no less than 5:1 for impacts to S3 ranked communities and 7:1 for S2 communities. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-8 – Nesting Bird Season The City shall modify Mitigation Measure BIO-3 in the MND to fully avoid impacts to nesting birds by conditioning the environmental document to provide the following language: “Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground disturbance activities, and vegetation removal shall be completed outside the avian breeding season. The City shall not perform any Project construction or activities or remove or otherwise disturb vegetation on the project site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31, and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts to breeding/nesting birds and raptors.” Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-9 – Nesting Bird Surveys If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified biologist shall complete a survey for nesting bird activity within a 500-foot radius of the Project footprint. Surveys shall begin no more than 14 days prior to the start of Project ground disturbing activities and shall be repeated for the duration of Project activities that occur during the bird nesting season. Nesting bird surveys shall be conducted at appropriate nesting times and concentrate on potential roosting or perch sites. If Project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, surveys shall be repeated before work can resume. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 182Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 16 of 19 MM-BIO-10 – Nesting Bird Avoidance Buffers If nesting birds or raptors are identified, a qualified biologist shall determine the nesting status and set up species-appropriate no-work buffers. The following minimum no-disturbance buffers shall be implemented: 300 feet around active passerine (perching birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor nests and 0.5 mile around active CESA-listed bird nests. No Project activities shall be allowed inside these buffers until the qualified biologist has determined that the birds have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival. These buffers shall be increased if needed to protect the nesting birds. Buffers shall be clearly delineated and marked around the active nest site as directed by the qualified biologist. Temporary fencing and signage shall be maintained for the duration of the Project as determined by the qualified biologist. A qualified biologist shall advise workers of the sensitivity of the buffered areas. Workers shall be advised not to work, trespass, or engage in activities that would disturb nesting birds near or inside the buffer. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-11 – Reptile Surveys Prior to vegetation removal and/or grading, qualified biologists familiar with the reptile species behavior and life history shall conduct specialized surveys to determine the presence/absence of Species of Special Concern (SSC). Surveys shall be conducted during active season when the reptiles are most likely to be detected. Survey results, including negative findings, shall be submitted to CDFW prior to initiation of Project activities. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 183Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 17 of 19 MM-BIO-12 – Moving Out of Harm’s Way A qualified biological monitor, approved by CDFW, shall be on-site during ground and habitat disturbing activities to move out of harm’s way special status species that would be injured or killed by grubbing or Project-related grading activities. It shall be noted that the temporary relocation of on-site wildlife does not constitute effective mitigation for the purposes of offsetting Project impacts associated with habitat loss. If the Project requires species to be removed, disturbed, or otherwise handled, the Project shall clearly identify that the designated entity shall obtain all appropriate state and federal permits. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar MM-BIO-13 – Notification for Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement Project applicant (or “entity”) must provide written notification to CDFW pursuant to section 1600 et seq. of the Fish and Game Code. Based on this notification and other information, CDFW determines whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement (LSA) with the applicant is required prior to conducting the proposed activities. A notification package for a LSA may be obtained by accessing CDFW’s web site at www.wildlife.ca.gov/habcon/1600. CDFW’s issuance of an LSA for a project that is subject to CEQA will require CEQA compliance actions by CDFW as a Responsible Agency. As a Responsible Agency, CDFW may consider the CEQA document of the Lead Agency for the Project. However, the DEIR does not meet CDFW’s standard at this time. To minimize additional requirements by CDFW pursuant to section 1600 et seq. and/or under CEQA, the CEQA document shall fully identify the potential impacts to the stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, monitoring and reporting commitments for issuance of the LSA. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 184Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 18 of 19 MM-BIO-14 – Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement Components Any LSA permit issued for the Project by CDFW may include additional measures protective of streambeds on and downstream of the Project. The LSA may include further erosion and pollution control measures. To compensate for any on-site and off-site impacts to riparian resources, additional mitigation conditioned in any LSA may include the following: avoidance of resources, on-site or off-site creation, enhancement or restoration, and/or protection and management of mitigation lands in perpetuity. Prior to construction City of Diamond Bar Recommendations REC-BIO-1 – Analysis of Recreational Usage Understanding wildlife responses to recreation and the area of influence of human activities may help managers judge whether wildlife populations are experiencing stress due to interactions with humans, and may aid in tailoring recreation plans to minimize long-term effects to wildlife from disturbance. In a subsequent environmental document, CDFW recommends including an analysis of recreational usage of the Summitridge trail system in which current levels of traffic (hiker, biker, and dog) is compared to the expected increase in traffic as a result of trail improvements. REC-BIO-2 – Education & Outreach People are often not aware of how their activities affect wildlife, even if they see animals respond to their actions (Stalmaster and Kaiser 1998). By emphasizing how human activities affect wildlife, people can associate their actions with either benefitting or harming animal populations and begin to develop a conservation ethic (Miller et al. 2001). With improved educational materials and outreach efforts, recreational users are more likely to support restrictions if they understand how wildlife will benefit. REC-BIO-3 – National Vegetation Classification System In 2007, the State Legislature required CDFW to develop and maintain a vegetation mapping standard for the state (Fish & G. Code, § 1940). This standard complies with the National Vegetation Classification System, which utilizes alliance and association-based classification of unique vegetation stands.
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 185Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Mr. Ryan Wright City of Diamond Bar November 13, 2020 Page 19 of 19 CDFW utilizes vegetation descriptions found in the Manual of California Vegetation (MCV) (CNPS 2020; Sawyer et al. 2008). To determine the rarity ranking of vegetation communities on the Project site, the MCV alliance/association community names shall be provided as CDFW only tracks rare natural communities using this classification system. This would allow CDFW to appropriately comment on potential impacts to sensitive plants and vegetation communities.
1-10Cont.2.3.aPacket Pg. 186Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-22 Responses to Comments
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 1
Erinn Wilson-Olgin, Environmental Program Manager I
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
November 13, 2020
1-1 This comment provides introductory language regarding the role of the California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW) and a summary of the project description. This comment does not pertain to the adequacy
of the environmental analysis within the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND), and no further
response is required.
1-2 This comment provides background information on the adverse effects that human recreation can have on
wildlife, and provides five “recommended potentially feasible mitigation measures” to minimize wildlife risk
from the presumed increase in recreation that would result from the trail widening.
CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #1 requests that the City of Diamond Bar set aside conserved
acreage of sensitive vegetation communities that will mitigate for the loss of on-site habitat. The lands
proposed for preservation and/or restoration should be shielded in perpetuity from direct and indirect effects
of human recreation, and CDFW recommends that such mitigation occur at a state-approved bank or other
approved entity that can manage mitigation lands. The City of Diamond Bar agrees with the necessity of
mitigating for the loss of lands associated with this trail widening and is currently investigating options between
conservation banks and on-site restoration. As noted within Mitigation Measure BIO-2 of the IS/MND, the City
of Diamond Bar would be required to obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare a habitat conservation
plan (HCP) to mitigate for impacts to sensitive habitat. The Incidental Take Permit and HCP, and consultations
to be conducted with CDFW, would include provisions for preservation and restoration of lands in perpetuity.
Thus, CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #1 has been accounted for in the IS/MND, and no further
mitigation is necessary.
CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measures #2 and #3 recommend that the City of Diamond Bar provide
educational materials and signage along the trail to educate users on the biological resources that are present
in the area. Mitigation Measure #3 also states that the City should provide a long-term maintenance plan to
repair and replace the signs. As noted within Section 2.0, Project Description, of the IS/MND, the project is
proposed to include interpretive signage in various locations that promotes awareness of the presence of
sensitive biological habitat and species (including the coastal California gnatcatcher and cactus wren). This
proposed signage would be maintained by the City routinely and regularly, as currently occurs with existing
signage along the trail. These project features accommodate CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measures
#2 and #3, and no mitigation is necessary.
CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #4 (regarding restrictions on uses/pets) and Mitigation Measure
#5 (regarding placement of trash receptacles) can be accommodated within the HCP to be prepared for the
proposed project, and through required consultations with CDFW. To that end, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 of
the IS/MND has been modified to include provisions in this regard. The Final IS/MND has incorporated the
following changes:
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-23 Responses to Comments
1-3 This comment describes impacts and mitigation to sensitive vegetation communities that have been mapped
on the project and provides two “recommended potentially feasible mitigation measures” to mitigate for
vegetation loss.
CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #1 recommends that a qualified botanist map all vegetation
communities on-site prior to ground disturbance. Mapping of vegetation communities at the alliance level
already occurred during initial environmental studies conducted for the project in 2020. This mapping was
included as part of the IS/MND. As such, no further response is necessary.
CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #2 states that if the project cannot avoid impacts to sensitive
vegetation communities, the City should mitigate for the loss of vegetation at no less than 5:1 for S3 ranked
communities and 7:1 for S2 ranked communities. S3 ranked communities found on-site include California
sagebrush – black sagebrush scrub and coast prickly pear scrub. As noted above in Response 1-2, the City
would be required to obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare an HCP to mitigate for impacts to sensitive
habitat. Through further consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and CDFW, provisions for
preservation and restoration of lands in perpetuity at a ratio to be determined through discussions with the
resource agencies. Thus, CDFW’s recommended Mitigation Measure #2 has been accounted for in the
IS/MND, and no further mitigation is necessary.
1-4 This comment addresses impacts to nesting birds and recommends three (3) “recommended potentially
feasible mitigation measures.”
CDFW recommended Mitigation Measure #1 recommends modifying the project’s existing Mitigation Measure
BIO-3 in the MND to include the following language: “Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization,
grading, ground disturbance activities, and vegetation removal should be completed outside the avian
breeding season. The City should not perform any Project construction or activities or remove or otherwise
disturb vegetation on the project site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31, and as early as
January 1, to avoid impacts to breeding/nesting birds and raptors.” This language is acceptable and has been
added to Mitigation Measure BIO-3 in the Final IS/MND.
Draft IS/MND Page 4.4-6:
BIO-2 In consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the City of Diamond Bar
Parks and Recreation Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare a low-
effect habitat conservation plan (HCP) to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used
by sensitive wildlife species, particularly coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica
californica) known to occur on-site.
Avoidance and minimization measures that may be required in a low-effect HCP for the
proposed project, subject to consultation with the USFWS, include, but are not limited to,
preconstruction nesting surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher and avoidance of any
active nests or scheduling of work outside of the gnatcatcher nesting season, environmental
training for all construction personnel, biological monitoring during initial vegetation removal,
closing and restoration of any extraneous trail sections or breeding habitat to recreational
use, provisions for pets (leashed pets, removal of pet waste), locations of trash receptacles,
and on-site restoration and preservation of coastal sage scrub communities within the survey
area (i.e., in the vicinity of the impacts).
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-24 Responses to Comments
CDFW recommended Mitigation Measure #2 recommends that “If avoidance is not feasible, a qualified
biologist should complete a survey for nesting bird activity within a 500-foot radius of the Project footprint.
Surveys should begin no more than 14 days prior to the start of Project ground disturbing activities and should
be repeated for the duration of Project activities that occur during the bird nesting season. Nesting bird surveys
should be conducted at appropriate nesting times and concentrate on potential roosting or perch sites. If
Project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, surveys should
be repeated before work can resume.” This language is acceptable and has been added to Mitigation Measure
BIO-4 in the Final IS/MND.
CDFW recommended Mitigation Measure #3 recommends avoidance buffers of minimum 300 feet for nesting
passerines, 500 feet for active nests of non-listed raptors, and 0.5 mile around active nests of CESA-listed
birds. No disturbance would be allowed within the buffer until a qualified biologist determines the nest(s) is no
longer active. The biologist would increase the buffer as necessary and would delineate it with fencing and
signage. This language is acceptable and has been added to Mitigation Measure BIO-4 in the Final IS/MND.
Draft IS/MND Page 4.4.6:
BIO-3 Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground disturbance activities,
and vegetation removal shall be completed outside the avian breeding season. The City of
Diamond Bar shall not perform any project construction or activities or remove or otherwise
disturb vegetation on the project site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31,
and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts to breeding/nesting birds and raptors. However,
if avoidance of the avian breeding season is infeasible and if project-related construction
activities are initiated during the nesting season for coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN;
Polioptila californica californica) and cactus wren (CACW; Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus) (February 15th through September 15th), a nesting bird clearance survey
shall be conducted within seven days prior to the start of construction within a 500-foot buffer
of the project site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable
experience identifying CAGN and CACW nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who
has been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conduct a CAGN
survey. If an active CAGN or CACW nest is found during the survey, no project-related
construction shall be allowed within 500 feet of an active CAGN nest or 300 feet of an active
CACW nest, or within an alternative safe distance as determined by the qualified biologist
based on topography, visual shielding, nest progress, and the type of construction and
associated disturbance, until the active nest has been determined by the qualified biologist
to have failed or to have successfully gone to completion (i.e., the nestlings have fledged
and are no longer reliant on the nest). Results of the nesting bird clearance survey shall be
compiled in a memorandum and submitted to the City and the USFWS for project records.
BIO-4 If project-related activities are to be initiated during the general avian nesting season
(January 1st through August 31st), a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be
conducted within a 500-foot radius of the project footprint by a qualified biologist no more
than three14 days prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities.
The qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat at appropriate nesting times
within the project’s development footprint, and areas within a biologically-defensible buffer
zone surrounding the project’s development footprint. If no active nests are detected during
the clearance survey, project activities may begin, and no additional avoidance and
minimization measures would be required.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-25 Responses to Comments
1-5 This comment addresses impacts to reptiles and provides two (2) “recommended potentially feasible
mitigation measures.” This comment also mistakenly states that red-diamond rattlesnake (Crotalus ruber) was
found on site during project surveys conducted in 2020. This is incorrect; although this species has been
recorded on these trails numerous times (as shown in the CNDDB), it was not incidentally detected during
any surveys conducted for the project in 2020. The comment is correct that coastal whiptail (Aspidoscelis
tigris stejnegeri) was found on-site in 2020.
CDFW recommended Mitigation Measure #1 recommends that a qualified biologist(s) familiar with reptile
behavior and life history should conduct specialized surveys prior to vegetation removal and/or grading to
determine the presence or absence of species designated as species of special concern by the CDFW,
including red-diamond rattlesnake and coastal whiptail. Survey results, including negative findings, would be
submitted to CDFW prior to the initiation of project activities. Language requiring a pre-construction clearance
survey has been added to Mitigation Measure BIO-4.
Mitigation Measure #2 recommends that a qualified biological monitor be on-site during ground and habitat
disturbing activities to move any special-status species out of harm’s way, and that the monitor possess all
appropriate state and federal permits. Language requiring an appropriately qualified biological monitor during
vegetation removal and grubbing has been added to Mitigation Measure BIO-4.
If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding
season, surveys shall be repeated before work can resume.
If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified and a “no-disturbance” buffer
shall be established around the active nest. Buffers shall be clearly delineated and marked
around the active nest site as directed by the qualified biologist. The size of the “no-
disturbance” buffer shall be determined based on the judgement of the qualified biologist
and level of activity and sensitivity of the species. The buffer shall be 300 feet around active
passerine (perching birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor
nests, and 0.5-mile around active California Endangered Species Act (CESA)-listed bird
nests. The qualified biologist shall advise workers of the sensitivity of the buffered areas,
and workers shall not work, trespass, or engage in activities that would disturb nesting birds
near or inside the buffer. The qualified biologist shall periodically monitor any active nests
to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-disturbance” buffer disturb
the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the
nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities
within the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur following an additional survey by the qualified
biologist to search for any new nests in the restricted area.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-26 Responses to Comments
1-6 This comment addresses impacts to streams and provides two (2) “recommended potentially feasible
mitigation measures.” These mitigation measures are based on the misconception that the project will have
impacts to features that are under CDFW jurisdiction. As noted in the IS/MND, although there is a jurisdictional
feature within the project site, it will not be affected at all by the project or any of its construction. No trail
improvements are proposed anywhere near this feature and no construction will occur anywhere in its vicinity.
As such, no further response is necessary and no mitigation is required in this regard.
1-7 The City of Diamond Bar will provide payment of the project’s Notice of Determination (NOD) CDFW filing fee
as required under the California Fish and Game Code.
Draft IS/MND Page 4.4-6:
BIO-4 The City of Diamond Bar shall protect special-status wildlife resources during
construction. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey
prior to any ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal to search for special-status
wildlife resources that may be present within the construction area. The biologist shall
be thoroughly familiar with the habitat requirements and life histories of special-status
species that could occur. The biologist shall submit survey results, including negative
results, to CDFW following the survey and prior to the start of construction.
If project-related activities are to be initiated during the general avian nesting season
(January 1st through August 31st), a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey
shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than three days prior to the start of
any vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities. The qualified biologist shall
survey all suitable nesting habitat within the project’s development footprint, and areas
within a biologically-defensible buffer zone surrounding the project’s development
footprint. If no active nests are detected during the clearance survey, project activities
may begin, and no additional avoidance and minimization measures would be required.
If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified and a “no-disturbance”
buffer shall be established around the active nest. The size of the “no-disturbance”
buffer shall be determined based on the judgement of the qualified biologist and level
of activity and sensitivity of the species. The qualified biologist shall periodically monitor
any active nests to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-
disturbance” buffer disturb the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the
young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under
natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur
following an additional survey by the qualified biologist to search for any new nests in
the restricted area.
A qualified biological monitor approved by CDFW shall be present during vegetation
removal or grubbing activities. Any special-status wildlife that is found within the
construction area shall be encouraged to move elsewhere or shall be physically moved
out of harm’s way by the biologist if necessary. The biological monitor shall have the
necessary state and/or federal permits or letters of permission from the wildlife agencies
to relocate wildlife as necessary.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-27 Responses to Comments
1-8 This comment provides a conclusion to the comment letter and provides contact information for the
commenter. The commenter will be provided a response and notified of public hearings for the project as
necessary under CEQA and the City’s public noticing requirements. No further response is required.
1-9 This portion of the comment letter provides references used by the commenter. No response is necessary.
1-10 This comment summarizes the recommended mitigation measures provided by CDFW. Refer to Responses
1-2 through 1-6, above.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
November 16, 2020
Mr. Ryan Wright
City of Diamond Bar
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765 RWright@DiamondBarCA.gov
RE: Public Comments: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement
Project, City of Diamond Bar
Dear Mr. Wright:
The Diamond Bar - Pomona Valley Sierra Club Task Force is locally focused on natural
wildlife habitats, open spaces and watersheds. Since 2016, we have been privileged to
serve Diamond Bar residents, through environmental literacy education, modeling
ecological integrity and oversight in the conservation efforts of city natural resources.
We are grateful for the opportunity to comment on the “Canyon Loop Trail” IS/MND
project.
However, at this moment, we regret to say, the proposed IS/MND is inadequate and
appears illegitimate based upon the data provided by Hamilton Biological report and the
elements called out in the CDFW commentary, November 2020.
It appears to be an illegitimate project because there is no evidence of former CEQA
permit applications for the area. Here, is perhaps one reason why?
The 2011 City of Diamond Bar, Parks & Recreation Master Plan, adopted July 19, 2011,
appears to have facilitated piecemeal trail making and landscape maintenance projects
in city open spaces, which have resulted in cumulative environmental impacts. On
Pages 13, 14, Section 1 of this document, explains CEQA categorical exemptions
(which conflict with actual findings in the field.) (Exhibit A) Through the years, city
numerous trail and park projects have proceeded with categorical exemptions. Work,
performed by unskilled labor, has caused cumulative environmental negative impacts.
As it’s supposed in the document, the 2011 Parks & Recreation masterplan itself, may
be exempt from CEQA, but each component of the plan, like building a trail, surely
cannot be exempt from CEQA.
October 14, 2019, the city attempted the Canyon Loop project with a categorical
exemption, to which the Sierra Club intervened and called for proper environmental
review. (See Exhibit B)
Therefore the trail project IS/MND was performed in 2020. We are grateful for the
improvement, however the critical elements needed are still wanting: best field practices
based on protocol surveys and biological conservation mitigation methods. The
COMMENT LETTER 2
2-1
2-2
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
technical details of these requirements are explained in the California Dept. Fish Wildlife
IS/MND comments and the Hamilton Biological comments, dated November 2020.
(Exhibit C + D)
If the Canyon Loop project accepts and adheres to the guidelines from the CDFW and
especially the Hamilton Biological comments, we think the project will be heading in a
good direction and could also attain authentic sustainability.
Performing landscape maintenance or trail building on Diamond Bar open space areas
which are host to natural communities, using CEQA guidelines and skilled field workers
who are trained in recognizing biological conditions, are an investment in the quality of
California natural landscapes and will enhance the cultural value of the city. Diamond
Bar landscape budgets may be greatly reduced by conserving and restoring natural
plant communities.
Degrading or converting natural habitats to ornamental (invasive) landscape plantings
actually increases maintenance services and costs.
We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Project and are available to assist the
City of Diamond Bar in adequately analyzing and minimizing/mitigating impacts to
biological resources. We also request an opportunity to receive notification of any
forthcoming hearing date(s) for the Project.
Respectfully
C. Robin Smith
Diamond Bar - Pomona Valley Sierra Club Task Force
.
eMail: DBPVSierraClubTaskForce@gmail.com
909-861-9920
Resources: Exhibit A City of Diamond Bar Parks & Recreation Masterplan 2011
Exhibit B Hamilton Biological Letter October 14, 2019
Exhibit C California Dept. Fish Wildlife Canyon Loop Project Comments
Exhibit D Hamilton Biological Canyon Loop Comments Nov. 16, 2020
Cc: Morgan Goodwin, Sr. Director, Sierra Club, Angeles Chapter
Greg Gubman, Community Development Director, City of Diamond Bar
Erin Wilson, California Dept. Fish Wildlife
Chris Medak, United States Dept. Fish Wildlife
2-2
Cont.
2-3
2-4
2-5
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
H AMILTON B IOLOGICAL
October 14, 2019
Greg Gubman
Director of Community Development
City of Diamond Bar
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
SUBJECT: CEQA REVIEW, CANYON LOOP TRAIL PROJECT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
Dear Mr. Gubman,
Working on behalf of a consortium of Diamond Bar residents, including Diamond Bar
Preservation Foundation, Responsible Land Use, and the Diamond Bar/Pomona Valley
Sierra Club Task Force, Hamilton Biological, Inc., (hereafter “Hamilton Biological”) has
reviewed a City Council Study Session Report for the Canyon Loop Trail Conceptual
Design, “a project to make improvements to the Canyon Loop Multi-Use Trail, which is
a 1.29-mile trail loop within the City’s Open Space area north of the Diamond Bar Cen-
ter.” Proposed actions include such activities as realigning parts of the trail, installing
steps, and creating rest areas and amenities such as benches, shade structures, and trash
receptacles. As you know, Hamilton Biological specializes in third-party review of tech-
nical biological reports and CEQA documentation, and I have been involved with re-
viewing and providing input into the forthcoming update to the City of Diamond Bar
General Plan.
As part of my review of issues related to the General Plan update, I observed that the
City appears to be inadequately analyzing — under CEQA and other relevant statutes,
such as the California Fish and Game Code and federal Endangered Species Act — the
potential adverse effects of actions that the City has undertaken in recent years. In my
cover letter to you, dated February 21, 2019 (Subject: Biological Resources Report for Open
Space & Conservation Element, Diamond Bar General Plan Update) I provided examples of
two examples of recent projects that the City undertook, apparently without CEQA re-
view. It is my understanding that the City claimed a Categorical Exemption for those
recent projects, and that the City is now claiming a Categorical Exemption for the pro-
posed Canyon Loop Trail improvement project. This letter (1) discusses the conditions
under which a CEQA Lead Agency may claim a Categorical Exemption (2) reviews the
two examples of improper use of the Categorical Exemption for trail projects under-
taken by the City in recent years; (3) provides information on biologically sensitive re-
sources known to exist in the vicinity of Canyon Loop Trail; and (4) discusses the City’s
obligation to satisfy CEQA requirements, and other relevant permitting procedures,
when proposing actions that may adversely affect rare and endangered species.
2-6
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 2 of 7
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS UNDER CEQA
Article 19 of the CEQA Guidelines addresses this topic. If the City is, in fact, planning to
claim a Categorical Exemption for the proposed trail improvement project, it would
presumably do so under Section 15301 and/or Section 15304 of Article 19. Relevant por-
tions of these Sections are excerpted below.
15301. Existing Facilities
Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or
minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equip-
ment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond
that existing at the time of the lead agency’s determination. The types of “existing facili-
ties” itemized below are not intended to be all-inclusive of the types of projects which
might fall within Class 1. The key consideration is whether the project involves negligi-
ble or no expansion of an existing use. Examples include:
(c) Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar
facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety).
15304. Minor Alterations to Land
Class 4 consists of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water,
and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees except
for forestry or agricultural purposes. Examples include:
(d) Minor alterations in land, water, and vegetation on existing officially designated wildlife
management areas or fish production facilities which result in improvement of habitat for fish
and wildlife resources or greater fish production.
Exceptions to Categorical Exemption Rules
Section 15300.2 of Article 19 discusses the conditions under which a CEQA Lead
Agency may not claim a Categorical Exemption that would otherwise be appropriate.
These include:
(a) Location. Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is
to be located -- a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may
in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered
to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of
hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted
pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
(b) Cumulative Impact. All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative
impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant.
(c) Significant Effect. A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is
a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due
to unusual circumstances.
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 3 of 7
As reviewed subsequently, the City appears to have improperly claimed Categorical
Exemptions for recent trail projects that have adversely affected natural areas known to
support listed and otherwise sensitive species. This practice should not be allowed to
continue.
IMPROPER USE OF CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS
As reviewed in my above-referenced letter to you, I am aware of two recent City pro-
jects that impacted natural habitat areas known to be occupied by special-status species.
As context for evaluating the current proposal to improve Canyon Loop Trail under a
Categorical Exemption, these recent projects are briefly summarized below.
Pantera Park: Dog Park and Trail Construction
In Pantera Park between 2013 and 2017, the City established a dog park adjacent to a
highly sensitive hillside of coastal sage scrub, and established a new trail through that
same hillside of coastal sage scrub. Please see Figures 1–3 on the following page. I have
not been able to find any CEQA documentation for these actions, and have been in-
formed that the City undertook them under Categorical Exemptions. Pantera Park is
known to be occupied by the federally threatened Coastal California Gnatcatcher and
by the “coastal” Cactus Wren, a California Species of Special Concern that is known to
be rapidly declining across the region. Records of these species at Pantera Park are doc-
umented here:
•https://ebird.org/view/checklist/S37560358
•https://ebird.org/view/checklist/S51324514
Under CEQA, the loss, degradation, and fragmentation of sensitive natural communi-
ties, such as coastal sage scrub and cactus scrub, and associated special-status species,
such as the California Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren, should be identified as significant
adverse effects. Any unavoidable significant impacts must be mitigated, and if poten-
tially significant effects remain after mitigation the CEQA lead agency must issue find-
ings of overriding considerations. Under the federal Endangered Species Act, “take” of
any listed species, such as the gnatcatcher, requires authorization from the US Fish and
Wildlife Service.
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 4 of 7
Figure 1. Photo, facing northeast, show-
ing the Pantera Park dog park, estab-
lished in 2013, and a trail established in
2017. The City appears not to have pre-
pared an EIR to evaluate potential im-
pacts to California Gnatcatchers, Cactus
Wrens, or other special-status species
known to occur in this park. Robert A.
Hamilton, 1/4/19.
Figure 2. Aerial image from Google
Earth, dated March 7, 2011, showing
largely intact stands of coastal sage
scrub and cactus scrub pre-project.
Figure 3. Aerial image from Google
Earth, dated June 8, 2018, showing the
post-project condition of the dog park
and trail area. Substantial areas of
coastal sage scrub were removed, frag-
mented, and degraded by increased
levels of human/canine disturbance.
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 5 of 7
Summitridge Park: Trail Construction
In Summitridge Park, just south of the Canyon Loop Trail, the City in 2017 established a
new trail through highly sensitive coastal sage scrub occupied by California Gnatcatch-
ers and Cactus Wrens:
•https://ebird.org/view/checklist/S51487531
I have been informed that this action was also conducted under a Categorical Exemp-
tion to CEQA that should not have been granted per Section 15300.2 of Article 19. This
action also appears to have violated the federal Endangered Species Act. See Figures 4
and 5, below.
Figures 4, 5. Aerial images from Google Earth, dated April 23, 2014 (left) and June 8, 2018 (right), showing
the area of intact cactus scrub where a major trail was established in 2014/2015. Substantial areas of this
sensitive community, known to be occupied by California Gnatcatchers and Cactus Wrens, were removed,
fragmented, and degraded by increased levels of human disturbance.
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 6 of 7
SENSITIVE RESOURCES IN THE CANYON LOOP TRAIL AREA
I have not walked the entire Canyon Loop Trail, but during two brief visits in January
2019 I documented multiple pairs of California Gnatcatchers and Cactus Wrens along
the southern part of the Canyon Loop Trail and in nearby areas (see Figure 6, below,
and the eBird checklists cited and linked on pages 3 and 5 of this letter). Coastal sage
scrub and cactus scrub habitats along the Canyon Loop Trail have potential to support
additional pairs of these species, as well as several other special-status species.
Figure 6. Locations of California Gnatcatchers and Cactus Wrens observed near the Canyon Loop trail by
Robert A. Hamilton in January 2019. Please refer to the eBird checklists cited in this letter for documentary
photographs of these birds.
CEQA AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS
Activities that impact the habitat of a listed or otherwise highly sensitive species, such
as the California Gnatcatcher and “coastal” Cactus Wren, are normally identified as sig-
nificant impacts under CEQA. Thus, in compliance with Section 15300.2 of Article 19 of
the CEQA Guidelines, the City should not issue itself a Categorical Exemption for these
proposed actions. Instead, current, appropriate biological surveys should be conducted
as part of routine CEQA review of the proposed actions. Potentially significant impacts
should be avoided or mitigated, per CEQA requirements.
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Review of Proposed Canyon Loop Trail Project, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
October 14, 2019 Page 7 of 7
Furthermore, (a) the US Fish and Wildlife Service should be notified of any actions that
could result in “take” of the federally threatened California Gnatcatcher, and (b) the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife should be notified of any proposed altera-
tion of any watercourse with bed and banks.
CONCLUSION
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the City of Diamond Bar’s proposed Can-
yon Loop Trail improvements project. If you have questions, or wish to discuss any
matters, please do not hesitate to call me at (562) 477-2181 or send e-mail to robb@ham-
iltonbiological.com.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Hamilton
President, Hamilton Biological, Inc.
316 Monrovia Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90803
562-477-2181
robb@hamiltonbiological.com
cc: Dan Fox, Manager, City of Diamond Bar
Christine Medak, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Victoria Tang, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Andrew Valand, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Angelica Gonzalez, Conservation Program Coordinator, Sierra Club Angeles Chapter
Robin Smith, Chair, Diamond Bar-Pomona Valley Sierra Club Task Force
Dr. Chia Teng, Diamond Bar Preservation Foundation
Lee Paulson, President, Responsible Land Use
2-6
Cont.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-37 Responses to Comments
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 2
C. Robin Smith
Sierra Club
November 16, 2020
2-1 This comment includes introductory language to the letter. It does not pertain to the adequacy of the
environmental analysis within the IS/MND, and no further response is required.
2-2 This comment references the Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Master Plan 2011. While the Canyon Loop
Trail is identified as a component of the Summit Ridge Trail System in the Master Plan, this comment does
not raise any concerns specific to the environmental analysis provided in the IS/MND. The City has prepared
an IS/MND for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project, which analyzes project-level and cumulative
impacts associated with its implementation. This comment also references the comment letters submitted by
CDFW and Hamilton Biological; refer to Response to Comment Letter Nos. 1 (above) and 3 (below).
2-3 The City acknowledges the biological value of the project site and surrounding area and the suitable habitat
it provides for California gnatcatcher and cactus wren. The City is committed to minimizing impacts to
sensitive biological species, and has conducted a comprehensive analysis of project impacts, including
preparation of a Biological Resources Analysis and focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher and cactus
wren. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the IS/MND and include the refinement of several
measures to accommodate concerns expressed by CDFW (refer to Response to Comment Letter No. 1). It
should be noted that no invasive landscaping would be included as part of the proposed project.
2-4 This comment provides a conclusion to the comment letter. The commenter will be notified of public hearings
for the project as necessary under CEQA and the City’s public noticing requirements. No further response is
required.
2-5 This comment letter includes numerous exhibits as attachments. Exhibit A, Diamond Bark Parks and
Recreation Master Plan 2011, is over 400 pages in length, and thus, has not been provided herein. However,
it is available for review at https://www.diamondbarca.gov/195/Parks-Master-Plan. A response to Exhibit B,
Hamilton Biological Letter, October 14, 2019, has been provided as Response 2-6, below. A response to
Exhibit C, CDFW Project Comments, has been provided as Response to Comment Letter No. 1, above.
Finally, a response to Exhibit D, Hamilton Biological Canyon Loop Comments has been provided as Response
to Comment Letter No. 3, below.
2-6 This comment from Hamilton Biological dated October 14, 2019, objects to the use of a Categorical Exemption
for the proposed project. The City has prepared an IS/MND for the Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project,
and a categorical exemption has not been used for the proposed project.
This comment also notes several previous improvements implemented by the City, including the Pantera Dog
Park and portions of Canyon Loop Trail; refer to Responses 3-2 and 3-3, below.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
H AMILTON B IOLOGICAL
November 16, 2020
Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director
City of Diamond Bar
21810 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
SUBJECT: COMMENTS ON MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CA
Dear Mr. Wright,
Working on behalf of a consortium of Diamond Bar residents, including Diamond Bar
Preservation Foundation, Responsible Land Use, and the Diamond Bar/Pomona Valley
Sierra Club Task Force, Hamilton Biological, Inc., (hereafter “Hamilton Biological”) has
reviewed an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Canyon
Loop Trail Improvement Project in the City of Diamond Bar (the City). The project pro-
poses trail widening along most of the South Canyon Loop, provision of gabion retain-
ing walls, stairs with handrails and cobblestone swales, drainage crossings, shade struc-
tures with benches/trash receptacles, lodge pole fences, and wayfinding/interpretive
signage.
PERMITTING MUST ADDRESS ILLEGALLY ESTABLISHED TRAILS
The current proposal to improve Canyon Loop Trail under the IS/MND represents a
continuation of actions the City has been taking over a period of years to establish ex-
tensive new trails through sensitive habitats, all without required CEQA review or the
requisite permits. As reviewed below, the City has failed to consult with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
regarding actions that have removed, fragmented, and disturbed substantial areas of
high-quality coastal sage scrub occupied by multiple special-status species, most nota-
bly the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) and the Coastal
Cactus Wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus).
Canyon Loop Trail Construction (2004 to Present)
As of April 10, 2004, the current Canyon Loop Trail was not a loop at all; rather, it was a
direct trail connecting Meandering Creek Drive in the west to Peak Court in the east. By
2013, however, the City established the southern half of the Canyon Loop Trail. This
was followed by construction of a major new trail connecting the southern half of the
Canyon Loop Trail to Summitridge Trail to the south, and after that a short cut-through
on the southern part of the Canyon Loop Trail. See Figures 1–5 on the following pages.
&200(17/(77(5
3-2
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 2 of 8
Figure 1. Aerial photo dated April 10, 2004, showing that the southern half of the Canyon Loop Trail did not
exist at that time. Source: Google Earth Pro.
Figure 2. Recent aerial photo showing in color 5,210 linear feet of trails that the City has built through sensitive
coastal sage scrub (~3,850 linear feet) and oak woodland (~1,360 feet) without proper CEQA review or con-
sulting with the USFWS or CDFW. The red segment was established in 2011-2013; the blue segment was
established in 2014-2015; and the magenta segment was established in 2015-2016 (see Figures 3 to 5). Source:
Google Earth Pro.
&RQW
3-2
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 3 of 8
Figure 3. Aerial photo dated March 13, 2013, a year or two after the City built the southern half of the Canyon
Loop Trail (red segment in Figure 2). The new trail impacted ~2,400 linear feet of coastal sage scrub habitat
occupied by the California Gnatcatcher. Source: Google Earth Pro.
Figure 4. Aerial photo dated March 24, 2015, shortly after the City built a new trail southern half of the Canyon
Loop Trail (blue segment in Figure 2). The new trail impacted ~2,400 linear feet of coastal sage scrub and
~1,360 linear feet of oak woodland (CDFW jurisdictional area). Source: Google Earth Pro.
&RQW
3-2
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 4 of 8
Figure 5. Aerial photo dated May 2, 2019, showing all of the unpermitted trails, including a ~250-foot-long
cut-through of a switch-back on the Canyon Loop Trail (the magenta segment in Figure 2). Source: Google
Earth Pro.
If the unpermitted trails average 8 feet wide, the area of habitat loss is approximately
41,680 square feet (0.96 acre). Approximately 19,250 square feet (0.71 acre) involves
coastal sage scrub and 10,880 square feet (0.25 acre) involves oak woodland. More im-
portant than the direct loss of habitat, however, is the indirect impact resulting from
habitat fragmentation and increased disturbance of wildlife by people and their animals
intruding into otherwise pristine blocks of native scrub and woodland habitats.
It is my understanding that these trail construction projects were not subject to proper
CEQA review because the City claimed, incorrectly, that the projects were categorically
exempt from CEQA. Furthermore, the City apparently did not consult with the USFWS
or CDFW to determine whether the projects could potentially impact sensitive biologi-
cal resources, such as intact coastal sage scrub occupied by the federally listed Califor-
nia Gnatcatcher, or native oak woodlands subject to CDFW jurisdiction. These deficien-
cies must be addressed at this time, since the unpermitted trails were established in
violation of the applicable laws and regulations.
Pantera Park: Dog Park and Trail Construction (2013-2017)
In nearby Pantera Park, between 2011 and 2017, the City established a dog park adja-
cent to a hillside of coastal sage scrub occupied by California Gnatcatchers and Cactus
Wrens, and then built a massive, winding trail through the scrub; see Figures 6 and 7 on
the following page. When the City consults with the USFWS and CDFW regarding the
Canyon Loop Trail project, these unpermitted impacts should be addressed.
&RQW
3-2
3-3
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 5 of 8
Figure 6. Aerial photo dated March 7, 2011, showing coastal sage scrub in the southeastern part of Pantera
Park, approximately 0.6 mile northeast of the Canyon Loop Trail project site. This scrub habitat is occupied
by California Gnatcatchers and Cactus Wrens (pers. obs.; eBird data). Source: Google Earth Pro.
Figure 7. Aerial photo dated December 3, 2017, showing the same area after the City built a dog park and a
large trail in the area, again without required CEQA review or consultation with the USFWS or CDFW. The
area of impact should be determined and compensatory mitigation provided. Source: Google Earth Pro.
&RQW
3-3
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 6 of 8
THE COASTAL CACTUS WREN IS A SPECIAL STATUS SPECIES
Page 4.4-4 of the IS/MND states:
Although multiple territories of cactus wren were observed onsite, the survey area is well
outside the known range for the coastal sandiegensis subspecies, which ends around State
Route 74 based on CDFW mapping.
And:
Cactus wren in Los Angeles County are considered to be of the non-sensitive subspecies C.b.
anthonyi, although it should be noted that many of the birds on the coast, including the ones
in the survey area, show characteristics, such as the extent of white barring in the tail feathers,
typically associated with the sensitive CCACW.
Contrary to the IS/MND’s depiction, coastal populations of the Cactus Wren in south-
ern California (not only subspecies sandiegensis, which is of questionable legitimacy as
currently described) are regarded as having special status by the resource agencies. For
example, the USFWS publication Birds of Conservation Concern1 identifies all coastal
populations of the Cactus Wren in southern California as being of conservation concern.
Despite the species having been identified as a “target species” of Natural Community
Conservation Planning efforts to conserve coastal sage scrub and associated species
across the region, Coastal Cactus Wrens are becoming increasingly rare in most areas,
and are generally faring more poorly than the federally listed Coastal California Gnat-
catcher. The causes of the Coastal Cactus Wren’s decline are not fully understood, but
appear to involve the widespread loss, fragmentation, and degradation of its required
cactus scrub habitat2.
As of a decade ago, only about 200 pairs of Cactus Wrens were known from the coastal
slope of Los Angeles County3. The species is very rare in Diamond Bar, being limited to
a small number of pairs in Summitridge Park, Pantera Park, and possibly a few stands
of cactus around the edges of the City4. The proposed project, considered together with
the City’s previous impacts to the species from building of unpermitted trails without
proper CEQA review, will significantly impact the Coastal Cactus Wren through loss,
fragmentation, and degradation of cactus scrub habitat. Compensatory mitigation
should consist of ecological restoration of cactus scrub habitat, at a minimum 5:1 ratio,
in degraded habitat areas located near extant populations of the Cactus Wren in Sum-
mitridge Park and/or Pantera Park.
1 https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/BCC2008.pdf
2 Hamilton, R. A., Proudfoot, G. A., Sherry, D. A., and Johnson, S. 2011. Cactus Wren (Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus), in The Birds of North America Online (A. Poole, ed.). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca,
NY.
3 Cooper, D. S., R. A. Hamilton, and S. D. Lucas. 2012. A population census of the Cactus Wren in coastal
Los Angeles County. Western Birds 43:151–163.
4 https://www.diamondbarca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/7072/Diamond-Bar-General-Plan-
2040?bidId=.
&RQW
3-53-4
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 7 of 8
ALL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE RESOURCES REQUIRE
COMPENSATORY MITIGATION
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 in the IS/MND calls for the City to obtain an Incidental Take
Permit for impacts to the California Gnatcatcher, and envisions the City obtaining “a
low-effect habitat conservation plan (HCP)” from the USFWS based on a conclusion
that the proposed actions would have only minimal effects on the California Gnat-
catcher. By erroneously characterizing the Coastal Cactus Wren as being “non-sensi-
tive” in the City of Diamond Bar, Mitigation Measure BIO-2 mistakenly concludes that
impacts to the wren are less than significant and require no compensatory mitigation.
The types of mitigation actions described in Mitigation Measure BIO-2 (e.g., precon-
struction nesting surveys for California Gnatcatchers, avoidance of active nests, envi-
ronmental training of personnel) fail to compensate for the City’s unpermitted construc-
tion of the Canyon Loop Trail and other major trails documented in this letter. All of the
City’s unpermitted trail-building actions in recent years, together with the trail im-
provements now proposed in the IS/MND, represent potentially significant impacts to
the last viable populations of the Coastal California Gnatcatcher and Coastal Cactus
Wren in the City of Diamond Bar. Also impacted are ecologically sensitive and valuable
oak woodlands and streambeds. Therefore, when the City consults with the USFWS and
CDFW, the City should be required to accurately document and account for the unper-
mitted impacts to all sensitive biological resources, as outlined herein.
The USFWS and CDFW should require that the City provide adequate compensatory
mitigation for all impacts to sensitive biological resources, including streambeds, oak
woodlands, coastal sage scrub, and especially cactus scrub that provides habitat for
both the California Gnatcatcher and the Coastal Cactus Wren.
CONCLUSION
If you have questions, or wish to discuss any matters, please do not hesitate to call me at
(562) 477-2181 or send e-mail to robb@hamiltonbiological.com.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Hamilton
President, Hamilton Biological, Inc.
316 Monrovia Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90803
562-477-2181
robb@hamiltonbiological.com
3-6
3-7
3-5
3-6
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
Comments on Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project IS/MND, Diamond Bar Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020 Page 8 of 8
cc: Greg Gubman, City of Diamond Bar
Christine Medak, US Fish and Wildlife Service
Erinn Wilson-Olgin, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Victoria Tang, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Andrew Valand, California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Morgan Goodman, Conservation Program Coordinator, Sierra Club Angeles Chapter
Robin Smith, Chair, Diamond Bar-Pomona Valley Sierra Club Task Force
Dr. Chia Teng, Diamond Bar Preservation Foundation
Lee Paulson, President, Responsible Land Use
Travis Longcore, President, Los Angeles Audubon Society
Dan Cooper, Cooper Ecological Monitoring
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-46 Responses to Comments
RESPONSE TO COMMENT LETTER NO. 3
Robert A. Hamilton, President
Hamilton Biological, Inc.
November 16, 2020
3-1 This comment includes introductory language and a summary of the project description. It does not pertain
to the adequacy of the environmental analysis within the IS/MND, and no further response is required.
3-2 This comment states that the proposed project represents a continuance of actions the City has previously
taken without conducting CEQA review or acquiring resource agency permits. The commenter provides aerial
photographs depicting the Canyon Loop Trail at various times since 2004.
At its most basic level, CEQA requires an analysis of how a proposed project will change the existing
environmental conditions, also known as the environmental baseline (CEQA Guidelines § 15125[a]).
Generally, the environmental baseline is the environmental conditions that exist at the time that environmental
review begins (CEQA Guidelines § 15125[a][1]). This is true no matter how those conditions came to be (see,
e.g., Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach [2012] 211 Cal.App.4th 1209, 1233 [proper
baseline for evaluating impacts to habitat was the existing condition of the site, even if the site may have been
degraded by illegal mowing]).
Here, the Canyon Loop Trail has been in existence for decades. It was created through human and/or wildlife
passage – not by the City. Thus, the existing environmental conditions for the current project, or baseline,
include an existing trail. This was the case each time the City previously improved other portions of the trail.
The commenter notes that the South Canyon Loop Trail did not exist as of 2004; however, based on Google
Earth aerial imagery dating back to 1994, the South Canyon Loop is clearly visible as an unimproved trail. In
any event, the statute of limitations regarding the City’s prior trail improvements has long expired, including
the Notice of Exemption (NOE) filed on September 14, 2009 for the Southern Trail Connection to Canyon
Route; NOE filed on October 22, 2010 for the Summitridge Park Southern Trail Vista; and the NOE filed on
October 12, 2011 for the Grand View Trail Link.
The City acknowledges the biological value of the project site and surrounding area and the suitable habitat
it provides for California gnatcatcher and cactus wren. The City is committed to minimizing impacts to
sensitive biological species, and has conducted a comprehensive analysis of project impacts, including
preparation of a Biological Resources Analysis and focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher and cactus
wren. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the IS/MND and include the refinement of several
measures to accommodate concerns expressed by CDFW (refer to Response to Comment Letter No. 1).
These measures fully mitigate the impacts of the project as proposed within the IS/MND, and no further
mitigation is required under CEQA.
3-3 This comment states that the City did not adequately analyze or permit improvements associated with the
Dog Park at Pantera Park Project. This dog park is located over 0.5-mile northeast of the project site, the
impacts of which are unrelated to the proposed Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project. However, it should
be noted that the City completed an IS/MND for the dog park, with a Notice of Determination approved for the
project in March 2012. As a result, the statute of limitations regarding this project expired over eight years
ago.
3-4 This comment is mostly for informational purposes to state that the Draft IS/MND incorrectly classifies the
sensitivity of on-site Cactus Wrens (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus) and to state that the entire population
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-47 Responses to Comments
of cactus wrens in coastal southern California is considered as a bird of conservation concern by the USFWS.
It further clarifies local status and declines in coastal Los Angeles County. Finally, the comment recommends
that compensatory mitigation of cactus scrub habitat be conducted at a minimum 5:1 ratio in degraded habitat
near extant Cactus Wren populations in Summitridge Park and/or Pantera Park. The City of Diamond Bar is
currently evaluating mitigation options between a conservation bank and on-site restoration in order to meet
the mitigation requirements of the CDFW and will finalize exact mitigation details based on consultations with
the CDFW.
3-5 This comment states that the IS/MND has discounted impacts to Cactus Wren by incorrectly addressing its
sensitivity and requiring no compensatory mitigation. The CDFW will be requiring compensatory mitigation for
project-related impacts to coast prickly pear scrub and California sagebrush – black sagebrush scrub, the two
habitat types that on-site Cactus Wrens were found to be inhabiting during surveys conducted in 2020.
Because these two communities will be mitigated for, no further response is necessary.
This comment also reiterates concerns regarding previous City actions and improvements allegedly without
CEQA review and acquisition of resource agency permits; refer to Response 3-2, above.
3-6 This comment provides a conclusion to the letter and contact information for the commenter. No response is
necessary.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2-48 Responses to Comments
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
PART III – MITIGATION MONITORING
AND REPORTING PROGRAM
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
3.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM
CEQA requires that when a public agency completes an environmental document which includes measures to mitigate
or avoid significant environmental effects, the public agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring plan. This
requirement ensures that environmental impacts found to be significant will be mitigated. The reporting or monitoring
plan must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).
In compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the attached Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
has been prepared for the proposed Canyon Loop Trail Improvement Project. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program is intended to provide verification that all mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study prepared for the
project are monitored and reported. Monitoring will include 1) verification that each mitigation measure has been
implemented; 2) recordation of the actions taken to implement each mitigation; and 3) retention of records in the project
file.
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program delineates responsibilities for monitoring the project, but also allows
the City of Diamond Bar and discretion in determining how best to monitor implementation. Monitoring procedures will
vary according to the type of mitigation measure. Adequate monitoring consists of demonstrating that monitoring
procedures took place and that mitigation measures were implemented.
Reporting consists of establishing a record that a mitigation measure is being implemented, and generally involves the
following steps:
The City distributes reporting forms to the appropriate entities for verification of compliance.
Departments/agencies with reporting responsibilities will review the Initial Study, which provides general
background information on the reasons for including specified mitigation measures.
Problems or exceptions to compliance will be addressed to the City as appropriate.
Periodic meetings may be held during project implementation to report on compliance of mitigation measures.
Responsible parties provide the City with verification that monitoring has been conducted and ensure, as
applicable, that mitigation measures have been implemented. Monitoring compliance may be documented
through existing review and approval programs such as field inspection reports and plan review.
The City prepares a reporting form periodically during the construction phase and an annual report
summarizing all project mitigation monitoring efforts.
Appropriate mitigation measures will be included in construction documents and/or conditions of
permits/approvals.
Minor changes to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, if required, would be made in accordance with
CEQA and would be permitted after further review and approval by the City. Such changes could include reassignment
of monitoring and reporting responsibilities, plan redesign to make any appropriate improvements, and/or modification,
substitution or deletion of mitigation measures subject to conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. No
change will be permitted unless the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program continues to satisfy the requirements
of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
January 2021 2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
This page intentionally left blank.
2.3.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING CHECKLIST Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks AESTHETICS AES-1 To minimize construction-related impacts to scenic vistas and the visual character and quality of the project area, the project contractor shall ensure that all construction materials, heavy-duty equipment, and debris piles are staged and screened from public view in a designated construction staging area. Staging areas shall be approved and subject to periodic field inspections by the City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department, or responsible designee(s). Review and Approval of Final Plans Prior to Issuance of Grading Permit; During Construction Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department or Responsible Designee(s) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BIO-1 Prior to construction and during the appropriate blooming periods for special-status plant species with the potential to occur within the survey area, a qualified botanist shall conduct a focused rare plant survey in areas with suitable habitat to determine presence or absence of special-status plant species. The surveys shall be floristic in nature (i.e., identifying all plant species to the taxonomic level necessary to determine rarity), and shall be inclusive of, at a minimum, the areas proposed for trail improvements and those immediately surrounding those areas. The results of the survey shall be documented in a letter report. If individual or populations of special-status plant species are found within the areas proposed for disturbance, measures to avoid and minimize impacts shall be recommended. The surveys and reporting shall follow 2018 California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or 2001 California Native Plant Society guidelines. Although not expected, if State- and/or Federally-listed plant species are present and avoidance is Rare Plant Surveys Conducted by Qualified Botanist Prior to Construction and During Appropriate Blooming Periods Project Botanist; City of Diamond Bar; USFWS; CDFW 2.3.aPacket Pg. 218Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 4 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks infeasible, consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or CDFW shall be required and an Incidental Take Permit(s) from the USFWS and/or CDFW shall be obtained prior to the commencement of project activities. BIO-2 In consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department shall obtain an Incidental Take Permit and prepare a low-effect habitat conservation plan (HCP) to permit removal of habitat suitable for and/or used by sensitive wildlife species, particularly coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica californica) known to occur on-site. Avoidance and minimization measures that may be required in a low-effect HCP for the proposed project, subject to consultation with the USFWS, include, but are not limited to, preconstruction nesting surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher and avoidance of any active nests or scheduling of work outside of the gnatcatcher nesting season, environmental training for all construction personnel, biological monitoring during initial vegetation removal, closing and restoration of any extraneous trail sections or breeding habitat to recreational use, provisions for pets (leashed pets, removal of pet waste), locations of trash receptacles, and on-site restoration and preservation of coastal sage scrub communities within the survey area (i.e., in the vicinity of the impacts). Incidental Take Permit Acquisition/ Preparation of HCP Resource Agency Permit Review; Prior to Construction Activities Project Biologist; City of Diamond Bar; USFWS; CDFW BIO-3 Project construction, equipment staging, mobilization, grading, ground disturbance activities, and vegetation removal shall be completed outside the avian breeding season. The City of Diamond Bar shall not perform any project construction or activities or remove or otherwise disturb vegetation on the project Completion of Preconstruction Nesting Surveys Prior to the Start of Construction Within 500-Foot Buffer of Project Site Project Biologist; City of Diamond Bar; USFWS 2.3.aPacket Pg. 219Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 5 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks site, or adjacent to the site, from February 15 to August 31, and as early as January 1, to avoid impacts to breeding/nesting birds and raptors. However, if avoidance of the avian breeding season is infeasible and if project-related construction activities are initiated during the nesting season for coastal California gnatcatcher (CAGN; Polioptila californica californica) and cactus wren (CACW; Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus) (February 15th through September 15th), a nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted within seven days prior to the start of construction within a 500-foot buffer of the project site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist with demonstrable experience identifying CAGN and CACW nesting behavior and finding their nests, and who has been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to conduct a CAGN survey. If an active CAGN or CACW nest is found during the survey, no project-related construction shall be allowed within 500 feet of an active CAGN nest or 300 feet of an active CACW nest, or within an alternative safe distance as determined by the qualified biologist based on topography, visual shielding, nest progress, and the type of construction and associated disturbance, until the active nest has been determined by the qualified biologist to have failed or to have successfully gone to completion (i.e., the nestlings have fledged and are no longer reliant on the nest). Results of the nesting bird clearance survey, shall be compiled in a memorandum and submitted to the City and the USFWS for project records. 2.3.aPacket Pg. 220Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks BIO-4 The City of Diamond Bar shall protect special-status wildlife resources during construction. A qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction clearance survey prior to any ground disturbance and/or vegetation removal to search for special-status wildlife resources that may be present within the construction area. The biologist shall be thoroughly familiar with the habitat requirements and life histories of special-status species that could occur. The biologist shall submit survey results, including negative results, to CDFW following the survey and prior to the start of construction. If project-related activities are to be initiated during the general avian nesting season (January 1st through August 31st), a pre-construction nesting bird clearance survey shall be conducted within a 500-foot radius of the project footprint by a qualified biologist no more than 14 days prior to the start of any vegetation removal or ground-disturbing activities. The qualified biologist shall survey all suitable nesting habitat at appropriate nesting times within the project’s development footprint, and areas within a biologically-defensible buffer zone surrounding the project’s development footprint. If no active nests are detected during the clearance survey, project activities may begin, and no additional avoidance and minimization measures would be required. If project activities are delayed or suspended for more than 7 days during the breeding season, surveys shall be repeated before work can resume. If an active nest is found, the bird species shall be identified and a “no-disturbance” buffer shall be established around the active nest. Buffers shall be clearly delineated and marked around the active nest Completion of Preconstruction Clearance Survey/Nesting Bird Survey Prior to the Start of Ground Disturbance or Vegetation Removal Project Biologist; City of Diamond Bar 2.3.aPacket Pg. 221Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 7 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks site as directed by the qualified biologist. The buffer shall be 300 feet around active passerine (perching birds and songbirds) nests, 500 feet around active non-listed raptor nests, and 0.5-mile around active California Endangered Species Act (CESA)-listed bird nests. The qualified biologist shall advise workers of the sensitivity of the buffered areas, and workers shall not work, trespass, or engage in activities that would disturb nesting birds near or inside the buffer. The qualified biologist shall periodically monitor any active nests to determine if project-related activities occurring outside the “no-disturbance” buffer disturb the birds and if the buffer should be increased. Once the young have fledged and left the nest, or the nest otherwise becomes inactive under natural conditions, project activities within the “no-disturbance” buffer may occur following an additional survey by the qualified biologist to search for any new nests in the restricted area. A qualified biological monitor approved by CDFW shall be present during vegetation removal or grubbing activities. Any special-status wildlife that is found within the construction area shall be encouraged to move elsewhere or shall be physically moved out of harm’s way by the biologist if necessary. The biological monitor shall have the necessary state and/or federal permits or letters of permission from the wildlife agencies to relocate wildlife as necessary. CULTURAL RESOURCES CUL-1 If previously unidentified cultural resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in the immediate area shall halt and a qualified archaeologist, defined as an archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards for archaeology, shall be During Construction; Preparation of Treatment Plan (If Resources are Found) During Ground-Disturbing Activities Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar; Project Archaeologist (If Necessary) 2.3.aPacket Pg. 222Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks contacted by the City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Director, or designated designee, immediately to evaluate the find. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility. If the discovery proves to be eligible for the CRHR and cannot be avoided by project activities, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted to mitigate any significant impacts to historical resources. In the event that an identified cultural resource is of Native American origin, the qualified archaeologist shall consult with the City of Diamond Bar Parks and Recreation Department staff to implement Native American consultation procedures. GEOLOGY AND SOILS GEO-1 If evidence of subsurface paleontological resources is found during construction, excavation and other construction activity in that area shall cease and the construction contractor shall contact the City of Diamond Bar Community Development Director. With direction from the Community Development Director, a paleontologist certified by the County of Los Angeles shall evaluate the find prior to resuming grading in the immediate vicinity of the find. If warranted, the paleontologist shall prepare and complete a standard Paleontological Resources Mitigation Program for the salvage and curation of the identified resources. Review of Paleontological Resources Mitigation Program (if Resources are Found); During Construction During Construction, Excavation and Other Construction Activity City of Diamond Bar; Project Paleontologist; Construction Contractor NOISE NOI-1 Prior to the initiation of construction, the City of Diamond Bar Director of Public Works, or authorized agents (such as the City’s Public Works Manager/Assistant City Engineer) acting within the scope of the particular duties delegated to them, shall Review of Project Plans and Specifications Periodic Site Inspections Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar 2.3.aPacket Pg. 223Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 9 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks ensure that all project plans and specifications stipulate that: All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other State-required noise attenuation devices. A construction notice shall be mailed to residents within a 500-foot radius of the project and shall indicate the dates and duration of construction activities, as well as provide a City of Diamond Bar staff contact name and a telephone number where residents can inquire about the construction process and register complaints. Construction haul routes shall be designed to avoid noise sensitive uses to the maximum extent feasible (e.g., residences etc.). During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers. Construction equipment staging areas shall be located away from adjacent sensitive receptors. Pursuant to City of Diamond Bar Municipal Code Section 8.12.720, all construction activities associated with the proposed project shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and on Saturdays. Construction on Sundays and Federal holidays shall be prohibited. 2.3.aPacket Pg. 224Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES TCR-1 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activity at the project site, the City of Diamond Bar shall retain a Native American monitor. The Native American monitor shall be selected from a tribe that has requested that a monitor be present, and in which the project site is within their ancestral region of occupation. The Native American monitor shall only be present on-site during the construction phases that involve ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities are defined as activities that may include, but are not limited to, grubbing, tree removals, boring, grading, excavation, drilling, and trenching. The Native American monitor shall complete daily monitoring logs that shall provide descriptions of the day’s activities, including construction activities, locations, soil, and any cultural materials identified. The on-site monitoring shall end when all ground-disturbing activities on the project site are completed, or when the Native American monitor has indicated that all upcoming ground-disturbing activities at the project site have little to no potential for impacting tribal cultural resources. Native American Monitoring During Construction Prior to Commencement of Any Ground Disturbing Activity Native American Monitor; Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar TCR-2 In the event tribal cultural resources are discovered during project construction, construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of the find (not less than the surrounding 50 feet) until the find can be assessed. All tribal cultural resources unearthed by project activities shall be evaluated by the Native American monitor and a qualified archaeologist if one is present. If the resources are Native American in origin, the affected tribe will retain it/them in the form and/or manner the tribe deems appropriate, for educational, cultural and/or historic purposes. Work may continue in other parts of the project site while evaluation and any required recovery activities take Evaluation and Recovery of Any Tribal Cultural Resources Found During Construction In the Event Tribal Cultural Resources are Found Native American Monitor; Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar 2.3.aPacket Pg. 225Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 11 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Number Mitigation Measure Monitoring and Reporting Process Monitoring Milestones Party Responsible for Monitoring VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE Initials Date Remarks place. 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. TCR-3 In the event human remains are encountered during project construction, said remains shall require proper treatment in accordance with Health and Safety Code 7050.5, which 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, the coroner shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission and Public Resources Code (PRC) 5097.98 shall be followed. PRC 5097.98 requires identification of the “most likely descendent,” and that remains are investigated and that appropriate recommendations are made for treatment of the remains. Treatment of Human Remains (if Found During Construction) County Coroner to be Contacted Within 24 Hours of Find County Coroner; Construction Contractor; City of Diamond Bar 2.3.aPacket Pg. 226Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)
CANYON LOOP TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Final Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration January 2021 12 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program This page intentionally left blank. 2.3.aPacket Pg. 227Attachment: Canyon Loop_FINAL IS-MND_Jan 2021 (Canyon Loop Trail Project Update)