Apple Valley City Council
October 11, 2022

Appendix F
Radar Certifications

Appendix G
FHWA Roadway Classification Map

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD
SAN

BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15T
SEE MAP 15T54
SEE MAP 15T52
SEE MAP 15U13
!(

BELL MOUNTAIN
SAN

BERNARDINO
!"#15
Cardova Rd
Johnson Rd
Dale Evans Pkwy
Stoddard Wells Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15T53

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD
SAN

BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15T
SEE MAP 15T
SEE MAP 15T53
SEE MAP 15U14
SAN

BERNARDINO
Cardova
Rd
Somis Ave
Dachshund Ave
Navajo Rd
Lafayette St
N
a
v
a
j
o
R
d
Johnson Rd
Stoddard Wells Rd
C
e
n
t
r
al R
d
Stoddard Wells Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15T54

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD

SAN BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15T53
SEE MAP 15U14
SEE MAP 15U12
SEE MAP 15U23
!(

VICTORVILLE
SAN

BERNARDINO
|}18
!"#15
M
o
n
d
a
m
on
R
d
Apple
Valley Rd
N D St
Kiowa Rd
Victor St
Avalon
Ave
Ridgecrest
Rd
Chippewa Rd
Wika Rd
Green
Tree Blvd
Abbey Ln
Choco Rd
Spring
Va
l
l
ey
Pkwy
Mojave Dr
Seneca Rd
M
a
n
dan
Rd
Po
h
e
z
R
d
6Th St
B St
Tao Rd
Blackfoot Rd
Falchion Rd
7Th St
Standing Rock Ave
Pine Ridge Ave
Symeron Rd
Zuni Rd
Choco Rd
Flathead Rd
Waalew Rd
C
r
o
n
e
s
e
Rd
Tomahawk Rd
Rimrock Rd
Yates Rd
Otoe Rd
Outer Hwy 18 S
Thunderbird Rd
Rincon Rd
Dale Evans Pkwy
Dale Evans Pkwy
Apple Valley Rd
Outer Hwy 18 N
Riverside Dr
Outer Hwy 18 N
Mandan Rd
Seneca Rd
Shoshonee Rd
Hesperia
Rd
Outer Hwy 18 S
Yucca Loma Rd
Stoddard Wells Rd
Corwin Rd
Rancherias Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15U13

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD

SAN BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15T54
SEE MAP 15U15
SEE MAP 15U13
SEE MAP 15U24
!(
APPLE
VALLEY

APPLE VALLEY
SAN

BERNARDINO
|}18
Nanticoke
Rd
Hanford Rd
Fresno Rd
R
a
m
o
n
a
R
d
Gustine
St
Somis Ave
Headquarters Dr
Flathead
Rd
Rancherias Rd
Corwin Rd Dakota Rd
Navajo Rd
Elkalo Rd
Mesquite Rd
Yucca Loma Rd
Waalew Rd
Outer Hwy 18 S
Kiowa Rd
Corwin Rd
Pine Ridge Ave
Ocotilla Rd
Outer Highway 18 S
Cahuilla Rd
Standing Rock Ave
Outer Hwy 18 N
Otoe Rd
Laguna Seca Dr
Navajo Rd
South Rd
Ramona Ave
Thunderbird Rd
Standing Rock Ave
Joshua Rd
Central Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15U14

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD

SAN BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15U13
SEE MAP 15U24
SEE MAP 15U22
SEE MAP 15U33
!(
!(
THORN

HESPERIA
SAN

BERNARDINO
Kiowa Rd
Green Tree
Blvd
Santa Fe
Ave E
Willow
St
Van Dusen Rd
Mauna
Loa St
Carob St
Mesa St
Pah Ute Rd
Nisqualli Rd
C Ave
Roundup Way
Ottawa Rd
Silica Dr
Sycamore St
Jasmine St
Industrial Blvd
2Nd Ave
Winona St
S
p
r
i
n
g
Va
l
el
y
P
kw
y
Rock Springs Rd
Reata Rd
Main St
E Ave
Ottawa St
Rincon Rd
1St Ave
Eucalyptus St
Lemon St
Jacaranda Ave
Tussing Ranch Rd
Orchid Ave
D
e
e
p
C
r
e
e
k
R
d
Choiceana Ave
Ridgecrest Rd
Apple Valley Rd
Del Oro Rd
Deep Creek Rd
Live Oak St
Sitting Bull Rd
Santa Fe Ave E
I Ave
Peach Ave
Hesperia Rd
Bear Valley Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15U23

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
In Cooperation With The

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL AGENCIES Ü
0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1
Mile SIGN ROUTES

INTERSTATE
£¤3 U.S.
|ÿ
1 STATE
COUNTY BOUNDARY §¨¦5

CITY BOUNDARY

RAILROAD

SAN BERNARDINO
SEE MAP 15U14
SEE MAP 15U25
SEE MAP 15U23
SEE MAP 15U34
!(

COTNERS
CORNER
SAN

BERNARDINO
|}18
Quinnault
Rd
Central Rd
Desert
View Rd
Central Rd
Nisqually Rd
Pah Ute Rd
Dennison Rd
Sitting Bull Rd
Roundup Way
Del Oro Rd
Nisqually Rd
Pah Ute Rd
Joshua Rd
Tussing Ranch Rd
Bear Valley Rd Mesquite Rd
Joshua Rd
Navajo Rd
Milpas Dr
Valley Vista Ave
Wren St
Roundup Way
Ottawa Rd
1 1
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 8
9 9
10 10
J
J
I
I
H
H
G
G
F
F
E
E
D
D
C
C
B
B
A
A
San Bernardino County

APPROVED

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
________________________________
FOR: VINCENT P. MAMMANO

DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
Date: 01/28/2022
LOCAL 7
MINOR COLLECTOR 6
MAJOR COLLECTOR 5
MINOR ARTERIAL 4
OTHER PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL 3
OTHER FWY OR EXPWY 2
INTERSTATE 1

FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
MAP 15U24

Appendix H
Caltrans District 8 - 2019 Crash Data

Crash Summary - Overall Summary by District
FOR 2019 PREPARED 10/19/2021
TRAVEL AND CRASH SUMMARY FOR DISTRICT 08

LANE TYPE ROAD TRAVEL CRASHES VICTIMS

MILES (MVM) TOTAL PDO INJURY FATAL KILLED INJURED
RATES
ACC/MVM F+I/MVM

FATALITIES
/100 MVM

RURAL AREAS
678.6 1,103.3 1,010 567 419 24 25 641

4.0 16.5 38 22 14 2 2 19 2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND 49.8 342.1 262 149 103 10 11 154

0.92 0.40

2.30 0.97

0.77 0.33

2.27 12.09

3.22 4+ DIV 732.5 1,462.0 1,310 738 536 36 38 814 0.90 0.39 2.60

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

36.4 44.4

96.1 293.0
99 205
48 120
48 80
3 5
3 5
64 117

1.03 0.70

0.53 0.29

3.12 1.71
4+ DIV EXP 813.3 1,851.1 1,614 906 664 44 46 995 0.87 0.38 2.48 NON FWY 413.2 6,008.2 3,180 2,193 927 60 70 1,495 0.53 0.16 1.17 FREEWAY 1,226.5 7,859.3 4,794 3,099 1,591 104 116 2,490 0.61 0.22 1.48 TOTAL

URBAN AREAS
128.7 445.7 481 245 228 8 9 322

15.5 142.3 123 58 59 6 8 108 2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND 74.2 660.4 876 381 480 15 18 735

1.08 0.53

0.86 0.46

1.33 0.75

2.02 5.62

2.73 4+ DIV 218.4 1,248.4 1,480 684 767 29 35 1,165 1.19 0.64 2.80

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

13.9 19.2

79.3 255.7
105
166
73 97
31 68
1 1
1 1
61 110

1.32 0.65

0.40 0.27

1.26 0.39
4+ DIV EXP 251.5 1,583.4 1,751 854 866 31 37 1,336 1.11 0.57 2.34 NON FWY 337.9 17,253.0 16,380 11,125 5,161 94 94 7,427 0.95 0.30 0.54 FREEWAY 589.4 18,836.4 18,131 11,979 6,027 125 131 8,763 0.96 0.33 0.70 TOTAL

DISTRICTWIDE
807.4 1,549.1 1,491 812 647 32 34 963

19.5 158.9 161 80 73 8 10 127 2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND 124.0 1,002.5 1,138 530 583 25 29 889

0.96 0.44

1.01 0.51

1.14 0.61

2.19 6.29

2.89 4+ DIV 950.9 2,710.4 2,790 1,422 1,303 65 73 1,979 1.03 0.50 2.69

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

50.3 63.6
175.4
548.7
204
371
121
217
79 148
4 6
4 6
125
227

1.16 0.68

0.47 0.28

2.28 1.09
4+ DIV EXP 1,064.8 3,434.6 3,365 1,760 1,530 75 83 2,331 0.98 0.47 2.42 NON FWY 751.1 23,261.2 19,560 13,318 6,088 154 164 8,922 0.84 0.27 0.71 FREEWAY 1,815.9 26,695.7 22,925 15,078 7,618 229 247 11,253 0.86 0.29 0.93 TOTAL
20

Statewide Travel / Crash Summary
FOR 2019 PREPARED 10/19/2021

TRAVEL AND CRASH SUMMARY FOR SB COUNTY
LANE
ROAD
MILES
TRAVEL
(MVM) TOTAL

CRASHES

PDO INJURY FATAL

VICTIMS

KILLED INJURED

RUTRYAPEL
2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND

59.1 2.6

4.8 129.7

6.8 31.3
146
9 22
100 43
5 4
15 7
3 0
0 3 64
0 4
0 9
4+ DIV 66.5 167.9 177 120 54 3 3 77

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

47.1 51.6
125.6
462.1
86 331
52 236
31 91
3 4
5 5
49 161
4+ DIV EXP 165.1 755.6 594 408 176 10 13 287
NON FWY 10.6 114.2 44 27 16 1 1 20
FREEWAY 175.7 869.8 638 435 192 11 14 307
TOTAL
URBAN
2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND

41.4 6.7

17.7 132.4

37.1 129.5
112
63 326
58 50
45 18
211 114
4 0
1 4 74
0 22
1 149
4+ DIV 65.7 299.0 501 314 182 5 5 245

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

8.5 4.1

29.5 36.0
31 29
18 24
12 5
1 0
1 0
18 9
4+ DIV EXP 78.3 364.6 561 356 199 6 6 272
NON FWY 40.0 1,039.1 1,002 710 285 7 8 412
FREEWAY 118.3 1,403.7 1,563 1,066 484 13 14 684
TOTAL

COUNTYWIDE
2 AND 3 LN
4+ UND
100.4

9.3 22.5
262.2

43.9 160.8
258
72 348
158 93
50 22
226 121
7 0
1 7 138
0 26
1 158
4+ DIV 132.2 466.9 678 434 236 8 8 322

SUBTOTAL
2 AND 3 LN EXP

55.6 55.7
155.2
498.1
117
360
70 260
43 96
4 4
6 5
67 170
4+ DIV EXP 243.5 1,120.2 1,155 764 375 16 19 559
NON FWY 50.6 1,153.3 1,046 737 301 8 9 432
FREEWAY 294.0 2,273.5 2,201 1,501 676 24 28 991
TOTAL
59

Town Council Agenda Report
Date: October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Subject: Adoption of the Village Specific Plan and associated Environmental Impact Report (EIR) - General Plan Amendment No. 2021-002; Zone Change No. 2021-001; Specific Plan No. 2021-001
From: Douglas Robertson, Town Manager
Submitted by: Daniel Alcayaga, AICP, Planning Manager
Planning
Budgeted Item: Yes No N/A

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Based upon the information contained within this report, and any input received from the public at the hearing, the Planning Commission recommends that the Town Council move to:

A. Adopt environmental findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, certify the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2021110271), and adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Village Specific Plan.

B. Approve GPA No. 2021-002; ZC No. 2021-001; SP No. 2021-001 This General Plan Amendment will represent the 2nd General Plan Amendment Cycle

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed Village Specific Plan guides the long-term development and redevelopment of a 1.5±-mile segment of Highway 18, including the Village commercial area. It revises land use designations and sets forth development guidelines in the context of five (5) planning Districts to enhance the Village’s identity as a downtown retail destination, guide future development of vacant parcels and redevelopment of underutilized parcels, and protect and expand residential neighborhoods with guidelines that scale down development at the periphery of the Village. Proposed circulation improvements to Highway 18 and Yucca Loma Road/Navajo Road are intended to minimize traffic conflicts, integrate multimodal facilities, and improve access and safety throughout the area.

BACKGROUND
The downtown Village, as it’s known today, was at its height in the mid-century, centered around State Route 18, locally known as Happy Trails Highway. For many decades, many challenges have existed in the Village area that this Specific Plan intends to resolve, including but not limited to the location of Highway 18, the Outer Highway frontages, size of lots, age of buildings, the existing drainage channels, lack of public parking and no cohesive design.

In 2007, a Property and Business Improvement District (PBID), a non-profit Association was formed to assess properties and fund added amenities to the area, which would include landscaping, signage, road improvements, marketing and special events. In order to take the next steps to encourage revitalization of the Village, in 2019, the PBID submitted a formal request to have a Specific Plan prepared for the Village, which would be administered by the Town. Adopting a Specific Plan for the Village is consistent with the goals of the Town’s General Plan that encourage the formation of a Village Specific Plan to encourage revitalization and reuse of the Village to attract more visitors and shoppers to the small businesses that make up the area (General Plan Policies 5.E, 6.C, and Programs 6.C.1 through 6.C.3).

In March 2020, the Town Council, in partnership with the PBID Association, initiated a process to hire a consultant to prepare the Village Specific Plan. The Council awarded a contract to Terra Nova Planning and Research, Inc. for the preparation of a specific plan for the Apple Valley Village and all required environmental documentation to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Public Outreach: Several outreach efforts have been facilitated in the preparation process of the Draft Village Specific Plan to ensure meaningful input was received from the community. Input from these efforts was used to develop a draft policy document that reflects the community’s vision for the Apple Valley Village. Key outreach efforts include:
 A community wide online survey was taken in December 2020 and January 2021. A total of 229 comments were received. This survey was advertised through social media and the Town’s and the PBID’s websites.  Several group interviews/virtual meetings occurred with stakeholders (i.e., business owners and organizations located in the Village) in Winter of 2021.  On March 17, 2021, the results of the survey and stakeholder interviews, as well as the preliminary recommendations were presented at a Joint Town Council and Planning Commission Meeting.
 On November 17, 2021, a presentation was made to the Village PBID Association Board on the latest draft of the Village Specific Plan  On December 8, 2021, a community workshop was held to receive community input of the latest draft of the Village Specific Plan. This workshop was advertised through social media.

 Two public review comment periods occurred to provide the public an opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR.

Purpose: The Draft Specific Plan intends to provide community leaders with a welldefined and practicable strategy that will drive incremental actions the Town and PBID can take to re-energize the Village planning area and enhance its historical identity. An important part of the Specific Plan process is to identify community design preferences for public improvement and determine where these improvements and investments will be the most impactful.

A. Five Districts: The Draft Specific Plan proposes to create five districts, each with its own identifying characteristics yet unified through interconnection, development standards and design guidelines. Generally, the same land uses will continue to be allowed with a few exceptions as specified below. The Specific Plan does not assign specific land uses by parcel, instead land uses are assigned by District, as follows:
 District 1: Village Core
 District 2: Village Services South
 District 3: Village Services North
 District 4: Residential + Recreation
 District 5: Residential

District 1 is the heart of downtown envisioned as a commercial and entertainment district. Retail, office, minor auto repair, restaurant, and breweries will continue to be allowed. New to the Village is the allowance of multi-family residential (6-20 dwelling units per acres) on properties fronting on to Outer Highway 18. Under the proposed Specific Plan, District 1 consolidates the existing Village Commercial (CV) and General Commercial (C-G) Districts. District 1 includes the properties located on the south side of Arapahoe, to the west of Quinnault Road, which are currently zoned Multi-Family Residential (R-M).

Districts 2 & 3 are commercial service districts that support a mix of commercial retail, office/professional, auto repair, and light industrial uses. Districts 2 & 3 incorporate the existing Service Commercial (C-S) District, as well as properties currently zoned Public (P) and Mobile Home Park (MHP). Specifically, District 3 includes properties presently zoned C-G located on the west side of Central Road to the north and south of Highway 18. Multi-Family Residential would not be allowed in Districts 2 and 3.

Districts 4 & 5 are proposed to be primarily Multi-family Residential (6-20 dwelling units per acres). Both districts are presently zoned R-M, as well as presently zoned P and MHP Districts.

In all Districts, Public uses will continue to be allowed. New mobile home parks will no longer be permitted in the proposed Village Specific Plan and will be considered legal non-conforming. The long-term vision is that the existing mobile home parks in the Village would either convert to commercial use (where they occur near the Highway), or be redeveloped as high-density residential projects, providing housing to activate the businesses in the Village.

B. Design Guidelines: The Specific Plan offers land use planning and design guidance by showcasing ideas for individual properties and public spaces that are either underdeveloped or that currently disrupt land use synergies. The purpose of providing real examples of design opportunities and enhancements for specific sites is to communicate the overall idea, rather than to mandate what any individual property owner or business owner should do.

Chapter 4 of the Village Specific Plan proposes new design guidelines with text and illustrations envisioning quality buildings, street furniture, landscaping, signage, lighting, hardscape elements, paseos and wayfinding. Pages 2-13 through 2-18 provide conceptual development plans to demonstrate real examples of revitalization potential throughout the village planning area. The text and illustrations in the Design Guidelines are intended to inspire and promote creativity.

They are not intended to dictate solutions or limit creativity. The guidelines are intended to be flexible if development plans adheres to the general design principles in a meaningful extent. New to the Village area, the Specific Plan offers examples of potential metal buildings that would be acceptable (see Pages 4-4, 4-

6, 4-7, 4-11, 4-13), as well as encouraging a mix of eclectic materials that can express each owner’s vision for his or her property.

C. Parking: Under the Village Specific Plan, each new use as part of a new development or new occupancy shall provide at least the minimum number of parking spaces required by the Village Specific Plan. This may include providing parking on-site; on-street; or through parking credits at central parking lots when available. Unprecedented to the Town, the Draft Specific Plan will allow on-street parking to count towards required parking in the Village area. On-street parking credits can be assigned to any on-street parking space, at a 1 to 1 ratio, when such parking abuts the project’s boundaries. Parking spaces can be angled parking on Highway 18 or on-street parallel parking on other Town streets. Additionally, the Specific Plan provides allowances for shared parking based on peak uses (day/night/weekend) land uses. Shared parking can allow for parking reductions when such reductions are substantiated with parking demand study and demonstrating different peak uses. In addition, parking credits can be secured in future planned public parking lots, which will require that the Town and PBID work together to identify properties and build public parking in the future.

In Districts 1 through 3, the Specific Plan recommends a reduction in parking requirements for retail and restaurant uses to encourage these types of uses directly on the corridor (see Pages 3-26, 3-28, 3-30). Although there would be a parking shortage along the corridor, such shortages would be made up by the surplus of parking outside of the corridor, as well as the implementation of onstreet parking allowances; share parking allowances; and availability of future public parking.

A parking analysis was completed as part of the preparation of the Village Specific Plan to determined how parking is distributed and where it will be needed in the future. Based on this analysis, the Draft Specific Plan recommends a host of modern parking alternatives and strategies. The parking analysis determined that dedicated parking lots would be needed in Districts 1 and 2. In Districts 3 through 5, more traditional parking strategies can be implemented. The Specific Plan calls for the acquisition and establishment of public parking to assist with parking shortages within the corridor. Although specific parcels are not identified, the Specific Plan identifies areas within the Village where parking spaces should be established. If public parking is provided as recommended, it is believed that sufficient parking will be provided in the Specific Plan area with a buffer of 10 to 15 percent. The analysis recommends strategies, such as small lot purchase and consolidation; long term leases of vacant or underutilized properties; joint venture

or incentivized development; and parking incentives to consolidate multiple parcels.
i) Circulation plan: The Village Specific Plan proposes to establish a network of Major Thoroughfares and Local streets. New street sections for Major Thoroughfares and Local streets are proposed which include enhanced pedestrian and bike facilities. All street sections incorporate landscape parkways between the street and the sidewalk/multi-use path. As projects are proposed with the Specific Plan area, they will be required to provide half-width improvements to include both the required travel way and the pedestrian improvements. In the long term, it is likely that the Town will also need to implement improvement projects to connect gaps in sidewalks and parkways.

Timing of all improvements recommended by the Village Specific Plan will be based on a number of factors, including development patterns, availability of funds, and traffic volumes as the Village and Town develop. ii) Highway 18 Major Improvement Alternatives: The Specific Plan offers two alternatives for Highway 18 improvements, including Alternative 1 which would include a series of roundabouts at all intersections within the corridor, and Alternative 2, which would include a series of traffic signals at all intersections within the corridor. These Alternatives are discussed in detail on Pages 5-1 through 5-17 of the EIR.
(a) Alternative 1 - Roundabouts. This alternative would involve installation of roundabouts at all intersections along Highway 18 with one lane of traffic in each direction from Navajo to Central Roads. Traffic lanes along the roundabouts could be both multi-lane and single lane with marked crosswalks to allow pedestrians to safely cross the corridor. The roundabouts would have a minimum 10-foot-wide raised pedestrian refuge area, or an island separating the roundabout entry and exit lanes.

Outer Highways on both sides would be widened to provide on-street parking and kept separate from the Highway, and each would be one direction. A Class II bikeway would be provided on both sides of the Highway, and a separate Class II multi-use pathway would occur on the south side of the Highway between Yucca Loma Road and Navajo Road. Under Alternative 1, Powhattan Road would serve as an eastwest major thoroughfare as an alternative route for traffic.

(b) Alternative 2 - Traffic Signals. This alternative would result in traditional traffic signals at key intersections throughout the corridor.

Frontage roads are retained but modified as one-way street with angled parking and elimination of conflicting movements where frontage roads intersect cross streets. Left turn bays on the Highway would be maintained, reducing the space available the Outer Highway for widened sidewalks and landscape parkways. This alternative would include pedestrian crosswalk timers, as well as pedestrian refuge islands.

The area currently taken up by drainage channels on both sides of the Highway will be available to create some additional space for aesthetic improvements, and Class II bike lanes would be provided on the Highway.

Additional traffic signals would be installed at:
 The new Yucca Loma Road realignment with Highway 18;
 Highway 18 at Pawnee Road; and
 The new realigned at Hitt Road with Headquarters Drive Intersections.

These additional intersections also shorten the distance for pedestrian crossings along the Highway to ¼ mile, to make safe crossings more

accessible.
iii) Traffic Control Improvements: The Specific Plan recommends four-way stops signs at Quinnault and Powhattan, as well as Quinnault and Ottawa Roads. Additionally, traffic signals are recommended at the following intersections:
 Navajo Road and Yucca Loma
 Navajo and Powhatan
 Ottawa and Navajo
 Ottawa and Central
 Powhattan and Central
 Headquarters and Central
iv) Realignment Improvement Plans: The circulation plan recommends two roadway improvement realignments. These include:
 Yucca Loma Road west of Navajo Road would be extended northeasterly from the south side of Highway 18, intersect with Navajo Road at Arapaho Avenue (extended) on the north side of the Highway. This realignment is already planned by the Town for the long term, with our without the Specific Plan.

 Headquarters Drive would be realigned southerly on the north side of the Highway to intersect at Hitt Road, creating a full new intersection, and an opportunity for a pedestrian crossing. v) Controlled Crosswalk Technology: Uncontrolled mid-block crosswalks are not recommended anywhere in the Specific Plan. As part of a comprehensive crosswalk system, the Village Specific Plan recommends installing a mid-block crossing Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB), an approved flashing warning sign. They include two rectangular-shaped yellow indications. The locations appropriate for RRFB include:
 Highway 18, near Del Mar Road; and
 Highway 18, midpoint between Pawnee Road and Quinnault Road.
vi) Pedestrian Bridges: The Village Specific Plan recommends pedestrian bridges to be constructed along Highway 18 located at the midpoint between Navajo Road and Pawnee Road, as well as the east end of Highway 18 as it connects Tonikan Road. Elevators would be necessary to comply with accessibility (handicap) requirements. These bridges, if constructed, would serve both as safe pedestrian corridors, and as monumentation identifying that the visitor has arrived in the Village.

D. Public Art: All new non-residential developments and new residential developments with 10 or more units are proposed to be subject to public art development standards. New development will be subject to an on-site public art project or make a monitory contribution to the Town’s Village Public Art fund.

Public art shall consist of murals, sculptures, interpretive plaques, signage and monumentations. If the Specific Plan is approved, the Town would develop a public art program as a follow-up action.

Under the on-site public art recommendations, the developer would be required to acquire and install a public art project on or in the vicinity of the development site.

The value of the public art project shall equal or exceed 0.5% of the valuation of the development. Any such public art project would be reviewed by the Village Public Art Committee, made up of members appointed by the Town Council and the PBID. The Committee would make recommendations to the Town Council, which will be responsible for final approval of all public art projects. Prior to occupancy, agreement would need to be executed setting forth the ownership, maintenance responsibilities, and insurance coverage for the public art project.

Public art would be required within roundabouts and landscaped medians on Highway 18.

E. Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): Pursuant to CEQA, the Town, acting as a lead agency, has prepared an Environmental Impact

Report (EIR) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts related to the Village Specific Plan (project).

Public Review Periods:
 A 30-day public review period for the Notice of Preparation occurred between November 19, 20221 and December 20, 2021.
 A virtual scoping meeting was held on December 2, 2021 at 4:00 p.m. via Zoom to provide the public an opportunity to learn more about this proposed Project and provide comments on the possible environmental effects the Town should study in the EIR.
 A 45-day public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report occurred on April 4, 2022 and ended on May 19, 2022
 A 45-day public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report occurred on April 4, 2022 and ended on May 19, 2022
 A 45-day public review period for the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report occurred on July 18, 2022 and ended on September 1, 2022.

During the public review period for the Draft EIR, the Town received three comments. One additional comment was received during the second public review period. All comment letters and responses to comments were prepared and included in the Final EIR for the project in accordance with CEQA.

As described in the Draft EIR, project impacts were found to have no impact or to be less than significant in most topic areas. It was determined that impacts to Biological and Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, Transportation and Traffic, and Tribal Cultural Resources would be less than significant with mitigation measures. Such mitigation measures are outlined in the Final EIR (Attachment 2).

The impacts associated with operational greenhouse gas emissions will exceed established standards, and although all feasible mitigation measures have been considered, impacts will remain significant and unavoidable. As a result, Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared and considered by the Town Council as a part of the EIR’s certification.

CEQA requires that an EIR analyze a reasonable range of feasible alternatives that meet most or all project objectives while reducing or avoiding one or more significant environmental effects of the project. Alternatives were considered and it was determined that regardless of which Alternative is in place, future development projects would be required to comply with the same regulations and mitigation measures. Alternative 2, which would result in less residential and commercial development, was identified as the environmentally superior

alternative. However, Alternative 2 would not meet all of the project objectives and would not maximize the development potential of the Village. Therefore, the Specific Plan as proposed is considered the superior alternative.

FISCAL IMPACT
None

ATTACHMENTS

1. Village Specific Plan (Exhibit “A”) (Provided under a separate attachment) – On file in the Town Clerks Office and online at applevalley.org

2. Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) (Provided under a separate attachment) – On file in the Town Clerks Office and online at applevalley.org

3. Ordinance No. 560 (Zone Change and Specific Plan)

4. Resolution No. 2022- 39 (General Plan Amendment)

5. Resolution No. 2022-40 (Environmental Impact Report)

ORDINANCE NO. 560

AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2021-001
AND SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 2021-001 FOR THE VILLAGE

SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, The General Plan of the Town of Apple Valley was adopted by the Town Council on August 11, 2009; and
WHEREAS, The Village Specific Plan is intended to guide the long-term development and redevelopment of a 1.5±-mile segment of Highway 18, including the Village commercial area, and parcels generally bounded by Arapahoe and Esaws Avenues on the north and Ottawa Road on the south, Central Road on the east, and the realigned Yucca Loma and Navajo Road on the west. It revises land use designations and sets forth development guidelines in the context of five (5) planning Districts to enhance the Village’s identity as a downtown retail destination, guide future development of vacant parcels and redevelopment of underutilized parcels, and protect and expand residential neighborhoods with guidelines that scale down development at the periphery of the Village. Proposed circulation improvements to Highway 18 and Yucca Loma Road/Navajo Road are intended to minimize traffic conflicts, integrate multimodal facilities, and improve access and safety throughout the area; and WHEREAS, The overall objectives of the Specific Plan are to:
 Create a vibrant neighborhood that will stand the test of time.  Expand the identity of the Village from Highway 18 throughout the Village boundary.
 Have a creative, cohesive and harmonious look and feel, with inviting streetscapes and attractive building façades.
 Enhance connectivity and access throughout the Village.  Create a sense of place with interesting public spaces and paseos to increase walkability.
 Be a convenient place for locals and visitors to stop, shop, and do business.  Be a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.  Attract an eclectic mix of retail, services, specialty shops, and restaurants.  Strengthen partnerships between the Town, the PBID and business and property owners to fund and implement improvements.

WHEREAS, Zone Change No. 2021-001 and Specific Plan No. 2021-001 are consistent with the General Plan of the Town of Apple Valley; and WHEREAS, On May 18, 2022 and June 15, 2022, the Planning Commission of the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed and advertised public hearing, and

Ordinance No.560
adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-003 recommending adoption of this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed public hearing on Zone Change No. 2021-001 and Specific Plan No. 2021-001, receiving testimony from the public and adopt Ordinance No. 560; and
WHEREAS, Zone Change No. 2021-001 and Specific Plan No. 2021-001 are consistent with the Land Use Element goals and policies of the Town’s General Plan and Title 9 “Development Code” of the Municipal Code of the Town of Apple Valley and shall promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the Town of Apple Valley; and
WHEREAS, on October 1, 2022, Zone Change No. 2021-001 and Specific Plan No. 2021-001 was duly noticed in the Victor Valley Daily Press, a newspaper of general circulation within the Town of Apple Valley; and
WHEREAS, The Town of Apple Valley, as lead agency, determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared pursuant to CEQA in order to analyze all adverse environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission recommends that the Town Council certify said Environmental Impact Report based on the following findings and that the Town Council also make the following findings:

1. That the Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the Town’s implementation procedures.

The Town Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the Project. The mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Report have been incorporated into the Project and/or will be made part of the approval of the project and these measures will mitigate most potential significant effects. Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions cannot be fully mitigated; therefore, the Town Council adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

2. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that most impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions cannot be fully mitigated; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared.

3. The Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict

Ordinance No.560
the range of, rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory.

4. There is no evidence before the Town that the Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends.

5. The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as the project is consistent with the General Plan, and impacts to all environmental factors except greenhouse gas emissions have been reduced to less than significant levels; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared.

6. The Project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the Project.

7. The Project will not have the environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services.

8. The Town Council has fully considered the Environmental Impact Report and the administrative record relating to the proposed project.

9. The Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission.

10. The Town Council finds the Town has not received any evidence of new significant impacts, as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, after circulation of the EIR which would require recirculation. No substantial changes to the Village Specific Plan have occurred that would require a subsequent or supplemental EIR.

11. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Town Council is based upon is in the Town of Apple Valley Town Hall, Community Development Department, 14955 Dale Evans Parkway Apple Valley, California 92307.

12. A copy of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is included in the Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation.

To the extent there is any conflict between the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the EIR, or the Findings of Fact, the terms and provisions of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.

Ordinance No.560

13. Based upon the Environmental Impact Report and the entire record of proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term is defined in Fish and Game Code Section 711.2.

14. The Town Council has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code of Regulations 753.5(d); and WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to the Village Specific Plan, and concluded said hearing on October 11, 2022; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, State of California does Ordain as follows, that in consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and for the reasons discussed by the Town Council at said hearing, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, California, finds and determines as follows and the Town Council makes the following findings and take the following actions:

Section 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced October 11, 2022, hearings, including public testimony and written and oral staff reports, this Town Council specifically finds as follows:

A. The following are the Findings for an amendment to the Development Code, through a Zone Change, as required under Section 9.06.060:

1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan.

The proposed Zone Change was clearly identified as a long-term goal in the General Plan, as envisioned in General Plan Land Use Goal Nos. LU-5 & LU6, as well as Policies Nos. 5E and 6C, and Programs Nos. 6.C.1, 6.C.2, 6.C.3.

The Amendment will assure the long-term, planned growth and redevelopment of the Village with high-quality residential, mixed use, and commercial development. The Village Specific Plan extends and enhances development standards already in place within the current Development Code.

2. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of the Town or its residents.

The proposed Zone Change will assure the master planned, high quality development of both land uses and infrastructure of sufficient size to accommodate the development and surrounding land uses for the long term.

Ordinance No.560
B. Development Code Section 9.03.050 requires that the following Findings be made in order to approve a Specific Plan:

1. The proposed Specific Plan meets all of the following content criteria, with a comment to address each:
a. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan;
The proposed Specific Plan details land-use designations, permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and development standards to assure cohesive development within the Specific Plan area.
b. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the proposed distribution, location and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid-waste disposal, energy and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan; Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan details both existing and required future infrastructure improvements required to assure master planned, high quality development in the Specific Plan area. All infrastructure has been sized to accommodate full build-out of the Specific Plan.
c. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources, where applicable; The development standards included in the Specific Plan include text, tables and graphic representations of the requirements for development. d. Specifies a program of implementation measures, including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out Findings 1.a, 1.b, and 1.c above;
Chapters 5 and 6 of the Specific Plan discusses improvements required and the potential financing of these improvements. The Specific Plan describes existing infrastructure and sets forth the backbone infrastructure required for the build-out of the Specific Plan area. In addition to this backbone infrastructure, individual projects will be required to extend infrastructure to their properties and assure connection to water, sanitary sewer, roads and drainage improvements for a uniform and master planned project.

Ordinance No.560
e. The Village Specific Plan is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Policies 3.B, 4.I, 4.J and 4.K, as described below:
i. The Village Specific Plan is consistent with Policy 3.B. in that a Specific Plan is required when development proposals propose a combination of land uses or variations of development standards in a particular zone.
ii. The Village Specific Plan does not propose single-family residential development and is therefore not subject to the density, lot sizes, and recreational and open space criteria established in Policies 4.I, 4.J and 4.K.
iii. The types of new residential development envisioned in the Village Specific Plan are multi-family residential or mixed-use development.

Both types of development will be allowed in either an area already zoned for multi-family residential zone or within an existing in-fill commercial area fronting on to Outer Highway 18. The Village Specific Plan will be consistent with Policy 4.J in that all new multifamily residential or mixed-use developments or redevelopment will be designed to be compatible with adjacent or nearby lot sizes and neighborhoods by complying with development standards and design guidelines to ensure quality development, including additional setbacks and landscape/screening buffers when located adjacent to residential developments or land uses.
f. Includes a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, Development Code and other applicable plans or ordinances; Section I.5 of Chapter 1 of the Village Specific Plan discuss the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, as well as its consistency with it. g. Address any other subjects that are necessary for implementation of the General Plan;
The Specific Plan includes extensive design guidelines to assure that the Specific Plan area is developed with high-quality buildings and landscape features.

2. The location and design of the proposed development will be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and with any other applicable plan or policies adopted by the Town and with any other applicable provisions of the Development Code.

The Specific Plan was specifically envisioned in the General Plan, and the development standards and guidelines included in it are refinements of the Development Code.

Ordinance No.560

3. The proposed location will allow the development to be well integrated with, or adequately buffered from, its surroundings, as appropriate.

The Specific Plan includes specific provisions for landscaping buffers, landscaped and building setbacks to assure that surrounding residential development is buffered from the proposed general and service commercial land uses.

4. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased increments or at build-out, will be accommodated safely and without causing significantly increased congestion upon adjoining streets.

The traffic impact analysis prepared for the EIR clearly demonstrates the level of improvements required and that the circulation system in the area will operate safely and without causing significantly increased congestion upon adjoining streets throughout the project’s development and at build out.

5. The final Specific Plan will identify a methodology to allow land uses to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services. In appropriate circumstances, and as provided elsewhere by the Development Code, the Town may require that suitable areas be reserved for uses such as schools, parks and pedestrian ways; public open spaces may be dedicated or reserved by private covenant for the common use of residents, establishments or operations in the development.

Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan includes discussion of all public services required for the Specific Plan area. The amount of residential growth within the Village Specific Plan does not necessitate areas to be reserved for schools and parks within the Village area, and/or beyond existing policies and the General Plan. The Village does provide opportunities for public open spaces integrated into private and public domains in the form of court yards and outdoor dining areas, as well as sidewalks and public rest areas with public seating and furniture.

6. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), environmental impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance, or in the case where such impacts remain, a statement of overriding considerations must be adopted to justify the merits of project implementation after certification of the Environmental Impact Report.

The EIR found that, although the project has the potential to result in significant impacts, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant

Ordinance No.560
levels with the exception of impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. A Statement of Overriding Considerations is required as a part of the Town Council approval.

7. The proposed Specific Plan should contribute to a balance of land uses so local residents may work and shop in the community in which they live.

The purpose of the Specific Plan is, in part, to create a retail, restaurant and entertainment destination for residents to shop, visit, and work. The Village will create jobs for residents of Apple Valley and limit commute times, which currently exceed 30 minutes on the average, by providing a wide range of employment and shopping opportunities within Town limits.

8. The proposed Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of the Town.

The Specific Plan includes development standards designed to assure that development is of high-quality and does not impact public health, safety or welfare.

Section 3. In order to maintain conformity, the three properties currently zoned Service Commercial (CS), known as APNs: 3087-351-52, 10, & 09, within District 4 shall have zoning and land use rights to develop and operate in accordance with the permitted uses and development standards in District 2 in addition to District 4.

Section 4. The Town Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts set forth in this Ordinance are true and correct.

Section 5. The Town Council hereby finds that the Village Specific Plan will have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends that the Town Council certify the EIR and adopt the facts, findings and a statement of overriding considerations, as well as a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

Section 6. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Ordinance, the Town Council approves the Village Specific Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and said exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. The existing zoning designations shall be eliminated and replaced with this adopted Village Specific Plan.

Section 7. Notice of Adoption. The Town Clerk of the Town of Apple Valley shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause publication to occur in a newspaper of general circulation and published and circulated in the Town in a manner permitted under Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California.

Ordinance No.560
Section 8. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption.

Section 9. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable.

APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, California, at its regular meeting held on the 25th day of October, 2022.

Kari Leon, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ms. La Vonda M. Pearson, Town Clerk
Approval as to Content: Approval as to Form:
________________________________ __________________________ Douglas B. Robertson, Town Manager Thomas Rice, Town Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-39

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN

OF APPLE VALLEY, CALIFORNIA, ADOPT GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2021-002 FOR THE VILLAGE

SPECIFIC PLAN
WHEREAS, The General Plan of the Town of Apple Valley was adopted by the Town Council on August 11, 2009; and
WHEREAS, The Village Specific Plan is intended to guide the long-term development and redevelopment of a 1.5±-mile segment of Highway 18, including the Village commercial area, and parcels generally bounded by Arapahoe and Esaws Avenues on the north and Ottawa Road on the south, Central Road on the east, and the realigned Yucca Loma and Navajo Road on the west. It revises land use designations and sets forth development guidelines in the context of five (5) planning Districts to enhance the Village’s identity as a downtown retail destination, guide future development of vacant parcels and redevelopment of underutilized parcels, and protect and expand residential neighborhoods with guidelines that scale down development at the periphery of the Village. Proposed circulation improvements to Highway 18 and Yucca Loma Road/Navajo Road are intended to minimize traffic conflicts, integrate multimodal facilities, and improve access and safety throughout the area; and WHEREAS, The overall objectives of the Specific Plan are to:
 Create a vibrant neighborhood that will stand the test of time.  Expand the identity of the Village from Highway 18 throughout the Village boundary.
 Have a creative, cohesive and harmonious look and feel, with inviting streetscapes and attractive building façades.
 Enhance connectivity and access throughout the Village.  Create a sense of place with interesting public spaces and paseos to increase walkability.
 Be a convenient place for locals and visitors to stop, shop, and do business.  Be a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.  Attract an eclectic mix of retail, services, specialty shops, and restaurants.  Strengthen partnerships between the Town, the PBID and business and property owners to fund and implement improvements.

WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-002 are consistent with the General Plan of the Town of Apple Valley; and
WHEREAS, On May 18, 2022 and June 15, 2022, the Planning Commission of

Resolution 2022-39
the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed and advertised public hearing, and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 2022-003 recommending adoption of this Resolution; an
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed public hearing on General Plan Amendment No. 2021-002, receiving testimony from the public and adopted Resolution No. 2022-39; and WHEREAS, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-002 are consistent with the Land Use Element goals and policies of the Town’s General Plan and Title 9 “Development Code” of the Municipal Code of the Town of Apple Valley and shall promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the Town of Apple Valley; and WHEREAS, on October 1, 2022, General Plan Amendment No. 2021-002 was duly noticed in the Victor Valley Daily Press, a newspaper of general circulation within the Town of Apple Valley; and
WHEREAS, The Town of Apple Valley, as lead agency, determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared pursuant to CEQA in order to analyze all adverse environmental impacts of the Project; and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission recommends that the Town Council certify said Environmental Impact Report based on the following findings and that the Town Council also make the following findings:

1. That the Environmental Impact Report has been prepared and processed in compliance with the State CEQA Guidelines and the Town’s implementation procedures.

The Town Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Environmental Impact Report, and finds that it adequately describes and addresses the environmental effects of the Project. The mitigation measures identified in the Environmental Impact Report have been incorporated into the Project and/or will be made part of the approval of the project and these measures will mitigate most potential significant effects. Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions cannot be fully mitigated; therefore, the Town Council adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations.

2. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that most impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Impacts associated with greenhouse gas emissions cannot be fully mitigated; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared.

3. The Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number, or restrict

Resolution 2022-39
the range of, rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history, or prehistory.

4. There is no evidence before the Town that the Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends.

5. The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as the project is consistent with the General Plan, and impacts to all environmental factors except greenhouse gas emissions have been reduced to less than significant levels; therefore, a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be prepared.

6. The Project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the Project.

7. The Project will not have the environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services.

8. The Town Council has fully considered the Environmental Impact Report and the administrative record relating to the proposed project.

9. The Environmental Impact Report reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission.

10. The Town Council finds the Town has not received any evidence of new significant impacts, as defined by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, after circulation of the EIR which would require recirculation. No substantial changes to the Village Specific Plan have occurred that would require a subsequent or supplemental EIR.

11. The location of the documents which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Town Council is based upon is in the Town of Apple Valley Town Hall, Community Development Department, 14955 Dale Evans Parkway Apple Valley, California 92307.

12. A copy of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is included in the Environmental Impact Report pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 in order to assure compliance with the mitigation measures during Project implementation.

To the extent there is any conflict between the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the EIR, or the Findings of Fact, the terms and provisions of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.

Resolution 2022-39

13. Based upon the Environmental Impact Report and the entire record of proceedings, the Project has no potential for adverse effects on wildlife as that term is defined in Fish and Game Code Section 711.2.

14. The Town Council has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 California Code of Regulations 753.5(d); and WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to the Village Specific Plan, and concluded said hearing on October 11, 2022; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that in consideration of the evidence presented at the public hearing, and for the reasons discussed by the Town Council at said hearing, the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, California, finds and determines as follows and the Town Council makes the following findings and take the following actions:

Section 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are hereby incorporated herein by this reference.

Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced October 11, 2022, hearings, including public testimony and written and oral staff reports, this Town Council specifically finds as follows:

C. The following are the Findings for a General Plan Amendment required under Section 9.02.050(H)(3) of the Development Code, with a comment to address each:

1. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals, policies and standards of all elements of the General Plan and will further those goals, policies and standards;
Adoption of the Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Goal Nos. LU-5 & LU-6, as well as Policies Nos. 5E and 6C, and Programs Nos. 6.C.1, 6.C.2, 6.C.3, as outlined below:
a. Policy 5.E - Mixed Use projects which integrate residential land uses and commercial or light industrial land uses are encouraged in The Village, on major roadways, and in close proximity to employment centers. b. Policy 6.C - The Town shall encourage the development and/or redevelopment of The Village.

Resolution 2022-39
c. Program 6.C.1 - Public facilities in The Village should be designed to include consolidated parking areas, special roadway standards, and prioritized flood control improvements.
d. Program 6.C.2 - The Redevelopment Agency shall consider land purchases or other incentives which allow for the consolidation of smaller, under-utilized sites in The Village into larger and more useable parcels, to be marketed to the development community.
e. Program 6.C.3 - Future development and redevelopment of The Village shall be governed by a Specific Plan.

The Amendment will assure the long-term, planned growth and redevelopment of the Village with high-quality residential, mixed use, and commercial development with adequate infrastructure. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the Land Use Element, which promotes a well-planned, orderly development pattern that enhances community values, and assures development of adequate infrastructure. The Land Use Element also promotes developments that will strengthen the local economy; enhance the quality of life; supports a broad-based economy; and encourages the jobs-housing balance, as directed by the Town’s adopted General Plan.

2. The General Plan, as amended, will comprise an integrated, internally consistent and compatible statement of policies for the Town; The proposed General Plan Amendment adopts the Village Specific Plan which is a long-range planning document envisioned by the General Plan and reflects the values of the community. The Village Specific Plan will not create any internal inconsistencies and assures the systematic implementation of the General Plan.

3. The General Plan Amendment furthers the public interest and promotes the general welfare of the Town by providing for a logical pattern of land uses and clarifying various land use policies for the Town.

The proposed General Plan Amendment enables the implementation of the Village Specific Plan, which has been developed to assure the long-term, planned growth and redevelopment of the Village with high-quality residential, mixed use, and commercial development. The Specific Plan establishes the best mix of land uses and development standards to assure that the area achieves its land use potential for residential uses, retail growth and establishment of local jobs.

D. Development Code Section 9.03.050 requires that the following Findings be made in order to approve a Specific Plan:

Resolution 2022-39

9. The proposed Specific Plan meets all of the following content criteria, with a comment to address each:
h. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the distribution, location and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan;
The proposed Specific Plan details land-use designations, permitted and conditionally permitted uses, and development standards to assure cohesive development within the Specific Plan area.
i. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the proposed distribution, location and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid-waste disposal, energy and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan; Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan details both existing and required future infrastructure improvements required to assure master planned, high quality development in the Specific Plan area. All infrastructure has been sized to accommodate full build-out of the Specific Plan.
j. Specifies through text and/or diagrams, the standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development and utilization of natural resources, where applicable; The development standards included in the Specific Plan include text, tables and graphic representations of the requirements for development. k. Specifies a program of implementation measures, including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out Findings 1.a, 1.b, and 1.c above;
Chapters 5 and 6 of the Specific Plan discusses improvements required and the potential financing of these improvements. The Specific Plan describes existing infrastructure and sets forth the backbone infrastructure required for the build-out of the Specific Plan area. In addition to this backbone infrastructure, individual projects will be required to extend infrastructure to their properties and assure connection to water, sanitary sewer, roads and drainage improvements for a uniform and master planned project. l. The Village Specific Plan is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Policies 3.B, 4.I, 4.J and 4.K, as described below:

Resolution 2022-39
i. The Village Specific Plan is consistent with Policy 3.B. in that a Specific Plan is required when development proposals propose a combination of land uses or variations of development standards in a particular zone.
ii. The Village Specific Plan does not propose single-family residential development and is therefore not subject to the density, lot sizes, and recreational and open space criteria established in Policies 4.I, 4.J and 4.K.
iii. The types of new residential development envisioned in the Village Specific Plan are multi-family residential or mixed-use development.

Both types of development will be allowed in either an area already zoned for multi-family residential zone or within an existing in-fill commercial area fronting on to Outer Highway 18. The Village Specific Plan will be consistent with Policy 4.J in that all new multifamily residential or mixed-use developments or redevelopment will be designed to be compatible with adjacent or nearby lot sizes and neighborhoods by complying with development standards and design guidelines to ensure quality development, including additional setbacks and landscape/screening buffers when located adjacent to residential developments or land uses.
m. Includes a statement of the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, Development Code and other applicable plans or ordinances; Section I.5 of Chapter 1 of the Village Specific Plan discuss the relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan, as well as its consistency with it. n. Address any other subjects that are necessary for implementation of the General Plan;
The Specific Plan includes extensive design guidelines to assure that the Specific Plan area is developed with high-quality buildings and landscape features.

10. The location and design of the proposed development will be consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and with any other applicable plan or policies adopted by the Town and with any other applicable provisions of the Development Code.

The Specific Plan was specifically envisioned in the General Plan, and the development standards and guidelines included in it are refinements of the Development Code.

Resolution 2022-39

11. The proposed location will allow the development to be well integrated with, or adequately buffered from, its surroundings, as appropriate.

The Specific Plan includes specific provisions for landscaping buffers, landscaped and building setbacks to assure that surrounding residential development is buffered from the proposed general and service commercial land uses.

12. All vehicular traffic generated by the development, either in phased increments or at build-out, will be accommodated safely and without causing significantly increased congestion upon adjoining streets.

The traffic impact analysis prepared for the EIR clearly demonstrates the level of improvements required and that the circulation system in the area will operate safely and without causing significantly increased congestion upon adjoining streets throughout the project’s development and at build out.

13. The final Specific Plan will identify a methodology to allow land uses to be adequately serviced by existing or proposed public facilities and services. In appropriate circumstances, and as provided elsewhere by the Development Code, the Town may require that suitable areas be reserved for uses such as schools, parks and pedestrian ways; public open spaces may be dedicated or reserved by private covenant for the common use of residents, establishments or operations in the development.

Chapter 5 of the Specific Plan includes discussion of all public services required for the Specific Plan area. The amount of residential growth within the Village Specific Plan does not necessitate areas to be reserved for schools and parks within the Village area, and/or beyond existing policies and the General Plan. The Village does provide opportunities for public open spaces integrated into private and public domains in the form of court yards and outdoor dining areas, as well as sidewalks and public rest areas with public seating and furniture.

14. In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), environmental impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance, or in the case where such impacts remain, a statement of overriding considerations must be adopted to justify the merits of project implementation after certification of the Environmental Impact Report.

The EIR found that, although the project has the potential to result in significant impacts, these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant

Resolution 2022-39
levels with the exception of impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. A Statement of Overriding Considerations is required as a part of the Town Council approval.

15. The proposed Specific Plan should contribute to a balance of land uses so local residents may work and shop in the community in which they live.

The purpose of the Specific Plan is, in part, to create a retail, restaurant and entertainment destination for residents to shop, visit, and work. The Village will create jobs for residents of Apple Valley and limit commute times, which currently exceed 30 minutes on the average, by providing a wide range of employment and shopping opportunities within Town limits.

16. The proposed Specific Plan will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of the Town.

The Specific Plan includes development standards designed to assure that development is of high-quality and does not impact public health, safety or welfare.

Section 3. In order to maintain conformity, the three properties currently zoned Service Commercial (CS), known as APNs: 3087-351-52, 10, & 09, within District 4 shall have zoning and land use rights to develop and operate in accordance with the permitted uses and development standards in District 2 in addition to District 4.

Section 4. The Town Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct.

Section 5. The Town Council hereby finds that the Village Specific Plan will have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends that the Town Council certify the EIR and adopt the facts, findings and a statement of overriding considerations, as well as a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.

Section 6. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Resolution, the Town Council approves the Village Specific Plan, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and said exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference. The General Plan Land Use Map shall show only that the Specific Plan boundary is within the “Specific Plan”, “SP” or “Village Specific Plan”.

Resolution 2022-39
APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, California, at its regular meeting held on the 11th of October, 2022.

Kari Leon, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ms. La Vonda M. Pearson, Town Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-40

A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF

APPLE VALLEY CERTIFYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (SCH # 2021110271) FOR THE VILLAGE SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT; ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS PURSUANT
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT;

ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Village Specific Plan Project (“Village SP” or “Proposed Project”) proposes the development of a Specific Plan that guides the long-term development and redevelopment of a 1.5±-mile segment of Highway 18. The planning area includes 651± acres north and south of the State Highway 18 corridor generally between Navajo Road and Central Road. It revises land use designations and sets forth development guidelines in the context of five (5) planning Districts to enhance the Village’s identity as a downtown retail destination, guide future development of vacant parcels and redevelopment of underutilized parcels, and protect and expand residential neighborhoods with guidelines that scale down development at the periphery of the Village. Proposed circulation improvements to Highway 18 and Yucca Loma Road/Navajo Road are intended to minimize traffic conflicts, integrate multimodal facilities, and improve access and safety throughout the area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 21067 of the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”), and section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), the Town of Apple Valley (“Town”) is the Lead Agency for the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the Lead Agency determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) should be prepared in order to analyze all potential adverse environmental impacts of the Proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the Town issued a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of a Draft EIR for Village SP on or about November 19, 2021, and it was transmitted to the State Clearinghouse, local and regional agencies, and posted at the San Bernardino County Clerk’s office for a 30-day comment period; and
WHEREAS, in the NOP, comments and participation were sought from the public and all interested and affected groups and agencies; and WHEREAS, on or about April 4, 2022 the Town initiated a 45-day public review and comment period of the Draft EIR for the Proposed Project and released the Draft EIR

Resolution 2022-40
for public review and comment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15086, the Town consulted with and requested comments from all responsible and trustee agencies, other regulatory agencies, and other interested parties during the 45-day public review and comment period; and
WHEREAS, the Town received one comment letter from a State agency, one from the regional air quality management district, one from a non-profit organization and one from an individual during the 45-day public review and comment period; and WHEREAS, the Town reviewed the comment letters, and amended the EIR, and determined that recirculation of the Draft EIR was appropriate; and WHEREAS, the Town released the Recirculated Draft EIR for an additional 45-day public review and comment period on July 18, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Town received one comment letter from an individual during the Recirculated Draft EIR’s 45-day public review and comment period; and WHEREAS, the Town has prepared a Final EIR, consisting of the comments received during the public review and comment periods on the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR, written responses to those comments, and revisions to the Draft EIR. For the purposes of this Resolution, the “EIR” shall refer to the Draft EIR, as revised by the Recirculated Draft EIR, together with the Final EIR; and WHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Town Council held a public hearing on the Project, at which all persons wishing to testify were heard; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the Lead Agency finds are of no impact or constitute a less than significant impact and do not require mitigation are described in Section 3 and Section 4 hereof; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant but which the Lead Agency finds can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the incorporation of feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 5 hereof; and WHEREAS, the environmental impacts identified in the EIR as potentially significant but which the Lead Agency finds cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level, despite the imposition of feasible Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 6 hereof; and
WHEREAS, the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 7 hereof; and

Resolution 2022-40
WHEREAS, the significant and irreversible environmental changes that would result from the Proposed Project, but which would be largely mitigated, and which are identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 8 hereof; and WHEREAS, the existence of any growth-inducing impacts resulting from the Proposed Project identified in the EIR and set forth herein, are described in Section 9 hereof; and
WHEREAS, alternatives to the Proposed Project that might eliminate or reduce significant environmental impacts are described in Section 10 hereof; and WHEREAS, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program setting forth the mitigation measures to which the Lead Agency shall bind itself in connection with the Proposed Project, is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, prior to taking action, the Lead Agency has heard, been presented with, reviewed and considered all of the information and data in the administrative record, including the EIR, and all oral and written evidence presented to it during all meetings; and
WHEREAS, the EIR reflects the independent judgment of the Town Council and is deemed adequate for purposes of making decisions on the merits of the Proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, the Lead Agency has not received any comments or additional information that constituted substantial new information requiring recirculation under Public Resources Code section 21092.1 and State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements of CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines, have been satisfied by the Town in the EIR, which is sufficiently detailed so that all of the potentially significant environmental effects of the Proposed Project have been adequately evaluated; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1: RECITALS

Resolution 2022-40
The recitals above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by reference as findings of fact.

SECTION 2: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Based on all of the evidence presented and the entirety of the administrative record, including but not limited to the EIR, written and oral testimony given at public hearings, and the submission of testimony from the public, organizations and regulatory agencies, the following environmental impacts associated with the Project are either: (1) less than significant and do not require mitigation; or (2) potentially significant but will be avoided or reduced to a level of insignificance through the identified Mitigation Measures; or (3) significant and cannot be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant but will be lessened to the extent feasible by the identified Mitigation Measures.

SECTION 3: FINDINGS REGARDING NO IMPACT DETERMINATIONS IN THE INITIAL STUDY/NOTICE OF PREPARATION.

The Town prepared an Initial Study/Notice of Preparation for the Project and circulated it for public comment from November 19, 2021 to December 20, 2021. State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 does not require specific findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as “no impact”. Nevertheless, the Town Council hereby finds that the Project would have no impact or on the following resource areas:

A. AESTHETICS
Thresholds:
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 16)
Explanation:

The Initial Study determined that the Project would result in “No Impact” to scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway because State Highway 18 in the Specific Plan Planning Area is not designated as a state scenic highway, and there are no notable rock outcroppings, trees, or other scenic resources in the Planning Area.

Resolution 2022-40
B. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Thresholds:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 18)
Explanation:

The Initial Study determined that the Project would result in “No Impact” to agriculture or forestry resources because no agricultural or forestry lands occur in the Specific Plan Planning Area. Specifically, the planning area is not located within an area mapped for farmland of statewide importance, is not zoned for agricultural or forestry uses, is not subject to a Williamson Act contract, and will not convert or result in the loss of existing agricultural or forestry uses.

C. ENERGY
Thresholds:
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 24)
Explanation:

Resolution 2022-40
The Specific Plan encourages and facilitates greater energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy resources. It will not obstruct implementation of a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Thresholds:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
iv) Landslides?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 25-27)
Explanation:

The Planning Area is not located within or adjacent to an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone; therefore, the Project will have no impact on risks associated with ground rupture due to an earthquake on an underlying fault.

The Planning Area is relatively flat. The nearest hillsides and mountainous slopes are approximately 2 miles to the west and east. Therefore, no impacts associated with landslides would occur.

The Planning Area is located on the valley floor where soils to depth are largely comprised of recently deposited aeolian and alluvial sediments that typically do not harbor paleontological resources. The Planning Area is not located in proximity to either a wash outflow or bedrock that could harbor such resources. Therefore, potentially sensitive paleontological resources are not expected to occur.

D. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Thresholds:

Resolution 2022-40
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?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 30)
Explanation:

The Planning Area does not contain any parcels included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the proposed Specific Plan would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.

The Apple Valley Airport is located approximately 4.5 miles north of the Planning Area.

The Project planning area is located well outside the airport planning boundary and operational and navigational hazard area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Planning Area.

E. HYDROLOGY
Threshold:
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 34)

Resolution 2022-40
Explanation:

The Proposed Specific Plan requires that future development and improvements conform to applicable water quality regulations, water quality control plans, and sustainable groundwater management plans. The proposed Specific Plan will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. No impact will occur.

F. MINERAL RESOURCES
Thresholds:
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? Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 36)
Explanation:

The Planning Area occurs in an urban setting and is not designated for mineral resource extraction so it would not result in the loss of availability of a mineral resource or a mineral resource recovery site.

G. NOISE
Thresholds:
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?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 38)
Explanation:

The Planning Area is located approximately 4.5 miles south of the Apple Valley Airport and is well outside existing and modeled future airport noise contours.

Resolution 2022-40
H. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Threshold:
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statues and regulations related to solid waste?
Finding: No Impact (IS/NOP page 47)
Explanation:

The Town and AVCO Disposal operate in compliance with federal, state, and local statutes regulating solid waste. Buildout of the proposed Project will not conflict with federal, state, and local statutes regulating the disposal of solid waste.

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 4: FINDINGS REGARDING LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION.

Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21002.1 and Section 15128 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the EIR focused its analysis on potentially significant impacts, and limited discussion of other impacts for which it can be seen with certainty there is no potential for significant adverse environmental impacts. State CEQA Guidelines section 15091 does not require specific findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as “no impact” or a “less than significant” impact. Nevertheless, the Town Council hereby finds that the Project would have either no impact or a less than significant impact on the following resource areas.

A. AESTHETICS

1. Scenic Vistas
Threshold:
a) Would the Project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Finding: Less than significant impact. (EIR, p. 2.3-7 through 2.3-14) Explanation:

The proposed Village Specific Plan will facilitate new development in areas that are currently vacant and redevelopment in existing urbanized areas within the Planning Area.

The redevelopment or development of new manmade structures, including buildings, streets, signage, walls, and landscaping, has the potential to disrupt or block views of the scenic vistas and natural landscapes. However, views of the surroundings will include high quality, thoughtfully designed architectural, landscaping, and streetscaping features in an existing urban environment. The vision, objectives, standards, and guidelines contained in the Specific Plan will limit the potential impacts on scenic vistas.

Development proposals in the Planning Area will be subject to project-specific environmental review, which will further avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential impacts to any scenic resources. As a result, impacts on scenic vistas caused by implementation of the proposed Village Specific Plan will be less than significant.

Resolution 2022-40

2. Existing Visual Character
Threshold:
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, pp. 2.3-15 and 2.3-16) Explanation:

The Planning Area is in a primarily urban environment, much of which is already developed except for larger vacant parcels along the perimeter of the Planning Area and smaller parcels scattered throughout.

Development Code and Specific Plan Standards
The proposed Project provides its own development standards that will supersede those in the Development Code, but development projects will be required to adhere to other applicable requirements set forth in the Town’s Municipal Code. Development standards and guidelines of the proposed Specific Plan are consistent with and will enhance the existing visual character of the Planning Area. Future development facilitated by the Specific Plan will be subject to rigorous regulatory review by the Town staff, Planning Commission, and/or Town Council. Architectural and landscape design for all new projects, major remodels and administrative design review applications will also be regulated by the Specific Plan and Town staff. Conflicts of the proposed Project with Development Code regulations governing scenic quality, therefore, will be less than significant.

General Plan
The proposed Specific Plan implements and is consistent with General Plan goals, policies, and programs governing scenic quality. The Specific Plan Design Guidelines prescribe building materials that are durable with colors and textures that are appropriate for the desert environment, which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element Goal 1. The Specific Plan mandates high quality design that is context-sensitive and respects and blends into the natural environment, which is consistent with General Plan Policy 2.C and supports Goals 3 & 4. General Plan Policy 4.E encourages new

Resolution 2022-40
development that emulates the character of existing neighborhoods, which is emphasized in the Specific Plan’s vision to revitalize the Town’s historic downtown while preserving its rustic hometown charm and two of the objectives, Historic Preservation and Urban Design: Identity + Image + Sense of Place. The proposed Project is not expected to conflict with General Plan guidelines governing scenic quality. Impacts will be less than significant

2. Light and Glare
Threshold
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, pp. 2.3-16 and 2.3-17) Explanation:

The Specific Plan will facilitate land uses (residential, commercial, institutional) and development patterns in the Planning Area similar to those that exist today, and future lighting sources will be comparable to those currently in the Planning Area. However, vacant land will be developed and additional light from new buildings, improvements, and vehicles will be generated as buildout occurs.

The Specific Plan provides regulations and guidance for reducing light and glare caused by new and remodeled development and maintains current regulations on light and glare included in Municipal Code Section 9.70.020. The Specific Plan and the Town Municipal Code prohibit light spillage onto neighboring properties or the street. Therefore, implementation of the Specific Plan is expected to have a less than significant impact on light and glare impacts.

B. AIR QUALITY

1. Conflict with Air Quality Plan
Threshold:
a) Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, pp. 2.4-12 through -14) Explanation:

Under CEQA, a significant air quality impact could occur if the Project is not consistent with the applicable air quality management plans or would obstruct the implementation of the policies or hinder reaching the goals of that plan. The Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) is responsible for monitoring criteria air pollutant concentrations and establishing management policies for the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB), including the Planning Area. A project is considered to be “in conformity” if it complies with all applicable District rules and regulations, complies with all proposed control measures that are not yet adopted from the applicable plan(s), and is consistent with the growth forecasts in the applicable plan(s).A non-conforming project would be one that increases the gross number of dwelling units, increases the number of trips, and/or increases the overall vehicle miles traveled in an affected area relative to the applicable land use plan. Conformity with growth forecasts can be established by demonstrating that the Project is consistent with the land use plan that was used to generate the growth forecast.

The Specific Plan includes policies and programs that would reduce the impact of increased air pollutant emissions resulting from the increased population. In addition, any future project as a result of the proposed Specific Plan would adhere to the General Plan policies designed to reduce air quality impacts, including Policy AQ 1.D, which states that the Town shall review all development proposals for potential adverse effects on air quality and requires mitigation of significant impacts. All future projects will be implemented in accordance with all applicable MDAQMD rules and regulations to ensure impacts to air quality are reduced to the greatest extent possible. The Town’s compliance with General Plan policies and standard MDAQMD rules and regulations will ensure that buildout of the Specific Plan is in accordance with applicable air quality management plans. Impacts will be less than significant.

2. Result in Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase in Criteria Pollutants Threshold:
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?
Finding: Less than significant impact. (EIR, p. 2.4-14 through 2.4-17)

Resolution 2022-40
Explanation:

A significant impact could occur if the Project would make a considerable cumulative contribution to federal or state non-attainment pollutants. Pollutants of primary concern in Apple Valley are ozone (O3) and particulate matter (PM10). For State designations, the MDAB is in non-attainment for ozone (O3) and PM10. For national area designations, the MDAB is in non-attainment (Severe-15) for the federal 8-hour ozone standard, and moderate non-attainment for the federal 24-hour PM10 standard.

Construction
Construction activities that would occur over the next 20 years in accordance with the proposed Specific Plan would cause temporary, short-term emissions of various air pollutants. Buildout of the Specific Plan will result in a mix of small-and medium-scale projects that will be required to adhere to the Town’s procedures and regulations as they relate to CEQA analysis and mitigation. Actual significance would be determined on a project-by-project basis as future development applications are submitted. The current General Plan policies and programs will apply to all future projects under the proposed Specific Plan and ensure that potential construction emissions from new development will be mitigated to the greatest extent feasible in accordance with MDAQMD requirements.

Impacts will be less than significant with implementation of standard regulations and project-specific mitigation measures.

Operation
Daily activities of future projects will result in the emission of air quality pollutants from the use of electricity and natural gas, and from area sources and moving sources. If an individual development project generates less than significant construction or operational emissions, then the development project would not generate a cumulatively considerable increase in emissions for those pollutants for which the basin is in nonattainment. In accordance with General Plan policies (Policy AQ 1.D), development projects proposed within the Planning Area will be reviewed on a project-by-project basis for their potential to result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to non-attainment criteria pollutants under CEQA. Subsequent CEQA documentation prepared for individual projects would have project-specific data and would be required to address, and to the extent feasible, mitigate any significant air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Air quality impacts are expected to be reduced to less than significant levels on a case-by-case basis.

3. Expose Sensitive Receptors to Substantial Pollutant Concentrations Threshold:

Resolution 2022-40
c) Would the Project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Finding: Less than significant impact. (EIR, p. 2.4-17 through 2.4-19) Explanation:

The potential impact of air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors will be assessed at an individual project level as directed by General Plan policy AQ 1.D to determine if a project would exceed the MDAQMD localized significance thresholds during construction and/or operation. Mitigation will be required for future projects under the Specific Plan if they would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations to ensure impacts to sensitive receptors would be less than significant. “Hot Spot” Analysis
During the operational phase of the Specific Plan, traffic may have the potential to contribute to local area air quality impacts, most notably the creation of CO “hot spots” at heavily congested intersections
The Project-specific Traffic Analysis requires the installation of a traffic signal (when warranted) coordinated with the existing traffic signal at Navajo Road and Powhattan Road East to ensure that intersection operates at acceptable levels of service. After traffic mitigation, all intersections would be operating at LOS D or better and therefore, the proposed Specific Plan would not result in the creation of an unmitigated CO hotspot.

Impacts would remain less than significant.

Health Impacts
Due to these limitations, the extent to which the Specific Plan or an individual project poses a health risk is uncertain but unavoidable. It is anticipated that the impacts associated with all criteria pollutants will be less than significant with adherence the Town’s environmental review process, and that health effects will also be less than significant.

4. Objectionable Odors
Threshold:
d) Would the Project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than significant impact. (EIR, pp. 2.4-19) Explanation:

The Specific Plan does not permit land uses that are sources of odor, including agriculture (farming and livestock), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting facilities, refineries, landfills, transfer stations, and fiberglass molding.

The Specific Plan will be developed with a mix of uses including residential, office, service commercial, restaurant and retail uses and has the potential to result in short-term odors associated with operation of heavy equipment during grading, excavation, and other construction activities. Odors from paints, coatings, and asphalt also will be emitted during construction. However, construction-related odors will be temporary and quickly dispersed below detectable levels as distance from the construction area increases.

Existing regulations such as MDAQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, would continue to minimize odor impacts. At buildout, residential units will generate typical odors from cooking and other household activities but will not generate objectionable odors.

C. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. Federally Protected Wetlands
Threshold:
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.

Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, p. 2.5-12 through -13) Explanation:

The General Plan does not identify any U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdictional waters or wetlands within the Specific Plan Planning Area.

Resolution 2022-40
In the Planning Area, the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory mapping database identified one Riverine habitat, which overlaps with the non-jurisdictional water mapped by the General Plan. The mapped habitat is part of a 42.81-acre area classified as Riverine (R)Intermittent (4) Streambed (SB)Seasonally Flooded (C), and mostly overlaps with existing developments east of Malaki Road south of Powhatan Road. Based upon on-site visits and review of aerial photos during development of the proposed Specific Plan, the mapped habitat is either non-existent or has been heavily modified to lose its original form and function. The area is not a state or federally protected resource, and therefore, impacts of the proposed Project will be less than significant.

2. Tree Preservation
Threshold:
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, p. 2.5-14) Explanation:

The proposed Specific Plan will not interfere with any Town policies regarding the preservation or protection of biological resources. Future development resulting from the Specific Plan will be required to adhere to Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP provisions and guidelines. The proposed Specific Plan landscaping guidelines prioritize native and other drought-tolerant species that are not known to be invasive, consistent with the goals, policies, and programs in the Town’s General Plan. Future projects will also be subject to provisions in the Municipal Code Chapter 9.76 regarding protection of specified desert native plants and trees, including Joshua Trees. No significant impact would occur.

3. Habitat Conservation Plan
Threshold:
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.

Finding: Less than Significant Impact. (EIR, p. 2.5-14) Explanation:

Resolution 2022-40
The CEQA review process for the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP was underway at the time the Project Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared. Future development facilitated by the Specific Plan will be required to adhere to the requirements of the MSHCP/NCCP when adopted. No conflict with any habitat conservation plan is expected as a result of the Specific Plan.

D. ENERGY

1. Energy Consumption
Threshold:
a) Would the Project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.7-10 through -15) Explanation:

Construction
During construction of future development, energy would be consumed in petroleumbased fuels for equipment, electricity associated with water conveyance and site lighting, and energy used in the production of construction materials. Overall, construction impacts would be temporary, minimal and would not be wasteful or inefficient.

Operation
Long-term operation of the proposed Project will consume electricity, natural gas, and transportation-related energy sources such as gasoline and diesel. When compared to buildout under the current General Plan land use designations, the proposed Specific Plan would result in an increase in housing units and commercial square footage at build out.

Electricity/Natural Gas Demand: The proposed Specific Plan would result in a slight increase of electricity demand and a substantial increase in natural gas demand compared to buildout under the existing zoning designations, due to the increased

Resolution 2022-40
potential housing units and commercial/service/office/public area. However, these projections do not take into account the energy savings mandated through regulations such as the Green Building Standards Code (Title 24), which is incorporated in the Apple Valley Municipal Code and requires zero-net-energy construction for new residential buildings starting in 2020 and for new commercial buildings starting in 2030.

Adherence to California Building Code and Energy Code standards will ensure the most energy efficient technologies and practices are used for the development and operation of projects within the Planning Area. The impacts are considered less than significant because the proposed Specific Plan would implement new policies and guidelines and maintain current regulations designed to minimize wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. Implementation of the California Building Code and other relevant regulations will ensure impacts related to energy efficiency are less than significant.

Transportation-related Energy Demand: The Specific Plan circulation plan aims to reduce vehicle travel miles through efficiencies in the circulation system and multi-modal transportation improvements, including a complete and coordinated network of paths, sidewalks, and bikeways that encourages alternative modes of transportation and reduces reliance on automobiles. According to the Specific Plan Air Quality Analysis, the proposed Project will result in a reduction of 25.7% in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) at buildout compared to buildout under the current General Plan, likely due to the different land use mixes, the increased connectivity, and the inclusion of mixed-use development.

The EPA and CARB continue to require increased vehicle fuel efficiency standards to reduce vehicle emissions. Increased fuel efficiency also means that less fuel energy is required per mile traveled. Although the Project will result in a direct increase in VMTs, the Project will not interfere with increased fuel efficiency standards and will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of transportation energy resources during operation. Impacts are less than significant.

E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Loss of Topsoil
Threshold:
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.8-15 and -16) Explanation:

The proposed Specific Plan would facilitate new development and redevelopment in the Planning Area. Grading and excavation activities for construction may lead to localized erosion, as wind and water carry loose soils off site. Chapter 8.12 of the Municipal Code (Section J.110) describes the Town’s erosion control requirements pertaining to slopes, wind erosion, and water control. In addition, individual projects are required to implement dust control to avoid measurable amounts of dust or dirt beyond the parcel boundary (Municipal Code Section 9.70.020 Performance Standards). Appropriate grading procedures include minimal disturbance of native vegetation, scheduling grading activities to avoid repeated grading, watering graded areas, construction of walls and fences to contain dust and dirt, and revegetation of graded areas. In addition, future development and redevelopment projects would be required to implement erosion control Best Management Practices (BMPs) outlined in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would be developed and implemented as part of construction activities on sites greater than one acre, in compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Implementation of existing Town standard erosion control measures on project-specific plans will ensure the impacts related to soil erosion or loss of topsoil are less than significant.

2. Soils Supporting Septic Tanks
Threshold:
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.

Finding: No impact (EIR, p. 2.8-17 and -18)
Explanation:

Much of the Specific Plan Planning Area is connected to the municipal sewer system.

Development that is not connected to the sewer system relies on septic systems, and soils have adequately supported them for many years. The Town requires new development in the Village to provide sewer facilities and extend sewer infrastructure as development occurs. The proposed sewer improvements will be constructed on an as needed basis as a condition of approval as development occurs. There will be no impact on soil suitability for septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.

F. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

Resolution 2022-40

1. Hazardous Materials Transport, Use, and Disposal
Threshold:
a) Would the Project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.10-9 through -11) Explanation:

Demolition and construction activities associated with new development and redevelopment are not expected to result in the routine use, storage, transport, or disposal of large quantities of hazardous substances. These activities will, however, involve the temporary use of heavy equipment and machinery, which could contain or use fuels and oils and involve the application of various other products such as paints and adhesives. However, all potentially hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with the manufacturers’ instructions and handled in compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Any associated risk would be adequately reduced to a less than significant level on a case-by-case basis through compliance with these standard requirements during construction.

The proposed Specific Plan land use plan does not include heavy industrial or other land uses that would generate or use large quantities of hazardous materials. Existing and future small business operations, individual households, and maintenance activities are likely to utilize hazardous materials in limited quantities, such as paints, thinners, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, pesticides, motor oil, and automotive substances. Existing federal, state, regional, and local regulations provide guidelines to prevent potential risks associated with the handling, storage, and transportation of hazardous and toxic materials. Additionally, regulations such as the Hazardous Material Transportation Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, California Hazardous Waste Control Act, and Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA), ensure that industrial and commercial users, generators, and transporters provide operational safety and emergency response measures so that no major threats to public health and safety are created.

2. Release of Hazardous Materials
Threshold:

Resolution 2022-40
b) Would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.10-12 and -13) Explanation:

Adoption and implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would enable development and redevelopment of a range of land uses in the Planning Area which are not expected to utilize or generate large quantities of hazardous materials. The use, storage, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials is regulated at the local, state, and federal levels. Compliance with and enforcement of existing laws and regulations concerning the upset and/or accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment, supported by the General Plan’s goals, policies, and programs would ensure that the public would not be exposed to any unusual or excessive risks related to upset/accidental conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Project-related impacts are expected to be less than significant.

3. Hazardous Materials Within One-Quarter Mile of School Threshold:
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.10-13 and -14) Explanation:

Future land uses consistent with the proposed Specific Plan could include commercial uses within one-quarter mile of four existing schools in and near the Planning Area, including Yucca Loma Elementary School, Rancho Verde Elementary School, Smart Starts Academy preschool, and Granite Hills High School. Permitting requirements for existing and future individual hazardous material handlers or emitters, if any, would require evaluation and notification where potential hazardous materials handling and emissions could occur in proximity to existing schools.

For new development, any future placement of schools would be required to comply with state statutory and regulatory requirements addressing safety from hazards. The proposed Specific Plan does not propose any changes to existing federal, state, or local school district policies or procedures that minimize risks to school facilities, students, and faculty. Future development project impacts would be managed and mitigated on a casePage 223 of 313 Resolution 2022-40
by-case basis and would comply with existing federal, state, and local laws and regulations concerning the handling, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Impacts of the proposed Specific Plan as it pertains to hazardous materials emissions in proximity to a school would be less than significant

4. Emergency Response and Evacuation Plans
Threshold:
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.10-14)
Explanation:

The Town’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) (2014) guides its response to large-scale emergencies and disasters. Construction Traffic Control Plans would be required for Specific Plan projects when necessary, and emergency/secondary access would be established and preserved during all construction activities. The proposed circulation plan, including roadway realignments, is designed to improve existing roadway capacity and access to properties, which will increase traffic safety and enhance access for emergency vehicles at build out. The Specific Plan does not propose any changes to, nor will it interfere with, the Emergency Operations Plan. Project impacts will be less than significant.

5. Wildland Fires
Threshold:
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.10-14 and -15) Explanation:

The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's (CALFire) Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP)identifies the majority of Apple Valley, including the Specific Plan Planning Area, as a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). FRAP does not identify any fire hazard severity zone within the Town, and the Planning Area is not near any fire hazard zone. The Specific Plan will facilitate development and redevelopment in the Planning Area; however, it is not expected to exacerbate wildfire risks because of its

Resolution 2022-40
location in the urban core of Apple Valley. In addition, all structures and improvements will be constructed per the latest edition of California Building Code and California Fire Code and will also be subject to review by the Apple Valley Fire Protection District. These existing conditions will ensure risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires will be reduced to less than significant levels.

G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

1. Surface and Groundwater Quality
Threshold:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-16 and -17) Explanation:

The Town and Regional Water Quality Control Board review would ensure that construction and operational best management practices (BMPs) satisfy local, state, and federal standards. New construction would be required to connect to the existing water and sewer system at the time of development in compliance with applicable standards that minimize impacts to regional groundwater quality. The implementation of existing regulations and guidelines will ensure that existing and future development in the Planning Area will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Impacts are expected to be less than significant.

2. Groundwater Supplies
Threshold:
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-17 through 2.11-19) Explanation:

Resolution 2022-40
Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would result in increased demand for domestic water as the population increases and development occurs in the Planning Area. The Town will work with Liberty Utilities to assure sufficient water would be available in the future during normal, dry and multiple dry years. Due to sufficient groundwater resources and Specific Plan guidelines and existing regulations to conserve water resources, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to water resources.

2. Alter Drainage Patterns: Erosion/Siltation
Threshold:
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site; Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-19)
Explanation:

The Specific Plan will facilitate development projects that will result in grading, excavation, and other modifications to the ground surface, and have the potential to result in erosion and/or siltation on-and off-site. However, the Town requires projects to implement effective erosion control measures. All future projects will be required to implement these measures, including BMPs for both construction and operation of project sites. These BMPs are well established regulations that have been demonstrated to effectively mitigate soil erosion impacts, including hay bales, bioswales and other techniques utilized in projects in Town currently.

The Specific Plan proposes changes to the existing drainage system to facilitate major improvements along Highway 18. However, compliance with federal, state, regional and local regulations and policies at the individual project level would minimize the potential for erosion and siltation in the Planning Area. With implementation of these standard requirements, this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels.

3. Alter Drainage Patterns: Surface Runoff
Threshold:

Resolution 2022-40
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site;
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-20 through 2.11-22) Explanation:

Implementation of the proposed Project will result in new and/or modified development and improvements that could increase stormwater runoff. The reconstruction of the existing frontage roads along Highway 18 proposed in the Specific Plan would require the removal or reconstruction of the two existing trapezoidal channels along the north and south side of Highway 18. Per the project-specific infrastructure plan contained in the Specific Plan, two alternatives are proposed for the drainage improvements along the Highway 18 corridor from Navajo Road to Central Road:
 Alternative 1: The recommended drainage improvements would be to replace the existing channels with larger capacity box culverts in a similar layout to the existing channels
 Alternative 2: This alternative would be to provide upstream improvements, such as detention basins to reduce the drainage flows to the Village area.

All future projects will require project level environmental review at which time impacts, the necessity for permits, and mitigation measures would be determined prior to approval.

With adherence to, and implementation of existing General Plan policies and implementation programs, impacts related to the generation of additional runoff, including additional sources of polluted runoff, will be less than significant. Also, said policies and programs also ensure that the capacity of existing and planned drainage facilities will not be exceeded. The Town engineer shall ensure the design of the selected stormwater drainage alternative has adequate capacity to contain current and future runoff resulting from buildout of the Planning Area. Therefore, impacts from the volumes and quality of future runoff will be less than significant

4. Alter Drainage Patterns: Impede or Redirect Flow
Threshold:
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of

Resolution 2022-40
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i) impede or redirect flood flows?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-22)
Explanation:

The proposed Project may result in major improvements to existing drainage facilities in the Planning Area that would replace the existing channels with larger capacity box culverts or stormwater drainpipes, and employ other means to reduce flooding, including drywells and retention basins. These improvements are meant to improve existing drainage patterns/facilities and will not significantly alter drainage patterns in the Planning Area. Adherence to development standards in the proposed Specific Plan, policies in the General Plan, and other regulatory requirements would ensure that no significant impact regarding the redirection or impediment of flood flows would occur.

5. Inundation
Threshold:
d) In a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.11-22 through -23) Explanation:

The Specific Plan Planning Area is designated Zone D on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). Zone D identifies areas of potential but undetermined flood hazards, as no analysis of flood hazards has been conducted. There is no risk of inundation resulting from dam failure as the Planning Area is outside of any dam inundation areas. There is no risk of inundation resulting from seiche because no above-ground water reservoirs or other large bodies of water are in or near the Planning Area. There is no risk of inundation from tsunami because the Planning Area is inland and well outside of any tsunami zones.

The proposed Project will facilitate the development of new buildings and improvements that could use, store, or otherwise be involved with potentially hazardous materials. These facilities would be required to comply with applicable safety regulations and best practices to minimize the release of pollutants during potential flood events. Adherence to development standards in the proposed Specific Plan and other regulatory requirements

Resolution 2022-40
would ensure that no significant impact regarding release of pollutants due to inundation would occur.

H. LAND USE AND PLANNING

1. Divide a Community
Threshold:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.12-14)
Explanation:

The Specific Plan is a policy document that will not physically divide an established community. The Planning Area boundaries were carefully considered and do not divide established communities or neighborhoods. Specific Plan standards and guidelines are intended to unify, not divide, the community, including connections between Specific Plan Districts through improved sidewalks, crosswalks, bike lanes and roadways. The Project is expected to have a beneficial effect on the cohesiveness of the Planning Area, and impacts will be less than significant.

2. Conflict with Land Use Plan, Policy or Regulation
Threshold:
b) Would the Project 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?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.12-14 through -17) Explanation:

The proposed Project establishes planning Districts, development standards, and design guidelines that differ from those currently in effect in the Town’s General Plan, Development Code, and Zoning Map.

General Plan
The proposed Specific Plan would remove parcel-level General Plan designations and assign a single “Village Specific Plan” designation to the entire Planning Area. This action

Resolution 2022-40
would require a General Plan Amendment (GPA). Adopting a Specific Plan for the Planning Area is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Program 6.C.3 (“Future development and redevelopment of the Village shall be governed by a Specific Plan”) and Policy 3.B (“Specific Plans shall be required for development proposals that include one or more of the following: a combination of residential, recreational, commercial and/or industrial land use designations except in the mixed use land use designation, or variations from development standards in the applicable zone”). The Specific Plan is also consistent with other General Plan Land Use Element policies and programs, including those that specifically address the Village as well as those that address land use in broader terms. Therefore, impacts of the proposed Project on the General Plan will be less than significant.

Development Code and Zoning Map
To maintain consistency between the General Plan and Zoning Map, a Zone Change (ZC) will also be required. The proposed Project would remove existing zoning designations and replace them with Specific Plan Districts 1 through 5. Permitted land uses (residential, commercial, and public facility) and maximum residential densities (up to 20 du/ac) are generally the same as currently allowed. The ZC would implement and be consistent with the proposed GPA, and impacts to the Zoning Map would be less than significant.

The Specific Plan provides detailed information about land uses, development standards, and design guidelines that are tailored to the Planning Area. It will replace the Development Code as the planning tool for development and redevelopment in the Planning Area. The development standards allowed in the Specific Plan are not substantially different than those in the Development, and instead are more closely tailored to the Districts of the Specific Plan. None of the proposed variations to the Town’s development standards will substantially alter the ultimate development of the area, and impacts of the Specific Plan on the Development Code would be less than significant.

Under existing zoning designations, the Planning Area could accommodate an additional 500 dwelling units and 5,413,585 square feet of commercial/ service/office/public facility uses. Under the proposed Project, the Planning Area could accommodate an additional 682 dwelling units and 6,067,523 square feet of commercial/ service/office/public facility uses. Therefore, compared to current zoning designations, the proposed Project could result in an increase of 182 dwelling units (23% increase) and 653,938 square feet (9% increase). The Project proposes residential densities (20 du/ac) and commercial FAR (0.5 that are consistent with the existing General Plan and Development Code, and increases would not be such that significant environmental impacts are anticipated. Impacts would be less than significant.

Resolution 2022-40
I. NOISE

1. Groundborne Vibration and Noise Levels
Threshold:
b) Would the Project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.13-14 through -15) Explanation:

Construction operations for potential future projects within the Specific Plan area could expose nearby sensitive receivers to a temporary increase in vibration depending on the construction procedures and equipment, soil type, and receptor-building construction.

Site-specific construction-related vibration impacts will be assessed on a case-by-case basis during the project-level review process prior to the issuance of building permits by the Town. Construction activities would be required to comply with all Noise Ordinance requirements for the control of construction vibration. The implementation of relevant General Plan policies and programs and compliance with the standard Town requirements will reduce potential vibration-related impacts to less than significant levels.

In an urban environment, the highest operational vibration levels are typically associated with heavy industrial uses, railroads, and freeways. The Planning Area is not located in proximity to the Interstate 15 freeway or railroads, and therefore will not expose sensitive land uses to significant levels of off-site vibration. The Specific Plan does not propose land uses that would generate significant stationary sources of vibration, such as from heavy equipment operations. Operational-related vibration sources would be limited to electrical and mechanical equipment consistent with existing land uses in the Planning Area. Future commercial/industrial projects proposed near sensitive receptors will be required to prepare focused noise studies and implement mitigation, where necessary, to reduce vibration impacts to less than significant levels.

J. POPULATION AND HOUSING

1. Population Growth
Threshold:
a) Would the Project 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)?

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p 2.14-10 through -14) Explanation:

The proposed Project will facilitate future development of new homes and businesses that will directly result in population growth, and the extension of water and sewer infrastructure that could indirectly induce population growth.

According to the General Plan, the Town has the potential to accommodate 31,716 additional dwelling units and 96,829 additional residents within the Town boundaries through General Plan buildout. The additional housing increase associated with the Project (682 units) accounts for approximately 2% of the Town’s estimated future housing capacity, and the Project’s additional population (2,005) accounts for 2% of the Town’s future population capacity. Therefore, Project-related housing growth is within the projections of the General Plan and constitutes only a small percentage of total anticipated growth. The Project is also consistent with General Plan Housing Element goals, policies, and programs. Therefore, the impacts of the Project on population growth inducement will be less than significant.

New commercial development will bring jobs to the area. It is anticipated that most new jobs will be filled by current residents of Apple Valley and/or neighboring communities who already live in the region. Economic development and job growth in the Planning Area are planned and anticipated by the Town, and the proposed Specific Plan has been prepared to guide that growth. Therefore, the impacts of Project-generated business growth on population inducement will be less than significant.

The Planning Area is urbanized and well served by existing roads. No major road extensions will be required to serve the Planning Area at buildout.

The Planning Area is well served by water and utility (electric, gas, telecommunications) infrastructure. Parcel-level extensions will be required to serve new development; however, they will have no impact on population growth.

The municipal sewer system is relatively new and does not extend throughout the entire Planning Area. Further extension of trunk lines will be required before all parcels in the Planning Area are within 200 feet of sewer lines. Development and redevelopment projects that are built before sewer extensions will need to install septic systems. Over the long term, sewer extensions could induce population growth on undeveloped parcels east, northeast, and south of the Planning Area. However, growth in those areas would be expected to occur incrementally over many years. Project-related impacts of sewer extensions on population growth will be less than significant.

Resolution 2022-40

2. Displace People or Housing
Threshold:
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p 2.14-14 through -17) Explanation:

The Specific Plan is a policy document that does not propose the demolition of existing housing units. However, it could facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized parcels which could result in demolition of existing housing and replacement with new housing or commercial uses. Redevelopment of underutilized parcels is projected to result in a net loss of 23 dwelling units in the Planning Area. Based on the Town’s average household size of 2.94 persons, 68 residents could be displaced.

It is unknown whether or to what extent redevelopment will occur, or the number of dwelling units that would be removed or replaced as the Planning Area builds out.

However, the number of replacement housing units would exceed the number of units lost by 682 units, and the new units could accommodate displaced residents.

Furthermore, none of the units which could be lost are currently restricted for lower income households. Should any of these units be affordable housing units in the future, State law requires that the residents be relocated to equivalent housing prior to the demolition of any unit. Therefore, Project-related impacts associated with the displacement of people or housing would be less than significant.

Environmental Justice
The Project Planning Area does not contain any disadvantaged communities, as designated by CalEPA. The Planning Area has relatively low overall CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentiles ranging from 29% to 33%. Therefore, the Project will have no impact on disadvantaged communities. Concepts relating to the equitable provision of resources and protection from environmental hazards, that are the hallmarks of environmental justice, are foundational to the Specific Plan. The Project will not create or exacerbate conditions associated with environmental justice.

Resolution 2022-40
K. PUBLIC SERVICES
Threshold:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
 Fire Protection
 Police Projection
 Schools
 Parks
 Other public facilities
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.15-6 through -10) Explanation:

Fire Protection
Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan could result in the development of up to 682 additional dwelling units and an 6,067,523 additional square feet of commercial/service/ office/public facility uses in the Village area at full buildout, in addition to existing development. Future projects will also be subject to review by the Fire Marshall to ensure that they provide adequate access for fire protection crew and equipment and do not interfere with such services during both construction and operation. Property taxes, special taxes, and developer impact fees levied on new development in the Planning Area would be utilized to fund the construction of new stations and/or to expand existing facilities to reduce fire services impacts. Compliance with the applicable design requirements and payment of the funds described above would ensure that future development facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan would not result in significant adverse impacts to fire protection services.

Police Protection
Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan could result in the addition of approximately 2,005 new residents from the development of 682 additional dwelling units throughout the

Resolution 2022-40
Planning Area. With 51 officers for a Town population of 74,350, the current officer-topopulation ratio is around one officer per 1,458 residents, which exceeds the one officer for every 1,500 residents target set in the General Plan. The addition of 2,005 new residents would increase the population to 76,355, with an officer-to-population ratio of one officer per 1,498 residents, which is still above the one-per-1,500-residents target.

Implementation of existing General Plan policies and programs (Police and Fire Protection Element) will require the Town to coordinate with the Police Department to provide adequate and timely police protection services to meet future development demands. Should new police stations or expansion of existing police facilities be required in the future, each facility would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to assure that impacts are minimized or mitigated, as needed. Overall, implementation of existing General Plan policies and standard requirements would ensure that impacts on police protection services would be less than significant.

Schools
Implementation of the proposed Specific Plan would result in the development of up to 682 additional dwelling units throughout the Planning Area. Assuming maximum buildout of multi-family units, approximately 224 new elementary/middle/high school students would be generated over the buildout period of the proposed Specific Plan. The projected Specific Plan student generation is well below these additional capacities at each level, and thus buildout of the Specific Plan is not expected to require new school facilities or expansion of existing school facilities other than those already planned by the AVUSD.

Pursuant to SB 50, AVUSD can collect school impact fees as new development occurs.

The payment of such fees is deemed to fully mitigate the impacts of new development on school services, and impacts from Specific Plan buildout on school facilities would be less than significant pursuant to SB 50.

Parks
Potential impacts to parks are analyzed in Section 2.16, Recreational Resources.

Other Public Facilities
Buildout of the Project is projected to result in an additional 2,005 residents (assuming full occupancy) and thus a limited increase in the need for additional community centers and/or other public facilities. The Town assesses Development Impact Fees on each new residential or commercial project, including fees for General Government Facilities, Animal Control Facilities, and Public Meeting Facilities. Under the Specific Plan, the development of new residential units will occur over time and the use of public facilities

Resolution 2022-40
by Project residents is not expected to require new or expanded facilities that could result in adverse environmental impacts. With the payment of applicable impact fees, Projectrelated impacts to public facilities will be less than significant.

L. RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

1. Increased Park Usage
Threshold:
a) 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.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.16-6 through -8) Explanation:

The Specific Plan will facilitate population growth in the Planning Area, which would incrementally increase the use of existing parks and recreational facilities in Apple Valley.

However, the projected Project buildout population (2,005) represents only 2.7% of the current Town population (74,350), 2.0% of SCAG’s projected 2045 Town population (101,400), and 1.1% of the anticipated General Plan buildout population (185,858). This is only a marginal increase in population that is not expected to result in or accelerate substantial physical deterioration of existing parks and recreational facilities.

The proposed Project would facilitate a combination of new public recreational improvements such as bike and pedestrian paths, private open spaces and recreational facilities, and payment of in-lieu fees or dedication of land to the Town that would reduce the demand for existing parks and recreational facilities. The inclusion of open space and recreational amenities is encouraged and integrated in multiple sections of the Specific Plan, particularly in Districts 4 and 5 where the bulk of new units are anticipated, and would be constructed consistent with Town standards; therefore, impacts are considered less than significant.

2. Recreational Facilities
Threshold:
b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.16-8)
Explanation:

As a policy document, the proposed Project will not, in and of itself, result in adverse physical effects on parks and recreation. However, the Specific Plan Circulation Plan includes conceptual design of a new/enhanced multi-modal pathway network that can accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and other users in the Planning Area. The Specific Plan also facilitates future development of private open space, recreational facilities, and plazas/courtyards and other passive gathering spaces. Construction and operation of future recreational amenities would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis as projects are proposed. Therefore, impacts of the proposed Project would be less than significant.

M. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION

1. Vehicle Miles Traveled
Threshold:
b) Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.17-30 through -32) Explanation:

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, as amended December 2018, states that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. A lead agency may use models or other methods to analyze a project’s VMT quantitatively or qualitatively. The Town of Apple Valley adopted thresholds of significance for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in May 2021 for the purpose of determining a potentially significant impact to transportation pursuant to CEQA
A VMT analysis was performed for the proposed Project in the Project-specific Traffic Analysis. The analysis was two-fold. First, it compared the Town of Apple Valley General Plan Buildout VMT service population with the Project’s VMT service population for the baseline (2016) and cumulative (2040) scenarios. The Town of Apple Valley General Plan Buildout VMT per service population threshold is 33.2, which was obtained from the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool. The Project’s baseline VMT per service population is 32.7, which is less than 33.2 and therefore does not indicate an impact. The Project’s cumulative VMT per service population is 34.9, which is greater than the regional threshold of 33.2 by about 5%. Typically, service

Resolution 2022-40
population estimates only include Project population and employment. When retail customers are considered in the calculation of service population, the Project’s cumulative VMT per service population is 16.0, which is below the threshold and results in a less than significant impact.

For the second part of the VMT analysis, the Traffic Study evaluated the Project’s effect on VMT by comparing VMT within the Town of Apple Valley under “With Project” and “Without Project” conditions. Baseline (2016) VMT per service population would be 8.5 with the Project, and 8.5 without the Project. Cumulative (2040) VMT per service population would be 10.0 with the Project, and 10.0 without the Project. Therefore, the Project does not result in any change in VMT between the Without Project and With Project conditions, and no significant impact would occur.

2. Design Hazards
Threshold:
c) Would the Project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.15-32 and -34) Explanation:

Proposed land uses (residential, commercial, institutional) are consistent with existing land uses in the Planning Area and those on surrounding lands. The future vehicle mix will be comparable to the existing mix. Therefore, the Project will not increase hazards due to incompatible uses.

The Project proposes numerous physical modifications to several roadway alignments in the Planning Area. The Village Specific Plan Circulation Plan includes two alternative concepts for the Highway 18 circulation system, which were originally developed as part of the Village State Route 18 Corridor Enhancement Plan (2019. Proposed modifications will improve safety for all users throughout the corridor through properly engineered intersections, simplification of frontage roads, removal of excess driveway access points, centralized parking, and a coordinated network of multi-use paths and pedestrian crossings. Impacts resulting from geometric design features will be positive, and no adverse safety impacts are anticipated.
3) Emergency Access

Resolution 2022-40
Threshold:
d) Result in inadequate emergency access.

Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.15 -34)
Explanation:

The Project does not propose any physical changes or land use designations that would result in inadequate emergency access. The Project would facilitate development and redevelopment projects and roadway modifications that could cause temporary road closures and/or detours. However, impacts would be temporary, and any activities impacting public streets would be coordinated with Town staff and emergency responders. The Town Police Department, Apple Valley Fire Protection District, and Town staff would continue to review site-specific traffic control plans and inspect new development/redevelopment projects to assure adequate emergency access is provided, including but not limited to adequate vehicular access and turn-around spaces, fire lanes, signage, secondary access points, and access to gated and locked entrances. Proposed modifications to existing roadways will replace confusing and inefficient intersections with safer designs that are expected to have net positive benefits for emergency access.

Project-related impacts will be less than significant.

N. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

1. Water, Wastewater, Storm Drainage, Electric, Natural Gas and Telecom
Thresholds:
a) Would the Project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
b) Would the Project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
c) Would the Project 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?

Resolution 2022-40
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.19-9 through -14) Explanation:

Domestic Water Supply
As discussed in Section 2.11, Hydrology and Water Quality, at full buildout under the proposed Specific Plan, the Planning Area would require 865.24 acre-feet (AF) of water annually, which represents an additional 436.02 AF or 101.6% increase from the estimated existing demand (429.22 AF). The net Project water demand of 436.02 AFY represents approximately 2.9% of the total 2020 water supply (14,979 AFY) from Liberty Utilities, and less than 2.4% of the projected 2045 water supply (18,538 AFY). According to its 2020 Urban Water Management Plan, based on historical and on-going management practices, Liberty Utilities will be able to rely on the Mojave Basin Area for adequate supply over the next 25 years during a normal year, a single-dry year, and a five consecutive year drought.

The Town will work with Liberty Utilities to assure sufficient water would be available in the future during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Due to sufficient groundwater resources and Specific Plan guidelines and existing regulations to conserve water resources, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to water resources.

Domestic Water Infrastructure
There are existing Liberty Utilities water lines within the Specific Plan Planning Area ranging from 4” to 12” in size. The Specific Plan identifies proposed 12” water lines along the north side of Highway 18 (generally between Navajo and Pioneer Roads), and several locations along Powhatan Road where water lines are currently absent (Specific Plan Exhibit 5.7). The Town requires new development in the Planning Area to provide water service and extend water infrastructure as development occurs. The water improvements will be constructed on an as-needed basis as a condition of approval as development occurs. The extension of water lines is expected to have less than significant environmental impacts because the physical expansion will be limited within the future development site and disturbed right-of-way, and the Specific Plan will facilitate new water-efficient buildings and drought-tolerant desert landscaping.

Wastewater Services and Infrastructure
The Town’s local wastewater collection system covers most of the developed portions of the Planning Area, with existing lines ranging from 4” to 21” in size. The Specific Plan identifies proposed 8” sewer lines along Nomwaket Road (between Ottawa and Powhatan

Resolution 2022-40
Roads), and along parcels located between Navajo Road and Pawnee Road (sewer lines would extend between Powhatan Road and Highway 18). The Town adopted a Sewer Connection Policy in 2006 that requires new development to connect with sewer facilities where the parcel is within one-half mile of existing sewer facilities, which would apply to the entire Village Specific Plan area.

The Town’s sewer system conveys wastewater to the Regional Wastewater Reclamation Facility (RWWRF) operated by Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority (VVWRA) in Victorville. The net Project wastewater generation of 524,555 gpd (equivalent to 0.52 million gallons per day, mgd) represents approximately 2.9% of the RWWRF’s design capacity. The Specific Plan buildout would increase the amount treated at RWWRF from

10.7 mgd to 11.2 mgd, which is well below its design capacity (18 mgd).

Based on the capacity analysis, buildout of the Planning Area consistent with the proposed Specific Plan is projected to generate wastewater quantities that are within the treatment capacity of the RWWRF, and it is not expected to require new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. As VVWRA carries out future projects on new or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities, each development project would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis. Overall, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a less than significant impact related to wastewater treatment facilities.

Stormwater Drainage
The Town of Apple Valley Public Works Department manages local drainage facilities through its Master Drainage Plan. The County of San Bernardino Flood Control District is responsible for regional stormwater management within the Town. In the Specific Plan area, existing drainage flows north to a low point in the Apple Valley Dry Lake region.

The Specific Plan Infrastructure Plan (Chapter 6) illustrates a recommended drainage concept in the Project Planning Area. There are currently two trapezoidal channels (77 cfs in capacity) parallel to the north and south frontage roads of Highway 18, which terminate near a wash on the northwest corner of Central Road and Highway 18. The Specific Plan recommends replacing the existing channels with larger capacity box culverts in a similar layout as the existing channels; or the installation of a 54” pipe to serve the same purpose, if upstream improvements are undertaken. At its outlet, a bio swale and combination basin and/or drywells would filter the stormwater and mitigate some of the volume. The Town has established per unit developer impact fees for storm drainage facilities for residential and commercial/industrial development to offset the cost of improvements due to increased development.

Resolution 2022-40
As individual projects are proposed under the Specific Plan, the increased runoff from new impervious surfaces may be addressed through use of on-site stormwater detention or retention improvements, which for compliance with NPDES, typically include bioremediation areas to break down potential pollutants and capture sand and sediment before and during percolation and before surface discharge. Therefore, the proposed Specific Plan is not expected to have a significant impact on new or expanded additional drainage facilities.

Electric Power
The developed areas in the Specific Plan area are well served by existing SCE infrastructure. According to the Specific Plan Air Quality Analysis, at buildout, the Planning Area is projected to consume 101,028,120 kWh per year, which would be equivalent to approximately 30.6% of annual Town-wide usage in 2019. The projections are considered conservative because the air quality analysis did not include specific energy-related mitigation measures for the operational phase, and the demand estimate is based on maximum gross building square footage rather than occupied space.

Buildout of the Planning Area under the proposed Specific Plan is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on SCE’s ability to provide power. Development will occur gradually as individual projects are approved. Future development will be subject to the latest requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code (California Building Code Part 11). The proposed Specific Plan also includes measures to promote energy efficiency in design and use of lighting.

Construction of future development and associated utility lines will comply with applicable SCE requirements regarding installation, extensions, and connections to limit impacts to electricity infrastructure and avoid service interruptions. No new SCE electric power facilities will need to be constructed or relocated which could cause significant environmental effects. Project-related impacts will be less than significant.

Natural Gas
The developed areas in the Specific Plan area are well served by existing SWG infrastructure. According to the Specific Plan Air Quality Analysis, at buildout, the Planning Area is projected to consume 2,130,448 therms of natural gas per year, which would be equivalent to approximately 13.7% of annual Town-wide usage in 2019. The projections are considered conservative because the air quality analysis did not include specific energy-related mitigation measures for the operational phase, and the demand estimate is based on maximum gross building square footage rather than occupied space.

Resolution 2022-40
As discussed above, future development will be subject to the latest requirements of the California Green Building Standards Code (California Building Code Part 11).

Buildout of the Planning Area under the proposed Specific Plan is not expected to significantly impact natural gas supplies or SWG’s ability to provide it. Prior to ground disturbance, project contractors would notify and coordinate with SWG to identify the locations and depths of all existing gas lines and avoid disruption of gas service. No additional natural gas facilities will need to be constructed or relocated. Impacts will be less than significant.

Utility providers plan for adequate capacity to serve new connections/development, which depends on rates of growth in their respective service boundaries. Both SCE and SWG are regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), which mandates that electric and natural gas service must be provided to new customers. The need for, and location of, new or expanded dry utility infrastructure, including communication systems, would be determined on a project-by-project basis. Generally, extension of dry utility services to new development occurs within the service provider’s easement or within a project’s boundary. The potential environmental impacts of new or expanded dry utility infrastructure would be addressed through each project’s environmental review process under CEQA.

Telecommunication
Frontier and Charter Spectrum provide telecommunications services, including telephone, high-speed Internet service, and cable television to the high desert region, including the Project Planning Area.

As with electricity and natural gas, the need for and location of new or expanded infrastructure, including communication systems, would be determined on a project-byproject basis. Generally, extension of dry utility services to new development occurs within the service provider’s easement or within a project’s boundary, and multiple utility infrastructure improvements can be installed during construction to save costs and reduce potential impacts associated with ground disturbance. The potential environmental impacts related to the need for new or expanded dry utility infrastructure, where applicable, would be addressed through each project’s environmental review process under CEQA. Overall, less than significant impacts are anticipated from the expansion of telecommunication facilities.

Resolution 2022-40

2. Solid Waste
Threshold:
d) Would the Project 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) Would the Project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Finding: Less than significant (EIR, p. 2.19-17 and -18) Explanation:

Future development facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan would increase development and the population in the Planning Area. At full buildout, there will be a total of 971 residential units and 7,890,903 square feet of commercial/ service/office/public facility uses within the Planning Area. Implementation of the Specific Plan would result in a population increase of approximately 2,005 new residents. This increase in growth and development as a result of the proposed Specific Plan would result in an increase in solid waste generation, and increased demand for solid waste services throughout the Planning Area. Using solid waste generation factors provided by CalRecycle, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan could result in the generation of 41,370,134.0± pounds, equivalent to 20,685.1 tons per year, of solid waste (Table 2.19-3). The Specific Plan buildout would result in a 333.9% increase in solid waste generation, or a net increase of 31,834,810.5± pounds, equivalent to 15,917.4 tons per year.

State law (AB 939) requires a 50% diversion of solid waste from landfills; after diversion, solid waste disposal at Specific Plan buildout is projected to be a net increase of 7,958.7 tons per year. As discussed above, the landfill serving the Town and Planning Area has a remaining capacity of at 79,400,000 cubic yards as of 2020. Waste generated annually by future development under the proposed Specific Plan would contribute approximately

0.4% to the remaining capacity as of 2020 and would not exceed the landfill capacity.

The Town of Apple Valley, Burrtec Waste Industries, and the landfill serving the Town are required to comply with applicable solid waste management and reduction statutes and regulations. The proposed Specific Plan would have no impact on their compliance with these requirements. Overall, with continuing adherence to the requirements of AB 939 and existing standards and regulations, the Planning Area would maintain compliance with applicable statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and impacts would be less

Resolution 2022-40
than significant.

SECTION 5: FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS MITIGATED TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.

The Town Council hereby finds that feasible Mitigation Measures have been identified in the EIR and this Resolution that will avoid or substantially lessen the following potentially significant environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The potentially significant impacts, and the Mitigation Measures that will reduce them to a less than significant level, are as follows:

A. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

1. Habitat Modifications, Riparian Habitat, and Migratory Corridors Threshold:
a) Would the Project 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?\ Finding: Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (EIR, p. 2.5-11 through -12) Explanation:

Potential impacts to special status species would be reduced or mitigated to less than significant levels through a variety of mechanisms, including adherence to guidelines and provisions of the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP upon its adoption, compliance with the MBTA, and use of habitat-enhancing landscaping. The Town will also continue to implement Municipal Code Chapter 9.76, which protects specified native desert plants, including Joshua Trees, and addresses acceptable methods of removal and/or transplanting. Future development projects causing their removal or transplanting would be subject to the provisions of the Municipal Code and the State of California.

Future development and redevelopment projects facilitated under the proposed Specific Plan will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis for potential adverse impacts to sensitive species and required to conduct site-specific biological surveys and implement mitigation measures, as needed (Mitigation Measure BIO-1), to minimize potential impacts. The Town will also require migratory bird surveys in compliance with the MBTA (Mitigation Measure BIO-2).

Resolution 2022-40
With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 and BIO-2, potential Project-related impacts to sensitive species would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1
Site-Specific Biological Surveys
Prior to grading or any other ground‐disturbing activity, including vegetation removal or other development actions, development projects proposed on vacant parcels, or as deemed necessary by the Town, shall be required to conduct site-specific biological studies in compliance with standard survey methodologies and the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP. Species-specific and/or resource-specific surveys may be required and shall comply with applicable protocols of CDFW, USFWS, and/or other appropriate regulatory agencies, as follows:
 Burrowing Owl surveys shall be conducted consistent with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required, including habitat assessments, surveys and impact assessments, to the standards and utilizing the protocols included in the Staff Report.  Desert Tortoise pre-construction surveys shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the initiation of ground disturbance, and in accordance with the standards and protocols provided in the US Fish and Wildlife Service 2019 Desert Tortoise Survey Methodology, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required. If the species is detected, a take permit shall be secured by the development’s proponent, consistent with State and federal requirements.
 Mohave Ground Squirrel pre-construction surveys shall be conducted following the standards and protocols of the CDFW Mohave Ground Squirrel Survey Guidelines, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required.

If biological resources are present that would be significantly impacted by a project, mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts on sensitive species/habitat to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2
Nesting Bird Surveys
For any grading or other site disturbance or tree or vegetation removal occurring during the nesting season typically between February 1st and August 31st, a qualified biologist shall conduct at least one nesting bird survey, and more if deemed necessary by the consulting biologist, and shall be required to conduct the initial field survey no more than

Resolution 2022-40
3 days prior to the initiation of ground disturbance. If nesting birds are present, no work shall be permitted near the nest until the young birds have fledged, as determined by the qualified biologist. The CDFW recommends avoidance buffers of about 500 feet for birdsof-prey, and 100-300 feet for songbirds. A smaller or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist.

2. Riparian Habitat and Sensitive Natural Communities
Threshold:
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Finding: Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (EIR, p. 2.5-12) Explanation:

No riparian habitats or sensitive natural communities are known to occur in the Planning Area. However, future development projects facilitated by the Specific Plan could potentially disturb these resources and will be required to conduct site-specific biological studies, as needed, to identify potential impacts to riparian habitats or natural communities, if applicable (Mitigation Measure BIO-1).

With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, potential Project-related impacts to natural habitats or sensitive biological communities would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1
Site-Specific Biological Surveys
Prior to grading or any other ground‐disturbing activity, including vegetation removal or other development actions, development projects proposed on vacant parcels, or as deemed necessary by the Town, shall be required to conduct site-specific biological studies in compliance with standard survey methodologies and the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP. Species-specific and/or resource-specific surveys may be required and shall comply with applicable protocols of CDFW, USFWS, and/or other appropriate regulatory agencies, as follows:
 Burrowing Owl surveys shall be conducted consistent with the CDFW Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required, including habitat assessments, surveys and impact assessments, to the

Resolution 2022-40
standards and utilizing the protocols included in the Staff Report.  Desert Tortoise pre-construction surveys shall be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to the initiation of ground disturbance, and in accordance with the standards and protocols provided in the US Fish and Wildlife Service 2019 Desert Tortoise Survey Methodology, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required. If the species is detected, a take permit shall be secured by the development’s proponent, consistent with State and federal requirements.
 Mohave Ground Squirrel pre-construction surveys shall be conducted following the standards and protocols of the CDFW Mohave Ground Squirrel Survey Guidelines, or the standard in place at the time that surveys are required.

If biological resources are present that would be significantly impacted by a project, mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts on sensitive species/habitat to less than significant levels.

3. Migratory Wildlife
Threshold:
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.

Finding: Less than significant with mitigation incorporated. (EIR, p. 2.5-13 through -14) Explanation:

The proposed Specific Plan would facilitate future urban development that could disturb or permanently remove sensitive species and/or their habitats that may be in the Planning Area. Much of the Specific Plan Planning Area is developed; the remaining vacant parcels are partially surrounded by development and/or transected with dirt trails/roads.

Therefore, given the general urban context and site conditions, the Planning Area is not used or considered suitable as a wildlife corridor.

The undeveloped lands are not known to serve as wildlife nursery sites but may serve as nesting sites for birds. Future development facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan could impact nesting birds if construction occurs during nesting seasons; however, implementation of MBTA surveys (Mitigation Measure BIO-2) would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels. With implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-2, potential Project-related impacts to sensitive species would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure BIO-2

Resolution 2022-40
Nesting Bird Surveys
For any grading or other site disturbance or tree or vegetation removal occurring during the nesting season typically between February 1st and August 31st, a qualified biologist shall conduct at least one nesting bird survey, and more if deemed necessary by the consulting biologist, and shall be required to conduct the initial field survey no more than 3 days prior to the initiation of ground disturbance. If nesting birds are present, no work shall be permitted near the nest until the young birds have fledged, as determined by the qualified biologist. The CDFW recommends avoidance buffers of about 500 feet for birdsof-prey, and 100-300 feet for songbirds. A smaller or larger buffer may be determined by the qualified biologist.

B. CULTURAL AND TRIBAL RESOURCES

1. Historical Resources
Threshold:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5.

Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.6-9) Explanation:

The proposed Project is a policy document that will not, in and of itself, result in physical changes to a historical resource. However, it will facilitate development and redevelopment in the Planning Area that could potentially impact “historical resources,” either directly or indirectly. Potential impacts will need to be determined through site-specific cultural resource surveys for individual projects (Mitigation Measure CUL-1). Any grounddisturbing activities in the Planning Area that inadvertently encounter buried cultural material that may be historical in age will need to be halted within 50 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the discovery (Mitigation Measure CUL-2). With implementation of these mitigation measures, Projectrelated impacts to historical resources will be less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1
Pre-Construction Surveys
The Town shall require intensive-level cultural resources surveys by qualified archaeologists, historians, and/or architectural historians, where deemed necessary.

Studies should include in-depth records search at the SCCIC, historic background

Resolution 2022-40
research, intensive-level field survey, and consultation with Native American representatives and/or other relevant parties, as well as impact evaluation and mitigation programs, as needed. The Town shall monitor and enforce recommended mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2
Archaeological and/or Tribal Resource Procurement and Documentation Should unknown archaeological or tribal cultural resources become unearthed, the area of potential resources shall be cordoned off within 50 feet of the find and protected from further disturbance until a qualified archaeologist can investigate the discovery. The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a findings report summarizing the methods and results of the investigation, including an itemized summary and detailed analysis of recovered artifacts upon completion of field and laboratory work. The report shall include an interpretation of the cultural activities represents by the artifacts and discussion of their significance. The submittal of the report to the Town and Tribal representative, as appropriate, along with final curation of the recovered artifacts, will signify completion of the monitoring program and, barring any unexpected findings of extraordinary significance, the mitigation of potential project impacts on cultural and tribal resources.

Overall, impacts to historical resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2.

2. Archaeological Resources
Threshold:
b) Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.6-10) Explanation:

The proposed Project is a policy document that will facilitate development and redevelopment of the Planning Area. Approximately 58% (377± acres) of the Planning Area is already developed. Developed lands are less likely to harbor archaeological resources due to previous ground disturbance. The remaining 42% (274± acres) of the Planning Area is vacant and could be subject to ground disturbance during build out.

Potential impacts will need to be determined through site-specific cultural resource surveys for individual projects (Mitigation Measure CUL-1). Ground-disturbing activities

Resolution 2022-40
such as demolition, grading, and excavation could potentially unearth previously unknown cultural resources of prehistoric age. Should such an event occur, such activities will need to be halted within 50 feet of the find until a qualified archaeologist can evaluate the nature and significance of the discovery (Mitigation Measure CUL-2). With implementation of these mitigation measures, Project-related impacts to archaeological resources will be less than significant.
(See Mitigation Measures CUL- 1 and -2, above)
Overall, impacts to archaeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1 and CUL-2.

2. Human Remains
Threshold:
c) Would the Project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.6.10 and -11) Explanation:

California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that, in the event that human remains are discovered, all excavation shall stop and the County coroner shall inspect the site. Should the remains be identified as Native American by the coroner, the NAHC is required to contact the Most Likely Descendant, and that descendant may recommend appropriate burial. This requirement, reflected in Mitigation Measure CUL-3, will assure that Project-related impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains are less than significant.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3
Human Remains
Should buried human remains be discovered during grading or other construction activity, in accordance with State law, the County coroner shall be contacted. If the remains are determined to be of Native American heritage, the Native American Heritage Commission

Resolution 2022-40
(NAHC) and the appropriate local Native American Tribe shall be contacted to determine the Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

Overall, impacts to human remains will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL-3.

D. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

1. Groundshaking and Liquefaction
Threshold:
a) Would the Project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Strong seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p.2.8-13 through -15) Explanation:

The Planning Area is in a seismically active area where strong groundshaking could occur during an earthquake event on the North Frontal, Helendale, San Andreas, Cleghorn, Cucamonga Faults, or other nearby faults.

For individual development projects in the Planning Area, site-specific geologic and geotechnical analyses should be conducted that address a range of topics, including but not limited to distance to the various faults in the region, local surface and sub-surface soil conditions, potential geologic hazards, liquefaction risk, proposed land use and development plans, and soil and building measures that reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels, to the greatest extent practicable(Mitigation Measure GEO-1).

Implementation of existing regulations and policies, Mitigation Measure GEO-1, and

Resolution 2022-40
project-specific mitigation measures would reduce potential hazards from ground shaking to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measure GEO-1
Proposals for future development and redevelopment under the Apple Valley Village Specific Plan shall include site-specific subsurface geotechnical investigations that address geologic and soil hazards, including ground shaking, settlement, liquefaction, subsidence, collapsible and expansive soils, and other relevant conditions and potential hazards. Seismic-related hazards shall be analyzed using Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA). The geotechnical investigations shall provide site-specific mitigation measures, including but not limited to, proper excavation, compaction and foundation design, as well as other standard construction practices.

2. Unstable Soils
Threshold:
c) Would the Project 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 offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Finding: Less than significant after mitigation (EIR, p. 2.8-16 and -17) Explanation:

Development facilitated by the Specific Plan will be constructed in conformance with recommendations of project-specific analyses and would not result in unmitigated unstable soils. Implementation of existing policies and Mitigation Measure GEO-1 will ensure impacts regarding unstable soils and associated potential hazards are reduced to less than significant levels.
(See Mitigation Measure GEO-1, above)
Overall, impacts related to unstable soils will be mitigated to less than significant levels through implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-1.

3. Expansive Soils
Threshold:

Resolution 2022-40
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property.

Finding: Less than significant after mitigation (EIR, p.2.8-17) Explanation:

Site-specific geotechnical investigations will be required to identify potential expansive soils, if any, and provide mitigation measures to avoid potential hazards. The geotechnical investigations should entail structural design criteria and construction recommendations to ensure the stability and integrity of structures and infrastructure, including the potential for soil expansion and the soil expansion index that needs to be used in the engineering design (Mitigation Measure GEO-1).
(See Mitigation Measure GEO-1, above)
Compliance with Mitigation Measure GEO-1and appropriate construction standards for individual projects would ensure that impacts related to expansive soils remain less than significant.

E. NOISE

1. Ambient Noise
Threshold:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.13-11 through -14) Explanation:

Build out of the proposed Specific Plan will result in overall increases to community noise levels from increased urbanization and associated activities, including short-term construction noise and increases in motor vehicle traffic and other modes of transportation. These impacts may be significant if not mitigated, especially to sensitive receptors along the major roadways in the Planning Area.

In order to assure that noise levels for future residential development in the Planning Area remain at acceptable levels, Mitigation Measure NOI-1 has been provided requiring the preparation of site and project-specific noise impact analysis for projects in areas

Resolution 2022-40
susceptible to noise hazards. These noise analyses will consider the specifics of a project, and impose mitigation measures, if necessary, in response to the project’s characteristics.

Mitigation Measures NOI-1
Residential development proposed along Navajo Road or Central Road, in Districts 4 and 5, shall be required to prepare a project-specific noise impact analysis to analyze the noise levels resulting from adjacency to these roadways. The noise analyses shall provide interior and exterior noise levels, and shall include mitigation measures, if necessary, to assure that noise levels remain within the Town’s acceptable standards for residential land uses.

Examples of noise mitigation measures may include but are not limited to best management practices such as limiting construction hours, maximizing the physical separation between noise generators and noise receptors, and the use of quiet construction equipment whenever possible. In addition, future projects will be subject to provisions in the Municipal Code Chapter 9.73 regarding noise control that is designed to reduce unnecessary and excessive noise.

With implementation of the Town’s standard requirements and Mitigation Measure NOI1, potential noise impacts associated with future development in the Specific Plan area will be less than significant.

F. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION

1. Circulation System Compliance
Threshold:
a) Does the Project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.17-25 through -30) Explanation:

LOS Policy
The Apple Valley General Plan establishes LOS D as the minimum peak hour intersection performance standard for the Town’s circulation network. The San Bernardino County Congestion Management Plan (CMP) establishes LOS E as the minimum LOS standard for CMP designated roadways, including Highway 18. The Project-specific Traffic Analysis projected year 2040 traffic conditions for the Planning Area without and with the proposed Project.

Resolution 2022-40
In year 2040 Without Specific Plan, all but two intersections are projected to operate within the Town’s LOS policy of LOS D or better. The two exceptions are: 1) Highway 18 at Navajo Road, operating at LOS E in the PM peak hour, and 2) Navajo Road at Ottawa Road, operating at LOS F in the PM peak hour for traffic turning left from Ottawa Road to northbound Navajo Road
In the year 2040 With Specific Plan, Alternative 1 (All Roundabouts on Highway 18), All intersections are projected to operate within the Town’s LOS policy of LOS D or better, except the intersection of Navajo Road at Powhatan Road West which is projected to operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour. If the intersection meets warrants justifying installation of a traffic signal, this improvement may be considered but, being only 400 feet from the signalized intersection at Navajo Road and Powhatan Road East, it will require that the two signals be synchronized.

In the year 2040 With Specific Plan, Alternative 2 (All Traffic Signals on Highway 18), the only intersection in the Planning Area that exceeds the Town’s LOS D policy is Navajo Road at Powhatan Road West. The projected delay of 36 seconds per vehicle and projected LOS E are the same as projected under Alternative 1.

Both Alternatives 1 and 2 of the proposed Project’s circulation plan can accommodate vehicular traffic generated by the Project. However, in year 2040 under both alternatives, all intersections in the Planning Area, except one, will meet the Town’s LOS D policy. The intersection of Navajo Road at Powhatan Road West will operate at LOS E in the PM peak hour from the side street (which is a left turn movement) and, therefore, will fail to meet the Town’s LOS D policy. The intersection is currently a side-street-stop controlled intersection. Installation of a traffic signal (when warranted) that is coordinated with the existing traffic signal at Navajo Road and Powhatan Road East, approximately 400 feet to the south, will improve LOS conditions to LOS D or better (Mitigation Measure TRANSP-1). With mitigation, all intersections in the Planning Area will meet the Town’s LOS policy and Project impacts will be less than significant.

Street Classifications
The Specific Plan proposes only two (2) classifications for the Planning Area: Major Thoroughfare and Local Street. This simplifies the classification system and allows flexibility in configuring sidewalks, bike lanes, and on-street parking in the Planning Area.

It improves parking and bikeway options and connectivity but maintains right-of-way consistency with streets outside of the Planning Area. Impacts would be positive and less than significant. However, under Alternative 1 (All Roundabouts on Highway 18), Powhatan Road between Navajo Road and Central Road may be widened to 4 lanes and designated a Major Thoroughfare should it be required to relieve traffic demand on Highway 18. This could be needed due to the constriction of Highway 18 to a single lane

Resolution 2022-40
in each direction between Navajo Road and Central Road. Should this occur, the intersection of Powhatan Road and Central Road would be signalized. Powhatan Road would need to be designated a Through Truck Route to accommodate trucks from Highway 18. New development projects would need to provide adequate right-of-way to accommodate a Major Thoroughfare. These modifications are described in Mitigation Measure TRANSP-2. With implementation of TRANSP-2, impacts would be less than significant.

Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities
Consistent with the General Plan, the Specific Plan proposes multi-use paths or Class I bicycle facilities on Central Road, Navajo Road, (realigned) Yucca Loma Road, and Esaws Avenue. The Specific Plan is also consistent with and expands the bikeway designations of the General Plan. Impacts to the General Plan multi-use and bikeway plan would be positive and less than significant.

Mitigation Measure TRANSP-1
Intersection of Navajo Road and Powhatan Road West
When warranted, a traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Navajo Road at Powhatan Road West and coordinated with the existing traffic signal at Navajo Road and Powhatan Road East.

Mitigation Measure TRANSP-2
Powhatan Road Between Navajo and Central Roads
Should circulation plan Alternative 1 (All Roundabouts on Highway 18) be implemented, the Town shall routinely (at least every 5 years) monitor traffic volumes on Powhatan Road between Navajo Road and Central Road to determine whether this roadway segment should be widened to 4 lanes and designated and improved as a Major Thoroughfare. Should this occur, this roadway segment shall be designated a Through Truck Route, the intersection of Powhatan Road and Central Road shall be signalized, and development projects shall be required to provide adequate right-of-way for a Major Thoroughfare.

G. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

Resolution 2022-40
Threshold:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii)A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe
Finding: Less than significant with mitigation (EIR, p. 2.18-5 through -6) Explanation:

AB 52 and SB 18 require the Town to initiate a formal consultation process with relevant tribes prior to releasing an environmental impact report, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration. The consultation process was completed and is described in Section 2.18.5. Written notices about the proposed Project were sent to tribal representatives recommended by the NAHC, but no responses were received. Therefore, no information about tribal cultural resources in the Planning Area was received from a Tribe.

There is a potential for development and redevelopment projects facilitated by the Project to impact tribal cultural resources if they occur on a project site. Demolition, grading, excavation, and other ground disturbing activities could uncover previously unknown resource. Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL-3 described in Section 2.6.7, Cultural Resources, of this EIR would reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1
Pre-Construction Surveys
The Town shall require intensive-level cultural resources surveys by qualified

Resolution 2022-40
archaeologists, historians, and/or architectural historians, where deemed necessary.

Studies should include in-depth records search at the SCCIC, historic background research, intensive-level field survey, and consultation with Native American representatives and/or other relevant parties, as well as impact evaluation and mitigation programs, as needed. The Town shall monitor and enforce recommended mitigation measures.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2
Archaeological and/or Tribal Resource Procurement and Documentation Should unknown archaeological or tribal cultural resources become unearthed, the area of potential resources shall be cordoned off within 50 feet of the find and protected from further disturbance until a qualified archaeologist can investigate the discovery. The qualified archaeologist shall prepare a findings report summarizing the methods and results of the investigation, including an itemized summary and detailed analysis of recovered artifacts upon completion of field and laboratory work. The report shall include an interpretation of the cultural activities represents by the artifacts and discussion of their significance. The submittal of the report to the Town and Tribal representative, as appropriate, along with final curation of the recovered artifacts, will signify completion of the monitoring program and, barring any unexpected findings of extraordinary significance, the mitigation of potential project impacts on cultural and tribal resources.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3
Human Remains
Should buried human remains be discovered during grading or other construction activity, in accordance with State law, the County coroner shall be contacted. If the remains are determined to be of Native American heritage, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and the appropriate local Native American Tribe shall be contacted to determine the Most Likely Descendant (MLD).

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 6: FINDINGS REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT FULLY

MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT
The Town Council hereby finds that, despite the incorporation of Mitigation Measures outlined in the EIR and in this Resolution, the following impacts from the Village Specific Plan Project and related approvals cannot be fully mitigated to a less than significant level and a Statement of Overriding Considerations is therefore included herein A. GREENHOUSE GASES

1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold:
a) Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Finding: Significant and unavoidable with mitigation incorporated. (EIR, p. 2.9-9 through -10)
Explanation:

Construction and operational activities would result in the generation and emission of greenhouse gases, which could have significant impacts to air quality locally and regionally. It is not known when this development will occur, or how much equipment, personnel, or time would be involved in each project. For analysis purposes, GHG emissions were estimated using the CalEEMod software, which bases GHG projections on land use factors for energy use, mobile trips, water use, solid waste generation, and wastewater generation. Results of the analysis show annual greenhouse gas emissions at build out of the proposed Specific Plan exceed MDAQMD annual threshold of 100,000 MTCO2e. Therefore, operational impacts as they currently stand are not in compliance with AB 32, and impacts will be significant and unavoidable.

Individual development projects proposed under the Village Specific Plan will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis per CEQA requirements and using project specific project-related information to estimate GHG emissions and determine the level of impact.

While implementation of existing General Plan policies and programs, Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-2, and proposed Specific Plan policies and guidelines will help reduce GHG emissions, based on the GHG projections in the DEIR, it is possible that the proposed Specific Plan would generate GHG emissions that could have a significant and unavoidable impact on the environment. Therefore, impacts are significant

Resolution 2022-40
and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures GHG-1
Energy Efficient Design
Site plans shall incorporate energy-efficient design elements, including appropriate site orientation, possibility for incorporation of active and/or passive solar design, and the use of shade and windbreak trees, to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling Mitigation Measures GHG-2
Alternative Energy: Community Wide
To encourage the use of alternative energy sources, installation of electric vehicle charging stations shall be encouraged in all new development and in major retrofits.

Mitigation Measures GHG-3
CEQA Analysis: Sustainability Plan Measures
Projects that require CEQA analysis shall be required to conduct detailed impact analyses and incorporate mitigation measures into their designs using the Towns’ current Climate Action Plan prescribed reduction measures for achieving greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. All proposed mitigation measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to the issuance of grading or demolition permits.

2. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plans
Threshold:
b) Does the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Finding: Significant and unavoidable with mitigation incorporated. (EIR, p. 2.9-11) Explanation:

Individual development projects proposed under the Specific Plan will be assessed on a case-by-case basis for potential impacts related to GHG emissions. Projects will be required to demonstrate adherence to applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purposed of reducing GHG emissions. Mitigation measures GHG-1through GHG3 provide design recommendations and require that individual projects analyze their emissions and incorporate measures, including the reduction measures included in the

Resolution 2022-40
Town’s Climate Action Plan. As noted above, these measures cannot be effectively quantified, but are provided to reduce project impacts to the greatest extent possible.

While implementation of existing General Plan policies and programs, proposed Specific Plan policies and guidelines, and Mitigation Measures GHG-1 through GHG-3 will help reduce GHG emissions, based on the GHG projections above, it is possible that the proposed Specific Plan would generate GHG emissions that are inconsistent with State reduction targets. Impacts will be significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures GHG-1
Energy Efficient Design
Site plans shall incorporate energy-efficient design elements, including appropriate site orientation, possibility for incorporation of active and/or passive solar design, and the use of shade and windbreak trees, to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling Mitigation Measures GHG-2
Alternative Energy: Community Wide
To encourage the use of alternative energy sources, installation of electric vehicle charging stations shall be encouraged in all new development and in major retrofits.

Mitigation Measures GHG-3
CEQA Analysis: Sustainability Plan Measures
Projects that require CEQA analysis shall be required to conduct detailed impact analyses and incorporate mitigation measures into their designs using the Towns’ current Climate Action Plan prescribed reduction measures for achieving greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. All proposed mitigation measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Town prior to the issuance of grading or demolition permits.

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 7: FINDINGS REGARDING CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15130) require a reasonable analysis of the significant cumulative impacts of a Proposed Project. Cumulative impacts are defined by CEQA as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts” (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15355). Currently there are several projects with approved environmental documentation proposed to occur within or near the project vicinity.

Consistent with CEQA’s requirements, the EIR for the Village Specific Plan includes an analysis of cumulative impacts, which include the impacts of Village Specific Plan plus all other pending or approved projects within the affected area for each resource. The geographic scope of the analysis the jurisdictions of the Town of Apple Valley, unless specifically identified below. Cumulative impacts have been assessed using the summary of projections method set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(B). The primary documents used to determine cumulative impacts were the Town of Apple Valley General Plan (2009) and its EIR.

The Town Council hereby finds as follows:

A. AESTHETICS
The General Plan EIR states that continued development facilitated by the General Plan will result in cumulative impacts to the Town’s visual resources, including mountain vistas and other natural forms that form the Town’s visual character. Because the General Plan provides policies and programs for the thoughtful evaluation of potential impacts on viewsheds and scenic resources associated with new development and restricts development on hillsides and in open space and conservation areas, and the Specific Plan is consistent with these policies and programs, cumulative impacts to visual resources are expected to be less than significant.

Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage, but the allowable land uses would be consistent with the current General Plan designations. The proposed Specific Plan provides design regulation and guidance for future development and redevelopment in the Project Planning Area, and augments additional regulation provided by the Town Municipal Code. As demonstrated in Section

2.3.6 above, impacts of the proposed Specific Plan would be less than significant.

Therefore, any aesthetics impacts resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan will not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on the aesthetic resources of Apple Valley. (EIR, p. 2.3-18)

Resolution 2022-40
B. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The Project will not affect any agricultural and forestry resources because it will not occur on or adjacent to any such resource. (EIR, p. 2.-2)
C. AIR QUALITY
The mitigation measures will be implemented by future projects under the proposed Specific Plan will ensure impacts to air quality will be reduced to the greatest extent possible. Due to the nature of air quality impacts, all future development within the Specific Plan area will be analyzed on a case-by-case basis and mitigated accordingly.

As described above, cumulative impacts are not expected to be significant in the context of MDAQMD thresholds, which are project-specific. Project-level impacts after mitigation are expected to be less than significant. (EIR, p. 2.4-20).

D. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Using the summary of projections method to analyze cumulative impacts set forth in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 (b)(1)(B), impacts have been assessed on both a regional and local level. The primary document used to determine cumulative impacts was the Town of Apple Valley General Plan and interim materials of the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP, which is designed for the long-term protection and regulation of biological resources in the Project area. Along with the West Mojave Habitat Conservation Plan that has jurisdiction over federal lands, these broad-scale plans ensure that continuing urbanization will have a less than substantial cumulative impact on biological resources.

The Project Planning Area consists of developed and undeveloped areas and is surrounded by urban development and/or fragmented undeveloped lands. Onsite habitat quality suggests a low potential for the Planning Area to sustain populations of sensitive species. The proposed Specific Plan will facilitate new development in already urbanized areas of Town and contribute to urbanization trends occurring throughout the high desert region, including the conversion of vacant land to development and permanent removal or alteration of native plants and habitat.

However, the proposed Specific Plan land uses will not affect lands currently preserved as open space for sensitive habitat or identified to contain valuable habitat, and future development will adhere to Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP provisions and guidelines to minimize impacts to sensitive species. The Town will continue to require project-specific

Resolution 2022-40
biological evaluations and mitigation measures, where necessary, for individual projects to minimize impacts at the local level. Therefore, the impacts of the Specific Plan on biological resources would not be cumulatively considerable. (EIR, p. 2.5-16 through -17) E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Apple Valley General Plan EIR (2009) determined that future ground disturbing activities associated with General Plan buildout have the potential to discover, damage, and/or destroy historic and archaeological resources of cultural importance. However, implementation of General Plan policies and programs, including requirements for sitespecific cultural resource surveys for proposed projects, would protect and preserve cultural resources such that no significant cumulative impacts would result.

Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the Planning Area according to the proposed Project would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial/service/office/public facility square footage. The increase could result in greater disturbances to ground surfaces in the Planning Area, but they would occur on the same sites and soils as the General Plan, and actual levels of disturbance would depend on site-specific parameters. Development and redevelopment projects would be subject to the same mitigation measures identified the General Plan and State law, including preparation of site-specific cultural resource surveys, cessation of ground-disturbing activities and contacting a qualified archaeologist if cultural resources are discovered, and compliance with California Health and Safety Code requirements if human remains are discovered. With implementation of these mitigation measures, the proposed Project would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on cultural resources. (EIR, p. 2.6-12)
F. ENERGY
Potential cumulative impacts on energy resources would result if the proposed Project, in combination with past, present, and future projects, would result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. This could result from development that would not incorporate sufficient building energy efficiency features or achieve building energy efficiency standards, or that would result in unnecessary use of energy during construction and/or operation. Projects within the areas served by the energy service providers would be applicable to this analysis. Projects that involve major construction, such as transportation infrastructure, could contribute to a cumulative impact; however, the impact of these projects would be limited because they would typically not involve substantial ongoing operational energy use.

Resolution 2022-40
Like most active development projects in the Town, buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in an increase in the consumption of electricity, natural gas, and transportation-related energy. Future projects under the Specific Plan would contribute incrementally to local and regional increases in energy consumption. However, they would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy due to design features, insofar as future development will be required to install energy efficient appliances and efficient water fixtures, and achieve zero-net-energy design/readiness through the installation/readiness of PV solar panels. Future projects would be subject to the California Building Code, including California Energy Code and CALGreen, an evolving set of energy efficiency standards for commercial and residential buildings implemented to minimize the wasteful and inefficient use of energy.

Future development would be subject to even more stringent requirements, such as the objectives set in the AB 32 Scoping Plan (CARB 2017) that would seek to make all new commercial buildings zero net energy consumers by 2030. Furthermore, many federal, state, and local regulations would aim to reduce the transportation fuel demand of cumulative projects and thus reduce cumulative energy demand of the projects.

Therefore, the cumulative impacts of the proposed Project on energy resources are considered less than significant. (EIR, p 2.7-14 and -15) G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
A consideration of cumulative effects associated with geotechnical conditions includes the degree to which a project may contribute to the cumulative impacts from seismic events, high groundwater, marginal soils, and other conditions. Most geology and soil hazards associated with development projects in the Planning Area and Town would be site-specific.

The General Plan EIR state that future development facilitated by the General Plan would subject more population and structures to geologic hazards including ground shaking, liquefaction, seismically induced settlement, rock falls, and landslides. However, development in the Town will be designed in accordance with policies and programs set forth in the General Plan, as well as mitigation measures in the General Plan EIR, recommendations of the geotechnical studies prepared for individual projects, and seismic requirements of the Uniform Building Code and/or International Building Code.

With the implementation of appropriate design and engineering precautions for future development, the General Plan EIR determined that no significant cumulative impacts associated with geotechnical hazards are expected. Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the

Resolution 2022-40
number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage within the Village, but they would occur in the same location as the current General Plan designations. Because geologic impacts are site-specific, they do not compound or increase in combination with other development projects in neighboring communities. As demonstrated in Section 2.9.8, impacts of the proposed Specific Plan would be less than significant with mitigation. The Project, therefore, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on geology and soils in Apple Valley. (EIR, p. 2.8-19) H. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Cumulative impacts were analyzed on a regional scale due to the dispersing nature and aggregate impacts of the greenhouse gas emissions and the current regulatory context.

Thorough analysis of the regional and statewide plans for GHG reductions was used. The geographic scope for the analysis of potential cumulative greenhouse gas impacts is the State of California.

Based on the analysis above, the proposed Specific Plan has the potential to make a cumulatively considerable contribution to GHG levels due to the projected emission levels. Although the proposed Specific Plan policies and guidelines include the best practicable strategies to reduce emissions associated with buildout, and are consistent with State regulations and guidelines, no additional mitigation is currently available to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Cumulative impacts could be significant and unavoidable. (EIR, p. 2.9-12).

I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Hazardous materials and risk of upset conditions are largely site-specific and would occur on a case-by-case basis for each individual project affected, in conjunction with site disturbance, structure demolition, and development proposals in the Planning Area. All new developments in the Town are required to evaluate potential threats to public safety, including those associated with the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment during demolition, construction and operation, emergency response, transport/use/disposal of hazardous materials, and hazards to sensitive receptors.

When considered in conjunction with other related development projects in the Town, the proposed Specific Plan will result in a finite increase in the quantities of hazardous materials transported to, used, and stored in the local area. However, Project-related impacts will be less than significant given the limited quantities and nature of hazardous materials that would be used by the allowed land uses and adherence to laws and

Resolution 2022-40
regulations which will minimize foreseeable upset and accident conditions. The same is true of future development in the Town surrounding the Planning Area, which is generally designated for residential and commercial development. Compliance with local, state, and federal laws pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials at the individual project level will ensure that cumulative impacts would be less than significant and not cumulatively considerable. (EIR, p. 2.10-15 and -16).

J. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The geographical context for the consideration of cumulative impacts associated with hydrology and water resources and quality is the Mojave River Basin/watershed, in which the Town is located and from which it derives its water resources. Future development and redevelopment pursuant to the proposed Specific Plan will not expose human lives or property to flooding hazards. Existing regulatory processes and procedures and the proposed Specific Plan’s standards and requirements will further serve to avoid, minimize and mitigate these potential hazards. Implementation of the Specific Plan will not result in cumulatively considerable new or ongoing flooding threats or hazards.

The implementation of the proposed Specific Plan will facilitate additional increases in demand for water resources. The Mojave Water Agency and its partners, including Liberty Utilities, closely manage the region’s groundwater resources and have made provision for long-term water supplies that will be available to serve the Planning Area and surrounding communities well into the future. The proposed Project serves to avoid the potential adverse effects of existing and future development on theses finite resources.

Implementation of the Specific Plan will not result in cumulatively considerable new or ongoing threats to local or regional water supplies.

The implementation of the proposed Project may generate new sources for urban pollutants, which could impact surface water quality and groundwater resources if not properly managed. Future development and redevelopment within the watershed will increase impermeable surfaces and decrease water percolation areas. Existing and future construction activities are regulated under the NPDES and Construction General Permit for the State. SWPPPs are required for construction activities in order to reduce pollutants in storm water during temporary ground-disturbing activities.

The proposed Specific Plan will require the Town to continue to participate in regional planning efforts to effectively manage existing and future urban development and to avoid, minimize and mitigate the potential adverse effects of contaminated runoff, erosion, flooding, and other possible sources of water pollution. The proposed Specific Plan serves to avoid the potential adverse effects of existing and future development on local

Resolution 2022-40
and regional water quality. Implementation of the Specific Plan will not result in cumulatively considerable new or ongoing threats to local or regional water quality. (EIR, p. 2.11-23 through -24).

K. LAND USE
The Apple Valley General Plan EIR determined that future development facilitated by the General Plan would not have a cumulative impact on land use and planning. Future development would be consistent with past land use patterns and uses. Implementation of General Plan policies and programs would assure that future development is thoughtfully designed so that it is compatible with, and minimizes impacts to, adjacent development.

Maximum buildout of the Project Planning Area according to current General Plan land use designations could result in up to 789 dwelling units and 7,236,965 square feet of commercial/service/office/public facility uses. Maximum buildout under the proposed Project could result in up to 971 dwelling units and 7,890,903 square feet of commercial/service/office/public facility uses, an increase of 182 dwelling units (23% increase) and 653,938 square feet of commercial/ service/office/public facility development (9% increase) over the General Plan. This is a limited increase that would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts. The Project proposes similar land uses as the General Plan and is consistent with General Plan land uses policies and programs.

It minimizes impacts to adjacent lands through compatible land use designations, thoughtful site planning guidelines and development standards, including setback requirements, height restrictions, and architectural and landscaping guidance. Therefore, the Project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. (EIR, p. 2.12-17 and -18) L. NOISE
The General Plan EIR stated that the most significant noise impacts will come from increased traffic volumes, and the most impacted areas will be lands adjacent to major arterials and regional roadways. The General Plan includes various policies and programs which would reduce potential noise impacts to less than significant levels. The General Plan requires that potential noise impacts be considered in the application review process for all proposed projects, and that future development, where necessary, conduct acoustical analyses to properly identify, mitigate, and reduce project-related noise impacts to acceptable levels. Implementation of the General Plan policies and programs

Resolution 2022-40
will control and minimize impacts to the community noise environment; therefore, the General Plan EIR determined no cumulatively considerable impacts would occur.

Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage, but the allowable land uses would be the same as the current General Plan designations. An increase in density may increase noise impacts due to higher vehicle trip generation, although the Specific Plan encourages mixed-use development which may reduce trip generation. As demonstrated in Section 2.13.6 above, impacts of the proposed Specific Plan would be less than significant, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, which addresses specific noise levels associated with the residential land uses proposed in the Planning Area. Elsewhere in the Planning Area, the character of land uses will remain consistent with that currently occurring, and will not as a result substantially increase noise levels beyond that predicted at General Plan buildout.

The Project, therefore, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on noise in Apple Valley (EIR, p. 2.13-16 and -17).

M. POPULATION & HOUSING
The Apple Valley General Plan EIR determined that future development facilitated by the General Plan would not have a cumulative impact on population and housing. Although General Plan implementation would increase population and housing units in Apple Valley, General Plan policies and programs would assure that new residential projects would be consistent with existing types of development, and no cumulative impacts would occur.

Buildout of the Project Planning Area according to current General Plan designations would result in 789 dwelling units and 2,320 residents.1 Buildout of the Planning Area according to the proposed Specific Plan would result in 971 dwelling units and 2,855 residents. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in 182 more dwelling units and 535 more residents than the General Plan. This is a limited increase that would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts. Land use designations, residential densities, and the distribution of land uses proposed by the Specific Plan are consistent with the General Plan. While the Project would contribute to growth in the County, region, and Town, its growth is consistent with increases anticipated by the General Plan and

1 Population projection is based on the Town of Apple Valley average household size of 2.94 persons.

Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, California Department of Finance, January 1, 2021.

Resolution 2022-40
regional growth forecasts. Therefore, the Project will not result in cumulatively considerable impacts. (EIR, p. 2.14-17 and -18).

N. PUBLIC SERVICES
The General Plan EIR stated that demand for services and facilities associated with future development facilitated by the General Plan is expected to increase incrementally and cumulatively. These services and facilities include police and fire protection, school and library services, parks, and recreation facilities. The General Plan EIR determined that buildout of the General Plan can have significant impacts on public services and facilities due to significant increases in demand for fire, police, school and other public services and facilities. The General Plan EIR provided mitigation measures in addition to existing funding mechanisms for public services.

Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage, but they would occur in the same location and area as the current General Plan designations. As discussed in Section 2.15.6 above, the Specific Plan will have less than significant impacts on public services and facilities. As described above, all future projects, whether in the Planning Area or elsewhere in Town, will be subject to development impact fee payments for public facilities, and will generate property tax revenues to the Town and Fire Protection District. These fees and taxes are designed to offset the costs of public facilities, not only in the Planning Area, but throughout the Town.

As fees and taxes are based on increases in property value and cost-of-living escalators, it is expected that the cumulative impacts of development in the Planning Area, when combined with development elsewhere in Town, will not be cumulatively considerable. (EIR, p. 2.15-11)
O. RECREATIONAL RESOURCES
The General Plan EIR stated that demand for parks and recreation facilities associated with future development facilitated by the General Plan is expected to increase incrementally and cumulatively. The General Plan EIR determined that impacts on parks and recreational resources will be less than significant through the development of additional parkland under the Quimby Act and via supplementary funding sources.

Resolution 2022-40
Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage, but they would occur in the same location and area as the current General Plan designations. As discussed in Section 2.16.6 above, the Specific Plan will have less than significant impacts on parks and recreational resources. Mitigation measures provided in the General Plan EIR and the recreational facilities planned within the Specific Plan will offset individual and cumulative impacts and ensure that cumulative impacts will not be considerable regarding parks and recreational resources. (EIR, p. 2.16-8 and -9) P. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
Analysis of the Project’s cumulative impacts on the local transportation system were evaluated through VMT analysis in the project-specific Traffic Impact Analysis.2 The findings were discussed in Section 2.17.6.a, above, because the Town’s thresholds of significance for VMT require analysis of cumulative impacts. The analysis was based on the San Bernardino County Transportation Analysis Model (SBTAM), a socioeconomic data-based model, and proposed Project land uses were converted into model employment categories (number of employees and dwelling units) using general conversion factors.

The analysis included two measures of cumulative impacts. First, it compared the proposed Project’s year 2040 VMT service population with the Town of Apple Valley General Plan Buildout year 2040 VMT service population. The Town of Apple Valley General Plan Buildout VMT per service population threshold is 33.2, which was obtained from the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool.

The Project’s cumulative VMT per service population is 34.9, which is greater than the regional threshold of 33.2 by about 5%. However, the modeling scenario is considered a conservative estimate because Project land uses are included in addition to assumed growth included in the model. Also, the Project includes a high percentage of retail land use with very high customer base/trips, and therefore high VMT is expected. Typically, service population estimates only include Project population and employment. When retail customers are considered in the calculation, the Project’s cumulative VMT per service population is 16.0, which is below the threshold and results in a less than significant cumulative impact.

The second part of the cumulative analysis compared Town-wide VMT “With Project” and “Without Project” in year 2040 at General Plan buildout. As shown in the following table,

2 “Village Specific Plan Traffic Analysis”, prepared by David Evans and Associates, December 14, 2021.

Resolution 2022-40
the Project would increase roadway VMT by 73,595 and the service population by 7,296, but VMT per service population (10.0) would be the same “With Project” and “Without Project.”
Comparison of Town-Wide VMT per Service Population
With and Without Project
Year 2040
With Project Without Project
Project
Variance
Roadway VMT 1,334,074 1,260,479 +73,595
Service Population 133,652 126,356 +7,296
VMT per Service
Population

10.0 10.0 no change
Source: “Village Specific Plan Traffic Analysis”, prepared by David Evans and Associates, December 14, 2021, Table 11.
(EIR, p. 2.17-35 and -36)
P. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The Apple Valley General Plan EIR (2009) did not evaluate impacts to tribal cultural resources because the analysis was not required at the time. It did evaluate cumulative impacts to cultural resources and determined that ground disturbing activities associated with General Plan buildout have the potential to discover, damage, and/or destroy historic and archaeological resources of cultural importance. However, it was determined that implementation of General Plan policies and programs would protect such resources and that no significant cumulative impacts would occur.

Similar findings can be made for tribal cultural resources because, like cultural resources, discovery of and impacts to tribal cultural resources are typically associated with grading, excavation, and other ground disturbing activities on vacant land. Compared to the General Plan, the proposed Project would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial/service/office/public facility square feet.

The increase can be expected to result in similar impacts to vacant land, because the Specific Plan allows increased intensification, but the type of development and the

Resolution 2022-40
amount of land disturbed will be the same as would have occurred under General Plan conditions.

The proposed Project would contribute considerably to cumulative impacts if it were to have a substantial adverse effect on tribal resources. Development and redevelopment projects would be subject to the same mitigation measures identified in the General Plan, including preparation of site-specific cultural resource surveys, and cessation of grounddisturbing activities and contacting a qualified archaeologist if cultural resources are discovered. In addition, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1, CUL-2, and CUL3 from Section 2.6.7 of this EIR would further protect potential tribal cultural resources.

With implementation of these measures, Project-related impacts to tribal cultural resources would be incremental but not cumulatively considerable. (EIR, p. 2.18-7).

Q. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
The General Plan EIR stated that future development facilitated by the General Plan is expected to increase the demand for utility services and facilities incrementally and cumulatively. However, substantial reductions to the cumulative demand for energy can result from an increased reliance on non-polluting energy systems and the construction of energy-efficient buildings, as supported by the policies and programs of the General Plan. In addition to regionally coordinated recycling programs, goals, policies and programs in the General Plan that support recycling programs and aggressive waste minimization could significantly reduce cumulative impacts to landfills. Impacts would be reduced such that the General Plan’s contribution to cumulative utility impacts would not be cumulatively considerable. Compared to the General Plan, maximum buildout of the proposed Specific Plan would result in a 23% increase in the number of dwelling units and a 9% increase in commercial square footage, but they would occur in the same location and area as the current General Plan designations. As discussed below, the Project would result in only a limited increase in development that would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on utilities and service systems in Apple Valley.

Liberty Utilities provides water services, the Town’s local sewer system (and septic systems in some locations) provides wastewater collection, and Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority provides wastewater treatment in the Project vicinity. The proposed Project will result in an increase of less than 2.4% of Liberty Utilities 2045 water supply. Liberty Utilities will have adequate supplies from the Mojave Basin Area to meet demands during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry years over the next 25 years.

Buildout of the proposed Project would require the construction or expansion of stormwater and sewer facilities in the Specific Plan area, which will be primarily limited to individual development parcels and public right-of-way. Potential impacts will be assessed as part of individual project-level CEQA analysis, or through a standalone public

Resolution 2022-40
project CEQA process. When considered in conjunction with other projects in the City’s General Plan boundaries, the proposed Project is not expected to have a significant impact on services. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts related to these services would not be cumulatively considerable.

SCE and SWG have policies, programs, and projects in place to provide continued, adequate energy to their users, including the proposed Project. As discussed above, the Project would increase the Town’s overall electricity and natural gas demand, and would not require additional facilities other than local connections to, or undergrounding of, existing facilities in the Project vicinity. Therefore, the proposed Project’s incremental demand for electricity and natural gas facilities would not be cumulatively considerable.

Regarding solid waste, implementation of state and municipal requirements to reuse and recycle construction and operation waste would lessen the amount of solid waste generated by the Project. When considered in conjunction with other development projects in the region, the solid waste generated by the proposed Project will represent a marginal increase in waste to landfills. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant. (EIR, p. 2.19-18 and -19).

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 8: FINDINGS REGARDING SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE

ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
Sections 15126.2(b) and (c) of the State CEQA Guidelines require discussion of significant environmental effects which cannot be avoided if the Project is implemented and significant irreversible environmental changes which would be caused by the Village Specific Plan should it be implemented, respectively. Where there are significant impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an alternate design, their implications and the reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding the effect, should be described. Irretrievable commitments of resources may include large commitments of nonrenewable resources, commitment of future generations to similar uses, and irreversible damage resulting from environmental accidents. Irretrievable commitments of resources should, therefore, be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.

Buildout of the proposed Project will result in the irretrievable and irreversible commitment of non-renewable natural resources, including energy resources such as petroleum and natural gas, water resources, and mineral resources used for construction materials, such as concrete and steel (See Section 2.7 Energy Resources.) Future development and redevelopment facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan would increase the demand for sand and gravel resources for roadways, infrastructure, and building construction. These resources could be derived from the regional market, but the demand for sand and gravel resources would not be considered significant when compared to available regional resources. In addition, the Town’s General Plan has policies and programs specifically designed to conserve and monitor the use of significant local mineral resources to ensure a reliable and affordable supply of materials for construction (Energy and Minerals Element, Policy 1.E).

The proposed Project would result in an overall increase in housing units, and commercial, office and institutional square footage. The development of these land uses at planned densities and intensities would also contribute to the need for additional energy supplies (i.e., natural gas, electricity). However, due to efficiencies in land use planning, the proposed Project will reduce overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and maintain the same overall VMT per service population at buildout (See Section 2.17 Transportation and Traffic). The reduction in VMTs is primarily due to a reduction in trip generation, combined with a shift in the relationship between residential and non-residential uses.

The annual demand for electricity (in kWh), natural gas (in therms) and transportation energy was estimated for the 2040 buildout of the proposed Specific Plan and is presented in Section 2.7. Future development facilitated by the proposed Specific Plan would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis to assure each project is designed, built,

Resolution 2022-40
and operated in accordance with all applicable energy-related regulations, including energy efficiency and conservation standards. Energy related impacts are considered less than significant because the proposed Specific Plan would implement a number of standards and guidelines designed to minimize wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

The proposed Specific Plan would facilitate continued urban development that could disturb or permanently affect sensitive species and/or their habitats. As discussed in Section 2.5, future development projects facilitated under the proposed Specific Plan would be evaluated on a project-by-project basis for potential adverse impacts to sensitive species and would be required to implement mitigation measures, as needed. Future development facilitated by the Specific Plan will be required to adhere to the requirements of the MSHCP/NCCP when adopted.

In summary, although the proposed Project will result in the irreversible loss of finite resources, the loss will not be significant, and is consistent with planned development goals of the Town and the objectives of the proposed Specific Plan. (EIR, p. 5-1 and -2)

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 9: FINDINGS REGARDING GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS
CEQA specifies that growth-inducing impacts of a project must be addressed in an EIR (PRC § 21100[b][5]). Specifically, Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to discuss the ways the Village Specific Plan could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Growth-inducing impacts include the removal of obstacles to population growth (e.g., the expansion of a wastewater treatment plant allowing more development in a service area) and the development and construction of new service facilities that could significantly affect the environment individually or cumulatively. In addition, growth must not be assumed as beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.

The proposed Project land use development scenario will not overtly, incidentally or significantly induce growth or change the physical conditions in the proposed Specific Plan area. The Planning Area is urbanized and well served by existing roads and utility infrastructure. The proposed Project includes changes in land use assignments on currently vacant lands, which if realized will improve the balance between jobs and housing and infrastructure, when compared to existing conditions. The proposed Project also improves land use adjacencies or compatibilities that improve access to employment centers, commercial services, retail, entertainment, and parks and recreation opportunities. Nonetheless, the proposed Project will contribute to an incremental increase in growth over the long-term throughout the Planning Area. The proposed Project intends to maintain and enhance the Town’s overall character, while it continues to provide expanded opportunities for housing, business and employment, and growth in other sectors of the local economy.

It should be noted that growth resulting from buildout of the proposed Project, as with all the project alternatives, is planned both on a local and regional level, through the Town’s General Plan and as estimated by the Southern California Association of Governments in their Regional Transportation Plan and Regional Housing Allocation. Therefore, growth that is facilitated by the proposed Project is not of a type or extent that is inadvertently induced in the sense meant by CEQA. Growth in the Town will be highly coordinated both locally and regionally, and will continue to coordinate land use and transportation, as well as public services and utilities.

Growth associated with the implementation of the proposed Project will be regulated and limited by Specific Plan objectives, standards and guidelines, as well as Town General Plan policies and programs and the Apple Valley Municipal Code. (EIR, p. 6-1 and -2)

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 10: FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES
A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As required by CEQA, project objectives have been developed to describe the project.

These are set forth below.

1. Create a vibrant neighborhood that will stand the test of time.

2. Expand the identity of the Village from Highway 18 throughout the Village boundary.

3. Have a cohesive and harmonious look and feel, with inviting streetscapes and attractive building façades.

4. Enhance connectivity and access throughout the Village.

5. Create a sense of place with interesting public spaces and paseos to increase walkability.

6. Be a convenient place for locals and visitors to stop, shop, and do business.

7. Be a safe and comfortable place for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.

8. Attract an eclectic mix of retail, services, specialty shops, and restaurants.

9. Strengthen partnerships between the Town, the Village Property and Business Improvement District (PBID), and business and property owners to fund and implement improvements.

In addition to the Project objectives, the Specific Plan’s primary focus is to encourage economic growth by expanding and enhancing shopping, dining, and other consumer activity in the downtown Village area. The Planning Area must offer sufficient square footage for a wide range of commercial facilities that attract consumers from the broader region, as well as smaller-scale shops and services that serve local residents. Additional commercial square footage expands business opportunities and creates more jobs. To

Resolution 2022-40
effectively expand its consumer and employment base, the commercial component of the Planning Area must be balanced with a sufficient residential component. Higher density residential development is needed to attract and accommodate enough residents to fill jobs and support the commercial component of the Planning Area. A larger local population that lives, works, and shops in the Planning Area also can be expected to increase use of the planned multimodal circulation improvements (i.e., sidewalks, bicycle facilities, transit) and their associated benefits, including reduced local vehicle trips and energy consumption, and improved air quality.

B. SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Based upon the Final Project EIR and the CEQA Findings of Fact contained herein, as well as the evidentiary materials supporting these documents, the Town Council finds that implementing the Proposed Project could result in the following list of significant and unavoidable impacts to the environment:

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Operational activities would result in the generation and emission of greenhouse gases, which could have significant impacts to air quality locally and regionally. There are five emission source categories that contribute either directly or indirectly to operational GHG emissions, including energy/electricity usage, water usage, solid waste disposal, area emissions (pavement and architectural coating off-gassing), and mobile sources.

According to the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, a project impact is considered to be significant if it generates total emissions (direct and indirect) in excess of the thresholds listed in Table 6 – Significant Emissions Thresholds of the MDAQMD Guidelines.3 For greenhouse gases, the annual threshold is 100,00 tons of CO2e. As shown in Section 2.9, Table 2.9-2, Project-generated operational emissions have the potential to exceed the MDAQMD’s annual greenhouse gas significance threshold by 37,128 tons of CO2e. It is possible and expected that GHG emissions will decrease over the next 20 years due to future technology improvements, increased use of alternative modes of transportation, improved building efficiency, and increased use of renewable energy sources. However, the elective use of alternative modes of transportation and future efficiency potentials cannot be confidently quantified and applied as a mitigation measure. Therefore, operational impacts as they currently stand are not in compliance with the MDAQMD Conformity Guidelines, and impacts will be significant and unavoidable.

3 “California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Federal Conformity Guidelines,” MDAQMD.

February 2020.

Resolution 2022-40
Implementation of the Climate Action Plan (CAP) is intended to reduce impacts associated with the emission of greenhouse gases within Town limits to the greatest extent practicable. The CAP and GHG Inventory are updated every three years to include current trends in technology, climate regulations, and to track the Town’s efforts to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the General Plan’s Environmental Resources Element, Air Quality Policy 1.A ensures that the Town will comply with local and regional air quality standards, including future greenhouse gas and global warming rules, regulations, and requirements to monitor and reduce emissions (Program 1.A.1).

The potential GHG emissions associated with the buildout and operation of individual development projects permissible under the Village Specific Plan will be evaluated by the Town on a case-by-case basis per CEQA requirements and using project specific information to estimate GHG emissions and determine the level of impact. Project-specific construction GHG emissions will be amortized over a 30-year period and added to the project’s annual operational emissions. (EIR, p. 4-1 and -2) C. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED
In addition to the two alternatives studied in the EIR, the Town also considered changes in land use designations within the 5 districts established in the Specific Plan, including an increase in residential development potential. This alternative was considered but not further analyzed because the Town’s goals and vision for the Village is the strengthening of the Village as an economic development opportunity for the Town’s long term growth, and for the preservation of a central downtown main street. (EIR, p. 3-8) D. ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR ANALYSIS IN THE EIR
Two alternatives were selected for consideration, based on the potential of each alternative to reduce the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project, and the ability to meet the stated project objectives. Each alternative is summarized below.

Resolution 2022-40
Alternative 1 – No Project/Existing Zoning Alternative
Based on the existing zoning designations in the Planning Area, Alternative 1 considers buildout of the Planning Area as currently designated. Land uses would develop as currently zoned, and the street system would build out consistent with General Plan roadway classifications.

The table below summarizes potential changes to the Planning Area associated with Alternative 1. Alternative 1 would facilitate new development projects that could add approximately 500 additional dwelling units and 5,413,585 additional square feet of commercial/retail/office/public facility development to the Planning Area. Based on the Town’s average household size of 2.94 persons per household4, the new dwelling units would house 1,470 new residents. Combined with existing development, buildout of Alternative 1 would result in a total of 789 dwelling units, 7,236,965 square feet of commercial/retail/office/public facility development, and 2,320 residents in the Planning Area.

Alternative 1 Buildout Summary
Residential
(dwelling
units)
Commercial/
Service/Office/
Public Facility
(square feet)
Population1
Existing 289 1,823,380 850
Potential new facilitated by Alternative 1 500 5,413,585 1,470 Total at Alternative 1 Buildout 789 7,236,965 2,320
1 Based on 2.94 persons per household, California Dept. of Finance, Table E-5, January 1, 2021.

4 California Department of Finance, Table E-5, January 1, 2021.

Resolution 2022-40
Alternative 2 – Reduced Intensity Alternative
Alternative 2 represents the Reduced Intensity Alternative. Under this Alternative, the Districts would build out with land uses and improvements consistent with the Specific Plan’s standards and guidelines, but at a lower density of units and intensity of square footage. For purposes of this Alternative, it has been assumed that residential development would occur at a density of 10 units per acre (a 50% reduction in density), and the commercial square footage Floor Area Ratio (FAR) would be reduced from 0.5 to 0.2. The residential density is consistent with past higher density projects built in Town and would likely result in a mix of single-family homes and apartments. The commercial FAR in this Alternative is consistent with the average FAR of existing development within the Planning Area. This Alternative assumes that redevelopment of underutilized parcels could occur, consistent with the proposed Project.

The table below summarizes potential changes to the Planning Area associated with Alternative 2. Alternative 2 would facilitate new development and redevelopment projects that could add approximately 237 additional dwelling units and 2,311,980 additional square feet of commercial/retail/office/public facility development in the Planning Area.

Based on the Town’s average household size of 2.94 persons per household5, the new dwelling units would house 697 new residents. Combined with existing development, buildout of Alternative 2 would result in a total of 526 dwelling units, 4,135,360 square feet of commercial/retail/office/public facility development, and 1,547 residents in the Planning Area.

Alternative 2 Buildout Summary
Residential
(dwelling
units)
Commercial/
Service/Office/
Public Facility
(square feet)
Population1
Existing 289 1,823,380 850
Potential new facilitated by Alternative 2 237 2,311,980 697

5 Ibid.

Resolution 2022-40
Total at Alternative 2 Buildout 526 4,135,360 1,547
1 Based on 2.94 persons per household, California Dept. of Finance, Table E-5, January 1, 2021.

The following discussion summarizes whether the proposed Project or any of the Project Alternatives meet project objectives.

Alternative 1 which would result in buildout of the Planning Area as currently designated, meets none of the project objectives because it does not result in an expanded, cohesive identity for the Village and does not strengthen partnerships between the Town, the Village Property and Business Improvement District (PBID), and business and property owners to fund and implement improvements. The Town Council hereby rejects Alternative 1 on the following grounds:
(1) the alternative fails to meet any of the project objectives, including those regarding the Village identity and design, circulation improvements, as well as strengthening partnerships between the Town, PBID, and business and property owners, (2) it would not foster economic development and an improved environment in the Village, (3) it would not result in circulation and alternative transportation improvements, and (4) Is not consistent with General Plan Program 6.C.3 which states Future development and redevelopment of The Village shall be governed by a Specific Plan.

Alternative 2 would meet many of the project objectives, including those regarding the Village identity and design, circulation improvements, as well as strengthening partnerships between the Town, PBID, and business and property owners. However, Alternative 2’s lower floor area ratio and residential densities do not maximize buildout potential of the Planning Area. The proposed Project allows higher residential densities that would increase the number of local residents to better support local businesses, fill jobs, and would increase the use of proposed multimodal improvements that would reduce local vehicle trips and energy consumption, as well as improve air quality. The Town Council hereby rejects Alternative 2 on the following grounds:
(1) the alternative does not maximize buildout potential of the Planning Area, and therefore would not result in substantial economic development for the Village.

E. ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines indicates that an analysis of

Resolution 2022-40
alternatives to a proposed Project shall identify an environmentally superior alternative among the alternatives evaluated in an EIR.

Each sub-section of this alternatives analysis has considered the potential impacts of each alternative and compared them to the proposed Project on a categorical basis.

Unlike the proposed Project and Alternative 1, Alternative 2 would not generate significant GHG emissions because operational emissions are projected to remain below MDAQMD’s established thresholds of 100,000 MTCO2e per year. Based on the analysis, and as shown in the table below, the “environmentally superior” project alternative is determined to be Alternative 2, the Reduced Intensity buildout scenario (per CEQA 15126.6).

Alternative 2, however, would not satisfy the Project’s objectives to the degree that the proposed Project would. The proposed Project is designed to maximize the development potential of parcels in the Planning Area while also assuring densities are sensitive to and compatible with the Town’s small-town character. The assumed commercial Floor Area Ratio of 0.5 (maximum) and residential density of 20 du/ac (maximum) were selected for the proposed Project based on existing and anticipated development trends in the Town, and they are believed to reflect realistic future growth in the Planning Area.

Environmentally Superior Alternative Comparison
Environmental Issue
Environmentally Superior
Proposed
Project
Alternative
1 Alternative 2
Aesthetics X
Air Quality X
Biological Resources Equivalent for all scenarios – full site disturbance
Cultural Resources Equivalent for all scenarios – full site disturbance
Energy X

Resolution 2022-40
Environmentally Superior Alternative Comparison
Environmental Issue
Environmentally Superior
Proposed
Project
Alternative
1 Alternative 2
Geology and Soils X
Greenhouse Gas Emissions X
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
X
Hydrology and Water Quality X
Noise X
Population and Housing X
Public Services X
Recreational Resources X
Transportation and Traffic X
Tribal Cultural Resources Equivalent for all scenarios – full site disturbance
Utilities and Service Systems X

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 11: ADOPTION OF STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS In compliance with Section 15093 (a)(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the Town of Apple Valley, as Lead Agency, must “balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project.” The adverse environmental effects may be considered “acceptable” where the benefits of a project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects. When the Final EIR identifies significant effects that are not avoided or substantially lessened, the Lead Agency must state the specific reasons to support approval
The Town Council, having considered the entire administrative record on the Village Specific Plan, and having weighed the benefits of the Proposed Project against the unavoidable adverse impacts to greenhouse gas emissions after mitigation, has determined that each and every one of the following social, economic and environmental benefits of the Proposed Project individually outweigh all of the potential significant and unavoidable adverse impacts and render those potential adverse environmental impacts acceptable based upon the following overriding considerations:

1. The Specific Plan would create a pedestrian-friendly mixed-use environment with buildings and streetscapes designed to provide a strong community identity and sense of place;

2. The Specific Plan would provide new employment and housing opportunities in the downtown Village area;

3. The Specific Plan would provide multi-modal streets to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in the Village downtown area that would reduce dependence upon automobiles.

4. The land uses provided by the Specific Plan would increase the level of goods and services available to residents of the community while strengthening the Town’s tax base;
The Town Council hereby declares that each and every one of the foregoing individual benefits provided through approval and implementation of the Village Specific Plan outweigh all of the identified significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated.

The Town Council finds that each of the benefits, separately and individually, outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR and therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable.

Resolution 2022-40
SECTION 12: ADOPTION OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING

PROGRAM
Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires that a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program be adopted upon certification of an EIR to ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented. The Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program specifies what the mitigation is, the entity responsible for monitoring the program, and when in the process it should be accomplished.

The Town Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached to this Resolution as Exhibit “A.” Implementation of the Mitigation Measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is hereby made a condition of approval of the Project. In the event of any inconsistencies between the Mitigation Measures set forth herein and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program shall control.

SECTION 13: CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR
The Town Council finds that it has been presented with the EIR, which it has reviewed and considered, and further finds that the EIR is an accurate and objective statement that has been completed in full compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Town's Local CEQA Guidelines and that the EIR reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Town Council.

The Town Council declares that no evidence of new significant impacts as defined by the State CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 have been received by the Town Council after circulation of the Draft EIR which would require recirculation.

Therefore, the Town Council hereby certifies the EIR based on the entirety of the record of proceedings.

SECTION 14: CUSTODIAN OF RECORD
The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution has been based are located at Apple Valley Town Hall, 14955 Dale Evans Parkway, Apple Valley, CA 92307. The custodian for these records is the Town Clerk of the Town of Apple Valley or designee. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6.

Resolution 2022-40
APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Apple Valley, California, at its regular meeting held on the 11th of October, 2022. ________________________________

KARI LEON, MAYOR

ATTEST:
__________________________________

LA VONDA M-PEARSON, TOWN CLERK

Resolution 2022-40
Exhibit “A”
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Resolution 2022-40
Exhibit “A”
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage

Resolution 2022-40
Biological
Resources
Less Than
Significant
BIO-1: Site-Specific Biological Surveys
Prior to grading or any other ground‐disturbing
activity, including vegetation removal or other
development actions, development projects
proposed on vacant parcels, or as deemed
necessary by the Town, shall be required to
conduct site-specific biological studies in
compliance with standard survey methodologies
and the Apple Valley MSHCP/NCCP. Speciesspecific and/or resource-specific surveys may be required and shall comply with applicable protocols
of CDFW, USFWS, and/or other appropriate
regulatory agencies, as follows:
 Burrowing Owl surveys shall be conducted
consistent with the CDFW Staff Report on
Burrowing Owl Mitigation, or the standard in
place at the time that surveys are required,
including habitat assessments, surveys and
impact assessments, to the standards and
utilizing the protocols included in the Staff
Report.
 Desert Tortoise pre-construction surveys shall
be conducted no more than 48 hours prior to
the initiation of ground disturbance, and in
accordance with the standards and protocols
provided in the US Fish and Wildlife Service
2019 Desert Tortoise Survey Methodology, or
Town Planning
Department,
Town Building
Department,
Project
Contractor
Prior to
construction.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
the standard in place at the time that surveys
are required. If the species is detected, a take
permit shall be secured by the development’s
proponent, consistent with State and federal
requirements.
 Mohave Ground Squirrel pre-construction
surveys shall be conducted following the
standards and protocols of the CDFW Mohave
Ground Squirrel Survey Guidelines, or the
standard in place at the time that surveys are
required.

If biological resources are present that would be
significantly impacted by a project, mitigation
measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts
on sensitive species/habitat to less than significant
levels.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
Less Than
Significant
BIO-2: Nesting Bird Surveys
For any grading or other site disturbance or tree
or vegetation removal occurring during the
nesting season typically between February 1st
and August 31st, a qualified biologist shall
conduct at least one nesting bird survey, and
more if deemed necessary by the consulting
biologist, and shall be required to conduct the
initial field survey no more than 3 days prior to the
initiation of ground disturbance. If nesting birds
are present, no work shall be permitted near the
nest until the young birds have fledged, as
determined by the qualified biologist. The CDFW
recommends avoidance buffers of about 500 feet
for birds-of-prey, and 100-300 feet for songbirds.

A smaller or larger buffer may be determined by
the qualified biologist.

Town Planning
Department,
Project Biologist
In the event
ground
disturbance
occurs during
the referenced
time frame, prior
to ground
disturbance.

Cultural and
Tribal
Resources
Less Than
Significant
CUL-1: Pre-Construction Surveys
The Town shall require intensive-level cultural
resources surveys by qualified archaeologists,
historians, and/or architectural historians, where
deemed necessary. Studies should include indepth records search at the SCCIC, historic Town Planning
Department,
Project
Archaeologist
Prior to any site
disturbance.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
background research, intensive-level field survey,
and consultation with Native American
representatives and/or other relevant parties, as
well as impact evaluation and mitigation programs,
as needed. The Town shall monitor and enforce
recommended mitigation measures.

Less Than
Significant
CUL-2: Archaeological and/or Tribal
Resource Procurement and Documentation
Should unknown archaeological or tribal cultural
resources become unearthed, the area of potential
resources shall be cordoned off within 50 feet of
the find and protected from further disturbance until
a qualified archaeologist can investigate the
discovery. The qualified archaeologist shall
prepare a findings report summarizing the methods
and results of the investigation, including an
itemized summary and detailed analysis of
recovered artifacts upon completion of field and
laboratory work. The report shall include an
interpretation of the cultural activities represents by the artifacts and discussion of their significance.

The submittal of the report to the Town and Tribal
Project
Contractor,
Project
Archaeologist.

Tribal Monitor
During all
phases of
ground
disturbance.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
representative, as appropriate, along with final
curation of the recovered artifacts, will signify
completion of the monitoring program and, barring
any unexpected findings of extraordinary
significance, the mitigation of potential project
impacts on cultural and tribal resources.

Less Than
Significant
CUL-3: Human Remains
Should buried human remains be discovered
during grading or other construction activity, in
accordance with State law, the County coroner
shall be contacted. If the remains are determined
to be of Native American heritage, the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and the
appropriate local Native American Tribe shall be
contacted to determine the Most Likely
Descendant (MLD).

Project
Contractor, Town
Planning
Department
During all
phases of
ground
disturbance.

Geology and
Soils
Less Than
Significant
GEO-1: Proposals for future development and
redevelopment under the Apple Valley Village
Specific Plan shall include site-specific subsurface
geotechnical investigations that address geologic
Project
Contractor, Town
Prior to grading.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
and soil hazards, including ground shaking,
settlement, liquefaction, subsidence, collapsible
and expansive soils, and other relevant conditions
and potential hazards. Seismic-related hazards
shall be analyzed using Probabilistic Seismic
Hazard Analysis (PSHA). The geotechnical
investigations shall provide site-specific mitigation
measures, including but not limited to, proper
excavation, compaction and foundation design, as
well as other standard construction practices.

Planning
Department
Greenhouse
Gas Emissions
Significant and
Unavoidable
GHG-1: Energy Efficient Design
Site plans shall incorporate energy-efficient design
elements, including appropriate site orientation,
possibility for incorporation of active and/or passive
solar design, and the use of shade and windbreak
trees, to reduce fuel consumption for heating and
cooling.

Project Architect,
Town Building
Department
Approved
building plans
prior to site
disturbance.

Significant and
Unavoidable
GHG-2: Alternative Energy: Community Wide
To encourage the use of alternative energy
sources, installation of electric vehicle charging
Project Architect,
Town Building
Department
Approved
building plans
prior to site
disturbance.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
stations shall be encouraged in all new
development and in major retrofits.

Significant and
Unavoidable
GHG-3: CEQA Analysis: Sustainability Plan
Measures
Projects that require CEQA analysis shall be
required to conduct detailed impact analyses and
incorporate mitigation measures into their designs
using the Towns’ current Climate Action Plan
prescribed reduction measures for achieving
greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. All
proposed mitigation measures shall be reviewed
and approved by the Town prior to the issuance of
grading or demolition permits.

Project Applicant,
Town Planning
Department
Approved plans
prior to site
disturbance.

Noise Less Than
Significant
NOI-1: Residential development proposed along
Navajo Road or Central Road, in Districts 4 and 5,
shall be required to prepare a project-specific noise
impact analysis to analyze the noise levels
resulting from adjacency to these roadways. The
noise analyses shall provide interior and exterior
noise levels, and shall include mitigation
Project Applicant,
Town Planning
Department
Approved plans
prior to site
disturbance.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
measures, if necessary, to assure that noise levels
remain within the Town’s acceptable standards for
residential land uses.

Transportation
Less Than
Significant
TRANSP-1: Intersection of Navajo Road and
Powhatan Road West
When warranted, a traffic signal shall be installed
at the intersection of Navajo Road at Powhatan
Road West and coordinated with the existing traffic
signal at Navajo Road and Powhatan Road East.

Town Public
Works
Department,
Project
Proponent
When
warranted, Prior
to issuance of
building permits.

Less Than
Significant
TRANSP-2: Powhatan Road Between Navajo and
Central Roads
Should circulation plan Alternative 1 (All
Roundabouts on Highway 18) be implemented, the
Town shall routinely (at least every 5 years)
monitor traffic volumes on Powhatan Road
between Navajo Road and Central Road to
determine whether this roadway segment should
be widened to 4 lanes and designated and
improved as a Major Thoroughfare. Should this
occur, this roadway segment shall be designated a
Through Truck Route, the intersection of Powhatan
Town Public
Works
Department,
Project
Proponent
When
warranted, Prior
to issuance of
building permits.

Resolution 2022-40
Impact
Heading
Level of Impact
After Mitigation Mitigation Measure
Responsible
Party/Monitoring
Party
Implementation
Stage
Road and Central Road shall be signalized, and
development projects shall be required to provide
adequate right-of-way for a Major Thoroughfare.

Town Council Agenda Report
Date: October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Subject: SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY AND DOUGLAS B. ROBERTSON, TOWN MANAGER

From: Douglas Robertson, Town Manager
Submitted by: Thomas Rice, Town Attorney
Budgeted Item: Yes No N/A

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approval of the Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement between the Town of Apple Valley and Douglas Robertson.

BACKGROUND
On November 28, 2017, the Town Council unanimously approved the Employment Agreement with Douglas Robertson under which he has served as Town Manager since January 2, 2018. On July 13, 2021, the Town Council approved the First Amendment to the Agreement, providing Douglas Robertson with an additional 80 hours of administrative leave time to be used on or before June 30, 2022. Since beginning his tenure as Town Manager in January 2018, Douglas Robertson has received just two cost-of-living adjustments to his pay collectively totaling a little over five percent. Local consumer price indexes reflect far higher cost-of-living increases over the same period. The most recently adopted Town of Apple Valley Classification Plan (i.e., for FY 2022-2023) shows the range for the Assistant Town Manager position as $15,851 to $22,397. As a result, at present, the Town Manager’s monthly base compensation (i.e., $21,584) is below the maximum base compensation for the Assistant Town Manager position.

DISCUSSION
The proposed Second Amendment follows a positive performance evaluation by the Town Council and would provide the Town Manager with a five percent (5%) merit increase to his monthly base pay, increasing the base pay from $21,584 to $22,663 per month effective July 1, 2022. It would increase the Town Manager’s salary above the maximum possible salary for the Assistant Town Manager position under the current Classification Plan.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Second Amendment would increase the monthly salary of the Town Manager from $21,584 to $22,663 per month. This increase would be backdated to July 1, 2022.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Employment Agreement between the Town of Apple Valley and Douglas Robertson
B. First Amendment
C. Proposed Second Amendment

1 SECOND AMENDMENT TO

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE TOWN OF APPLE VALLEY AND DOUGLAS B. ROBERTSON
This Second Amendment to the Employment Agreement (“Second Agreement”) is made by and between Douglas B. Robertson (“Employee”) and the Town of Apple Valley, a California Municipal Corporation, (“Town”) and is entered into this 11th day of October, 2022.

WHEREAS, following unanimous Town Council approval on November 28, 2017, the Town and Employee entered into an Employment Agreement under which Employee has served as Town Manager since January 2, 2018 (“Original Agreement”); and WHEREAS, following unanimous Town Council approval on July 13, 2021, the Town and Employee entered into a First Amendment to the Employment Agreement to provide Employee with an additional balance of administrative leave (“First Amendment”); and WHEREAS, in the time since Employee has served as Town Manager, he has received just two cost-of-living increases at the same time as other employees of the Town and has not received any merit increase; and
WHEREAS, Town and Employee now wish to amend the Original Agreement, as amended by the First Agreement to provide Employee with a five percent increase to his current base salary.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Town and Employee agree as follows:

1. Section 4.1 of the Original Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment, is hereby amended to increase the monthly salary to “Twenty Two Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Three Dollars ($22,663.00)” effective July 1, 2022.

2. Except as stated herein, the Original Agreement, as amended by the First Amendment, remains in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Employee have executed this Second Amendment on this 11th day of October, 2022.

By:

Douglas B. Robertson, Employee
By:

Kari Leon, Mayor
Town of Apple Valley

Town Council Agenda Report
Date: October 11, 2022
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Subject: CLOSED SESSION

From: Douglas Robertson, Town Manager
Submitted by: Thomas Rice, Town Attorney
Budgeted Item: Yes No N/A

RECOMMENDED ACTION
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9) Name of Case: Nerses Shahinyan v. Town of Apple Valley, San Bernardino Superior Court, Case No. CIVSB2203397