The conclusions that a 201,000-square-foot logistics warehouse proposed for northwest Upland won’t add to air pollution, global warming or cause traffic tie-ups is being questioned by state environmental agencies and two adjacent cities.
The South Coast Air Quality Management District says the Bridge Development Partners project’s analysis contained in a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) underestimated the number of truck trips and the resulting air pollution impacts to the community. At issue is the health effects caused by tailpipe emissions from trucks, vans and automobiles entering and leaving the distribution center.
“The Lead Agency did not perform a mobile source health risk assessment analysis,” concluded the SCAQMD’s Lijin Sun, program supervisor for the California Environmental Quality Act and planning, rule development and area sources.
Bridge, through its consultant Kimley-Horn, responded to the anti-smog agency, saying it has performed a health risk study, which specifically examines possible occurrences of cancer, and found that the warehouse planned for the corner of Foothill Boulevard and Central Avenue will produce 1.92 cases of cancer per 1 million residents, well below the acceptable level of 10 cancer cases in 1 million set by the SCAQMD.
“This project is 1.92 incidences of cancer. That is well below the 10 incidences per million. It is a minuscule percent,” said Heather Crossner, vice president of Bridge Development Partners during an interview on Wednesday, Feb. 5.
In addition, the SCAQMD criticized Bridge for talking about green measures instead of promising alternatives that would reduce diesel particulate pollution, the main pollutant that causes lung disease and premature death, studies show. Sun of the SCAQMD wrote that Bridge should “go beyond providing information by requiring the use of zero-emission or near-zero-emission heavy-duty trucks during operation.”
Bridge has pledged to provide 30 electric vehicle charging stations on-site. It will build 0.75 megawatts of rooftop solar, use only electric-powered forklifts and all-electric and battery-operated landscaping tools. As a result, the project will have “net-zero” electricity consumption, further reducing the release of greenhouse gases from power plants, Crossner said.
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife said it disagrees with the conclusions that building a warehouse on the 50-acre site will not destroy natural vegetation and in particular, the habitat needed for the burrowing owl, a species of special concern. The agency said burrowing owls were spotted immediately next to the site and the developer failed to perform a habitat assessment.
The city needs to determine the potential effects of the development on the burrowing owls, wrote Scott Wilson, CDFW environmental program manager. Bridge said in the document that it will conduct a search for any owls before allowing the start of any construction activity. If owls are found, they may be moved from the site according to state rules.
“If they comply with the requirement of the CDFW I’m not going to make an issue out of it. But it pains me to see this habitat being lost,” said Councilwoman Janice Elliott during an interview Feb. 5.
The developer said the project will be one building, approximately 191,096 square feet for warehouse/parcel delivery uses and 10,000 square feet would be office/retail uses. Also, it would “add less than 1% to the existing traffic on Baseline Road, approximately 2% to the existing traffic on Benson Avenue and less than 5% to Foothill Boulevard.” The developer added that about 98% of the vehicle trips generated would be automobiles or vans and not heavy-duty diesel trucks.
The project goes before the Planning Commission for a possible vote on Feb. 12. It would consist of a 201,096-square-foot warehouse/delivery/retail office center with 16 dock-high doors for trucks and 16 van-loading doors; 224 parking spaces; 12 stalls of truck trailer parking and 1,104 van parking stalls.
The city of Montclair wrote it “remains concerned” about additional trucks using Central Avenue, saying they also would go through Montclair to get to the 10 Freeway. Instead, it wants Upland to require the developer to use Mountain Avenue as a truck route.
Claremont wrote a lengthy response, saying the warehouse/logistics distribution center “could have a detrimental effect on future traffic flows on nearby Claremont streets and intersections.”
Claremont said the MND underestimates the number of truck trips generated once the warehouse is operational. Though Bridge has not signed a tenant, it has said it is working with a Fortune 10 company. Many residents and others assume the company is Amazon, but that has not been confirmed.
By not naming the tenant, the exact use and the details of how the warehouse will operate remains unclear, wrote Brad Johnson, Claremont’s community development director. Claremont requested that driveway counts be conducted at three different Amazon facilities within the region as a comparison. Bridge responded, saying its consultants did a review of nearby Amazon facilities.
