Agenda packet — Beaumont City Council, October 18, 2022 (part 11 of 17)

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -22 4.11 | Noise
down the dock ramps; and maneuvering away from the docks. The proposed warehouse building includes dock-high doors for truck loading/unloading and manufacturing/light industrial operations. The dock -high doors are approximately 250 feet from the closest property line (non-residential uses located to the east).

The closest residential property line is approximately 675 feet to the northeast. Intervening terrain/slope and a retaining wall and is also located between the Building 2 Warehouse. Based on the Project plot plans, the elevation of the site would be approximately 48 feet lower than the grade at the property line of the receptors. The retaining wall and terrain would block the line of sight between the loading docks and the receptors, providing a minimum 5 dB A reduction.7 Truck and loading dock noise is typically

64.4 dBA Leq at 50 feet.8
Based on distance attenuation, noise levels due to loading/unloading would be reduced to 45 dBA at the closest residential property line located 675 feet to the northeast of the loading areas . Note that this noise level conservatively assumes activity would occur at the three closest loading docks simultaneously.

Loading dock operations would occur throughout the Project site and would be at average distances further away. As noted above, the Project would be grade separated by approximately 48 feet and would include a retaining wall that would attenuate noise between the loading docks and receptors to the east.

Due to the grade differences and intervening wall, noise levels would be attenuated by 5 to 8 dB 9 to at least 40 dBA at the closest residential property line. At the closest non-residential property line, noise levels would be 49 dBA. Therefore, loading/unloading noise levels would be below the City’s 45 dBA nighttime residential standard and below the 50 dBA non-residential standard. It should be noted that this noise level does not assume any reductions for topographical differences and intervening terrain.

Furthermore, loading dock doors would also be surrounded with protective aprons, gaskets, or similar improvements that, when a trailer is docked, would serve as a noise barrier between the interior warehouse activities and the exterior loading area. This would attenuate noise emanating from interior activities, and as such, interior loading and associated a ctivities would be permissible during all hours of the day. Conservatively, this analysis does not take credit for these protective aprons/gaskets. As described above, noise levels associated with trucks and loading/unloading activities would not exceed the City’s standards and impacts would be less than significant.

Parking Noise
Parking would be scattered throughout the site and located on the north, west, south, and center portions of the Project site. The proposed Project would provide 1,482 automobile parking stalls and 918 trailer stalls. Traffic associated with parking lots is typically not of sufficient volume to exceed community noise standards, which are based on a time-averaged scale such as the CNEL scale. The instantaneous maximum sound levels generated by a car door slamming , engine starting up, and car pass -bys range from 53 to 61 dBA.10 Conversations in parking areas may also be an annoyance to adjacent sensitive receptors. Sound levels of speech typically range from 33 dBA at 50 feet for norm al speech to 50 dBA at 50 feet for very loud speech.11 It should be noted that parking lot noises are instantaneous noise levels compared to noise

7 Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide , 2006. 8 Loading dock reference noise level measurement (single truck) conducted by Kimley -Horn on December 18, 2018. 9 Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide , 2006. 10 Kariel, H. G., Noise in Rural Recreational Environments, Canadian Acoustics 19(5), 3-10, 1991. 11 Elliott H. Berger, Rick Neitzel, and Cynthia A. Kladden. Noise Navigator Sound Level Database with Over 1700 Measurement Values, July 6, 2010.

Page 1971 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -23 4.11 | Noise
standards in the hourly Leq metric, which are averaged over the entire duration of a time period. As a result, actual noise levels over time resulting from parking lot activities would be far lower than the reference levels identified above.

For the purpose of providing a conservative, quantitative estimate of the noise levels that would be generated from the vehicles entering and exiting the parking lot, the methodology recommended by FTA for the general assessment of stationary transit noise sources is used. Using the methodology, the Project’s peak hourly noise level that would be generated by the on -site parking levels was estimated us ing the following FTA equation for a parking lot:

Leq(h) = SELref + 10 log (NA/1,000) – 35.6
Where:

Leq(h) = hourly Leq noise level at 50 feet
SELref = reference noise level for stationary noise source represented in sound exposu re level (SEL) at 50 feet
NA = number of automobiles per hour

35.6 is a constant in the formula, calculated as 10 times the logarithm of the number of seconds in an hour
Based on the peak hour trip generation rates in the Traffic Study, approximately 585 trips during the worst-cas e peak hour (Phase 1 and Phase 2 combined) would be made to the Project site each day. Using the FTA’s reference noise level of 92 dBA SEL 12 at 50 feet from the noise source, the Project’s highest peak hour vehicle trips would gene rate noise levels of approximately 54 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the parking lot.

The nearest property line is 160 feet east of the closest parking area. Based strictly on distance attenuation, parking lot noise at the nearest receptor would be 44 dBA which is below the City’s night time residential and non-residential noise standards of 45 dBA and 50 dBA, respectively. Therefore, noise impacts from parking lots would be less than significant.

Drive-Thru Noise
Phase 2 of the proposed Project would include two drive-thru restaurants. Project noise sources from drive-thru operations include amplified speech from the intercom, idling vehicles, vehicles circulating along the drive-thru lanes. The measured noise level associated with active drive -thru operations is 64 dBA at a distance of 20 feet.13 The restaurants would be located approximately 560 feet and 700 feet from the eastern property line and based on distance attenuation, drive -thru noise levels would be

35.1 and 33.1 dBA, respectively. The combined noise le vels from these two drive-thru restaurants operating simultaneously would be 37.2 dBA, which is below the City’s nighttime residential and non - residential noise standards of 45 dBA and 50 dBA, respectively.

Off-Site Phase 1 Traffic Noise
Implementation of the Project would generate increased traffic volumes along nearby roadway segments.

Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis, Phase 1 of the proposed Project would result in approximately

12 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Asse ssment Manual, September 2018. 13 Drive-thru noise sample collected by Kimley -Horn on August 17, 2018.

Page 1972 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -24 4.11 | Noise
3,692 daily trips. The Phase 1 Opening Year “2024 Without Project” and “2024 With Project” scenarios are compared in Table 4.11-12, Phase 1 Traffic Noise Levels . As shown in Table 4.11-12, roadway noise levels without the Project, would range from 46.2 dBA CNEL to 68.5 dBA CNEL and with the Project between

48.6 dBA CNEL and 69.6 dBA CNEL. Project generated traffic would result in a maximum increase of

2.4 dBA. In general, a 3-dBA increase in traffic noise is barely perceptible to people, while a 5‐dBA increase is readily noticeable. Table 4.11-12 shows that none of the roadway seg ments would exceed both 3.0 dBA and the County’s 60 CNEL land use compatibilit y standard for residential uses (refer to Table 4.11-8).14 Therefore, Phase 1 Opening Year traffic noise would result in a less than significant impact.

Table 4.11-12: Phase 1 Traffic Noise Levels

Roadway Segment
2024 Without Project 2024 With Project
Change
Normally/
Conditionally
Acceptable
Standard 1
Significant
Impacts ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Centerline
ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Centerline
Cherry
Valley Blvd
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 18,933 68.5 20,550 69.6 1.1 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Project Access 12,022 66.5 15,139 68.3 1.8 70 / 77.5 No Project Access to Hannon Rd 12,022 66.5 14,480 67.3 0.8 60 / 70 No Hannon Rd to Union St 9,602 65.6 10,933 66.1 0.6 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 8,612 65.1 9,639 65.6 0.5 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Beaumont Ave 7,578 64.5 8,184 64.9 0.3 60 / 70 No Brookside
Ave
Hannon Rd to Union St 2,227 56.8 2,379 57.1 0.3 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 2,511 57.4 2,967 58.1 0.7 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Oak View Dr 2,926 58.0 3,803 59.2 1.1 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr to Beaumont Ave 2,714 57.7 3,018 58.1 0.5 60 / 70 No Oak Valley
Pkwy
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 29,962 67.2 30,307 67.2 0.0 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Oak View Dr 39,313 68.5 39,886 68.6 0.1 70 / 77.5 No Hannon Rd Cherr y Valley Blvd to Brookside 953 49.9 1,105 50.5 0.6 60 / 70 No Union St Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 406 46.2 710 48.6 2.4 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 1,555 52.0 1,976 53.0 1.0 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 5,012 60.3 5,585 60.8 0.5 60 / 70 No Beaumont
Ave
Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 11,844 64.1 12,146 64.2 0.1 60 / 70 No Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 14,034 64.8 14,488 64.9 0.1 60 / 70 No ADT = average daily traffic; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL = community noise equivalent level.

1. Potential impacts occur when the Project change exceeds 3 dBA and the land use compatibility standard is exceeded (i.e., both must occur).

Source: Based on traffic data within the Traffic Impact Study , prepared by Kimley -Horn, 2022. Refer to Appendix J for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

Off-Site Phase 1 Plus Phase 2 Traffic Noise
Phase 2 of the Project is anticipated to be complete by 2027. Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis, Phase 2 of the proposed Project would generate an additional 8,485 trips for a combined total of 12,177 daily trips. The Project Buildout Opening Year “2027 Without Project” and “2027 With Project” scenarios are compared in Table 4.11-13, Project Buildout (Phase 1 Plu s Phase 2) Traffic Noise Levels . As shown in Table 4.11-13, roadway noise levels without the Project, would range from 48.6 dBA CNEL to 69.6 dBA CNEL and with the Project between 52.0 dBA CNEL and 69.9 dBA CNEL. Project generated traffic would result in a maximum increase of 5.7 dBA. In general, a 3-dBA increase in traffic noise is barely perceptible to people, while a 5‐dBA increase is readily noticeable. Table 4.11-13 shows that an increase in traffic noise levels along the following roadway segments would exceed 3.0 dBA:

14 As noted above in the thresholds section. the City of Beaumont does not specifically provide noise and land use compatibility standards for traffic noise. However, the City has identified a two-step process for evaluating traffic noise impacts in previous CEQA documents. The County’s noise and land use compatibility standards (as recommended by the State Office of Planning and Research) are relied upon for receptors within the City and unincorporated County.

Page 1973 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -25 4.11 | Noise
• Brookside Avenue from Nancy Avenue to Oak View Drive
• Union Street from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue • Nancy Avenue from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue However, although the “2027 With Project” traffic noise along these roadway segment s may be noticeably louder, the traffic noise would remain below 60 CNEL, the County’s normally acceptable land use compatibility standard for residential uses (refer to Table 4.11-8), except for Brookside Avenue from Nancy Avenue to Oak View Drive. However, 61.5 dBA is the noise level at 100 feet from the roadway centerline. There is one residence along this segment, and it is 150 feet from the roadway centerline. At 150 feet, the noise level attenuates to 58.8 dBA, which is within the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard.

Additionally, the primary outdoor space for this receptor appear s to be in the back yards and not along the roadway (i.e., further than 150 feet away). Additionally, a golf course is located along the south side of this segment. The golf course would be within the 75 dBA normally acceptable standard . Therefore, traffic noise at Project Buildout would result in a less than significant impact.

Table 4.11-13: Project Buildout (Phase 1 Plus Phase 2) Traffic Noise Levels

Roadway Segment
2027 Without Project 2027 With Project
Change
Normally/
Conditionally
Acceptable
Standard 1
Significa nt
Impacts ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Roadway
Centerline
ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Cherry
Valley Blvd
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 19,488 68.6 23,439 69.9 1.2 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Project Access 12,458 66.7 19,818 68.8 2.1 70 / 77.5 No Project Access to Hannon Rd 12,458 66.6 19,159 68.5 1.9 60 / 70 No Hannon Rd to Union St 9,996 65.7 15,144 67.5 1.8 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 8,945 65.3 12,941 66.9 1.6 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Beaumont Ave 7,884 64.7 10,186 65.8 1.1 60 / 70 No Brookside
Ave
Hannon Rd to Union St 2,364 57.1 2,940 58.0 0.9 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 2,665 57.6 4,393 59.8 2.2 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Oak View Dr 3,105 58.3 6,527 61.5 3.2 60 / 70 No2 Oak View Dr to Beaumont Av e 2,880 57.9 4,032 59.4 1.5 60 / 70 No Oak Valley
Pkwy
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 30,676 67.3 32,082 67.5 0.2 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Oak View Dr 40,147 68.6 42,417 68.9 0.2 70 / 77.5 No Hannon Rd Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 1,000 50.1 1,576 52.0 2.0 60 / 70 No Union St Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 431 46.4 1,583 52.1 5.7 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 1,615 52.1 3,309 55.3 3.1 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 5,319 60.6 7,589 62.1 1.5 60 / 70 No Beaumont
Ave
Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 12,292 64.2 13,442 64.6 0.4 60 / 70 No Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 14,650 65.0 16,376 65.5 0.5 60 / 70 No ADT = average daily traffic; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL = community noise equivalent level.

1. Potential impacts occur when the Project change exceeds 3 dBA and the land use compatibility standard is exceeded (i.e., both must occur).

2. There is one residence along this segment, and it is 150 feet from the roadway centerline. At 150 fee t, the noise level attenuates to 58.8 dBA, which is within the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard and impacts are less than significant.

Source: Based on traffic data within the Traffic Impact Study , prepared by Kimley -Horn, 2022. Refer to Appendix J for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

Off-Site Horizon Year (Phase 1 Plus Phase 2) Traffic Noise The Horizon Year “2040 Without Project” and “2040 Plus Project” scenarios were also compared. As shown in Table 4.11-14, Horizon Year (Phase 1 Plu s Phase 2) Traffic Noise Levels , roadway noise levels would range between 48.8 dBA CNEL and 68.6 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the centerline and between

Page 1974 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -26 4.11 | Noise

52.9 dBA CNEL and 69.9 dBA CNEL with the Project . The Project would result in a maximum increase of

4.0 dB A CNEL. Table 4.11-14 shows that an increase in traffic noise levels along the following roadway segments would exceed 3.0 dBA:
• Union Street from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue • Nancy Avenue from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue However, although the “2040 With Project” traffic noise along these roadway segments may be noticeably louder, the traffic noise would remain below 60 CNEL, the County’s normally acceptable land use compatibility standard for residential uses (refer to Table 4.11-8). Therefore, the Horizon Year “2040 Plus Project” scenario would result in a less than significant traffic noise impact.

Table 4.11-14: Horizon Year (Phase 1 Plus Phase 2) Traffic Noise Levels

Roadway Segment
2040 Without Project 2040 With Project
Change
Normally/
Conditionally
Acceptable
Standard 1
Significant
Impacts ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Roadway
Centerline
ADT
dBA CNEL at
100 feet from
Roadway
Centerline
Cherry Valley
Blvd
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 19,488 68.6 23,439 69.9 1.2 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Project Access 13,961 67.2 21,321 69.1 1.9 70 / 77.5 No Project Access to Hannon Rd 13,961 67.1 20,662 68.9 1.8 60 / 70 No Hannon Rd to Union St 13,528 67.1 18,676 68.5 1.4 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 12,337 66.7 16,333 67.9 1.2 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Beaumont Ave 10,229 65.8 12,531 66.7 0.9 60 / 70 No Brookside
Ave
Hannon Rd to Union St 2,982 58.1 3,558 58.9 0.8 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 3,265 58.5 4,993 60.3 1.8 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Oak View Dr 3,807 59.2 7,229 61.9 2.8 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr to Beaumont Ave 3,540 58.8 4,692 60.1 1.2 60 / 70 No Oak Valley
Pkwy
I -10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB Ramps 30,676 67.3 32,082 67.5 0.2 70 / 77.5 No I -10 WB Ramps to Oak View Dr 40,147 68.6 42,417 68.9 0.2 70 / 77.5 No Hannon Rd Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 8,197 59.2 8,773 59.5 0.3 60 / 70 No Union St Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 750 48.8 1,902 52.9 4.0 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 1,615 52.1 3,309 55.3 3.1 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 5,319 60.6 7,589 62.1 1.5 60 / 70 No Beaumont
Ave
Cherry Valley Blvd to Brookside 16,110 65.4 17,260 65.7 0.3 60 / 70 No Brookside Ave to Oak Valley Pkwy 18,534 66.0 20,260 66.4 0.4 60 / 70 No ADT = average daily tra ffic; dBA = A-weighted decibels; CNEL = community noise equivalent level.

1. Potential impacts occur when the Project change exceeds 3 dBA and the land use compatibility standard is exceeded (i.e., both must occur).

Source: Based on traffic data within the Traffic Impact Study , prepared by Kimley -Horn, 2022. Refer to Appendix J for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

As discussed, construction and operation of the Project would not result in significant noise impacts.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Impact 4.11-2 Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact

Page 1975 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -27 4.11 | Noise
Construction Vibration
Construction can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures and equipment. Operation of construction equipment generates vibrations that spread through the ground and diminish with distance from the source. Construction on the P roject site would have the potential to result in varying degree s of temporary groundborne vibration, depending on the specific construction equipment used and the operations involved.

The FTA has published standard vibration velocities for construction e quipment operations. In general, the FTA architectural damage cr iterion for continuous vibrations (i.e., 0.2 in/sec) appears to be conservative. The types of construction vibration impacts include human annoyance and building damage.

Human annoyance occurs when construction vibration rises significantly above the thres hold of human perception for extended periods of time. Building damage can be cosmetic or structural. Ordinary buildings that are not particularly fragile would not experience any cosmetic dam age (e.g., plaster cracks) at distances beyond 30 feet. This dis tance can vary substantially depending on the soil composition and underground geological layer between vibration source and receiver. In addition, not all buildings respond similarly to vibra tion generated by construction equipment. For example, for a building that is constructed with reinforced concrete with no plaster, the FTA guidelines show that a vibration level of up to 0.20 in/sec is considered safe and would not result in any construct ion vibration damage.

Table 4.11-15, Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels , lists vibration levels at 25 feet for typical construction equipment. Vibration levels at 67 feet, the distance from the Project boundary to the nearest existing structure is also included in Table 4.11-15. Groundborne vibration generated by construction equipment spreads through the ground and diminishes in magnitude with increases in distance. As indicated in Table 4.11-15, based on FTA data, vibration velocities from t ypical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during Project construction range from 0.003 to 0.089 in/sec PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity.

Table 4.11-15: Typical Construction Equipment Vibration Levels Equipment Peak Particle Velocity
at 25 Feet (in/sec)
Peak Particle Velocity
at 67 Feet (in/sec)1
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.0203
Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.0203
Loaded Trucks 0.076 0.0173
Jackhammer 0.035 0.0080
Small Bulldozer/Tractors 0.003 0.0007
1 Calculated using the following formula: PPV equip = PPV ref x (25/D)1.5, where: PPVequip = the peak particle velocity in in/sec of the equipment adjusted for the distance; PPV ref = the reference vibration level in in/sec from Table 7-4 of the Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018; D = the distance from the equipment to the receiver.

Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.

The nearest structure to the Project construction site is approximately 67 feet away. Table 4.11-15 shows that at 67 feet the vibration velocities from construction equipment would not exceed 0.0203 in/sec PPV, which is below the FTA’s 0.20 in/sec PPV threshold for building damage and below the 0.04 in/sec PPV annoyance threshold. It is also acknowledged that construction activities would occur throughout the Project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the nearest structure. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with Project cons truction would be less than significant.

Page 1976 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -28 4.11 | Noise
Operational Vibration
The Project would include truck movement activity at the Project site. These movements would generally be low-speed (i.e., less than 15 miles per hour) and would occur over new, smooth surfaces . For perspective, Caltrans has studied the effects of propagation of vehicle vibration on sensitive land uses and notes that “heavy t rucks, and quite frequently buses, generate the highest earthborn vibrations of normal traffic.” Caltrans further notes that the highest traffic-generated vibrations are along freeways and state routes. Their study finds that “vibrations measured on freewa y shoulders (five meters from the centerline of the nearest lane) have never exceeded 0.08 inches per second, with the wor st combinations of heavy trucks and poor roadway conditions (while such trucks were moving at freeway speeds). This level coincides with the maximum recommended safe level for ruins and ancient monuments (and historic buildings)”.15 Since the Project’s truck movements would be at low speed (not at freeway speeds) and would be over smooth surfaces (not under poor roadway conditions), Project-related vibration associated with truck activity would not result in excessive groundborne vibrations; no vehicle-generated vibration impacts would occur. In addition, there are no sources of substantial groundborne vibration associated with the Project, such as rail or subways. The Project would not create or cause any vibration impacts due to operations.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Impact 4.11-3 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?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The closest airport to the Project site is the Banning Municipal Air port located approximately 9 miles to the southeast. The Project is not within 2.0 miles of a pub lic airport or within an airport land use plan.

Additionally, there are no private airstrips located within the Project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not expose people working in the Project area to excessive airport - or airstrip-related noise levels and no mitigation is required.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

15 California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (“TeNS”), September 2013.

Page 1977 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -29 4.11 | Noise

4.11.6 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative Construction Noise
The Project’s construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels. Construction noise would be periodic and temporary noise impacts that would cease upon completion of construction a ctivities. The Project would contribute to other proximate construction project noise impacts if construction activities were conducted concurrently. However, based on the noise analysis above, the Project’s construction-related noise impacts would be less than significant following the City of Beaumont Municipal Code.

Construction activities at othe r planned and approved projects near the Project site would be required to comply with applicable City rules related to noise and would take place during dayti me hours on the days permitted by the applicable Municipal Code, and projects requiring discretionary City approvals would be required to evaluate construction noise impacts, comply with the City’s standard conditions of approval, and implement mitigation, if necessary, to minimize noise impacts. Construction noise impacts are by nature localized. Bas ed on the fact that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, noise impacts would be limited to the Project site and vicinity. Therefore, Project construction would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts, assuming such a cumulative impact existed, and impacts in this regard are not cumulatively considerable.

Cumulative Operational Noise
Cumulative Off -Site Traffic Noise
Cumulative noise impacts describe how much noise levels are projected to incre ase over existing conditions with the development of the proposed Project and other foreseeable projects. Cumulative noise impacts would occur primarily as a r esult of increased traffic on local roadways due to buildout of the proposed Project and other projects in the vicinity. Cumulative increases in traffic noise levels were estimated by comparing the Existing and Opening Year Without Project scenarios to the Opening Year Plus Project scenario. The traffic analysis considers cumulative traffic from futur e growth assumed in the transportation model, as well as cumulative projects.

A project’s contribution to a cumulative traffic noise increase would be consider ed significant when the combined effect exceeds perception level (i.e., auditory level increase) threshold. The following criteria is used to evaluate the combined and incremental effects of the cumulative noise increase. • Combined Effect . The cumulative with Project noise level (“Opening Year With Project”) would cause a significant cumulative impact if a 3.0 dB increase over “Existing” conditions occurs and the resulting noise level exceeds the applicable exterior standard at a sensitive use. Although there may be a significant noise increase due to the proposed Project in combination with other related projects (combined effects), it must also be demonstrated that the Project has an incremental effect. In other words, a significant portion of the noise inc rease must be due to the proposed Project.
• Incremental Effects. The “Opening Year With Project” causes a 1.0 dBA increase in noise over the “Opening Year Without Project” nois e level.

Page 1978 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -30 4.11 | Noise
A significant impact would result only if both the combined and incremen tal effects criteria have been exceeded. Noise, by definition, is a localized phenomenon and reduces as distance from the source increases. Consequently, only the proposed Project and growth due to occur in the general area would contribute to cumulative noise impacts.

Table 4.11-16, Opening Year Plus Project Conditions Predicted Traffic Noise Levels identifies the traffic noise effects along roadway segments in the Project vicinity for “Existing,” “Opening Year Without Project,” and “Opening Year With Project,” conditions, including incremental and net cumulative impacts.

Table 4.11-16: Opening Year Plus Project Conditions Predicted Traffic Noise Levels Roadway Segment Existing1
2040
Without
Project 1
2040
With
Project 1
Combined Effects Incremental Effect s
Normally/
Conditionally
Acceptable
Standard3
Cumulatively
Significant
Impact?
Difference In dBA
Between Existing
and 2040 With
Project
Difference In dBA
Between 2040
Without Project and
2040 With Project
Cherry Valley
Blvd
I-10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB
Ramps 65.1 68.6 69.9 4.8 1.2 70 / 77.5 No
I-10 WB Ramps to Project
Access 64.0 67.2 69.1 5.1 1.9 70 / 77.5 No2
Project Access to Hannon Rd 63.9 67.1 68.9 5.0 1.8 60 / 70 Yes3 Hannon Rd to Union St 63.6 67.1 68.5 4.9 1.4 60 / 70 yes3 Union St to Nancy Ave 62.9 66.7 67.9 5.0 1.2 60 / 70 Yes3 Nancy Ave to Beaumont Ave 62.5 65.8 66.7 4.2 0.9 60 / 70 No Brookside Ave
Hannon Rd to Union St 56.6 58.1 58.9 2.3 0.8 60 / 70 No Union St to Nancy Ave 57.1 58.5 60.3 3.2 1.8 60 / 70 No Nancy Ave to Oak View Dr 57.8 59.2 61.9 4.2 2.8 60 / 70 No Oak View Dr to Beaumont Ave 57.4 58.8 60.1 2.6 1.2 60 / 70 No Oak Valley
Pkwy
I-10 EB Ramps to I -10 WB
Ramps 62.8 67.3 67.5 4.7 0.2 70 / 77.5 No
I-10 WB Ramps to Oak View
Dr 63.7 68.6 68.9 5.2 0.2 70 / 77.5 No
Hannon Rd Cherry Valley Blvd to
Brookside 48.7 59.2 59.5 10.8 0.3 60 / 70 No
Union St Cherry Valley Blvd to
Brookside 45.9 48.8 52.9 7.0 4.0 60 / 70 No
Nancy Ave Cherry Valley Blvd to
Brookside 49.7 52.1 55.3 5.6 3.1 60 / 70 No
Oak View Dr Brookside Av e to Oak Valley
Pkwy 60.1 60.6 62.1 2.1 1.5 60 / 70 No
Beaumont Ave
Cherry Valley Blvd to
Brookside 61.7 65.4 65.7 4.0 0.3 60 / 70 No
Brookside Ave to Oak Valley
Pkwy 63.1 66.0 66.4 3.3 0.4 60 / 70 No
ADT = average daily trips; dBA = A -weighted decibels; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level

1. Traffic noise levels are at 100 feet from the roadway centerline. The actual sound level at any receptor location is dependen t upon such factors as the source-to-receptor distance and the presence of intervening structures, barriers, and topography.

2. Future development along this segment would be industrial/warehouse. There is one residence approximately 200 feet from the r oadway centerline. At this distance, traffic noise levels would attenuate to 64.6 dBA CNEL. Additionally, planned roadway improvements along this segment include a 10 -foot earthen berm that would reduce noise levels by approximately 10 dBA or more, resulting in 54.6 dBA, which is be low the 60 dBA residential standard.

3. Noise levels are between the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable level and the 70 dBA CNEL Conditionally Acceptable level. Standard construction provides 2 5 dBA of exterior -to-interior noise attenuation. Therefore, interior noise levels would be below the 45 dBA CNEL interior standard with windows closed.

Source: Based on traffic data within the Traffic Impact Study , prepared by Kimley -Horn, 2022. Refer to Appendix J for traffic noise modeling assumptions and results.

Page 1979 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -31 4.11 | Noise
Table 4.11-16 shows the volume of traffic generated by the Project would potentially meet the criteria for cumulative noise increases along several road segments . The noise levels along the following roadway segments result in combined effects and incremental effects :
• Cherry Valley Boulevard from I -10 eastbound ramps to I-10 westbound ramps . Noise levels would be 69.9 dBA and would not exceed the 70 dBA Normally Acceptable noise standard. Impacts along this segment would be less than significant.
• Cherry Va lley Boulevard from I -10 westbound ramps to Project access . Noise levels would be 69.1 and would not exceed the 70 dBA Normally Acceptable noise standard. Future development along this segment would be industrial/warehouse. There is one residence approxima tely 200 feet from the roadway centerline. At this distance, traffic noise levels would attenuate to 64.6 dBA CNEL.

Additionally, planned roadway improvements along this segment include a 10 -foot earthen berm that would reduce noise levels by approximately 10 dBA or more, resulting in 54.6 dBA, which is below the 60 dBA residential standard. Impacts along this segment would be less than significant. • Cherry Valley Boulevard from Project access to Hannon Road. Although noise levels would exceed the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard, the 70 dBA conditionally acceptable sta ndard would not be exceeded. The With Project noise level would be 68.9 dBA. Interior noise levels would be

43.9 dBA with the standard 25 dBA exterior -to-interior attenuation rate. There are four residences located along this segment. However, the primary outdoor space appears to be in the backyard and not along the roadway. Impacts along this segment would be potentially significant. • Cherry Valley Boulevard from Hannon Road to Union Street. Although noise levels would exceed the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard, the 70 dBA conditionally acceptable standard would not be exceeded. The With Project noise level would be 68.5 dBA. Interior noise levels would be

43.5 dBA with the standar d 25 dBA exterior -to-interior attenuation rate. There are three residences located along this segment. However, the primary outdoor space appears to be in the back yards and not along the roadway. Impacts along this segment would be potentially significant .
• Cherry Valley Boulevard from Union Street to Nancy Avenue . Although nois e levels would exceed the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard, the 70 dBA conditionally acceptable standard would not be exceeded. The With Project noise level would be 67.9 dBA. Int erior noise levels would be

42.9 dBA with the standard 25 dBA exterior -to-interior attenuation rate. A landscape supply, a place of worship, agricultural uses, and approximately seven residences are located along this segment. However, the primary outdoor space appears to be in the back yards and not along the roadway. It should be noted that commercial and agricultural uses are normally acceptable up to 70 dBA and 75 dBA, respectively. Impacts along this segment would be potentially significant. • Brookside Avenue from Union Street to Nancy Avenue . Although noise levels would exceed the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard, the 70 dBA conditionally acceptable standard would not be exceeded. The With Project noise level would be 60.3 dBA. There are several resi dences along the south side of this roadway segment, but they all are abov e the roadway grade and include a solid block wall barrier that would attenuate noise levels by 8 dBA. Therefore, exterior noise levels in the backyard activity areas would be 52.3 dBA, which is below the 60 dBA normally acceptable

Page 1980 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -32 4.11 | Noise
standard. Additionally, interior noise levels would be 27.3 dBA with the standard 25 dBA windows closed exterior-to-interior attenuation rate and 37.3 dBA with the standard 15 dBA windows open attenuation rate. Impacts along this segment would be less than significant. • Brookside Avenue from Nancy Avenue to Oak View Drive. However, 61.9 dBA is the noise level at 100 feet from the roadway centerline. There is one residence along this segment, and it is 150 feet from the roadway centerline. At 150 feet, the noise level attenuates to 59.3 dBA, which is within the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable standard. Additionally, the primary outdoor space appears to be in the back yards and not along the roadway (i.e., further than 150 feet away). Additionally, a golf course is located along the south side of this segment. The golf course would be within the 75 dBA normally acceptable standard. Impacts along this seg ment would be less than significant. • Union Street from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue . Noise levels would be 52.9 dBA and would not exceed the 60 dBA Normally Acceptable noise standard. Impacts along this segment would be less than significant .
• Nancy Avenue from Cherry Valley Boulevard to Brookside Avenue . Noise levels would be 55.3 dBA and would not exceed the 60 dBA Normally Ac ceptable noise standard. Impacts along this segment would be less than significant.

As noted above, locations are conditionally acceptable when interior standards can still be met. Standard construction provides 25 dBA of exterior -to-interior noise attenua tion with windows closed16 and interior noise levels would be below the 45 dBA CNEL interior standard. However, the exterior-to-interior noise attenuation rate is 15 dBA with windows open17 and interior noise levels could exceed the 45 dBA standard in a windows open condition. Therefore, traffic noise impacts along Cherry Valley Boulevard (from Project access to Hannon R oad, from Hannon Road to Union Street, and from Union Street to Nancy Avenue) would be potentially significant.

Feasible mitigation is not available to reduce traffic noise. Typically, feasible mitigation measures for off-site roadway noise impacts include repairing the roads with rubberized asphalt and developing sound walls or attenuation barriers to minimize noise impacts. However, this miti gation can only be imposed on on-site roadways since the Applicant would not have authorization or control t o make off-site improvements. As impacts would also occur on off-site roadways and properties, it is usually infeasible for the Applicant to impleme nt these measures. Sound walls would be infeasible due to impacts on right of way, restricted views, and not being proportional to the barely perceptible 18 increase in sound compared with the No Project scenario. Rubberized asphalt could be considered by th e City’s public works department in the future as part of scheduled maintenance funding, but it would not b e roughly proportional to impose paving costs on the Project for a barely perceptible sound level increase.

Therefore, mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant traffic noise impact along Cherry Valley Boulevard are not feasible. Noise leve ls along this segment of Cherry Valley Boulevard would still be within the Conditionally Acceptable standard. However, as the Normally Acceptable sta ndard

16 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9-79-100), 1979. 17 Ibid.
18 Per the Caltrans Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol (2013), a 3-dBA increase in traffic noise is barely perceptible to people, while a 5‐dBA increase is readily noticeable. The incremental effects noise increase for Cherry Valley Boulevard s hown on Table 19 range from 0.9 dBA to 1.9 dBA and would be below the 3-dBA barely perceptible standard.

Page 1981 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -33 4.11 | Noise
would be exceeded, cumulative operational noise impact from related projects, in conjunction with Project-specific noise impacts would not be cumulatively considerable along Cherry Valley Boulevard (from Project access to Hannon Road, from Hannon Roa d to Union Street, and from Union Street to Nancy Avenue) and impacts would be significant and unavoidable.

Cumulative Stationary Noise
Stationary noise sources of the proposed Project would result in an incremental increase in non - transportation noise sources in the Project vicinity. However, as discussed above, operational noise caused by the proposed Projec t would be less than significant. Similar to the proposed Project, other planned and approved projects would be required to mitigate for stationary n oise impacts at nearby sensitive receptors, if necessary. As stationary noise sources are generally localiz ed, there is a limited potential for other projects to contribute to cumulative noise impacts.

No known past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects would combine with the operational noise levels generated by the Project to increase noise levels above acceptable standards because each project must comply with applicable City regulations that limit operational noise. Therefore, the Project, toget her with other projects, would not create a significant cumulative impact, and even if there was such a significant cumulative impact, the Project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative operational noises .

Given that noise dissipates as it travels away from its source, operational noise impacts from on -site activities and other stationary sources would be limited to the Project site and vicinity. Thus, cumulative operational noise impacts from related projects, in conjunction with Project specific noise impacts, would not be cumulatively significant.

4.11.7 Significant Unavoid able Impacts
Noise impacts would be less than significant with the exception of cumulative off -site traffic noise along Cherry Valley Boulevard (from Project access to Hannon Road, from Hannon Road to Union Street, and from Union Street to Nancy Avenue). Cumulative traffic noise impacts would occur primarily as a result of increased traffic on local roadways due to buildout of the proposed Project and other projects in the vicinity. Noise levels along the affected segments of Cherry Valley Boulevard would be Conditionally Acceptable. However, mitigation was determined to be infeasible to reduce mobile traffic noise to Normally Acceptable levels in accordance with the Land Use Compatibility standards.

4.11.8 References
California Department of Transportation, California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels, 1987.

California Department of Transportation, Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2020.

California Department of Transportation, Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, 2013.

California Depart ment of Transportation, Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual , 2020.

Page 1982 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -34 4.11 | Noise
City of Beaumont, Beaumont General Plan, 2018.

City of Beaumont, Municipal Code, 2018.

County of Riverside, General Plan, 2015.

County of Riverside, Code of Ordinances, 2019.

Federal Highway Administration, Noise Measurement Handbook – Final Report, 2018.

Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model, 2006.

Federal Highway Administration, Roadway Construction Noise Model User’s Guide Final Report , 2006.

Federal Interagency Committee on Noise, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, 1992.

Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, 2018.

HPA Architecture, Conceptual Site Plan: Brookside Ave. and Cherry Valley Blvd., June 24, 2021 Kimley-Horn, Beaumont Summit Station Project Traffic Impact Study, February 2022.

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Protective Noise Levels (EPA 550/9 -79-100), 1979.

Page 1983 of 2513 ends

Not to scale!(!(!(!(Brookside AveCherry Valley Blvd!"`$Katherine CtN Deodar DrCalimesa BlvdST-1ST-2ST-3ST-4/LT-1!(Noise Measurement LocationExhibit 4.11-1: 1RLVH0HDVXUHPHQW/RFDWLRQVCity of Beaumont%HDXPRQW6XPPLW6WDWLRQ6SHFLƄF3ODQ(,5Exhibit 4.11-1: Noise Measurement Locations Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan EIRCity of BeaumontPage 1984 of 2513

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.11 -36 4.11 | Noise
This page intentionally left blank.

Page 1985 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -1 4.12 | Population and Housing

4.12 POPULATION AND HOUSING

4.12.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the existing population and housing character of the Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan (Project) Area and evaluate the potential environmental consequences of future development that could occur by adopting and implementing the Project . This section includes a summary of the relevant regulatory setting necessary to evaluate potential environmental imp acts resulting from the proposed Project, describes potential impacts, and discusses existing and proposed goals, policies, and implementation programs and zoning regulations that would avoid or reduce those potential impacts. Available data from the State of California Department of Finance (DOF), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the City of Beaumont (City) was used for this analysis.

4.12.2 Environmental Setting
The approximately 188-acre Project site is comprised of the former Sunny‐Cal Egg and Poultry Ranch; remaining uses include cement pads and several structures on a vacant property containing no housing, population, or places of employment. The Project site is located entirely within the limits of the C ity. Site topography slopes towards the southwest. A jurisdictional waterway with a sharply incised channel crosses the southern portion of the site in a southeast to northwest direction. The Project includes e- commerce, commercial, and open space land uses.

SCAG Projections
SCAG’s regional forecast population, housing, and employment projections towards year 2045 for the City and the County are shown in Table 4.12-1, SCAG Projections – City of Beaumont and County of Riverside.

According to SCAG’s 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) or Connect SoCal, significant growth is anticipated to occur within the City as well as the County in the next two decades. Population in the City is forecasted to increase to 80,200 persons by 2045, an approximately 55.2 percent difference from 2016. Households within the City are forecasted to increase to 25,100 households by 2045, an approximately 55.4 percent difference from 2016. SCAG also forecasts that the number of jobs in the City will increase to 15,900 by 2045, an approximately 52.3 percentage difference.

Table 4.12-1: SCAG Projections – City of Beaumont and County of Riverside 2016 2045 Projected Change
2016-2045
Percent Difference
2016-2045
City of Beaumont
Population 45,500 80,200 34,700 55.2 %
Households 14,200 25,100 10,900 55.4 %
Employment 9,300 15,900 6,600 52.3 %
County of Riverside
Population 2,364,000 3,252,000 888,000 31.6 %
Households 716,000 1,086,000 370,000 41.0 %
Employment 743,000 1,103,000 360,000 39.0 %
Source: SCAG 2020. RTP/SCS 2020-2045 – Connect SoCal, Demographics and Growth Forecast. Retrieved from: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/ files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed February 2021).

Page 1986 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -2 4.12 | Population and Housing
Citywide and County Population
As of January 2021, the City and the County of Riverside (County) have a current population of approximately 52,686 persons and 2,454,453 persons, respectively. Table 4.12-2, Population – Trends in the City of Beaumont and County of Riverside , below displays the population growth trends in the City as well as the County, collected by the DOF and SCAG. SCAG projects that the population of the City and County would increase to 80,200 persons and 3,252,000 persons by horizon year 2045, respectively.1 According to Table 4.12-2, the population growth has steadily increased in both the City and the County from 2010 to 2021. The largest percentage increase for the City occurred from 2018 to 2019, at 3.88 percent. The largest percentage increase for the County occurred from 2016 to 2017 at 1.39 percent.

Table 4.12-2: Population – Trends in the City of Bea umont and County of Riverside Year City of Beaumont County of Riverside
Population Percent Change Population Percent Change
2010 36,877 N/A 2,189,641 N/A
2011 38,230 3.66 % 2,216,250 1.21%
2012 39,231 2.61 % 2,244,472 1.27%
2013 40,375 2.9 1 % 2,268,660 1.07%
2014 41,501 2.78 % 2,290,907 1.08%
2015 43,108 3.87 % 2,315,706 0.83%
2016 44,685 3.65 % 2,343,785 1.21%
2017 46,025 2.99% 2,376,580 1.39%
2018 47,776 3.80 % 2,400,762 1.01%
2019 49,630 3.88 % 2,422,146 0.89%
2020 51,475 3.71 % 2,442,304 0.83%
2021 52,686 2.35% 2,454,453 0.49%
Source:
(1) DOF. (2021). E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011 -2020 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e -4/2010-20/ (accessed August 2021). (2) DOF. (2021) E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011 -2021 with 2010 Census Benchmark . https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e -5/ (accessed August 2021). (3) SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal – Demographics and Growth Forecast. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed August 2021).

Citywide and County Households
As shown in Table 4.12-3, Housing Units – City of Beaumont and County of Riverside , the DOF estimated that as of January 2021, there are approximately 17,232 housing units in the City and 864,076 housing units in the County. Households, broken down by total housing units and occupied housing units, average household, and vacancy rates are also shown in Table 4.12-3 below.

1 SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal – Demographics and Growth Forecast. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file - attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed August 2021).

Page 1987 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -3 4.12 | Population and Housing
Table 4.12-3: Housing Units – City of Beaumont and County of Riverside City of Beaumont County of Riverside
By Unit Type 1
Single -Family Detached 14,832 592,473
Single -Family Attached 310 53,163
Two to Four 686 39,173
Five Plus 881 98,295
Mobile Homes 523 80,972
Total 17,232 864,076
Occupied 16,41 0 751,584
Average Household Size 3.18 3.23
Vacancy Rate 4.8% 13.0%
Source: DOF. 2020. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011 -2020 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/ (accessed February 2021).

According to the data presented in Table 4.12-3, both the City and County have a marginal difference between total housing available and housing units occupied. Furthermore, both the City and County have a high vacancy rate of 4.8 percent and 13.0 percent, respectively, and therefore are not considered housing -poor.

City Employment
As shown in Table 4.12-4, Employment by Sector – City of Beaumont (2020), the latest information provided in the City’s Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element determined that the City’s employment consists of approximately 19,385 persons who work across 13 major industrial sectors. As determined in Table 4.12-4, the most prevalent industries in the City are Education & Social Services, which includes Health Care, with 5,714 employees (29.5 percent of total) and Retail Trade with 2,593 employees (13.4 percent of total). Agriculture is the least prevalent employment industry, employing ap proximately 1 percent of employees.2
Table 4.12-4: Employment by Sector – City of Beaumont (2020) Industrial Sector Jobs in the City of Beaumont
Jobs Percent (%) of Total Jobs
Agriculture 180 1.0%
Construction 1,071 5.5%
Manufacturing 1,483 7.6%
Wholesale Trade 383 1.9
Retail Trade 2,593 13.4%
Transportation 1,279 6.5%
Information 456 2.3%
Finance 810 4.1%
Professional Services 1,709 8.8%
Education & Social Services 5,714 29.5%
Art, Entertainment, Recreation 1,729 8.9%
Other 715 3.6%
Public Administration 1,263 6.5%
Total 19,385 100%
Source: SCAG 2020 Pre-Certified Local Housing Data (American Community Survey 2014 -2018 5-year estimates using groupings of 2-digit NAICS codes)

2 Note that the Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element is currently in public review and employment demographics are estimates based on SCAG’s Pre-Certified Local Housing Data. Therefore, the employment data presented in this section is subject to change and does not represent.

Page 1988 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -4 4.12 | Population and Housing
Jobs-Housing Balance
The jobs -housing ratio is a general measure of the total number of jobs and housing units in a defined geographic area, without regard to economic constraints or individual preferences. The balance of jobs and housing in an area —in terms of the total number of jobs and housing units as well as the type of jobs versus the price of housing —has implications for mobility, air quality, and the distribution of tax revenues.

The jobs/housing ratio is one indicator of a project’s effect on growth and quality of lif e in the project area. SCAG applies the jobs -housing ratio at the regional and sub regional levels to analyze the fit of unemployed, housing, and infrastructure. A major focus of SCAG’s regional planning efforts has been to improve this balance.

Jobs -hous ing goals and ratios are advisory only. No ideal jobs -housing ratio is adopted in state, regional, or city policies. According to SCAG ’s RTP/SCS, also called Connect SoCal, an area’s job-housing ratio is balanced when the jobs -housing ratio in the SCAG reg ion is 1.19. C ommunities with more than 1.19 jobs per dwelling unit are considered jobs -rich; those with fewer than 1.19 are housing -rich. A job-housing imbalance can indicate potential air quality, greenhouse gas and traffic problems associated with commuting.

Table 4.12-5: Job Housing Balance
Jurisdiction Year Employment Households Jobs-Housing Ratio City of Beaumont 2021 19,385 17,232 1.12
2045 15,900 25,100 0.63
County of Riverside
2021 1,035,300* 864,076 1.19
2045 1,103,000 1,086,000 1.01
Source:
*Employment based on State of California Employment Development Department (EDD)’s Riverside County Profile. Last updated Jul y 2021.

Retrieved from:
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSResults.asp?selectedarea=Riverside+County&selectedi ndex=3 3&state=true&geogArea=0604000065&countyName=
(1)SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal, Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed August 2021). (2) SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal, Environmental Justice. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file - attachments/0903fconnectsocal_environmental-justice.pdf?1606001617 (accessed August 2021).

As shown in Table 4.12-5, the City is below the proposed balanced ratio of 1.19 in both 2021 and projected 2045. The job-housing ratio is expected to decrease by 0.49 percent from 2021 to 2045 which indicates that the City is anticipated to be housing -rich and jobs -poor. The jobs creat ed from Project implementation would help shorten work related trips by providing jobs within the City and thus, get closer to meeting Vehicle M iles Traveled (VMT) threshold for the City. Therefore, the Project would provide needed employment opportunities in the City, which is expected to create a better balance between housing and jobs within the City and the region.

4.12.3 Regulatory Setting
This section summarizes existing regional and local laws and policies pertaining to population and housing in Beaumont.

Page 1989 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -5 4.12 | Population and Housing
Federal
There are no federal regulations that pertain to regulations for housing and population.

State
California Planning and Zoning Law
California planning and zoning law require s each city and county to adopt a general plan for future growth (California Government Code [CGC] § 65300). This plan must include a housing element that identifies housing needs for all economic segments and provides opportunities for housing development to meet that need. At the state level, the Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) estimates the relative share of California’s projected population growth in each county based on California DOF population projections and historical growth trends. These figures are compiled by HCD in a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for each region of California. The RHNA is a tool used for SCAG and its member local governments in planning for growth. The R HNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction. Communities then plan, consider, and decide how they will address this need through the process of completing the Housing Elements of their General Plans. The RHNA does not necessarily encourage or promote growth but allows communities to prepare for growth in a way that enhances quality of life and mobility; improves access to jobs, transportation, and housing; and in a way that would not adversely impact the environment.

State law recognizes the vital role that local governments play in the supply and affordability of housing.

To that end, the California Government Code requires that the housing element achieve legislative goals to:
• Identify adequate sites to facilitate and encourage the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for households of all economic levels, including persons with disabilities. • Remove, as legally feasible and appropriate, governmental constraints to the production, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons of all incomes, including those with disabilities.
• Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low - and moderate-income households.
• Conserve and improve the condition of housing and neighborhoods, including existing affordable housing. Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability. • Preserve for lower-income households the publicly assisted multifamily housing deve lopments in each community.

California housing element laws (CGC §§ 65580–65589) require that each city and county identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs within its jurisdiction and prepare goals, policies, and programs to further the de velopment, improvement, and preservation of housing for all economic segments of the community commensurate with local housing needs.

Page 1990 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -6 4.12 | Population and Housing
Housing Accountability Act (S enate Bill 330)
Senate Bill (SB) 330 – Housing Accountability Act (CGC § 65589.5 et seq.) was passed by the California Legislature, signed by the Governor, and became effective on January 1, 2020. The bill is the result of the Legislature’s extensive findings regarding the California “housing supply crisis” with “housing demand far outstripping supply.” In 2018, California ranked 49th out of 50 states in housing units per capita. As stated in SB 330, the Legislature further found that:
[T]he housing crisis has particularly exacerbated the need for affordable homes at prices below market rates… The housing crisis harms families across California and has resulted in all of the following… including increased poverty and homelessness, crowded and unsafe housing in urban areas, forced housing in green fields at the urban -rural interface with longer commute times and a higher exposure to fire hazard…as well as increase greenhouse gas emissions… the housing crises is severely impacting the state’s economy and also harms the environment.

As part of the newly enacted SB 330, CGC § 65589.5(a)(1) provides:

The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and social quality of life in California. California housing has become the most expensive in the nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially caused by activities and policies of many local governments that limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of housing. Among the c onsequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration… Many local governments do not give adequate attention to the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction in the density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing development projects.

SB 330 amends CGC § 65589.5, adds CGC §§ 65940, 65943 and 65950, and repeals and readopts CGC §§ 65906.5, 65913.10 and 65941.1. SB 330 has numerous provisions, for which the most relevant to the Project include new prohibitions against removing or downzoning residentially zoned land such that there would be a “net loss” in residential zoning capacity. The legislation adds Chapter 12 to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code (§§ 66300 et seq.) that applies to “affected cities,” which are identified as cities in urbanized areas as determined by the most recent census. In accordance with SB 330, the HCD has prepared a list of affected cities and has determined that Beaumont is an “affected city.” Therefore, pursuant to CGC § 66300(b)(1)(A) and (b):
(b)(1) Notwithstanding any other law except as provided in subdivision (i), with respect to land where housing is an allowable use, an affected city shall not enact a development policy, standard, or condition that would have any of the following effects:
(A) Changing the general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district below what was allowed under the land use designation

Page 1991 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -7 4.12 | Population and Housing
and zoning ordinances of the affected county or affected city, as applicable, as in effect on January 1, 2018…”
Except when approved by HCD or when the following exception is set out in CGC § 66300(i)(1) applies:
(i)(1) This section does not prohibit an affected county or an affected city from changing a land use designation or zoning ordinance to a less intensive use if the city or county concurrently changes the development standards, policies, and conditions applicable to other parcels within the jurisdiction to ensure that there is no net loss in residential capacity.

Regional
Southern California Association of Governments and Reg ional Housing Needs Assessment SCAG is a council of governments representing Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura counties. SCAG is the federally recognized metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for this region, which encompasses over 38,000 square miles. It serves as a forum for addressing regional issues concerning transportation, the economy, community development, and the environment. SCAG develops, refines, and maintains SCAG's regional and small area socio-economic forecasting/allocation models.

SCAG is also the regional clearinghouse for projects requiring environmental documentation under federal and state law. In this role, SCAG reviews proposed development and infrastructure projects to analy ze their impacts on regional planning programs. As the Southern California region’s MPO, SCAG cooperates with the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the California Department of Transportation, and other agencies in preparing regional planning documents . The socioeconomic estimates and projections are used for federal and state-mandated long -range planning efforts such as the RTP/SCS, the Air Quality Management Plan, the Federal Transportation Improvement Program, and the RHNA.

The RHNA is an assessment process perfor med periodically as part of Housing Element and General Plan updates at the local level. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing by income group within each jurisdiction during specific planning periods. The RHNA is used in land use planning, to prioritiz e local resource allocation and to help decide how to address existing and future housing needs. The RHNA allows communities to anticipate growth, so that collectively the region can grow in ways that enhance quality of life, improve access to jobs, promot e transportation mobility, and address social equity and fair share housing needs .

Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Western Riverside Council of Governments
The Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) is a joint -powers agency that conducts interagency regional coordination and planning for local governments in western Riverside County and serves as the council of governments and local transportation planning agency for the western Riverside subregion of SCAG. Its member agencies are 17 cities, including the City of Beaumont; Riverside County, and the Eastern and Western Municipal Water Districts. WRCOG administers the Riverside County Measure A, a half-cent transportation sales tax that supports freeway construction proj ects and designates smaller revenue allocations for arterial roadway improvements in western Riverside County.

WRCOG also administers western Riverside County’s Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)

Page 1992 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -8 4.12 | Population and Housing
Program to mitigate the cumulative regional impacts of new development on the subregion’s arterial highway system identified on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials. Other areas overseen by WRCOG include housing, planning for regional growth, and planning for solid waste and hazard ous waste management.

Local
Beaumont Housing Element
The current Housing Element for the City is a “6th cycle” Housing Element that covers the years 20 21 through 2029. Beaumont’s Housing Element is intended to ensure that the City establishes policies, procedures, and incentives in its land use planning activities that result in the maintenance and expansion of the housing supply to adequately accommodate households currently living and expected to live in the City. The Housing Element provides the policies that guide City decision-making and implement housing goals through the year 2029 to ensuring a balance of housing types and costs are available to meet the needs of the City. The Project would not displace any housing and therefore, not required to alloc ate residential units as part of the City’s RHNA.

City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan
Land Use and Community Design Element
Goal 3.1: A City structure that enhances the quality of life of residents, meets the community’s vision for the future, and connects new growth areas together with established Beaumont neighborhoods.

Goal 3.3: A City that preserves its existing residential neighborhoods and promotes development of new housing choices.

Policy 3.3.1 Support the development of new housing opport unities, as defined by the Land Use Plan contained in this Element.

Policy 3.3.2 Develop a variety of housing types at varying densities that meet the needs of residents of a variety of incomes, lifestyles and needs.

Policy 3.3.3 Continue to maintain and conserve existing residential neighborhoods.

Policy 3.3.4 Continue to explore future opportunities for new residential development.

Policy 3.3.6 Encourage developers to build proposed retail and services in a specific plan no later than when 75 percent of the residential development has occurred.

Policy 3.3.7 Require well-connected walkable neighborhoods with quality access to transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities.

Policy 3.3.10 Permit accessory dwelling units on single-family residential lots.

Imp lementation LUCD14 Develop financial and regulatory incentives (e.g., reduced fee permits, expedited building permits, impact fee waivers) to promote new development in the Sphere of Influence that conforms with the vision of the

Page 1993 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -9 4.12 | Population and Housing
General Plan, including s upport for employment uses, mixed use housing, active transportation, and jobs.

Implementation LUCD15 Establish an infill housing incentive program. Potential incentives may include an expedited building permit process, impact fee waivers, or other incenti ves.

Goal 3.4: A City that maintains and expands its commercial, industrial and other employment-generating land uses.

Policy 3.4.1 Continue to promote commercial and industrial development in the Interstate Employment Subarea that capitalizes on the City’s location near the I -10 and the SR60 Freeways.

Policy 3.4.2 Promote the development of neighborhood commercial uses in the vicinity of residential neighborhoods and larger commercial retail centers along the major transportation corridors.

Policy 3.4.6 Continue to promote the maintenance and preservation of industrial activities and businesses that contribute to the City’s economic and employment base.

Policy 3.4.7 Encourage the continued expansion of the City’s industrial districts to accommodate economic development and growth.

Economic Development Element
Goal 5.1: A dynamic local economy that attracts diverse business and investment.

Policy 5.1.2 Recruit and retain emerging growth industries (industries with significant employment and performa nce potential) that provide revenues to the City and jobs to the community, including health care, education, and professional services.

Policy 5.1.5 Maintain a regulatory environment that is business friendly, easy to navigate, flexible and encourages growth consistent with the General Plan.

4.12.4 Impact Thresholds and Significance Criteria
State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions concerning population and housing. The questions presented in the Envir onmental Checklist Form have been utilized as significance criteria in this section. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have a significant effect on population and housing if it would:
a) Include 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); and/or
b) Displace substantial numbers of exist ing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacing housing elsewhere.

Methodology and Assumptions
The Project’s demographics were examined in the context of existing and projected population for the City and County and considers consistency with relevant planning documents . Information on population,

Page 1994 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -10 4.12 | Population and Housing
housing, and employment for the planning area is available from several sources , including SCAG’s Connect SoCal and population and housing data from the DOF.

Approach to Analysis
This analysis of impacts on population and housing examines the Project’s temporary (i.e., construction) and permanent (i.e., operational) effects based on application of the significance criteria/thresholds outlined above. Each criterion is discussed in the context of the Project site and the surrounding characteristics/geography. The impact conclusions consider the potential for changes in environmental conditions, as well as compliance with the regulatory framework enacted to protect the environment.

The baseline conditions and impact analyses are based on review of Project maps and drawings; analysis of aerial and ground‐level photographs; and review of various data available in public records, including local planning documents. The determination that a Project component would or would not result in “significant” adverse effects on population and housing considers the available policies and regulations established by local and regional agencies and the amount of deviation from these policies in the Project’s components.

4.12.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 4.12-1 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)? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Although the Project does not include residential uses, the Project would indirectly induce population growth since the Project includes commercial uses, which would result in jobs for City residents. The Project’s construction and operations would result in the development of commercial, e -commerce, and open space land uses on approximately 188 acres. Refer to Section 5.3, Growth -Inducing Impacts for additional discussion.

Employment Growth
Construction
The construction phase of the Project would generate employment opportunities, including construction management, engineering, and labor. Construction related jobs are not considered significantly inducing because they are temporary in nature and are anticipated to be filled by persons in the surrounding ar ea.

As noted above in Table 4.12-3: Housing Units – City of Beaumont and County of Riverside , the City is housing -rich and has a 4.8 percent vacancy rate. Additionally, the City is considered “jobs poor” as it has a high 10.5 percent unemployment rate. This suggests that the Project’s employment opportunities would be adequately filled by local residents or the surrounding community. Therefore, the Project’s employment opportunities for the construction phase would not induce substantial unplanned populatio n growth.

Page 1995 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -11 4.12 | Population and Housing
Operations
As shown in Table 4.12-6, Project Generated Employment below, the projected number of employees that would result from the implementation of the Project was calculated based on the employment forecast factors used in the Beaumont 2040 GP Draft EIR.3 The Project has the potential to generate approximately 4,010 employees.

Table 4.12-6: Project Generated Employment
Land Use Square Feet (sf) Employment Factor Total Employees E-Commerce Center (light
industrial)
E-Commerce
Office
2,557,465 sf 1 employee per 750 sf 3,410 employees
Commercial
Hotel
Retail
Restaurant
150,000 sf 1 employee per 250 sf 600 employees
Although the Project would generate approximately half of SCAG’s forecasted employment for the City, the forecasted increase in Project employment is well within the City’s total future employment of 19,910 by 2045 and well within the County’s forecasted employment of 1,103,000 by 2045. In addition, the City is jobs -poor with a significant unemployment rate of 10.5 percent, as of July 2021. According to the Beaumont 2040 GP Draft EIR, most of the City’s residents commute to other cities for work. Thus, the Project’s related employment growth impacts are not anticipated to be significant since the City is housing -rich and would be adequately served by the regional and local workforce.

Population Growth
Buildout of the Specific Plan would increase jobs in the City, which would have the potential to increase the demand for housing in the area. However, the City is housing -rich and therefore the Project would produce more jobs that would support the improvements designated by SCAG in pursuit of an improved jobs -housing -balance for the City and the County by 2045. As stated above, because the City is housing - rich, it is expected that jobs at the Project site would be drawn from the local and regional labor force.

The Project is not anticipated to result in a substantial population growth, and impacts would be less than significant.

Jobs-Housing Balance
As shown in Table 4.12-5 above, the job-housing balance for the City and County towards horizon year 2045 would be considered housing -rich. The Project would produce approximately 4,010 more jobs and therefore would support the improvements designated by SCAG in pursuit of a job-housing balance for the SCAG region, including the City and County.

As shown in Table 4.12-7, Projected Jobs-Housing Balance (with Project), the jobs -housing ratio for the City (with Project) is estimated to be 0.79, which represents a slight difference from the SCAG projections for the City in 2045 of 0.63. Project buildout would result in a similar job-housing balance of 1.02 for the

3 City of Beaumont. (2019). Beaumont General Plan 2040 Program DEIR – Section 5.13 Population and Housing: page 5.13-13. Retrieved at:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36627/DEIR-090720 (Accessed August 24, 2021).

Page 1996 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -12 4.12 | Population and Housing
County, equivalent to the SCAG projection for the County of 1.01. Therefore, no significant impact related to jobs -housing balance is anticipated to occur with implementation of the Project.

Table 4.12-7: Projected Jobs -Housing Balance (with Project) Year Employment Households Jobs-Housing
Ratio
City of Beaumont
2021 1 9,385 17,232 1.12
SCAG 2045 Projection 15,900 25,100 0.63
Net increase due to Project 4,010 Not Applicable Not Applicable 1 SCAG 2045 Projection + Project 19,910 25,100 0.79
County of Riverside
2021 1,035,300 864,076 1.19
SCAG 2045 Projection 1,103,000 1,086,000 1.01
Net increase due to the Project 4,010 Not Applicable Not Applicable SCAG 2045 Projection + Project 1,107,010 1,086,000 1.02 Source: Employment based on State of California Employment Development Department (EDD)’s Riverside County Profile. Last updated July 2021. Retrieved from:
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSResults.asp?selectedarea=Riverside+County&selectedindex=3 3&state=true&geogArea=0604000065&countyName=
(1)SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal, Demographics and Growth Forecast Technical Report. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file - attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed August 2021). (2) SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal, Environmental Justice. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file - attachments/0903fconnectsocal_environmental-justice.pdf?1606001617 (accessed August 2021). 1 Jobs-housing ratios are identified for regions and subregions and are not applicable to an area as small as the Summit Station Specific Plan Conclusion
As noted above, the Project would generate approximately 4,010 new employment opportunities in the City of Beaumont. All growth is planned according to the Beaumont GP 2040 and SCAG Connect SoCal Plan and would improve the City’s job-housing imbalance. The Project’s employment is anticipat ed to be served by the regional and local workforce and would not require additional housing. A less than significant impact is expected to occur.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are necessary.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Impact 4.12-2 Would the Project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction and Operations
The Project site is comprised of cement pads, several structures, and vacant property. The approved 2007 Sunny-Cal Specific Plan included approximately 158.65 acres of Low Density Residential. This Project, which would amend the previously approved specific plan includes 1) a General Plan Amendment to change the current “Single Family Residential” land use to “Industrial, General Commercial, and

Page 1997 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -13 4.12 | Population and Housing
Open Space” land use, consistent with the proposed e -commerce center, commercial area, and open space uses ; and 2) approval of a Specific Plan that establishes the zoning, land use designations, development standards, and design guidelines for the entire Project area . While the Sunny-Cal Specific Plan project was approved, no development occurred since the Project approval. There are no homes in the Project site, as such, no displacement of homes would occur. A less than significant impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are necessary.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

4.12.6 Cumulative Impacts
The County of Riverside is considered the area for cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts are analyzed using demographic projections in SCAG’s C onnect SoCal Growth Forecast. As identified above, the Project would not result in cumulative citywide or countywide population and housing impacts, since the Project would be adequately served by the regional and local workforce and improve SCAG’s job-housing balance for the region, without necessitating additional housing. Related Projects would undergo project -specific discretionary review by the City, and development would be required to be consistent with applicable state and local regulatory framework.

Upon approval, the Project would improve the jobs -housing balance in the C ity and County which is notably considered a housing -rich area. Therefore, the Project combined with related projects would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts to population and housing as no substantial new unplanned growth would occur.

4.12.7 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable population and housing impacts have been identified.

4.12.8 References
City of Beaumont. (2021). 6th Cycle Housing Element . Retrieved from:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/37079/Draft-Housing -Element---2021- 2029---6th-Cycle. (accessed August 17, 2021).

City of Beaumont. (2019). Beaumont General Plan 2040 Program DEIR – Section 5.13 Population and Housing: page 5.13-13. Retrieved at:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36627/DEIR -090720 (accessed August 2021).

DOF. (2021). E-4 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011 -2020 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e -4/2010-20/ (accessed August 2021).

Page 1998 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.12 -14 4.12 | Population and Housing
DOF. (2021). E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2021 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e -5/ (accessed August 2021).

EDD. (2021). Riverside County Profile. Retrieved from:
https://www.labormarket info.edd.ca.gov/cgi/databrowsing/localAreaProfileQSResults.asp?sele ctedarea=Riverside+County&selectedindex=33&state=true&geogArea=0604000065&countyNa me= (accessed August 2021).

SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal – Demographics and Growth Forecast. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics -and- growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 (accessed August 2021).

SCAG. (2020). Connect SoCal - Environmental Justice. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_environmental-justice.pdf?1606001617 (accessed August 2021).

Page 1999 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -1 4.13 | Public Services

4.13 PUBLIC SERVICES

4.13.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the potential impacts from the Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan (Project) on public services within the City of Beaumont (City) by identifying anticipated increased demand and evaluating its relationship to existing and planned public services facilities and availability. Per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the emphasis in this Dr aft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) is on impacts to public services by the Project that could require construction or expansion of existing public service facilities resulting in a physical impact on the environment. For purposes of this Draft EIR , public services consist of fire and police protection, schools, parks, and library services. Information provided in this section was primarily obtained from the City of Beaumont General Plan (Beaumont GP) and the City of Beaumont Municipal Code (Beaumont MC).

This section describes the environmental and regulatory setting for public services , as it pertains to implementation of the Project. Information given in this section is based on resource information obtained from available public resources including, but not limited to, the Beaumont GP. The analyses for each Project component are considered with respect to the applicable plan, policy, or regulation of the agency with jurisdiction over that Project component.

In accordance with Appendix G of CEQA, t he emphasis in this Draft EIR is on impacts to recreation by the Project that could require construction or expansion of existing recreational facilities resulting in a physical impact on the environment. CEQA Appendix G questions related to recreation and fire services are separately addressed in this Draft EIR in Section 4.14, Recreation and Section 4.18, Wildfire.

4.13.2 Environmental Setting
City of Beaumont Public Services
Fire Protection
The City contracts with the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD), in conjunction with the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), for City-wide fire protection, emergency medical services, dispatch, and fire prevention and safe ty education. CAL FIRE is dedicated to the fire protection and stewardship of over 31 million acres of California's privately owned wildlands. Additionally, the U.S. Forest Service is responsible for nearby federal lands in national forests and grasslands. All Riverside County stations are dispatched by the same County Fire 9 -1-1 Center and are part of the “Integrated Fire Protection System,” under contract with the State of California. The RCFD and CAL FIRE staff serve not only the City, but also provide s hared resources with the cities of Calimesa and Banning. In addition to fire services provided by RCFD/CAL FIRE, the City employs a Fire Safety Specialist who oversees plan review, installation, and inspections of fire suppressant systems.1,2

1 City of Beaumont. 2020. Beaumont General Plan. https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont-GPU_Final-rev- 22521 (accessed August 2021).
2 City of Beaumont. 2016. Existing Conditions Report. https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36624/City -of-Beaumont- Existing-Conditions-Final (accessed August 2021).

Page 2000 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -2 4.13 | Public Services
The fire station closest to the Project area is RCFD Station 22, the Cherry Valley Station, located at 10055 Avenida Miravilla, Cherry Valley, CA 92223, approximately 2.8 roadway miles northeast of the Project area.3
The City, through its contract with the RCFD and CAL FIRE also has the use of seven shared engines in San Jacinto, five shared engines in Desert Hot Springs, and nine shared engines in Moreno Valley for a total of 21 shared engines.4
The Project would be required to comply with RCFD requireme nts for emergency access, fire -flow, fire protection standards, fire lanes, and other site design/building standards. Additionally, all future development within the Specific Plan area would be subject to compliance with the existing regulations specified in the California Fire Code (CFC), California Building Code (CBC), International Fire Code, Beaumont MC and specific fire and life safety requirements in effect that the time of building fire plan check.

Law Enforcement
The City operates its own police department. The Beaumont Police Department (BPD) is located across the street from Beaumont City Hall at 660 Orange Avenue, 4.4 roadway miles southeast of the Project site. BPD utilizes Community-Oriented Policing and Problem Solving (COPPS). COPPS is a polic ing philosophy that promotes and supports organizational strategies to address the causes and reduce the fear of crime and social disorder through problem-solving tactics and community police partnerships.

Community policing brings police and citizens together to prevent crime and solve neighborhood problems. With community policing, the emphasis is on stopping crime before it happens, not r esponding to calls for service after the crime occurs. Community policing gives citizens more control over the quality of life in their community.

The BPD currently operates with a total of 38 sworn staff members and includes patrol officers, detectives and a sergeant; task force members; motor officers; community policing team member; multiple enforcement team members; and one K-9 unit.5 Per the Beaumont GP, the BPD has a long -standing and successful tradition of maintaining positive relationships with c ommunity members through effective community partnerships, and a variety of programs such as a Community -Oriented Policing and Problem Solving (COPPS) team. Furthermore, the City has a three -minute response time objective. As of 2017, the BPD met this goal with average response times of three minutes for in-progress calls.

3 RCFD. ND. Station Locator. https://www.rvcfire.org/stationsAndFunctions/FireStations/Pages/Fire -Station-Map.aspx (accessed August 2021). 4 City of Beaumont. 2016. Existing Conditions Report. https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36624/City -of-Beaumont- Existing-Conditions-Final (accessed August 2021).
5 City of Beaumont. 2020. Beaumont General Plan. https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont-GPU_Final-rev- 22521 (accessed August 2021).

Page 2001 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -3 4.13 | Public Services
Schools
The Project area is within the Beaumont Unified School District (BUSD). The BUSD consists of seven elementary schools, two middle schools, and two high schools. 201 9-2020 enrollment for BUSD was 14,739 students.6 The following schools are within three linear miles from the Project area:
• Tournament Hills Elementary School at 36611 Champions Dr ive, Beaumont, CA 92223 • Three Rings Ranch Elementary School at 1040 Calumet Ave nue, Beaumont, CA 92223 • Glen View High School at 939 E 10th St reet, Beaumont, CA 92223 • Mountain View Middle School at 200 Cougar Way, Beaumont, CA 92223 • Brookside Elementary School at 39139 Cherry Valley Boulevard, Beaumont, CA 92223 • Beaumont High School at 39139 Cherry Valley Boulevard, Beaumont, CA 92223 Parks
Refer to Section 4.14, Recreation , for discussion on parks and recreation throughout the City.

Other Public Facilities
The Beaumont Library District currently provides library services for the City. The Beaumont Library District is a special "library services" district and is independent of both City and County governments. The District currently serves over 80,000 residents of the City, unincorporated Cherry Valley, and unincorporated areas of Riverside Count y. The Beaumont Library main branch is located at 125 E. 8th Street and is approximately 11,700 square feet. Typical hours of operation are:
• 10am – 6pm Monday, Friday, and Saturday
• 10am – 8pm Tuesday and Thursday
• 1pm – 6pm Sunday
• Closed Wednesday

4.13.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA)
In March 2003, FEMA became part of the U .S. Department of Homeland Security. FEMA's continuing mission is to lead the effort to prepare the nation for all hazards and effectively manage federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident. FEMA also initiates proactive mitigation a ctivities, trains first responders, and manages the National Flood Insurance Program and the U.S. Fire Administration.

6 Ed Data. 2021. Beaumont Unified School District, District Summary. http://www.ed-data.org/district/Riverside/Beaumont-Unified . (Accessed August 2021).

Page 2002 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -4 4.13 | Public Services
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
This Act (42 United States Code [USC] § 5121) was signed into law to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief Act of 1988 (42 USC § 5121-5207). Among other things, this legislation reinforces the importance of pre-disaster infrastructure mitigation planning to reduce disaster losses nationwide and is aimed primarily at the control and streamlining of the administration of federal disaster relief and programs to promote mitigation activities.

Some of the major provisions of this Act include:
i) Funding pre-disaster mitigation activities;
ii) Developing experimental multi-hazard maps to better understand risk; iii) Establishing state and local government infrastructure mitigation planning requirements; iv) Defining how states can assume more responsibility in managing the hazard mitigation grant program; and
v) Adjusting ways in which management costs for projects are funded.

The mitigation planning provisions outlined in § 322 of this Act establish performance -based standards for mitigation plans and require states to have a public assistance program (Advance Infrastructure Mitigation [AIM]) to develop county government plans. The consequence for counties that fail to develop an infrastructure mitigation plan is the chance of a reduced federal share of damage assistance from 75 percent to 25 percent if the damaged facility has been damaged on more than one occasion in the preceding 10-year period by the same type of event.

Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 (42 USC § 12181) prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in public accommodation and State and local government ser vices. Under the ADA, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board issues guidelines to ensure that facilities, public sidewalks, and street crossings are accessible to individuals with disabilities. Public play areas, meeting rooms, park restrooms, and other buildings and park structures must comply with ADA requirements.

State
California Fire Plan
The California Fire Plan is the state’s road map for reducing the risk of wildfire through planning and prevention to reduce firefighting cost s and property losses, increase firefighter safety, and to contribute to ecosystem health. The California Fire Plan is a cooperative effort between the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and CAL FIRE.
2019 California Fire Code
California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24, Part 9 (2019 C alifornia Fire C ode [CFC]) contains regulations relating to construction and maintenance of buildings, the use of premises, and the management of

Page 2003 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -5 4.13 | Public Services
wildland-urban interface areas, among other issue s. The CFC is updated every three years by the California Building Standards Commission and was last updated in 201 9 (adopted December 3, 2019). The CFC sets forth regulations regarding building standards, fire protection and notification systems, fire pro tection devices such as fire extinguishers and smoke alarms, high-rise building standards, and fire suppression training. It contains regulations relating to construction, maintenance, and use of buildings. Topics addressed in the CFC also include fire department access, fire hydrants, automatic sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, fire and explosion hazards safety, hazardous materials storage and use, provisions intended to protect and assist fire responders, industrial processes, and many other general and specialized fire-safety requirements for new and existing buildings and the surrounding premises.

Development under the Project would be subject to applicable regulations of the CFC .

Title 5, California Code of Regulations
This State legislation governs the requirements school facility construction must meet (CCR 5).

Title 8, California Code of Regulations §§ 1270 and 6773 In accordance with CCR, Title 8 § 1270 “Fire Prevention” and § 6773 “Fire Protection and Fire Equipment,” the California Occupationa l Safety and Health Administration (Cal-OSHA) has established minimum standards for fire suppression and emergency medical services. The standards include, but are not limited to, guidelines on the handling of highly combustible materials, fire hose sizing requirements, restrictions on the use of compressed air, access roads, and the testing, maintenance, and use of all firefighting and emergency medical equipment.
2019 California Building Standards Code
California building standards are published in the CCR, Title 24, also known as the California Building Standards Code (CBSC). The CBSC, which applies to all applications for building permits, consists of 12 parts that contain administrative regulations for the California Building Standards Commission and for all State agencies that implement or enforce building standards. Local agencies must ensure the development complies with the guidelines contained in the CBSC. Cities and counties have the ability to adopt additional building standards beyond the CBSC including the CBSC Part 2, named the CBC which is based upon the 2018 International Building Code, and Part 11, named the California Green Building Standards Code, also called the CalGreen Code. The City o f Beaumont adopted Title 24, Parts 1-12.

California Health and Safety Code
State fire regulations are set forth in California Health and Safety Code §§ 13000 et seq., and include provisions concerning building standards, fire protection and notification sy stems, fire protection devices, and fire suppression training, as also set forth in the 2019 CBSC and related updated codes.

Mutual Aid Agreements (MAA)
The Emergency Management Mutual Aid (EMMA) system is a collaborative effort between city and county emergency managers in the Office of Emergency Services (OES) in the coastal, southern, and inland regions of the state. EMMA provides service in the emergency response and recovery efforts at the Southern Regional Emergency Operations Center, local Emergency Operations Centers, the Disaster Field

Page 2004 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -6 4.13 | Public Services
Office, and community service centers. The purpose of EMMA is to support disaster operations in affected jurisdictions by providing professional emergency management personnel. In accordance with the MAA, local and state emergency managers have responded in support of each other under a variety of plans and procedures.

California Governor’s Office of Emergency Management Agency (Cal -EMA) In 2009, the State of California passed legislation creating the Cal -EMA and authorizing it to prepare a Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) program (Title 19 CCR §§ 2400 et seq.), which sets forth measures by which a jurisdiction should handle emergency disasters. Non -compliance with SEMS could result in the state withholding disaster relief from the non-complying jurisdiction in the event of an emergency disaster.

Cal-EMA serves as the lead state agency for emergency management in the state. Cal -EMA coordinates the state response to major emergencies in support of local government. The primary responsibility for emergency management resides with local government. Local jurisdictions first use their own resources and, as these are exhausted, obtain more from neighboring cities and special districts, the county in which they are located, and other counties throughout the state through the statewide mutual aid system. In California, the SEMS provides the mechanism by which local government requests assistance. Cal -EMA serves as the lead agency for mobilizing the state’s resource s and obtaining federal resources; it also maintains oversight of the state’s mutual aid system.

California Penal Code
All law enforcement agencies within the State of California are organized and operated in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Penal Code. This code sets forth the authority, rules of conduct, and training for peace officers. Under state law, all sworn municipal and county officers are state peace officers. There are no relevant s tate regulations pertaining to police protection.

California Education Code §§ 17620
California Education Code §§ 17620, et seq. allows school district governing boards to collect impact fees from developers of new commercial and residential construction.

California State Assembly Bill (AB) 2926
The State of California has traditionally been responsible for the funding of local public schools. To assist in providing facilities to serve students generated by new development projects, the State passed AB 2926 in 1986. This bill allowed school dis tricts to collect impact fees from developers of new residential and commercial building space. Development impact fees were also referenced in the Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998, which required school districts to contribute a matching shar e of project costs for construction, modernization, or reconstruction.

California Government Code § 65995 and Education Code
California Government Code, § 65995 is found in Government Code, Title 7, Chapter 4.9. Government Code § 65995 authorizes school districts to collect impact fees from developers of new residential and

Page 2005 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -7 4.13 | Public Services
commercial building space. Senate Bill (SB ) 50 amended Government Code § 65995 in 1998. Under the provisions of SB 50, schools can collect fees to offset costs associated with increasing school capacity as a result of development.

The provisions of SB 50 prohibit local agencies from denying either legislative or adjudicative land use approvals on the basis that school facilities are inadequate, and reinstate the school facility fee cap fo r legislative actions (e.g., General Plan amendments, specific plan adoption, zoning plan amendments) as was allowed under the Mira, Hart, and Murrieta court cases. The provisions of Chapter 4.9 are the exclusive means of considering as well as mitigating school impacts caused by new development.

Accordingly, these provisions limit the scope of impact review in an EIR, the mitigation that can be imposed, and the findings a lead agency must make in justifying its approval of a project (Government Code §§ 65995-65996). According to Government Code § 65996, the provisions of Chapter 4.9, including development fees authorized by SB 50, are deemed to be “full and complete school facilities mitigation….” These provisions remain in place as long as subsequent State bonds are approved and available.

Local
Local Regulations
The City publishes a Development Related Fee Schedule 7 for public services, including:
• Public Facilities Fee
• Fire Protection Impact Fee
• Police Facilities Impact Fee
City of Beaumont Municipal Code
Chapter 15.20 – Fire Code. 8 This MC adopted the 2019 California Fire Code as Amended as well as the County of Riverside Ordinance No. 787.

City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan
The Beaumont 2040 General Plan9 goals and policies that reduce potential impacts related to public services include:

Land Use and Design Element
Goal 3.8: A City that encourages a healthy lifestyle for people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

7 City of Beaumont, Development Related Fee Schedule. (2021). Retrieved from:
https://beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2313/Development-Fee-Schedule-Planning-Public-Works-Building--Fire?bidId= . (accessed on June 7, 2021).
8 City of Beaumont Municipal Code. (2021). Chapter 15.20 Fire Code. Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/beaumont/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT15BUCO_CH15.20FICO . (accessed on June 7, 2021). 9 City of Beaumont General Plan. (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont-GPU_Final- rev-22521. (accessed on June 7,2021).

Page 2006 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -8 4.13 | Public Services
Policy 3.8.4 Prioritize health-promoting uses in new development, including neighborhood markets, grocery stores, medical centers, pharmacies, parks, gyms, and community gardens.

Goal 3.9: A City with neighborhoods and districts with enhanced safety and welfare of all residents and employees.

Policy 3.9.1 Use Crime Prevention through Environmental Design strategies (CPTED) in new and existing development to improve public safety, including the following:
▪ Active public space
▪ Building design to promote “eyes on the street”
▪ Clear delineation between private and public space
▪ Natural access control between public and private space ▪ Maintenance of public places
▪ Removal or repair of vandalism or broken property
Policy 3.9.2 Promote Business and Neighborhood Watch programs, in addition to collab orations between residents and law enforcement, to help maintain a clean and safe environment.

Policy 3.9.4 Improve lighting and nighttime security across all City neighborhoods to prevent crime and increase safety.

Economic Development Element
Goal 5.8: A financially stable community.

Policy 5.8.1 Support development that is fiscally sustainable and provides the City with a diverse tax base to sustain municipal services.

Policy 5.8.2 Promote development and growth that contributes to a balanced budget and the efficient distribution of public services.

Policy 5.8.3 Require new development to pay its fair share of required improvements, including maintenance costs, to public facilities and services through impact fees and other financial and regulatory mechanisms such as benefit assessment districts (BADs) or community facilities districts (CFDs).

Policy 5.8.4 Require fiscal impact analysis for development proposals requiring a General Plan Amendment or annexation to assess citywide impacts and identify any burden such project might create for the City.

Policy 5.8.5 Maintain fees and charges appropriate for offsetting the cost of providing services.

Balance the costs of providing services with the needs of the community.

Page 2007 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -9 4.13 | Public Services
Community Facilities and Infrastructure Element
Goal 7.1: City-wide infrastructure to support existing development and future growth Policy 7.1.3 Require that new and existing development pay its fair share of infrastructure and public service costs.

4.13.4 Impact Thresholds and Significance Criteria
State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions concerning public s ervices. The questions presented in the Environmental Checklist Form have been utilized as significance criteria in this section. Accordingly, the Project would have a significant environmental impact if one or more of the following occurs:
• Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmenta l facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
▪ Fire protection?
▪ Police protection?
▪ Schools? (refer to Section 7, Effects Found Not to Be Significant ); ▪ Parks? (refer to Section 7, Effects Found Not to Be Significant ); ▪ Other public facilities - Libraries? (refer to Section 7, Effects Fo und Not to Be Significant).

Methodology and Assumptions
The Project’s public services were examined in the context of existing facilities and service times and projected population and development for the City and County and considers changes in both need for additional facilities and the changes in services. Information on public services for the City is available from the City’s website, BPD and RCFD.

4.13.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 4.13-1 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?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The development of the Project site includes three separate e-commerce buildings totaling approximately

2.6 million square feet and up to 150,000 square feet of commercial uses . The increase in development and workers within the Project site could result in additional calls for fire department services and increase

Page 2008 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -10 4.13 | Public Services
the need for additional fire department staffing and equipment. The area that would be occupied by the Project is currently vacant. Implementation of the Project and construction of the area for e-commerce and commercial uses would potentially create an increased need for fir e protection.

The Project buildings would be constructed from non-flammable concrete and would be equipped with automatic ceiling -mounted fire sprinkler systems. All other fire -related safety features would be in accordance with the applicable provisions of the adopted CFC and the City’s MC , ordinances, and standard conditions regarding fire prevention and suppression measures related to water improvement plans, fire hydrants, fire access, and water availability. Additionally, prior to the approval of the P roject, the City’s Building Department and RCFD would review building plans in order to ensure that all applicable fire safety features are incorporated as part of the Project. Prior to the approval of occupancy permits for the new buildings, it would be r equired that the RCFD would inspect all new structures in order to ensure that all fire safety features have been implemented and installed correctly. Furthermore, Fire Protection Impact Fees would also be collected in order to build and supply necessary i nfrastructure for fire protection services, as necessary.

As stated above, the fire station closest to the Project area is RCFD Station 22, the Cherry Valley Station, located in the County approximately 2.8 roadway miles northeast of the Project area .

RCFD has reviewed the Project design to ensure conformance to RCFD requirements and would thereby reduce demands on fire protection services. Additionally, payment of the Fire Protection impact fees, property taxes, and other revenues generated by development within the Project area would be available to the City to offset any increased costs for fire protection services with little or no net effect on the City’s budget.

Implementation of the Project would be required to be consistent with the City’s General Plan for e- commerce, commercial, and open s pace uses as well as permitted floor area ratios (FAR). Lastly, Project development would be subject t o compliance with RCFD requirements for emergency ac cess, fire-flow, fire protection standards, fire lanes, and other site design/building standards. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Police Protection?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Project development would be subject to BPD review. BPD has previously reviewed the Project for consistency with crime prevention design and BPD requirements. BPD review would act to ensure that development would conform to BPD emergency access and site/facility security requirements and

Page 2009 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -11 4.13 | Public Services
recommendations, and thereby reduce demands on law enforcement services. Additionally, the Project applicant would pay the required Police Facilities Impact fees, property taxes, and other revenues generated by development and would be available to the City to offset any inc reased costs for law enforcement services with little or no net effect on the City’s budget.

Upon development , BPD located at 660 Orange Avenue, approximately 4.4 roadway miles southeast, would provide law enforcement services to the Project site. The City has a target ratio of 1.0 to 1.2 officers per 1,000 residents, which is reviewed annually.10 Currently, the ratio is approximately 0.93 officers per 1,000 residents. Further, the City response times in the City is 2.9 minutes for in progress calls and

5.9 minutes for past calls.11 The Project consists of e-commerce, commercial, and open space uses. The Project would not directly increase population and the officer to population ratio would remain the same.

Per BPD Project comments at various Project Development Review Committee meetings , the Project does not include or require construction of any new or physically altered police protection facilities. Prior to commencement of construction activities, Project plans would be reviewed by applicable local agen cies to ensure compliance with the City’s MC as well as all applicable regulations to ensure adequate site signage, lighting and other crime safety preventative measures are implemented. Construction of the Project would not result in adverse physical impa cts associated with the provision of or need for new or physically altered police protection facilities. The Project would not substantially affect service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives such that new facilities are required. The P roject also would include design elements such as lighting of streets, walkways, and bikeways; visibility of doors and windows from the street; and fencing of the property. These measures would help reduce demands for law enforcement services and impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

4.13.6 Cumulative Impacts
The Project is not anticipated to substantially increase the need for public services in the City. The Project would not result in an overall net increase in City population. Anticipated increase demands for public services within the City was accounted for in the GP and analyzed in the GP EIR, which accounts for cumulative growth in the City. In addition, related to all public services, the Project would pay the required development fees that would be appropriately allocated for police, fire, schools, park s, and other public facilities. The Project would also generate additional revenue for the City which would provide General Fund revenues to offset the Project’s contribution toward additional public service demand.

10 City of Beaumont. (2017). Municipal Service Review. https://lafco.org/wp- content/uploads/documents/archives/City%20of%20Beaumont%20MSR%20-%20Final%20July%2027%202017.pdf. (Accessed August 2021). 11 Ibid.

Page 2010 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.13 -12 4.13 | Public Services
Similar to the Project, other cumulative projects would be required to demonstrate their level of impact on public services including paying the appropriate development fees; therefore, the past, present, and future projects would not result in a cumulative impact related to the provis ion of public services.

4.13.7 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable impacts have been identified.

4.13.8 References
BUSD. (ND). Developer Fees. https://www.beaumontusd.us/apps/pag es/Developer_Fees.

City of Beaumont. (2016). Existing Conditions Report .
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36624/City-of-Beaumont -Existing - Conditions -Final.

City of Beaumont. (October 2020). City of Beaumont General Plan. Beaumont, CA: City of Beaumont. https://www.beaumontca.gov/Document Center/View/36923/Beaumont -GPU_Final-rev-22521.

City of Beaumont. (June 2019). City of Beaumont Code of Ordinances. Beaumont, CA: City of Beaumont. https://library.municode.com/ca/beaumont .

City of Beaumont. (July 2020). City of Beaumont Development Related Fee Schedule. http://beaumontpd.org/DocumentCenter/View/2313/Development-Fee-Schedule-Planning- Public-Works -Building--Fire?bidId=.

Page 2011 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -1 4.14 | Recreation

4.14 RECREATION

4.14.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the potential impacts from the Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan (Project) to recreation within the City of Beaumont (City) by identifying anticipated demand and evaluating its relationship to existing and planned recreational facilities and availability.

In accordance with Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines , the emphasis in this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) is on impacts to recreation by the Project that could require construction or expansion of existing recreational facilities resulting in a physical impact on the environment.

4.14.2 Environmental Setting
Parks
The City operates the following recreation facilities:

City of Beaumont’s Parks and Recreation Department

1. Noble Creek Community Center . Approximately six acres, with two half-basketball courts, and a tot lot. Located at Oak Valley Parkway and Oak View Drive.

2. Stewart Park . Approximately 15 acres with community swimming pool, pavilion, and restrooms.

Located about two miles to the northeast between 8 th and 11th Streets and Orange and Maple Avenues.

3. Three Rings Ranch Community Park . Approximately seven acres with half-basketball court, baseball field, tot lot, and playground. Located about two miles northeast at Claiborne Avenue East and Brookside Lane.

4. Rangel Park . Approximately four acres with baseball field, full basketball court, restrooms, tot lot, and a playground. Located about two miles east at 4 th and B Streets.

5. Beaumont Sports Park . Approximately 25 acres with adult and youth soccer fields, a little league baseball field, youth flag football fields, and restrooms. Located approximately three miles northeast at the southeast comer of Brookside and Beaumont Avenues.

6. Other Community Parks . Includes Veterans, Seneca Springs, Trevino, Mt. View, Wildflower, Palmer, Stetson, Shadow Hill, and Sunny Hills.

Page 2012 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -2 4.14 | Recreation
Beaumont Cherry-Valley Recreation and Park District1
The Beaumont Cherry-Valley Recreation and Park District currently provides park and recreation services for the City. The District provides services to most of the City, part of Calimesa, and surrounding unincorporated areas. The District operates the following facilities:

1. Noble Creek Community Center and Franco Garden . Approximately 60 acres located at 390 Oak Valley Parkway, Beaumont.

2. The Woman’s Club . Approximately 0.5 acres and located at 306 East 6 th Street, Beaumont.

3. Cherry Valley Grange Community Cent er. Approximately one acre and located at 10478 Beaumont Avenue, Cherry Valley.

In addition to operating these facilities, the District manages a number of baseball and softball fields, soccer fields, a horse arena, a raceway, picnic areas and horseshoes pits, tennis courts, and a hockey arena. Further, the District provides numerous recreational programs and services including senior programs, childcare programs, field trips, summer camp, craft shows, theatre groups, karate, and yoga.

4.14.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
There are no federal regulations applicable to recreation and parks.

State
Quimby Act (California Government Code § 66477)
The Quimby Act was established by the California legislature in 1965 to develop new or rehabilitate existing neighborhood or community park or recreation facilities. This legislation was enacted in response to the need to provide parks and recreation facilities for Calif ornia’s growing communities. The Quimby Act gives the legislative body of a city or county the authority, by ordinance, to require the dedication of land or payment of in-lieu fees, or a combination of both, for park and recreational purposes as a condition of approval of a tract map or parcel map. Cities can require land or in-lieu fees for a minimum of three acres per 1,000 residents, with the possibility of increasing the requirement to a maximum of five acres per 1,000 residents if the city already provides more than three acres per 1,000 residents. Assembly Bill (AB) 1191, which was approved by the Governor of California on September 8, 2015, amended the definition of park and recreation purposes to include land and facilities for the activity of “recreational community gardening,” which activity consists of the cultivation by persons other than, or in addition to, the owner of the land, of plant material not for sale (AB 1911.) The Quimby Act is implemented through City Ordinance and is discussed furthe r below.

Landscaping and Lighting Act
The Landscaping and Lighting Act (California Streets and Highways Code §§ 22500 et seq.) enables cities, counties, and special districts to acquire land for parks, recreation, and open space. A local government

1 Beaumont Cherry -Valley Recreation and Park District. (2021). Retrieved from: https://bcvparks.specialdistrict.org/facilities . (accessed on June 8,2021).

Page 2013 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -3 4.14 | Recreation
may als o use the assessments to pay for improvements and maintenance to these areas. In addition to local government agencies (i.e., counties and cities), park and recreation facilities may be provided by other public agencies, such as community service districts , park, and recreation districts, etc. If so empowered, such an agency may acquire, develop, and operate recreational facilities for the public.

State of California Open Space Standards
State planning law provides a structure for the preservation of open space by requiring every city and county in the state to prepare, adopt, and submit to the Secretary of the Resources Agency a “local open-space plan for the comprehensive and long -range preservation and conservation of open-space land within its jurisdiction” (California Government Code § 65560). The following open space categories are identified for preservation:
• Open space for public health and safety, including, but not limited to, areas that require special management or regulation due to hazardous or special conditions. • Open space for the preservation of natural resources, including, but not limited to, natural vegetation, fish and wildlife, and water resources.
• Open space for resource management and production, including, but not limited to, agricultural and mineral resources, forests, rangeland, and areas required for the recharge of groundwater basins.
• Open space for outdoor recreation, including, but not limited to, parks, and recreational facilities, areas that serve as links between major recreation and open space reservations (such as trails, easements, and scenic roadways), and areas of outstanding scenic and cultural value. • Open space for the protection of Native American sites, including, but not limited to, places, features, and objects of historical, cultural, or sacred significance such as Native American sanctified cemeteries, places of worship, religious or ceremonial sites, or sacred shrines located on public property (further defined in California Public Resources Cod e (PRC) §§ 5097.9 and 5097.993)).

Local
City of Beaumont Municipal Code
The following chapters of the Beaumont Municipal Code (MC) address issues regarding recreation and park facilities.

Title 3 – Revenue and Finance, Chapter 3.34 – Regional Park, Multipu rpose Trail and Open Space Facility Fee2
In September 2005, the Beaumont City Council had been advised that the cumulative impact of all new development permitted under the (2005) General Plan (GP) would exceed the capacity of the City’s two existing regional parks (Noble Cree Park and the City’s Sports Park), which were already operating at capacity. Therefore, in order to meet the increased demand, it was determined that facilities at the two

2 City of Beaumont Municipal Code. (2021). Title 3, Revenue and Finance. Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/beaumont/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT3REFI . (accessed on June 8, 2021).

Page 2014 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -4 4.14 | Recreation
parks must be upgraded and expanded, and two new regional parks are needed on the east and south sides of the City, connected to existing and future open space by a system of multipurpose trails. (B eaumont MC § 3.34.010.) In order to meet the need for additional park, multipurpose trails, and open space, the City Council adopted the "City of Beaumont Regional Park, Multipurpose Trail and Open Space Facility Fee," which is levied and collected at issuance of a building permit for any new residential unit or the conversion of an existing unit to more than one residential unit. The exceptions to payment of this fee are a development or other agreement, low -income residential housing, and the rehabilitation and/or reconstruction of any legal residential dwelling unit and/or the replacement of an existing dwell ing unit. (B eaumont MC §§ 3.34.020, 3.34.030, and 3.34.080.)
City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan
The Beaumont 2040 General Plan3 goals and policies that reduce potential impacts to park and recreation include:

Community Design Element
Goal 3.6: A City with active and comfortable places that encourage social interaction and community gathering.

Policy 3.6.3 Require project developers to establish mechanisms, such as a Community Facilities District, to adequately maintain new parks, recreational facilities, and infrastructure.

Goal 3.8: A City that encourages a healthy lifestyle for people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

Policy 3.8.4 Prioritize health-promoting uses in new development, including neighborhood markets, grocery stores, medical centers, pharmacies, parks, gyms, and community gardens.

Goal 3.10: A City designed to improve the quality of the built and natural environments to reduce disparate health and environmental impacts.

Policy 3.10.5 Encourage smoke-free and Vape-free workplaces, multi-family housing, parks, and other outdoor gathering places to reduce exposure to second-hand smoke.

Economic Development Element
Goal 5.8: A financially stable community.

3 City of Beaumont General Plan. (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont-GPU_Final- rev-22521. (accessed on June 8,2021).

Page 2015 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -5 4.14 | Recreation
Equity and Environmental Justice Element
Goal 6.1: A City that improves the overall health and welfare of its residents.

Policy 6.1.9 Encourage smoke-free/vape-free workplaces, multi-family housing, parks, and other outdoor gathering places to reduce exposure to second-ha nd smoke.

Goal 6.5: A City that builds neighborhoods that enhance the safety and welfare of all people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

Policy 6.5.8 Encourage health-promoting uses in new development, including neighborhood markets, grocery stores, pharmacies, parks, gyms, and community gardens.

4.14.4 Impact Thresholds and Significance Criteria
State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions concerning recreation. The questions presented in the Environmental Checklist Form have been utilized as significance criteria in this section. Accordingly, the Project would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
• Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and region al parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
• Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?

4.14.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 4.14-1 Would the Project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Level of Significance: No Impact
The Project does not propose any on-site or off-site park or recreational facilities , nor does it propose any residential developments or any other uses that would contribute population growth requiring the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities . The Project proposes e commerce and commercial uses, as well as 30.6 acres of open space within Planning Area 3 of the Specific Plan. Therefore, no impacts to existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities are anticipated.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance
No impact.

Page 2016 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.14 -6 4.14 | Recreation
Impact 4.14-2 Does the Project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Level of Significance: No Impact
As noted above, the Project does not include recreational facilities and would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities as the Project is composed of e -commerce, office, and future hotel and general retail uses. The Project does not involve uses that would induce population growth requiring the use of recreational facilities. No impact would occur.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation is necessary.

Level of Significance
No impact.

4.14.6 Cumulative Impacts
The Project would not result in an overall net increase in City population that exceeds either City and/or regional growth plans . Anticipated increased demands for recreation within the City was accounted for in the City’s GP and analyzed in the City’s GP EIR, which accounts for cumulative growth in the City. In addition, the Project would pay the required development fees that would be appropriately allocated for parks and other recreational facilities.

Similar to the Project, other cumulative projects would be required to demonstrate their level of impact on recreational facilities including paying the appropriate development fees; therefore, the past, present, and future projects would not result in a cumulative impact related to the provision of recreation.

4.14.7 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable impacts have been identified.

4.14.8 References
Beaumont Cherry-Valley Recreation and Park District. (2021). Retrieved from:
https://bcvparks.specialdistrict.org/facilities .

City of Beaumont General Plan. (2020). Retrieved from:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont -GPU_Final-rev-22521.

City of Beaumont Municipal Code. (2021). Title 3, Revenue and Finance. Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/beaumont/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT3REFI .

City of Beaumont Municipal Code. (2021). Title 12, Chapter 12.24, Parks -Hours. Retrieved from:
https://library.municode.com/ca/beaumont/codes/code_of _ordinances?nodeId=TIT12STSIPUPL _CH12.24PAOU.

Page 2017 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-1 4.15 | Transportation

4.15 TRANSPORTATION

4.15.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the potential transportation impacts that may result from construction and operation of the Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Project (Project). The following discussion addresses the existing transportation conditions in the Project area, identifies applicable regulations, evaluates the Project’s consistency with applicable goals and policies, identifies and analyzes environmental impacts, and recommends measures to reduce or avoid adverse impacts anticipated from implementation of the Project. The information and analysis herein rely on the following investigations and collectively document the traffic and circulation conditions of the Project site found in Appendix K of this EIR:
• Traffic Study for Beaumont Summit Station Project in the City of Beaumont, February 2022, prepared by Kimley-Horn.
• Beaumont Summit Station Project Vehicle Mile Traveled (VMT) Analysis, February 2022, prepared by Kimley-Horn.

4.15.2 Environmental Setting
Existing Transportation System
Existing Roadway System
Regional vehicular access to the site is provided by State Route (SR-) 60 and Interstate (I-) 10. I-10 is an east-west freeway, located immediately west of the Project site. I-10 provides three travel lanes in each direction and connects directly to SR-79 (Beaumont Avenue) and SR-60. SR-60 is an east-west freeway located approximately 2.15 miles south of the Project site. SR-60 provides two travel lanes in each direction. Southeast of the Project site, SR-60 merges into I-10.

Local access to the Project vicinity is provided by the following arterial and commuter roadways:

Cherry Valley Boulevard is an east-west undivided roadway that is immediately north of the Project site and currently provides one travel lane in each direction. Cherry Valley Boulevard is shown as a Secondary Street in the Riverside County Circulation Element of the General Plan (Circulation Element). On-street parking is prohibited, and bike lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway. Cherry Valley Boulevard connects to the I-10 Freeway that is approximately one-half mile from the Project site.

Brookside Avenue is an east-west divided roadway located immediately south of the Project site and currently provides one travel lane in each direction. Brookside Avenue is shown as a Secondary Street on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway, and there are no bike lanes provided.

Oak Valley Parkway is an east-west undivided roadway that currently provides two travel lanes in each direction. Oak Valley Parkway is shown as an Urban Arterial east of Potrero Boulevard on the City of

Page 2018 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-2 4.15 | Transportation
Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited, and bike lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway.

Beaumont Avenue (SR-79) is north-south undivided roadway that currently provides one travel lane in each direction north of Oak Valley Parkway and two lanes in each direction south of Oak Valley Parkway.

Beaumont Avenue is shown as an Industrial Collector on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element.

On-street parking is prohibited, and bike lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway.

Calimesa Boulevard is a north-south undivided roadway that currently provides one travel lane in each direction. Calimesa Boulevard is shown as a Secondary Street on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited, and bike lanes are provided on the east side of the roadway.

Hannon Road is a north-south undivided roadway that provides one lane in each direction. Hannon Road is shown as a Local Street on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway, and no bike lanes are provided.

Union Street is a north-south undivided roadway that provides one lane in each direction. Union Street is shown as a Local Street on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway, and no bike lanes are provided.

Nancy Avenue is a north-south undivided roadway that provides one lane in each direction. Nancy Avenue is shown as a Local Street on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element. On-street parking is prohibited on both sides, and no bike lanes are provided.

Oak View Drive is a north-south undivided roadway that currently provides one travel lane in each direction. Oak View Drive is shown as an Industrial Collector on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element.

On-street parking is prohibited, and bike lanes are provided on both sides of the roadway.

Desert Lawn Drive is a north-south undivided roadway that currently provides one travel lane in each direction. Desert Lawn Drive is shown as an Urban Arterial on the City of Beaumont Circulation Element.

On-street parking is prohibited on both sides of the roadway, and no bike lanes are provided.

Existing Transit Service
Public transportation within the City of Beaumont is provided by PASS Transit, operated by the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) and the Sunline Transit Agency lines. The nearest bus stop to the Project site is Bus Route 3, located near the intersection of Cherry Valley Boulevard and Beaumont Avenue approximately two miles away from the Project site.

Bus Route 3 ends at the Walmart Supercenter, at Highland Springs Avenue and I-10. This shopping center is a transfer point for the PASS Banning lines, as well as the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) and the Sunline Transit Agency lines.

Page 2019 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-3 4.15 | Transportation

4.15.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Federal rules and regulations govern many facets of the City’s transportation system, including transportation planning and programming; funding; and design, construction, and operation of facilities.

The City complies with all applicable rules and regulations of the Federal Highway Administration, the Urban Mass Transit Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, and other Federal agencies. In addition, the City coordinates with Federal resource agencies where appropriate in the environmental clearance process for transportation facilities.

State
Assembly Bill 1358 – Complete Streets
The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 was signed into law on September 30, 2008. Beginning January 1, 2011, Assembly Bill (AB) 1358 required circulation elements to address the transportation system from a multi-modal perspective. The Complete Streets Act also requires circulation elements to consider the multiple users of the transportation system, including children, adults, seniors, and people with disabilities. (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p. 88)
Assembly Bill 32 – Global Warming Solutions Act
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) was signed into law in September 2006 after considerable study and expert testimony before the legislature. The law instructs the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verifying of statewide GHG emissions. The Act directed CARB to set a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission limit based on 1990 levels to be achieved by 2020. The bill set a timeline for adopting a scoping plan for achieving GHG reductions in a technologically and economically feasible manner (AB 32). In December 2008, CARB adopted a Scoping Plan to achieve the goals of AB 32 (CARB 2008, pp. ES-3 – ES-4). AB 32 was followed by Senate Bill (SB) 32 in 2016, which expanded this goal for statewide GHG emissions to be 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (SB 32).

The scoping plan has a range of GHG reduction actions, which include direct regulations, alternative compliance mechanisms, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-based mechanisms (e.g., cap-and-trade system), and an AB 32 program implementation regulation to fund the program. CARB recognizes cities as “essential partners” in reducing GHGs. As such, CARB has developed a Local Government Toolkit with guidance for GHG reduction strategies, such as improving transit, developing bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure, and increasing city fleet vehicle efficiency, among other strategies (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p. 88).

CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon the successful framework established by the Scoping Plan, while identifying new, technologically feasible, and cost-effective strategies to ensure that California meets its GHG reduction targets in a way that promotes and rewards innovation, continues to foster economic growth, and delivers improvements to the environment and public health, including in disadvantaged communities (CARB 2017, pp. 5-6). The 2017 Scoping Plan includes goals and measures that specifically

Page 2020 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-4 4.15 | Transportation
reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector. These goals and measures focus on using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the metric for determining transportation impacts o n the environment; encouraging development practices that reduce VMT; enhancing mass transit systems, shared-use mobility, and bicycle and pedestrian networks; and reducing fossil fuels for transportation use, in favor of fuels and energy technology that emits less GHG emissions (CARB 2017, pp. 76-77).

Senate Bill 375 – Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, or SB 375, provides incentives for cities and developers to bring housing and jobs closer together and to improve public transit. The goal is to reduce the number and length of automobile commuting trips, which will help to meet the statewide targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions set by AB 32 (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p 89).

SB 375 requires each Metropolitan Planning Organization to add a broader vision for growth, called a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), to its transportation plan. The SCS must lay out a plan to meet the region’s transportation, housing, economic, and environmental needs in a way that enables the area to lower greenhouse gas emissions. The SCS should integrate transportation, land-use, and housing policies to plan for achieving the emissions target for their region. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and SCS were adopted in 2016 (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p 89).

Senate Bill 743 – Amending CEQA with Respect to Evaluating Transportation Impacts On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law. A key element of this law is the potential elimination or deemphasizing of auto delay, level of service (LOS), and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts. According to the legislative intent contained in SB 743, these changes to current practice were necessary to “More appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions” (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p. 90).

As noted, SB 743 requires impacts to transportation network performance to be viewed through a filter that promotes the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and the diversification of land uses. Some alternative metrics were identified in the law, including vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or automobile trip generation rates. SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to analyze delay or LOS as part of other plans (i.e., the general plan), studies, or ongoing network monitoring, but these metrics may no longer constitute the sole basis for determining CEQA impacts once SB 743 is ratified into CEQA Guidelines (Beaumont 2040 Plan, p. 90).

In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the State CEQA Guidelines, which included SB 743 (CGOPR). Section 15064.3 of the 2019 CEQA Guidelines provide that transportation impacts of projects are, in general, best measured by evaluating the project's VMT.

Automobile delay (often called Level of Service; referred to here as LOS) will no longer be considered to be an environmental impact under CEQA. Automobile delay can, however, still be used by agencies to determine local operational impacts. The provisions of this section became mandatory July 1, 2020.

Page 2021 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-5 4.15 | Transportation
State Transportation Improvement Program
The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) is a multi-year capital improvement program for transportation projects on and off the State Highway System, funded with revenues from the Transportation Investment Fund and other funding sources. STIP programming generally occurs every two years. The programming cycle begins with the release of a proposed fund estimate in July of odd numbered years, followed by California Transportation Commission (CTC) adoption of the fund estimate in August (odd years). The fund estimate serves to identify the amount of new funds available for the programming of transportation projects. Once the fund estimate is adopted, Caltrans and the regional planning agencies prepare transportation improvement plans for submittal to the CTC by December 15th (odd years). Caltrans prepares the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) and regional agencies prepare the Regional Transportation Improvement Plans (RTIPs). Public hearings are held in January (even years) in both northern and southern California. The STIP is adopted by the CTC by April (even years) (CDOT).

Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) in December 2018. The Technical Advisory aids in the transition from LOS to VMT methodology for transportation impact analysis under CEQA. The advisory contains technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures.

California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) owns and operates the State highway system, which includes the freeways and State routes within California. In Beaumont, Caltrans maintains I-10, SR-60, and SR-79. As discussed above, VMT are now used which, although Caltrans recognizes will not apply to all projects on the State Highway System (SHS); however, they would apply to the proposed Project. Caltrans also recognizes that VMT is the most appropriate primary measure of transportation impacts for capacity increasing transportation projects on the SHS.

The Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002) provides guidance on the evaluation of traffic impacts to State highway facilities. The document outlines when a traffic impact study is needed and what should be included in the scope of the study. The Guide states the following:
“Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on State highway facilities, however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not be always feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS.” Regional Western Riverside Council of Government (WRCOG) Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF)
WRCOG’s Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) Program is a regional fee program designed to provide transportation and transit infrastructure that mitigates the impact of new growth in western Riverside County. WRCOG administers the program in partnership with its member agencies. Each member agency elects to participate in the TUMF Program through adoption of an ordinance and

Page 2022 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-6 4.15 | Transportation
membership in WRCOG. In an effort to create additional efficiencies in the TUMF Program, WRCOG pursued a revision in the TUMF process to give member agencies the option to shift responsibility of calculation and collection of TUMF from the member agency to WRCOG.

Riverside County Long Range Transportation Study
The Riverside County Long Range Transportation Study (LRTS) is meant to address the challenges of a growing population and growing industrial and warehousing base. The Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) is the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for Riverside County. RCTC is charged with coordinating transportation planning, funding, and facilitation of all modes of transportation in Riverside County. Short and long-range transportation is a key responsibility of RCTC. RCTC plans and implements transportation and transit improvements, particularly those that affect more than one jurisdiction. The agency also assists local governments with money for local streets and roads and develops plans and programs to improve commuting and goods movement. Policies adopted by RCTC also aim to ensure that all persons have equitable access to transportation.

The purpose of the LRTS is meant to strengthen transportation in the region in order to improve mobility, safety, and economic prosperity for Riverside Country residents. The LRTS dovetails with and bridges local plans and SCAG’s RTP/SCS. It supports the County’s economy and quality of life through smart planning, project development and implementation. The Study is multimodal in nature and encompasses all forms of transportation: highways, local roads, transit, rail, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities.

The four basic purposes of the LRTS are to:
• Develop strategies to address transportation challenges. • Provide a realistic vision of transportation in Riverside County in 2045. • Develop a list of high priority feasible and fundable projects. • Comprise RCTC’s input to SCAG’s RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal), which was released in 2020.

SCAG’s RTP/SCS, is a long-range regional plan covering the six counties within the SCAG region. The Riverside County LRTS focuses only on Riverside County and its cities. SCAG’s RTP/SCS is required to address transportation and related elements such as housing, aviation, air quality conformity, public health, environmental justice, and conservation lands. The LRTS focuses on transportation projects and funding.

RCTC also functions as the County Congestion Management Agency and contained within the LRTS is the County of Riverside Congestion Management Program (CMP), the purpose of which is provided immediately below.

County of Riverside Congestion Management Program
The passage of Proposition 111 in June 1990 established a process for each metropolitan county in California that has an urbanized area with a population over 50,000 (which would include the County of Riverside) to prepare a CMP. The CMP that was prepared by the RCTC in 2011 in consultation with the county and cities in Riverside County is an effort to more directly align land use, transportation, and air

Page 2023 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-7 4.15 | Transportation
quality management efforts and to promote reasonable growth management programs that effectively use statewide transportation funds while ensuring that new development pays its fair share of needed transportation improvements RCTC 2011. Additionally, the passage of Proposition 111 provided additional transportation funding through a $0.09 per gallon increase in the state gas tax.

The focus of the CMP is the development of an Enhanced Traffic Monitoring System in which real-time traffic count data can be accessed by the RCTC to evaluate the condition of the Congestion Management System, as well as meeting other monitoring requirements at the state and federal levels. Per the CMP- adopted LOS standard of E, when a Congestion Management System segment falls to LOS F, a deficiency plan is required. Preparation of a deficiency plan would be the responsibility of the local agency where the deficiency is located. Other agencies identified as contributors to the deficiency would also be required to coordinate with the development of the plan. The plan must contain mitigation measures, including transportation demand management strategies and transit alternatives, and a schedule of mitigating the deficiency. To ensure that the Congestion Management System is appropriately monitored to reduce the occurrence of CMP deficiencies, it is the responsibility of local agencies, when reviewing and approving development proposals, to consider the traffic impacts on the Congestion Management System.

Local
Title 10 – Vehicle and Traffic, Chapter 10.42 – Transportation Demand Management Requirements
All applicable new developments (non-residential developments which employ 100 or more persons) which are owned and managed as one unit shall submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) prepared by a traffic engineer, transportation planner or other qualified professional identifying the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Project and including design recommendations and mitigation measures, as appropriate, to address on and off-site project impacts. The TDMP shall also indicate specific strategies and guidelines to reduce the number of trips and increase the amount of nonvehicular transportation. The TDMP also includes operational standards that shall be implemented within 60 days after occupancy of the development by an employer. In addition, all property owners of applicable new development (non-residential development and/or changes of use) shall be subject to the required capital improvement standards as specified in this Section (Beaumont Municipal Code [MC]).

Title 10 – Vehicle and Traffic, Chapter 10.50 – Golf Cart Transportation The City encourages the increased use of golf carts as a non-polluting local transportation option and establishes rules and regulations for the operation of golf carts in the City (Beaumont MC).

Title 12 – Streets, Sidewalks, and Public Places, Chapter 12.08 – Public Works Construction Standards
The City’s municipal code adopts Riverside County Ordinance No. 461 as the standard specifications for the construction of public streets (Beaumont MC).

Page 2024 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-8 4.15 | Transportation
Title 15 – Buildings and Construction, Chapter 15.48 – Electric Vehicle Charging Station Streamlined Permitting Process
This code section encourages timely and cost-efficient installation of electric vehicle charging stations via an expedited permitting process (Beaumont MC).

City of Beaumont Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for Vehicle Miles Traveled In June 2020, the City of Beaumont’s Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines were revised to ensure consistency with SB 743 implementation. The revision incorporates VMT guidance consistent with the information from WRCOG SB 743 Implementation Pathway study.

The City of Beaumont utilized a threshold consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy future year VMT projects by jurisdiction or subregion to reduce VMT by three percent below the City’s current average VMT per service population per household, or below the subregion’s average VMT (VMT, p. 4). Projects that cannot demonstrate a percent reduction in VMT would be required to conduct additional analysis and add mitigation as appropriate. If project design or operational features cannot reduce VMT below the threshold then an EIR may be required in order for the City to consider a statement of overriding considerations.

Policy 3.1.2 Re-establish the City’s pedestrian-oriented Downtown, along Sixth Street and Beaumont Avenue, as a community anchor with a local and regional-serving mix of civic, commercial and residential uses.

Policy 3.1.3 Establish or preserve areas for mixed-use districts that contain a mix of retail, service, office, and residential uses in a compact, walkable setting along SR-79 (between I-10 and SR-60).

Policy 3.1.4 Establish an Employment District that integrates diversity of jobs with multi-modal access to the rest of City.

Policy 3.1.7 Connect new growth areas to existing Beaumont neighborhoods by directing transportation investments to improve open space connectivity, wayfinding, and urban design strategies.

Policy 3.1.8 Require new major centers and larger residential developments to be accessible to major transportation facilities, a well-connected street network, and safe and efficient access to transit.

Policy 3.1.11 Strive to create development patterns such that most residents are within one-half mile walking distance of a variety of neighborhood-serving uses, such as parks,

Page 2025 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-9 4.15 | Transportation
grocery stores, restaurants, cafes, dry cleaners, laundromats, banks, hair salons, pharmacies, religious institutions, and similar uses.

Goal 3.3: A City that preserves its existing residential neighborhoods and promotes development of new housing choices.

Policy 3.3.7 Require well-connected walkable neighborhoods with pedestrian with quality access to transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Goal 3.4: A City that maintains and expands its commercial, industrial and other employment generating land uses.

Policy 3.4.1 Continue to promote commercial and industrial development in the Interstate Employment Subarea that capitalizes on the City’s location near the I-10 and the SR-60 Freeways.

Policy 3.4.2 Promote the development of neighborhood commercial uses in the vicinity of residential neighborhoods and larger commercial retail centers along the major transportation corridors.

Policy 3.4.3 Continue to promote the development of a regional urban village in the vicinity of the I-10 and the SR-60 Freeways. Encourage a second urban village in the SR-79 East Subarea.

Policy 3.4.8 Where industrial uses are near existing and planned residential development, require that industrial projects be designed to limit the impact of truck traffic, air and noise pollution on sensitive receptors, especially in El Barrio.

Goal 3.6: A City with active and comfortable places that encourage social interaction and community gathering.

Policy 3.6.2 Encourage new development to incorporate public plazas, seating, drinking fountains, and gathering places, especially in prominent locations and areas of pedestrian activity.

Policy 3.6.3 Require project developers to establish mechanisms, such as a Community Facilities District, to adequately maintain new parks, recreational facilities, and infrastructure.

Goal 3.7: A City with a high-quality pedestrian environment for people, fostering interaction, activity, and safety.

Policy 3.7.1 Require that all new neighborhoods be designed and constructed to be pedestrian friendly and include features such as short blocks, wide sidewalks, tree-shaded streets, buildings oriented to streets or public spaces, traffic-calming features, convenient pedestrian street crossings, and safe streets that are designed for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.

Policy 3.7.2 Create pedestrian-oriented streetscapes by establishing unified street tree planting, sidewalk dimensions and maintenance, pedestrian amenities, and high-quality building frontages in all new development.

Page 2026 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-10 4.15 | Transportation
Goal 3.8: A City that encourages a healthy lifestyle for people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

Policy 3.8.1 Design neighborhoods to emphasize connectivity and promote physical activity, including increased pedestrian access by promoting high-density, mixed use development, access to existing and proposed transit, and the use of bicycles and walking as alternatives to driving.

Policy 3.8.3 Ensure the design of context-specific streetscaping that promotes safe travel for all users, including signs, curbs, trees and landscaping to provide a more pleasant environment for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians.

Policy 3.8.6 Support Safe Routes to School partnerships that increase the number of school children who walk, bicycle, use public transportation and carpool to and from school.

Goal 3.10: A City designed to improve the quality of the built and natural environments to reduce disparate health and environmental impacts.

Policy 3.10.4 Designate truck routes to avoid sensitive land uses, where feasible.

Goal 3.11: A City that maintains and enhances open space used for resource preservation and/or recreation.

Policy 3.11.4 Negotiate agreements with the utility companies and the Flood Control District for the establishment of recreation trails, linkages, uses, and appropriate landscaping within their respective rights-of-way.

Mobility Element
Goal 4.1: Promote smooth traffic flows and balance operational efficiency, technological, and economic feasibility.

Policy 4.1.1 Reduce vehicular congestion on auto-priority streets to the greatest extent possible.

Policy 4.1.2 Maintain LOS D on all auto-priority streets in Beaumont. LOS E is considered acceptable on non-auto-priority streets.

Policy 4.1.3 Identify key streets and intersections that will be exempt from the LOS threshold due to inadequate right-of-way, environmental constraints, or funding limitations.

Policy 4.1.4 Strengthen partnerships with transit management organizations to develop citywide demand management programs and incentives to encourage non-automotive transportation options.

Policy 4.1.5 Require residential and commercial development standards that strengthen connections to transit and promote walking to neighborhood services.

Policy 4.1.6 Review and coordinate circulation requirements with Caltrans, as it pertains to freeways and state highways.

Page 2027 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-11 4.15 | Transportation
Goal 4.2: Support the development of a comprehensive network of complete streets throughout the City that provides safe, efficient, and accessible connectivity for users of all ages and abilities.

Policy 4.2.1 Work with regional agencies to implement complete streets that are designed to accommodate users of all ages and abilities. This will apply to all phases of a transportation project, including planning, design, construction, maintenance, and operations for both existing and future facilities.

Policy 4.2.2 Maintain standards that align with SB 743 and multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) methodologies. Incorporate these into impact assessments when appropriate.

Policy 4.2.3 Design residential streets to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, without compromising connectivity for emergency first responders, cyclists, and pedestrians.

Policy 4.2.4 Obtain and preserve adequate right-of-way to accommodate future mobility system improvements.

Policy 4.2.5 Ensure that existing and future roadway improvement balance the needs of all users, including pedestrians and bicyclists.

Goal 4.3: A healthy transportation system that promotes and improves pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle safety in Beaumont.

Policy 4.3.1 Reduce the potential for car collisions through design improvements, speed limit enforcement, and education efforts, prioritizing areas with a high level of collision incidence.

Policy 4.3.2 Support local Safe Routes to Schools programs to ensure safe walking and biking access for children and youth to school, prioritizing sites with the highest need.

Policy 4.3.3 Support Safe Routes to School partnerships that increase the number of school children who walk, bicycle, use public transit, and carpool to and from school.

Policy 4.3.4 Enhance existing pedestrian infrastructure to support the needs of aging adults, particularly routes to transit, health care services, and shopping centers.

Goal 4.4: A balanced transportation system that provides adequate facilities for people in the City to bicycle, walk, or take transit to their destinations.

Policy 4.4.1 Ensure connectivity of pedestrian and cyclist facilities to key destinations, such as downtown, commercial centers, and employment centers, and link these facilities to each other by providing trails along key utility corridors.

Policy 4.4.2 Develop an active transportation core in the Downtown Area and improve active transportation facilities near schools and in residential areas.

Policy 4.4.3 Improve safety for all active transportation users.

Policy 4.4.5 Promote policies and programs that encourage the use of transit and increased transit service.

Page 2028 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-12 4.15 | Transportation
Goal 4.5: Work collaboratively with regional transit agencies to enhance existing transit facilities and promote the implementation of future transit opportunities.

Policy 4.5.1 Collaborate with transit agencies and RCTC to ensure the development of transit facilities in Beaumont can accommodate future rail service between the Coachella Valley and City of Riverside.

Policy 4.5.2 Periodically evaluate the transit system to ensure its efficient operation.

Policy 4.5.3 Work with SunLine Transit and RCTC to analyze and forecast commuter traffic trends and develop strategies to make a more efficient transit system.

Goal 4.6: An efficient goods movement system that ensures timely deliveries without compromising quality of life, safety, or smooth traffic flow for Beaumont residents.

Policy 4.6.1 Prioritize goods movement along specific routes in the city, consistent with the adopted layered network, to foster efficient freight logistics.

Policy 4.6.2 Minimize or restrict heavy vehicle traffic near sensitive areas such as schools, parks, and neighborhoods
Economic Development and Fiscal Element
Goal 5.1: A dynamic local economy that attracts diverse business and investment.

Policy 5.1.4 Encourage growth and expansion of businesses and employment centers near public transit to increase transportation options for employees and limit traffic congestion.

Policy 5.1.8 Align City investment, including capital projects, with areas of desired economic growth and business attraction in the existing commercial and industrial areas, Employment District and Urban Villages.

Goal 5.8: A financially stable community.

Goal 5.9: A community with sustainable and improved infrastructure.

Policy 5.9.3 Support local businesses and economic development by improving Beaumont’s infrastructure including well-maintained streets, transit improvements, adequate water and sewer services and communications infrastructure.

Health and Environmental Justice
Goal 6.5: A City that builds neighborhoods that enhance the safety and welfare of all people of all ages, income levels, and cultural backgrounds.

Policy 6.5.1 Design neighborhoods that promote pedestrian and bicycle activity as alternatives to driving. This policy is implemented through the Land Use and Community Design Element.

Page 2029 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-13 4.15 | Transportation
Policy 6.5.3 Integrate land use and transportation infrastructure to support higher-density development, a balanced mix of residential and commercial uses, and connected system of sidewalks, bikeways, greenways, and transit.

Goal 6.6: A safe City with improved pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety and reduced community crime.

Policy 6.6.1 Strive for a safe transportation system that eliminates traffic-related fatalities and reduces non-fatal injury collisions. This policy is implemented through the Mobility Element.

Policy 6.6.2 Pursue and support local Safe Routes to Schools programs.

Policy 6.6.3 Promote safe routes for aging adults, particularly routes to transit and shopping centers.

Community Facilities and Infrastructure
Goal 7.1: City-wide infrastructure to support existing development and future growth.

Policy 7.1.1 Manage and upgrade the City’s aging infrastructure, as funds allow, and leverage funds whenever possible.

Policy 7.1.2 Explore options available to attain sustainable funding levels for maintaining existing infrastructure in the City.

Policy 7.1.3 Require that new and existing development pay its fair share of infrastructure and public service costs.

Policy 7.1.4 Require developers to present a plan to provide adequate infrastructure and utility service levels before approving new development.

Goal 7.9: High-quality community facilities and services that meet the needs and preferences of all residents in the City.

Policy 7.9.2 Provide community facilities and services throughout the City close to or on accessible transit corridors and priority bikeways. Ensure connecting sidewalks are well maintained for accessibility.

Goal 7.10: Access to high-quality education and community services for all residents.

Policy 7.10.1 Work with the Beaumont Unified School District to site schools within new residential neighborhoods in close proximity to parks, bike paths, and other open space amenities.

Policy 7.10.3 Encourage public and public-private partnerships to cluster development of schools, parks, childcare facilities, and community activity centers with a coordinated share of costs and operational responsibilities.

Safety Element
Goal 9.4: A City that is protected from the effects of natural and manmade disasters.

Page 2030 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-14 4.15 | Transportation
Policy 9.4.5 Require new development to provide access roads that allow both safe and efficient access of emergency equipment and community evacuation.

Revised Zoning Ordinance
Chapter 17.03 of the Revised Zoning Ordinance proposes additional requirements for pedestrian connections, access to transit, and Transit Oriented District Overlay, Chapter 17.11 proposes additional requirements for gated communities to provide pedestrian and bicycle connections.

4.15.4 Impact Thresholds and Significance Criteria
Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions related to transportation. The issues presented in the Environmental Checklist Form have been utilized as Thresholds of Significance in this section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if one or more of the following occurs:
• Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
• Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? • Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? • Result in inadequate emergency access?
Methodology and Assumptions
The Project is evaluated against the aforementioned significance criteria, as the basis for determining the level of impacts related to transportation. In addition, this analysis considers existing regulations, laws and standards that serve to avoid or reduce potential environmental impacts. Where significant impacts remain, feasible mitigation measures are recommended, where warranted, to avoid or lessen the Project’s significant adverse impacts.

Based on subsection (b) of § 15064.3, Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts, CEQA provides guidance on how VMT from various types of projects can be evaluated. These four categories or projects and explanation of methodology is provided below under subheading (b) to correspond with the CEQA guidelines section.
b) Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts.

1. Land Use Projects. VMT exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high-quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project area compared to existing conditions should be considered to have a less than significant transportation impact.

2. Transportation Projects. Transportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, VMT should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. For roadway capacity projects,

Page 2031 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-15 4.15 | Transportation
agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. To the extent that such impacts have already been adequately addressed at a programmatic level, a lead agency may tier from that analysis as provided in § 15152.

3. Qualitative Analysis. If existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle miles traveled for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze a Project’s VMT qualitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis of construction traffic may be appropriate.

4. Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in § 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.

The analysis for VMT prepared by Kimley-Horn for the Project was completed in February 2022 and is included as Appendix K of this EIR. The analysis below utilizes the VMT significance criteria to determine the significance of Project-generated trip impacts and whether mitigation is required.

City VMT Thresholds
The City of Beaumont staff report for SB 743 VMT Thresholds for CEQA Compliance Related to Transportation Analysis (June 16, 2020) recommends VMT thresholds consistent with the RTP/SCS future year VMT by jurisdiction as described below:

The portions of the RTP/SCS that affect Beaumont are based on the land use element of the General Plan.

As such, using this option assumes that projects consistent with the General Plan are also consistent with the RTP/SCS and should not require additional analysis for VMT. Projects that require amendment to the General Plan that would trigger an EIR would need to complete a VMT analysis using the methodology described below.
• Utilizing the Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVTAM/RIVCOM) as its methodology to measure VMT.
• Utilizing the Riverside County Travel Demand Model (RIVTAM/RIVCOM) as its method to analyze a project’s VMT impact.
• Utilizing a threshold consistent with the City’s current average VMT per service population (population plus employment).

Other amendments to the General Plan would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Rather than the 15 percent reduction in VMT recommended in the OPR guidance, the City of Beaumont has adopted

Page 2032 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-16 4.15 | Transportation
a threshold of three percent below existing VMT. This threshold is appropriate for projects within the City of Beaumont, given that it would create consistency with, and progress the goals of the SCAG RTP/SCS.

Projects that cannot demonstrate a three percent reduction in VMT are required to conduct additional analysis and add mitigation as appropriate. If project design or operational features, or mitigation measures, cannot reduce VMT below the threshold then an EIR may be required in order for the City to consider a statement of overriding considerations.

4.15.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 4.15-1: Would the Project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project does not propose elements or aspects that would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. On a long-term basis, the Project may result in increased demand for public transportation as increased employment opportunities become available on-site; however, transit agencies routinely review and adjust their ridership schedules to accommodate public demand. There are no existing public transit stops in the vicinity of the Specific Plan area. Community Services may require a future transit stop if warranted by a traffic study. The Pass Transit System provided by the City includes Routes 3, 4, 7, and 9 which are within approximately two miles of the Specific Plan area. As the Project develops, the Pass Transit System may assess the potential demand for these facilities in the area and may establish new or extended routes in the area.1 Coordination with the Pass Transit System would be required as the Project builds out to determine the need for future bus turnouts along Cherry Valley Boulevard. Accordingly, the Project has no potential to conflict with local public transit service.

The Project site is divided into five parcels and would be developed in two phases. Phase 1 would initiate development in 2023 and conclude in 2024. Phase 1 includes Parcels 1, 2, and 3 designated for e-commerce uses. Construction of Phase 1 of the Project would alter the site and result in the construction a 1,213,235 square-foot high-cube short-term storage building, a 985,860 square-foot high-cube short- term storage building, and a 358,370 square-foot general warehouse.

Phase 2 of the Project would occur from 2026 to 2027 and include the development of Parcel 4.

Construction of Phase 2 would include the development of a 220-room hotel, 25,000 square foot shopping center, 15,000 square feet of high-turnover (sit-down) restaurant uses, and 10,000 square feet of fast- food restaurant uses with drive-throughs. Project access would consist of three driveways along Cherry Valley Boulevard. Planning Area 3 (Parcel 5) would remain as open space. The existing General Plan designation of Single Family Residential would be amended to Open Space.

The proposed Project has been designed and would be constructed to be responsive to the goals and policies from the Land Use and Community Design and Mobility elements of the City of Beaumont General Plan (GP) that pertain to the circulation system. The Project’s land use and circulation elements would be

1 San Gorgonio Crossing EIR

Page 2033 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-17 4.15 | Transportation
consistent with the requirements pertaining to the overall transportation and circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, elements that are included as part of the proposed roadway improvements.

Specifically, Beaumont GP Policy 4.1.2 calls for the maintenance of LOS D on all auto-priority streets in Beaumont. LOS E is considered acceptable on non-auto-priority streets. In order to identify LOS on Project area intersections a Traffic Study with LOS analysis was conducted for the Project. See the detailed analysis in Appendix K. LOS at 19 intersections/driveways under seven scenarios was evaluated and found that under varying scenarios, various study intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS and therefore not be compliant with Policy 4.1.2. However, the recommended improvements below are proposed in order to bring the intersections to an acceptable LOS:
• #1 – I-10 EB Ramps at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Install a traffic signal
▪ Add a westbound left-turn lane
▪ Add an eastbound right-turn lane
▪ Add a southbound right-turn lane
• #2 – I-10 WB Ramps at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Install a traffic signal
▪ Add a northbound left-turn lane
▪ Add an eastbound left-turn lane
▪ Add a westbound right-turn lane
• #3 – Calimesa Boulevard at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
▪ Install a traffic signal
• #4 – Hannon Road at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
▪ Install a traffic signal
• #5 – Union Street at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
▪ Install a traffic signal
• #6 – Nancy Avenue at Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane

Page 2034 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-18 4.15 | Transportation
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
▪ Add a dedicated eastbound right-turn lane
• #11 – Beaumont Avenue at Brookside Avenue
▪ Add EB right-turn overlap phase
▪ Add WB right-turn lane
▪ Add WB right-turn overlap phase
▪ Traffic Signal relocation and modification
• #12 – Desert Lawn Drive at Oak Valley Parkway
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
• #13 – I-10 EB Ramps at Oak Valley Parkway
▪ Add a 2nd southbound left-turn lane
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
• #14 – I-10 WB Ramps at Oak Valley Parkway
▪ Add a northbound left-turn lane
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Add a 2nd westbound through lane
• #15 – Oak View Drive at Oak Valley Parkway
▪ Add a 2nd eastbound through lane
▪ Modify southbound right-turn lane to free right-turn lane ▪ Traffic Signal relocation and modification
A summary of the intersection operation before and after implementation of the recommended improvements is provided on Traffic Study Table 11. Recommended improvements may include a combination of fee payments to established programs, construction of specific improvements, payment of a fair share contribution toward future improvements, or a combination of these approaches. A summary of which improvements are part of the regional TUMF program are shown on Traffic Study Table 12. The project fair share proportion at deficient study intersections under Opening Year 2024, Opening Year 2027, and Horizon Year 2040 are shown on Traffic Study Tables 13, 14, and 15, respectively.

Site Adjacent Roadway Improvements
The Project would construct the following site adjacent roadway improvements:
• Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ Construction along the Project frontage to its ultimate half-width as an Arterial Highway (128-foot right-of-way). A raised median would be constructed by the San Gorgonio Crossing project to the north.

Page 2035 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-19 4.15 | Transportation
• Brookside Avenue
▪ Construction along the Project frontage to its ultimate half-width as a Secondary Highway (88-foot right-of-way).

Site Access Improvements
Project access would consist of three driveways along Cherry Valley Boulevard. The west and middle Project driveways would be signalized, and the east Project driveway would be an unsignalized right-in- right-out (RIRO) driveway. The Project would construct the following site access improvements:
• Cherry Valley Boulevard
▪ West Project Driveway
▪ A signal modification to provide a four-legged traffic signal (future traffic signal to be installed by adjacent development).
▪ Middle Project Driveway
▪ Install new traffic signal
▪ Construct a 300-foot dedicated eastbound right-turn pocket into the project driveway.
▪ One dedicated left-turn and one dedicated right-turn lane at the northbound approach
▪ East Project Driveway
▪ Install a stop sign on the northbound approach and permit right-in-right-out access only.
• Brookside Avenue
▪ No Project-related access is planned along Brookside Avenue.

Therefore, the proposed improvements would adhere to all relevant circulation regulations and be consistent with policy and planning document guidance related to needed improvements. Adherence to these planning directives and incorporation of the associated improvements would have a less than significant impact on the environment.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Impact 4.15-2: Would the Project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable Impact

Page 2036 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-20 4.15 | Transportation
As discussed above, comprehensive updates to CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines require projects to use VMT to determine project impacts. The VMT impact analysis for the Project is presented below.

Project VMT
Project VMT was calculated using the most current version of RivTAM. Adjustments in socio-economic data were made to the appropriate traffic analysis zone within the RivTAM model to reflect the Project’s proposed land use. Socio-economic data inputs were derived based on factors developed using Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation rates.

Project Home-Based Work (HBW) VMT per Employee
The home-based work (HBW) VMT per employee is the HBW attraction VMT divided by the number of employees derived from the RivTAM model. The HBW VMT per Employee is used to measure efficiency of VMT generated by employment-based uses. The Project HBW VMT per Employee calculated based on RivTAM is 14.9.

Project VMT per Service Population
Service population (SP) is defined as the sum of population and employment. Since the Project does not have any residential component, the Project SP consists of employees only. The VMT per SP is the total VMT (including all trip purposes) divided by the number of workers derived from the RivTAM model. The VMT per SP is used to measure efficiency of VMT generated by all trip purposes. The Project VMT per SP calculated based on RivTAM is 55.9.

Heavy Truck VMT
Consistent with air quality and GHG analyses, the average trip length for heavy trucks were assumed to be 33.2 miles one way based on the data provided in California Air Resources Board, Appendix B: Emissions Estimation Methodology for On-Road Diesel-Fueled Heavy-Duty Drayage Trucks at California Ports and Intermodal Rail Yards, 2007. As a conservative measure, a trip length of 33.2 miles has been utilized for all trucks multiplied by the daily truck trips (659) estimated in the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) based on Institute of Transportation Engineer trip rates, resulting in a heavy truck daily VMT of 21,879.

VMT Thresholds
For purposes of this VMT assessment the Project’s HBW VMT per Employee and VMT per SP has been compared to three percent below citywide average future year (2040) VMT for the City of Beaumont, based on data provided by WRCOG. Table 4.15-1 shows the calculated VMT thresholds for HBW VMT per Employee and VMT per SP.

Table 4.15-1: VMT Thresholds
Threshold Option Citywide Average Threshold (3% below)
Future Year (2040) HBW VMT per Employee 9.2 8.9
Future Year (2040 VMT per SP 31.3 30.4
Source: Kimley-Horn. 2022. Beaumont Summit Station Project Vehicle Mile Traveled (VMT) Analysis. Table 1.

Page 2037 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-21 4.15 | Transportation
Potential Impacts
As shown in Table 4.15-2, the Project’s HBW VMT per Employee and VMT per SP would not meet the three percent below citywide future year threshold. As such, the Project’s transportation impact is potentially significant based on City of Beaumont’s recommended thresholds.

Table 4.15-2: VMT Impact Evaluation
Threshold Option Threshold Project Change in VMT Potentially Significant? HBW VMT per Employee 8.9 14.9 +6.0 Yes
VMT per SP 30.4 55.9 +25.5 Yes
Source: Kimley-Horn. 2022. Beaumont Summit Station Project Vehicle Mile Traveled (VMT) Analysis. Table 2.

Transportation Demand Management Strategies
Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies have been evaluated for reducing VMT impacts determined to be potentially significant. Given the jurisdiction’s rural/suburban land use context, the following key strategies may be considered for the Project. • Improving pedestrian networks
• Implementing traffic calming infrastructure
• Building low-street bicycle network improvements
• Encouraging alternative work schedules
• Providing ride-share programs.

The effectiveness of the above-noted TDM measures would be dependent on the ultimate building tenant(s), which are unknown at this time. Beyond project design and tenancy considerations, land use context is a major factor relevant to the potential application and effectiveness of TDM measures. More specifically, the land use context of the Project is characteristically suburban. Of itself, the Project’s suburban context acts to reduce the range of feasible TDM measures and their potential effectiveness.

Consistent with the mitigation measures recommended in the air quality and greenhouse gas analyses, the Project shall implement a TDM program to reduce single occupant vehicle trips and encourage transit.

Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Project operator shall prepare and submit TDM program detailing strategies that would reduce the use of single occupant vehicles by employees by increasing the number of trips by walking, bicycle, carpool, vanpool, and transit. The TDM shall include, but is not limited to the following:
• Provide a transportation information center and on-site TDM coordinator to educate residents, employers, employees, and visitors of surrounding transportation options. • Promote bicycling and walking through design features such as showers for employees, self- service bicycle repair area, etc. around the Project site. • Each building shall provide secure bicycle storage space equivalent to two percent of the automobile parking spaces provided.

Page 2038 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-22 4.15 | Transportation
• Each building shall provide a minimum of two shower and changing facilities within 200 yards of a building entrance.
• Provide on-site car share amenities for employees who make only occasional use of a vehicle, as well as others who would like occasional access to a vehicle of a different type than they use day- to-day.
• Promote and support carpool/vanpool/rideshare use through parking incentives and administrative support, such as ride-matching service.
• Incorporate incentives for using alternative travel modes, such as preferential load/unload areas or convenient designated parking spaces for carpool/vanpool users. • Provide meal options on-site or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations. • Each building shall provide preferred parking for electric, low‐emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles equivalent to at least eight percent of the required number of parking spaces.

Based on available research, for projects located within a suburban context, a maximum 10 percent reduction in VMT is achievable when combining multiple TDM strategies. Due to limitations of Project- level approaches to reducing VMT, the City or region may consider larger mitigation programs such as VMT mitigation banks and exchanges. VMT mitigation banks and exchanges have not yet been developed or tested by WRCOG or City of Beaumont.

Conclusion
The Project’s transportation impact based on VMT is potentially significant based on City of Beaumont’s recommended thresholds. As the efficacy of TDM measures and reduction of VMT impacts below thresholds cannot be assured, the Project’s VMT impact is therefore considered significant and unavoidable.

Mitigation Measures
Impact is significant, unavoidable, and unmitigable.

Level of Significance
Significant and unavoidable impact.

Impact 4.15-3: 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)?
Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
The Project would not create a significant traffic-related safety hazard. The Project roadways, ingress and egress, and interior circulation elements have been designed and would be constructed consistent with the City’s Department of Public Works Department standard drawings. There are no incompatible land uses proposed or in the vicinity of the Project Site, such as those utilizing farm equipment, that would result in a potential significant traffic safety hazard. Although construction would involve the use of large heavy-duty equipment such as rollers, graders, and dump trucks, all staging and construction areas would

Page 2039 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-23 4.15 | Transportation
have appropriate signage and standard safety protocols as implemented by the Project Applicant through standard construction practices. Therefore, potential impacts associated with design hazards would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Impact 4.15-4: Would the Project result in inadequate emergency access? Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact
Construction
The Project is not anticipated to result in any significant emergency access impacts during construction.

In case of an emergency, the construction manager will have assigned staff to flag emergency response vehicles and direct them to the emergency location. Vehicles and equipment throughout the Project site would not be parked or placed in a manner that would impede access for emergency response vehicles.

Site conditions, during and after the workday, would be either maintained or left in a condition that adheres to Division of Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) safety standards to prevent any hazardous condition that may affect construction staff and emergency responders.

Operations
The City of Beaumont has reviewed the Project’s design and confirmed that the Project would provide adequate access to-and-from the Project site for emergency vehicles and also that development of the Project would not interfere with the circulation of emergency vehicles along public streets that abut the site. The City also would require the Project Applicant to provide adequate paved access to-and-from the site as a condition of Project approval. Lastly, the City would review all future Project construction drawings to ensure that adequate emergency access is maintained along abutting public streets during construction activities. Based on the proposed Project design and with required adherence to City requirements for emergency vehicle access, impacts would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance
Less than significant impact.

Page 2040 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.15-24 4.15 | Transportation

4.15.6 Cumulative Impacts
Construction
Construction activities associated with the Project and nearby cumulative projects may overlap and result in temporary traffic impacts to local roadways. However, the Project would not result in significant traffic related impacts resulting from conflicts with transportation plans or policies and is consistent with all applicable Beaumont GP policies such as working with Caltrans, making needed roadway improvements, etc. Cumulative development projects would also be required to reduce construction traffic impacts on the local circulation system and implement any required mitigation measures that may be prescribed pursuant to CEQA provisions. Therefore, the Project contribution to impacts in these regards would be less than significant.

Operations
As outlined above, the Project is anticipated to result in VMT that would exceed the City’s adopted thresholds of significance for HBW VMT per Employee and VMT per SP. This represents a significant cumulative impact. While the Project would consider various General Plan policies and TDMs, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) identifies the maximum achievable VMT reduction with TDMs to be 10 percent in a suburban setting. Given that the Project is estimated to generate VMT per SP that is 12.1 VMT greater than the threshold, TDM measures would likely not reduce VMT per SP to a level below the City’s threshold of significance. Therefore, the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to this significant impact.

4.15.7 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
Even with implementation of regulatory requirements, standard conditions of approval and implementation of reasonable and feasible mitigation measures, the Project would result in unavoidable significant impacts with respect to inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b) (Impact 4.15-2) and significant cumulative transportation impacts.

4.15.8 References
City of Beaumont. 2020. Staff Report: SB 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Thresholds for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance Related to Transportation Analysis. Retrieved from: https://mccmeetingspublic.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/beaumntca-meet- f1da32f813d04b548d03815d09f7fef6/ITEM-Attachment-004-
92c35ec0a7a44ac195e79254290997ac.pdf.

City of Beaumont. 2021. Beaumont General Plan.
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36923/Beaumont-GPU_Final-rev-22521 .

Kimley-Horn, 2022. Traffic Impact Study for Beaumont Summit Station.

Kimley-Horn, 2022. Beaumont Summit Station Project Vehicle Mile Traveled (VMT) Analysis.

Page 2041 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -1 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources

4.16 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
This section provides an assessment of potential impacts related to tribal cultural resources that could result from implementation of the Project.

4.16.1 Introduction
This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifies and analyzes the Tribal Cultural Resources impacts associated with the development of the Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan (Project). Historically, the term “cultural resources” encompassed archaeological, historical, paleontological, and tribal cultural resources, including both physical and intangible remains, or traces left by historic or prehistoric peoples. Tribal resources refer to either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape, that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred p lace, or object with cultural value to a California native American tribe.

4.16.2 Environmental Setting
Ethnographic Setting
At the time of Spanish contact, the Project area of potential effects (APE) was likely utilized by the Cahuilla.

The Cahuilla have been st udied extensively by Dr. Lowell Bean and much of the following discussion is derived from Bean’s description of the Cahuilla in Volume 8 of the Handbook of North American Indians (Bean 1978:575–587). The Cahuilla belong to nonpolitical, nonterritorial patr imoieties that governed marriage patterns as well as patrilineal clans and lineages. Each clan, “political -ritual-corporate units” composed of 3 to 10 lineages, owned a large territory in which each lineage owned a village site with specific resource areas . Clan lineages cooperated in defense, in large communal subsistence activities, and in performing rituals. Clans were apt to own land in the valley, foothill, and mountain areas, providing them with the resources of many different ecological niches.

In prehistoric times Cahuilla shelters are believed to have been dome shaped; after contact they tended to be rectangular in shape. Cahuilla shelters were often made of brush, palm fronds, or arrowweed. Most of the Cahuilla domestic activities were performed outside the shelters within the shade of large, expansive ramadas.

The Cahuilla were, for the most part, hunting, collecting, harvesting, and proto -agricultural peoples. As in most of California, acorns were a major staple, but the roots, leaves, seeds, and fruit of many other plants also were used. Fish, birds, insects, and large and small mammals were also available.

To gather and prepare these food resources, the Cahuilla had an extensive inventory of equipment including bows and arrows, traps, nets, disguises, blinds, spears, hooks and lines, poles for shaking down pine nuts and acorns, cactus pickers, seed beaters, digging sticks and weights, and pry bars. In addition, the Cahuilla also had an extensive inventory of food processing equipment including ham mers and anvils, mortars and pestles, manos and metates, winnowing shells and baskets, strainers, leaching baskets and bowls, knives (made of stone, bone, wood, and carrizo cane), bone saws, and drying racks made of wooden poles to dry fish.

Page 2042 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -2 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
Mountain tops, unusual rock formations, springs, and streams are held sacred to the Cahuilla as are rock art sites and burial and cremation sites. In addition, various birds are revered as sacred beings of great power and sometimes were killed ritually and mourned in mortuary ceremonies similar to those for important individuals. As such, bird cremation sites are considered sacred by the Cahuilla.1

4.16.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) (54 U.S.C. 300101 et seq.) is legislation intended to preserve historical and archaeological sites in the United States of America. The act created the National Register of Historic Places, the list of National Historic Landmarks, and the State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO). Among other things, the act requires federal agencies to evaluate the impact of all federally funded or permitted projects on historic properties (buildings, archaeological si tes, etc.) through a process known as “Section 106 Review.”
National Register of Historic Places
Developed in 1981 pursuant to Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations § 60, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) provides an authoritative guide to be used by federal, state, and local governments, private groups and citizens to identify the nation’s cultural resources and to indicate what properties should be considered for protection from destruction or impairment . It should be noted that the listing of a private property on the NRHP does not prohibit any actions which may otherwise be taken by the property owner with respect to the property. The listing of sites in California to the National Register is initiated through an application submitted to the State Office of Historical Preservation. Applications deemed suitable for potential consideration are handled by the State Historic Preservation Officer. All NRHP listings for sites in California are also automatically added to the California Register of Historical Resources by the State of California. The listing of a site on the NRHP does not generally result in any specific physical protection.

Among other things, however, it does create an additional level of CEQA (and NEPA, the National Environmental Protection Act) review to be satisfied prior to the approval of any discretionary action occurring that might adversely affect the resource.

American Indian Religious Freedom Act
This American Indian Religious Freedom Act became law in 1978 (Public Law 95-341, 42 USC 1996) in order to protect and preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express and exercise their traditional religions. These religious rights extend to, but are not limit ed to, access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.

Under this regulation, federal agencies and departments are charged with evaluating their policies and procedures in consulta tion with native traditional religious leaders in order to eliminate interference with the free exercise of native religion. Agencies must determine and make appropriate changes necessary to

1 PaleoWest. 2021. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Beaumont Summit Station Project, Riverside County, California .

Page 2043 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -3 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
protect and preserve Native American religious cultural rights an d practices, and to accommodate access to and use of religious sites “to the extent that the use is practicable and not inconsistent with an agency’s essential functions.” The intent is to protect Native Americans’ First Amendment right to “free exercise” of religion.

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
Enacted in 1990 under Title 25 U.S. § 3001, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) describes the rights of Native American lineal descendants, Indian Tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations with respect to treatment , repatriation, and disposition of Native American cultural items for which they can show a relationship of lineal descent or cultural affiliation. The statute also requires federal agencies and museums receiving federal funds to inventory holdings of Native American human remains and funerary objects and provide written summaries of other cultural items. In an attempt to recognize the religious and cultural significance of such sites and to protect t heir sacred integrity, it also provides for greater protection of Native American burial sites and more careful control over the removal of Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and items of cultural patrimony on federal and tribal lands.

National Park Service – National Register Bulletin 38
National Park Service has prepared guidelines to assist in the documentation of Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs ) by public entities. The Bulletin is intended to be an aid in determining whether properties have traditional cultural significance and if they are eligible for inclusion in the National Register. It is also intended to assist federal agencies, SHPOs, Cert ified Local Governments, tribes, and other historic preservation practitioners who need to evaluate such properties when considering their eligibility for the NRHP as part of the review process prescribed by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).

TCPs are a broad group of places that can include:
• location associated with the traditional beliefs of a Native American group about its origins, its cultural history, or the nature of the world;
• rural community whose organization, buildings and structures, or patterns of land use reflect the cultural traditions valued by its long -term residents; • an urban neighborhood that is the traditional home of a particular cultural group, and that reflects its beliefs and practices;
• location where Native America n religious practitioners have historically gone, and are known or thought to go today, to perform ceremonial activities in accordance with traditional cultural rules of practice; and
• location where a community has traditionally carried out economic, artis tic, or other cultural practices important in maintaining its historic identity.

Page 2044 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -4 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
State
California Register of Historical Resources
(Public Resource Code Section 5024.10 et seq.)
Created in 1992 and implemented in 1998, the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR ) is “an authoritative guide in California to be used by state and local agencies, private groups, and citizens to identify the state’s historical resources and to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feas ible, from substantial adverse change” (Public Resources Code [PRC ] § 5024.1). Certain properties, including those listed in or formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP and California Historical Landmarks (CHL) numbered 770 and higher, are auto matically included in the CRHR. Other properties recognized under the California Points of Historical Interest (PHI) program, identified as significant in historical resources surveys or designated by local landmarks programs, may be nominated for inclusion in the CRHR. A resource, either an individual property or a contributor to a historic district, may be listed in the CRHR if the SHRC determines that it meets one or more of the following criteria, which are modeled on NRHP criteria:
• Criterion 1: It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage. • Criterion 2: It is associated with the lives of persons important in our past. • Criterion 3: It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction; represents the work of an important creative individual; or possesses high artistic values.
• Criterion 4: It has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in history or preh istory.

Under PRC § 5024.1 and 14 California Code of Regulations (CCR) § 4852(c), a cultural resource must retain integrity to be considered eligible for the CRHR. Specifically, it must retain sufficient character or appearance to be recognizable as a hist orical resource and convey reasons of significance. Integrity is evaluated with regard to retention of such factors as location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Cultural sites that have been affected by ground -disturbing activities, such as agricultural activities and off-road vehicle use (both of which occur within the warehouse site), often lack integrity because they have been directly damaged or removed from their original location, among other changes.

Typically, a prehistoric archaeological site in California is recommended eligible for listing in the CRHR based on its potential to yield information important in prehistory or history (Criterion 4). Important information includes chronological markers such as projectil e point styles or obsidian artifacts that can be subjected to dating methods or undisturbed deposits that retain their stratigraphic integrity. Sites such as these have the ability to address research questions.

CRHR Criteria
For purposes of CEQA, a historical resource is any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR (PRC § 21084.1). A resource is eligible for listing in the CRHR if it meets any of the following criteria:

Page 2045 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -5 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources

1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.

2. Is associated with the lives of persons important in our past.

3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.

4. Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

The CCR further provides that cultura l resources of local significance are CRHR-eligible (Title 14 CCR, § 4852).

California Government Codes (Related to Native American Heritage) Section 6254(r) of the California Government Codes (C GC) exempts from disclosure public records of Native American graves, cemeteries and sacred places maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC ). Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18, C GC § 65351 specifies how local planning agencies should provide opportunities for involvement of California Native America n tribes to consult on the preparation or amendment of general plans. In particular, C GC § 65352 requires local planning agencies to refer proposed actions of general plan adoption or amendment to California Native American tribes on the contact list maintained by the NAHC and others, with a 45-day opportunity for comments. In regard to historical properties, C GC §§ 25373 and 37361 allows city and county legislative bodies to acquire property for the preservation or development of a historical landmark. It also allows local legislative bodies to enact ordinances to provide special conditions or regulations for the protection or enhancement of places or objects of special historical or aesthetic interest or values. Lastly, C GC §§ 50280-50290 implement the Mills Act which allows the negotiation of historical property contracts between a private property owner of a “qualified historical property” and provides additional guidelines for such contracts.

California Health and Safety Code (Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7054) Sections 7050.5, 7051, and 7054 of the California Health and Safety Code collectively address the illegality of interference with human burial remains (except as allowed under applicable sections of the PRC ), as well as the disposition of Native American burials in archaeological sites and protects such remains from disturbance, vandalism, or inadvertent destruction; establishes procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project, treatment of the remains prior to, during and after evaluation, and reburial procedures.

Public Resources Code Section 5097 (Related to Cultural Resources) California PRC § 5097 addresses the disposition of Native American burials in archaeological sites and pr otects such remains from disturbance, vandalism, or inadvertent destruction; establishes procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered during construction of a project; and establishes the California NAHC to resolve disputes regarding the disposition of such remains. It has been incorporated into § 15064.5(e) of the CEQA Guidelines.

The NAHC, created in statute in 1976 (Chapter 1332, Statutes of 1976), is a nine -member body whose members are appointed by the Governor. The NAHC identifies, catalogs, and protects Native American

Page 2046 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -6 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
cultural resources -- ancient places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans and known ancient graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private and public lands in Cal ifornia. The NAHC is also charged with ensuring California Native American tribes’ accessibility to ancient Native American cultural resources on public lands, overseeing the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains and burial items, and administering the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (CalNAGPRA), among many other powers and duties (NAHC).

PRC §§ 5097.9 through 5097.991 establish that no public agency or private party using or occupying public property (or operating on under a public license, permit, grant, lease, or contract made after July 1, 1977) shall in any manner interfere with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion as provided in the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution. It also prohibits such agencies and parties from causing severe or irreparable damage to any Native American sanctified cemetery, place of worship, religious or ceremonial site or sacred shrine located on public property, except on a clear and convincing showing that the public interest and necessity so require it.

These sections also establish the state’s NAHC. The NAHC is tasked with working to ensure the preservation and protection of Native American human remains, assoc iated grave goods and cultural resources. Towards this end, the NAHC has a strategic plan for assisting the public, development communities, local and federal agencies, educational institutions, and California Native Americans to better understand problems relating to the protection and preservation of cultural resources and to serve as a tool to resolve these problems. In 2006, PRC §§ 5097.91 and 5097.98 were amended by Assembly Bill (AB) 2641 to authorize the NAHC to bring legal action when necessary to prevent damage to Native American burial grounds or places of worship. It also established more specific procedures to be implemented in the event that Native American remains are discovered.

Human Remains
According to § 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, all human remains are a significant resource. This section also assigns special importance to human remains and specifies procedures to be used when Native American remains are discovered. These procedures are discussed within PRC § 5097.

Native American Heritage Commission
The NAHC, created in statute in 1976, is a nine -member body, appointed by the Governor, to identify and catalog cultural resources (i.e., places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans, and known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands) in California. The Commission is charged with the duty of preserving and ensuring accessibility of sacred sites and burials, the disposition of Native American human remains and burial items, maintain an inventory of Native American sacred sites located on public lands (i.e., Sacred Lands File), and review current administrative and statutory protections related to these sacred sites.

State Historic Preservation Office
SHPO (or Office of Historic Preservation [OHP]) is a state governmental function created by the federal government in 1966 under Section 101 of the NHPA. SHPO administers the NRHP, the CRHR, the CHL, and

Page 2047 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -7 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
the California PHI programs. The purposes of a SHPO include surveying and recognizing historic properties, reviewing nominations for properties to be included in the NRHP, reviewing undertakings for the impact on the properties as well as supporting federal organizations, s tate and local governments, and private sector. SHPO maintains the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), which includes the statewide Historical Resources Inventory database.

California State Historical Landmarks
CHLs are buildings, s tructures, sites, or places that have been determined to have statewide historical significance and meet specific criteria. The resource must also be approved for designation by the county or local jurisdiction, be recommended by the State Historical Resou rces Commission, and be officially designated by California State Parks. California Historical Landmarks are automatically listed in the CRHR.

California Points of Historical Interest
California PHI are sites, buildings, features, or events that are of loc al (city or county) significance and have anthropological, cultural, military, political, architectural, economic, scientific, technical, religious, experimental, or other value.

Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
PRC § 5097.91 established the NAHC , the duties of which include inventorying places of religious or social significance to Native Americans and identifying known graves and cemeteries of Native Americans on private lands. PRC § 5097.98 specifies a protocol to be followed when the NAHC rece ives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner.

California Public Records Act
Sections 6254(r) and 6254.10 of the California Public Records Act (C GC § 6250 et seq.) were enacted to protect archaeological sites from unauthorized excavation, looting, or vandalism. Section 6254(r) explicitly authorizes public agencies to withhold information from the public relating to “Native American graves, cemeteries, and sacred places and records of Native American places, features , and objects…maintained by, …, the Native American Heritage Commission….” § 6254.10 specifically exempts from disclosure requests for “records that relate to archaeological site information and reports maintained by, or in the possession of, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Historical Resources Commission, the State Lands Commission, the [NAHC], another state agency, or a local agency, including the records that the agency obtains through a consultation process between a California Native American tribe and a state or local agency.”
Senate Bill 18
SB 18 (CGC § 65352.3) requires local governments to consult with Native American tribes prior to making certain planning decisions and to provide notice to tribes at certain key points in the plan ning process.

These consultation and notice requirements apply to the adoption and amendment of general plans and specific plans. The consultation process requires (1) that local governments send the NAHC information on a proposed project and request conta ct information for local Native American tribes; (2) that local governments then send information on the project to the tribes that the NAHC has identified and notify

Page 2048 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -8 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
them of the opportunity to consult; (3) that the tribes have 90 days to respond on whethe r they want to consult or not, and (4) that consultation begins, if requested, by a tribe and there is no statutory limit on the duration of the consultation. If issues arise and consensus on mitigation cannot be reached, SB 18 allows a finding to be made that the suggested mitigation is infeasible.

Assembly Bill 52
Signed into law in September 2014, California AB 52 created a new class of resources – tribal cultural resources – for consideration under CEQA. Tribal cultural resources may include sites, feat ures, places, cultural landscapes , sacred places, or objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are listed or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR, included in a local register of historical resources, or a resource determined by the lead CEQA agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant and eligible for listing on the CRHR. AB 52 requires that the lead CEQA agency consult with California Native American tribes that have requeste d consultation for projects that may affect tribal cultural resources. The lead CEQA agency shall begin consultation with participating Native American tribes prior to the release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report. Under AB 52, a project that has potential to cause a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource constitutes a significant effect on the environment unless mitigation reduces such effects to a less than significant level.

Local
Application for Environmental Review and Processing
As part of the entitlement process, applicants are required to complete and submit an Application for Environmental Review and Processing , which is used by the City Planning Department to determine what, if any, technical studies may be required as part of the entitlement process. According to the Application for Environmental Review and Processing, a cultural resources report is required for an implementing development project if: native s oils are present; the project area is known to have a rich cultural history; construction activities will result in trenching, excavation of undisturbed soils, and/or the project area is within, or nearby historical buildings .

City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan
Land Use and Community Design Element
Goal 3.12: A City that minimizes the extent of urban development in the hillsides, and mitigates any significant adverse consequences associated with urbanization.

Policy 3.12.2 Limit the extent and intensity of uses and development in areas of unstable terrain, steep terrain, scenic vistas, and other critical environmental areas.

Conservation and Open Space Element
Goal 8.9: A City where the extent of urban development in the hillsides is minimized and mitigated.

Policy 3.12.2 Limit the extent and intensity of uses and development in areas of unstable terrain, steep terrain, scenic vistas, and other critical environmental areas.

Page 2049 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -9 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
Goal 11: A City where cultural resources and historical places are identifi ed, recognized, and preserved.

Policy 8.11.1 Avoid or when avoidance is not feasible, minimize impacts to sites with significant archaeological, paleontological, cultural and tribal cultural resources, to the extent feasible.

Policy 8.11.2 Comply with notification of California Native American tribes and organizations of proposed projects that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources, per the requirements of AB52 and SB18.

Policy 8.11.4 Require that any human remains discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the City be treated with respect and dignity and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act California Public Resources Code Amended Statutes 1982 Chapter 1492, California Public Resources Code Statutes 2006, Chapter 863, Section 1, CA Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, Public Resources Code Section 5097.94, SB 447 (Chapter 404, Statutes of 1987) and other appropriate laws.

Implementation C20 Cultural Resources Sensitivity Map. Develop a Cultural Resources Sensitivity Map based upon field and literature surveys identifying the locations of known cultural resources and areas of archaeological sensitivity within t he City and its Sphere of Influence.

4.16.4 Impact Thresholds and Significan ce Criteria
State CEQA Guidelines Appendix G contains the Environmental Checklist Form, which includes questions concerning tribal cultural resources . The questions presented in the Envir onmental Checklist Form have been utilized as significance criteria in this section. Accordingly, the Project would have a significant effect on the environment if it would:
• C ause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resou rce, defined in Public Resources Code § 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 t ribe, and that is:
▪ The Project is 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
▪ The Project contains a resource de termined 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 Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Page 2050 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -10 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources

4.16.5 Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 4.16-1 Would the Project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code § 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 Ca lifornia Native American tribe, and that is:

Would the Project be developed in an area 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 § 5020.1(k)? Would the Project contain 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 § 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code § 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Level of Significance: Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated.

Construction and Operations
In compliance with PRC § 21080.3.1(b), formal notification has been provided to California Native American tribal representatives which may have interest in projects within the geographic area traditionally and culturally affiliated with the tribe. Native American groups may ha ve knowledge about cultural resources in the area and may have concerns about adverse effects from development on tribal cultural resources (TCRs) as defined in PRC § 21074. The NAHC was contacted on April 28, 2021, for a review of the Sacred Land File (SL F) search.

The SLF search did not return any information of Nat ive American cultural resources (e.g., traditional use or gathering area, place of religious or sacred activity, etc.) within the immediate vicinity of the Project APE. The NAHC responded on May 17, 2021, noting that the SLF returned negative results. However, NAHC noted that the absence of specific site information in the SLF does not indicate the absence of TCRs within the Project area of potential effect (APE). The NAHC requested 23 individuals representing 15 Native American tribal groups be contacted to elicit information regarding cultural resource issues related to the Project. Outreach letters to the 15 recommended tribal groups were sent on June 17, 2021.

These letters were followed up by phone calls on July 2, 2021.

As of July 2021, the following five responses have been received:
• The Quechan Historic Preservation Department sent an email indicating the Tribe does not wish to comment on the Project and stating they defer to more local tribes. • Mr. Ryan Nordness, Cultural Resource Analyst for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians (SMBMI), stated that the Project area is not located within the Serrano ancestral territory. As such, the Tribe will not be requesting to receive consulting pa rty status with the lead agency and do not wish to participate in scoping, development, or review of documents for the Project.

Page 2051 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -11 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
• The Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians responded by stating that the Project area is not within the Tribe’s specific area of historic interest and as such, they do not have any information to provide and defer to a closer tribe to the Project area.
• Mr. Paul Macarro, Cultural Resources Coordinator for the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians, responded via phone call and stated that the P roject area is outside of the Tribe’s ancestral territory and therefore, the Tribe has no comment to provide for the Project. • Mr. Mark Cochrane, Co-Chairperson for the Serrano Nation of Mission Indians, stated that he did not have any comments to provide for the Project but requested that the Serrano Nation, either himself or Mr. Wayne Walker, be notified if any cultural material is encountered during construction.

Based on the lack of TCRs found during the site visit, the lack of TCRs noted by NAHC and the SLF search, and the lack of tribal interest for the APE from tribes, it is concluded that tribal consultation has officially concluded. Additionally, based on the aforementioned, t he Project would not be developed in an area listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR , or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources , and nor is the Project site anticipated to contain a TCR. With the implementation of MM TCR-1, a less than significant impact is anticipated.

Mitigation Measures
MM TCR-1 The Serrano Nation, (currently Mr. Mark Cochrane and/or Mr. Wayne Walker , but the representative could change depending on when a finding may occur ), shall be notified if any cultural material is encountered during Project construction.

4.16.6 Cumulative Impacts
For purposes of cumulative impact analysis to cultural and tribal resources, the geographic context for cumulative analysis is regional and considers both direct and indirect impacts over a wide area. However, the discussion is focused on the Projects potential for resulting in site -specific impact that could contribute to a cumulative loss. Accordingly, impacts are site -specific and not generally subject to cumulative impacts unless multiple projects impact a common resource, or an affected resource extends off -site, such as a historic townsite or district. With this consideration, the cumulative analyses for historical, archaeological, and tribal cultural resources considers whether the Project, in combination with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, could cumulatively affect any common cultural or paleontological resources.

As discussed above, the NAHC determined that there are no known Native American cultural resources within the immediate Project site. In addition, future cumulative development projects have the potential to encounter/adversely affect tribal cultural resources. Potential tribal cultural resource impacts associated with other project development would be sit e-specific and would undergo individually environmental and design review pursuant to CEQA in order to evaluate potential impacts. The combination of the proposed Project as well as past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the City would be required to comply with all applicable State, federal, and County and local regulations concerning preservation, salvage, or handling of cultural and paleontological resources, including compliance with required mitigation. This also includes project -by-project consultation with the

Page 2052 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.16 -12 4.1 6 | Tribal Cultural Resources
appropriate tribal representatives to discuss mitigation measures that would be included to mitigate impacts to tribal cultural resources. In addition, implementation of the proposed mitigation measures would reduce project -specific impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the Project’s contribution to cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

4.16.7 Significant Unavoidable Impacts
No significant unavoidable tribal cultural resources impacts have been identified.

4.16.8 References
PaleoWest. 2021. Cultural Resources Assessment for the Beaumont Summit Station Project, Riverside County, California.

Page 2053 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -1 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems

4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

4.17.1 Introduction
The purpose of this section is to describe the existing utilities and service systems setting and the Summit Station Specific Plan project’s (Project ) consistency with applicable goals and policies, identifies and analyzes environmental impacts, and recommends measures to reduce or avoid adverse impacts anticipated from implementation of the Project, as applicable. As such, the information and analysis herein rely on the General Plans of both the City of Beaumont (City) and the County of Riverside (County).

A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was prepared for the Project in November 2021 by Albert A. Webb Associates, Inc., included as Appendix I.

4.17.2 Environmental Setting
Project Setting
The Project encompasses approximately 188 acres of the former Sunny-Cal Specific Plan, which is in the northwest portion of the City. T he Sunny-Cal Specific Plan properties were assigned overlying water rights to the B eaumont Groundwater Basin pursuant to the 2004 adjunction of the Beaumont Basin (Judgment).

The original Safe Yield1 of the Beaumont Basin in the 2004 Judgement was 8,650 acre-feet per year (AFY).

The current Safe Yield is 6,700 AFY. The 2004 Judgment ass igned the original Sunny-Cal properties a total of 1,784 acre-feet (AF) of overlying water rights. Subsequent actions removed six parcels totaling 138.14 acres, thus decreasing the Sunny-Cal water right to 1,439.5 AF. Based on the current Safe Yield, the current water right attribute to the Project parcels is 1,114.99 AF.

The Project is located south of Cherry Valley Boulevard, north of Brookside Avenue, and east of Interstate (I -) 10, refer to Exhibit 3.0-2, Local Vicinity . The following Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) are associated with the Project site: 407-230-22, -23, -24, -25, -26, -27, -28 and 407-190-016 and -017. The entire Project site is currently designated by the City General Plan land use plan as Single -Family Residential with a zoning designation of Specific Plan. The Project includes a City of Beaumont General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan Approval, Tentative Parcel Map, Plot Plan Approval, and a Development Agreement.

Remaining uses for the Project site include vacant property containing cement pads and several structures.

Water
An existing 16-inch water line is present in Cherry Valley Boulevard fronting the Project area. The property also contains three existing wells . One active Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD ) well (Well 29). To serve the proposed water infrastructure, the Project would connect to the existing 16-inch diameter water line in Cherry Valley Boulevard and connect to an existing 24-inch diameter water line in Brookside Avenue (see Exhibit 3.0-9, Conceptual Water Plan ). Laterals would be extended from this

1 Safe Yield is defined in the 2004 Judgement as, “The maximum quantity of water which can be produced annually from a groundwa ter basin under a given set of conditions without causing a gradual lowering of the groundwater level leading eventually to depleti on of the supply in storage.” Pursuant to the Judgment, the Safe Yield is reevaluated every 10 years.

Page 2054 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -2 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems backbone main to individual buildings. The Project is located in BCVWD potable water pressure zone 2650 that includes the Hannon Potable Water Tank with 5 -million-gallon (MG) capacit y. A fire flow of 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm) at 20 pounds per square inch (psi) for four hours will be required for the Project. BCVWD will provide the Project proponent a Plan of Service with Development Conditions stipulating what improvements will be required as part of the Project. As of 2014, the nine APNs associated with the Project site have 1,114.99 AF in overlying water rights.

Water Supply Assessment
A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was prepared for the proposed Project to evaluate the existing and future demands on the water supply needed to be supplied from BCVWD . The Project site is currently vacant and does not require potable water. The WSA used information from both BCVWD and San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency Urban Water Management Plan’s (UWMP) to examine existing water supply entitlements, water rights, and water service contracts relevant to the water supply for the proposed Project, water received in prior years pursuant to those entitlements, and any additional planned water supplies, to assess whether sufficient water supplies would be available for the proposed Project.

Water Sources
San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency (SGPWA)
The SGPWA is one of 29 State Water Contractors. Each Contractor is responsible for the importation of water from northern California through the State Water Project (SWP) into their service area. The contractors use the imported water to supplemental water supplies of local water districts such as BCVWD, which would serve the proposed Project, within their servic e areas. The SGPWA boundaries extends from Calimesa to Cabazon and includes the BCVWD, as well as the City of Banning and the Yucaipa Valley Water District as some of its retail service providers.

SGPWA prepared an UWMP in 2020. SGPWA accounted for water demands within the BCVWD service area. The BCVWD UWMP, also prepared in 2020 considered development of the Project site. Because the proposed Project was included in the demands in BCVWD’s 2 020 UWMP, it is considered included in the 2020 SGPWA UWMP and those regional planning efforts.

Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District
BCVWD is the water supplier to the City which includes the proposed Project. BCVWD has two sources of potables water supply: District wells in Edgar Canyon (Lit tle San Gorgonio Creek) and the Beaumont Groundwater Basin (Beaumont Basin). The Beaumont Basin is an adjudicated basin. BCVWD also produces non-potable water from a District well in the Beaumont Basin. Recycled water is not yet available for distribution to BCVWD customers from the City Wastewater Treatment Plant. BCVWD purchases imported SWP water from SGPWA for the purposes of recharging the Beaumont Basin; SWP water is not currently distributed directly to BCVWD customers. BCVWD service area includes the City of Beaumont and the majority of unincorporated Cherry Valley and BCVWD would provide potable and non -potable water to these areas. BCVWD owns and operates the water system that serves the areas surrounding the

Page 2055 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -3 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Project site. BCVWD owns approximately 1,524 acres of watershed land north of Cherry Valley along the Little San Gorgonio Creek (also known as Edgar Canyon) and Noble Creek that are used as water sources.

BCVWD diverts water from Little San Gorgonio Canyon Creek into a series of ponds adjacent to the creek where it percolates and recharges the shallow aquifers in Edgar Canyon.

BCVWD's present service area covers approximately 28 square miles, virtually all of which is in Riverside County and includes the City of Beaumont and the community of Che rry Valley. The Project site is within the BCVWD Sphere of Influence (SOI) boundaries, but outside of the water service area boundaries. As part of the proposed Project, the Project site require annexation into the BCVWD water service area and a water main would be extended onto the Project site. The projected BCVWD -wide water demands from 2025 to 2045 are shown in Table 4.17-1.

Table 4.17-1: Projected Future BCVWD Water Demand (AFY) Customer Type 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Single Family Residential 9,302 10,047 10,849 11,479 12,041 Multifamily Residential 367 397 429 454 476
Commercial 214 231 249 264 276
Industrial 186 201 217 230 241
Institutional/ Governmental 1,106 1,194 1,290 1,365 1,431 Agricultural Irrigation 55 60 64 68 72
Landscape (potable) 209 226 244 258 271
Other (potable)1 318 343 370 392 411
Other (non-potable)2 276 246 228 278 328
Groundwater Recharge3 1,500 1,200 1,000 1,000 1,000
Losses (estimated) 1,499 1,614 1,738 1,835 1,922
Subtotal 15,032 15,759 16,678 17,623 18,469
Recycled Water 4 2,233 2,421 2,706 2,840 2,906
Total 17,265 18,180 19,384 20,463 21,375
Source: Water Supply Assessment, 2021. Table 2-4, page 2-9. (Appendix I).

Notes: From BCVWD 2020 UWMP, pp. 4-12, 4-14. Projected water use by sector based off of water demand distribution by sector for 2020.

Groundwater recharge quantities are planned qualities to build and maintain 5-year supply per BCVWD Resolution no. 2014-05; landscape demand will be met with recycled water and supplemented with other non -potable water as needed. (1) Metered construction and street sweeping water, etc. (2) Raw Water to supplement non-potable water system (used for irrigation) (3) Imported raw water banked for future extractions during dry periods. Does not include imported water to meet adjudication replacement obligations.
(4) The recycled water demand includes the forecast amount used on landscaping irrigated by the non -potable water system. Source of recycled water is the City of Beaumont. Also includes a portion of the golf course irrigation demands on 268 and 203 AFY for Tukwet Canyon and Oak Valley Greens, respectively.

Water System and Operation
BCVWD provides potable water and scheduled irrigation water to users through the potable water system.

BCVWD provides non-potable water (often referred to as purple pipe) for landscape irrigation of parks, playgrounds, school yards, street medians and common areas through its non -potable (recycled) water system. Potable water service would be extended to the Project site, but non -potable water service is not

Page 2056 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -4 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems available to the Project site. At the end of 2020, the BCVWD had over 19,659 active metered connections.

Further, the potable water demand was 10,845 A F and the non-potable water demand (including supplemental potable water) was 1,647 AF for a total of 12,492 AF (not including system losses of 1,326 AF) in CY 2020. Refer to Chart 2-1 of the WSA, for an illustration of the BCVWD 2020 individual water demands for CY 2020.

Surface Water
BCVWD does not use local surface water directly but does have two active surface water diversions in Edgar Canyon, which are on file with the State of California Division of Water Rights. These diversions direct flows to percolation ponds in Edgar Canyon to recharge the shallow aquifers for wells in the uppe r and middle Edgar Canyon. BCVWD has a pre -1914 appropriative water right to divert up to 3,000 miner’s inches (MIH) or approximately 43,440 AFY for domestic and irrigation uses. However, the District has never required such a large quantity of water and t he watersheds may not be capable of supplying such quantities in an average year. Further, the District does not include the diversion right in water supply calculations.

BCVWD retains the right to capture the occasional very high flood flows that are cap tured in basins located at the mouth of Edgar Canyon. During those times, SGPWA would be precluded from percolating imported water there and instead use other SGPWA facilities.

Groundwater
BCVWD’s potable water system is supplied by 24 wells in Edgar Canyon and the Beaumont Groundwater Basin, which is an adjudicated basin and managed by the Beaumont Basin Watermaster. Groundwater supply is augmented with imported water from the SPW and dispersed by SGPWA. Imported water is typically used for groundwater recharged at BCVWD’s recharge facility at the intersection of Brookside Avenue and Beaumont Avenue.

Reservoirs
BCVWD has 14 reservoirs ranging in size from 0.5 million gallons (MG) to 5 MG. Total storage is approximately 22 MG, slightly more than 2 avera ge days or 1 maximum day. The reservoirs provide gravity supply to their respective pressure zones. BCVWD’s system is constructed such that any higher zone reservoir can supply water on an emergency basis to any lower zone reservoir. There are booster pump s in the system that allow water to be pumped up from a lower pressure zone to a higher -pressure zone also. This provides great flexibility in system operations. Sufficient reservoir redundancy exists permitting reservoirs to be taken out of service for ma intenance.

Potable Water Transmission
The Edgar Canyon wells currently provide about 10 percent of the District’s potable water. The wells pump water to a gravity transmission main that extends the full length of the BCVWD -owned properties in Edgar Canyon. The transmission main connects to the distribution system in Cherry Valley. Because of the range of topographic elevations in the BCVWD’s service area, 11 pressure zones are needed to provide reasonable operating pressures for customers. BCVWD has 14 rese rvoirs ranging in size from 0.5 MG to

Page 2057 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -5 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems 5 MG. Total storage is approximately 22 MG. The backbone transmission system in the main pressure zones is primarily 24-inch diameter pipelines though there are some 30-inch diameter pipelines leading to some reservoirs. There are several small, older, distribution lines in the system that are gradually being replaced over time with minimum eight -inch diameter ductile iron pipe. The system can provide over 4,000-gallons per minute (gpm) fire flow in the industrial/comme rcial areas of the service area.

Recharge Facilities and Imported Water
BCVWD has a 78-acre site for ground water recharge using both imported water and storm water that is piped to the location so it can infiltrate to the ground. From 2006 through 2018, i t is estimated that an estimated 84.242 acre-ft. of imported water has been used for recharged. This is a small fraction of the recharge capacity which is between 25,000 to 30,000 AFY. BCVWD is working with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Cons ervation District (RCFCWCD) to increase recharge using stormwater. The stormwater drainage and recharge Project anticipated to be operational in 2022 and incorporates a 505-acre area that include the Project site.

Recycled Water System
Currently, BCVWD does not produce or distribute recycled water. The City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant is located within BCVWD’s service area and has been recently upgraded and expanded to include the ability to produce recycled water for distribution. BCVWD and the City ente red into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on July 10, 2019, which defined the general terms, roles, and responsibilities of both agencies as they related to the delivery of recycled water from the City’s upgraded and expanded treatment facility to BCVWD . Efforts are currently underway by both agencies to develop an agreement to set the specific terms and responsibilities. Studies and plans have been completed for a recycled water transfer pumping station.

The volume of wastewater collected from BCVWD’s service area in 2020 was 4,032 AF; because 2,020 AFY must be discharged by the City’s treatment plant to Cooper’s Creek to meet certain environmental habitat mitigation requirements, the remaining 2,012 AFY would hypothetically be available for recycled wa ter use by BCVWD. Projected future recycled water supplies available to the BCVWD are in Table 4.17-2, below.

BCVWD has an extensive network of more than 40 miles of non-potable water transmission pipelines already built that can convey untreated imported water, groundwater, and recycled water. In addition, there is a network of smaller distribution mains, 2 MG non-potable water reservoir, and about 300 existing landscape connections to the non-potable system receiving 1,620 AF of water. The non-potable system is pressurized currently with groundwater from Well 26. This is supplemented with potable water during periods of high demand.

Table 4.17-2: Projected Future Recycled Water Supply (AFY) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Estimated amount which can
be distributed (AFY) 1,630 2,017 2,381 2,892 2,955 2,915 Source: Water Supply Assessment, 2021. Table 3-5, page 3-13. (Appendix I ).

Page 2058 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -6 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Wastewater
Wastewater
There are three existing wastewater reclamation plants in the San Gorgonio Pass Area. Only the City of Beaumont’s Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) No. 1 is within BCVWD’s service area. Wastewater generally flows by gravity to WWTP No. 1. The City also uses nine wastewater lift and pumping stations in the southeastern and western portions of the City to maintain flows through the collection systems . The treatment facility provides secondary treatment using the Biolac activated sludge process, tertiary filtration and ultraviolet disinfection and operates under permit R8 -2015-0026 NPDES CA 0105376. WWTP No. 1 has a current permitted capacity of four mgd.

The WWTP is a tertiary treatment facility and is located at 715 W. 4th Street. The WWTP receives and treats domestic and commercial/industrial wastewater generated from users within the City, in addition to approximately 850 connections outside City boundaries. The facility was developed in 1994, and upgraded in 2006, to expand its capacity to four mgd. In 2018, the City approved the Beaumont Wastewater Treatment Plan Upgrade/Expansion and Brine Pipeline Project. The expansion is planned to expand the plant treatment capacity from four mgd to six mgd and includes a system upgrade to include advanced treatment, recycled water pump station, and recycled water storage. The second phase of the expansion includes constructing a 12-inch diameter brine waste disposal gravity pipeline extending 23 miles from the WWTP nort h to the nearest connection point of the Inland Empire Brine Line (IEBL), located near the north side of E Street Bridge in the City of San Bernardino.

Stormwater and Drainage
The City is in Zone 5 of the Riverside County Flood Control District’s Beaumont Area Master Drainage Plan.

The Project area slopes in a northeast to southwest direction with site elevations ranging from 2,570 to 2,420 feet above mean sea level (amsl). A stream course crosses the Project area. The stream passes from Brookside Avenue across the southwest corner of the property. The site presently sheet flows towards the existing stream course.

The Project’s drainage plan would collect stormwater through catch basins placed throughout the Project area. Stormwater would be discharged into a series of above and below-ground detention basins to reduce flows and to provide treatment prior to being discharged into the existing stream course in Planning Area 3 (see Exhibit 3.0-11, Conceptual Drainage Plan ).

RCFCWCD provides regional facilities , but stormwater management services for the City and for the Project site are provided by the City. The Project site is currently unimproved, and no storm drainage facilities are in place. Runoff from the site has historically drained to Coopers Creek and then directed via culverts under State Route (SR)- 60 to San Timoteo Creek, which ultimately drains westerly to the Santa Ana River Basin.

Urban runoff is untreated water from the impervious surfaces (hardscape, paving, rooftops, etc.) of developed sites. Runoff is conducted from these sites to the storm drain system and typically directed into local streams and rivers. Anything thrown, swept, washed, or poured into the street, gutter or a catch

Page 2059 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -7 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems basin can flow into these receiving waters and eventually flow to the ocean. To address this issue, the City adopted the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations to reduce pollutants in urban runoff and in stormwater. Compliance with this permit(s) would be the responsibility of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).

As part of the NPDES regulations, the City of Beaumont was issued a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit. This State Permit places pollution prevention requirements on planned developments, construction sites, commercial and industrial busine sses, municipal facilities and activities, and residential communities. The Project site is located within the boundaries of the San Timoteo Watershed Management Authority, with which the City entered a joint powers agreement to manage water resources.

St ormwater drainage also would be subject to the City of Beaumont adopted a Drainage Management Plan in 1999. One of the objectives of this plan is to reduce levels of pollutants within storm water runoff and increasing public awareness of water quality problems.

Solid Waste
Riverside County Waste Management
The Riverside County Waste Management Department (RCWMD) is currently responsible for providing solid waste management services for the Project site. The department operates three regional Class III municipal solid waste landfills: Lamb Canyon, El Sobrante, and Badlands. Waste haulers are able to use any of the three landfills but would most likely use Lamb Canyon because it is the closest.

Waste Management
Waste pickup and disposal services within Beaumont is provided by Waste Management (WM). Solid waste is disposed at the Lamb Canyon Landfill, located within the southwesterly portion of the City’s SOI, which will be maintained as an unincorporated County enclave within the City’s General Plan Area, and will continue to be operated and maintained by the RCWMD. The City and RCWMD would review any adjacent land use or development proposals to ensure that potential land use conflicts are avoided.

Lamb Canyon Landfill
The Lamb Canyon Landfill is located between the City of Beaumont and City of San Jacinto at 16411 Lamb Canyon Road (SR -79), south of I -10 and north of Highway 74. The landfill is owned and operated by Riverside County. The landfill property encompasses approximately 1,189 acres, of which 703.4 acres encompass the current landfill permit area. Of the 703.4 -acre landfill permit area, approximately 144.6 acres are permitted for waste disposal. The landfill is currently permitted to receive 5,000 tons per day (tpd) of MSW for disposal and 500 tpd for beneficial reuse. The site has an estimated total disposal capacity of approximately 20.7 million tons. As of January 1, 2020 (beginning of day), the landfill has a total remaining capacity of approximately 8.7 million tons. The current landfill remaining d isposal capacity is estimated to last, at a minimum, until approximately 2029. From January 2019 to December 2019, the

Page 2060 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -8 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Lamb Canyon Landfill accepted a daily average of 1,925 tons with a period total of approximately 591,125 tons. Landfill expansion potential exists at the Lamb Canyon Landfill site.2 Badlands Landfill
The Badlands Landfill is located northeast of the City of Moreno Valley at 31125 Ironwood Avenue and accessed from State Highway 60 at Theodore Avenue. The landfill is owned and operated by Ri verside County. The existing landfill encompasses 1,168.3 acres, with a total permitted disturbance area of 278 acres, of which 150 acres are permitted for refuse disposal. The landfill is currently permitted to receive 4,500 tpd of MSW for disposal and 30 0 tpd for beneficial reuse. The site has an estimated total capacity of approximately 20.5 million tons. As of January 1, 2020 (beginning of day), the landfill had a total remaining disposal capacity of approximately 5.1 million tons.5 The current landfill remaining disposal capacity is estimated to last, at a minimum, until approximately 2022 . From January 2019 to December 2019, the Badlands Landfill accepted a daily average of 2,878 tons with a period total of approximately 886,388 tons. Landfill expansion potential exists at the Badlands Landfill site (RCDWR, 2020). 3
El Sobrante Landfill
The El Sobrante Landfill is located east of I -15 and Temescal Canyon Road to the south of the City of Corona and Cajalco Road at 10910 Dawson Canyon Road. The landfill is owned and operated by USA Waste of California, a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc., and encompasses 1,322 acres, of which 645 acres are permitted for landfill operation. The El Sobrante Landfill has a total disposal capacity of approximately 209.9 million cubic yards and can receive up to 70,000 tons per week (tpw) of refuse. USA Waste must allot at least 28,000 tpw for County refuse. The landfill’s permit allows a maximum of 16,054 tons per day (tpd) of waste to be accepted into the landfill, due to the limits on vehicle trips. If needed, 5,000 tpd must be reserved for County waste, leaving the maximum commitment of Non-County waste at 11,054 tpd. Per the 2018 Annual Report, the landfill had a remaining in-County disposal capacity of approximately

53.8 million tons. In 2018, the El Sobrante Landfill accepted a daily average of 11,031 tons with a period total of approximately 3,386,471 tons. The landfill is expected to reach capacity in approximately 2060 (RCDWR, 2020).4
Natural Gas
The Project site is within the service territory of the Southern California Gas Company (SoCalGas).

SoCalGas is the largest natural gas distribution utility in the nation, serving approximately 21.8 million consumers through 5.9 million gas meters in over 500 communities. The service area for SoCalGas consists of over 24,000 square miles throughout central and southern California with a total storage capacity of approximately 136 billion cubic feet (bcf). In an effort to ensure that natural gas is always available to its customers, SoCalGas employs the use of four underground storage tanks: Aliso Canyon Storage Facility,

2 RCDWR. Lamb Canyon Landfill. Available at https://www.rcwaste.org/landfill/lambcanyon . Accessed January 2022. 3 RCDWR. Badlands Landfill. Available at https://www.rcwaste.org/landfill/badlands . Accessed January 2022. 4 RCDWR. El Sobrante Landfill. Available at https://www.rcwaste.org/landfill/elsobrante . Accessed January 2022.

Page 2061 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -9 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Honor Ranch Storage Facility, La Goleta Storage Facility, and Playa del Rey Storage Facility. These facilities help balance the energy supply and demand.

Electric
The Project site is located within the 50,000 square mile energy service territory of Southern California Edison (SCE). It is one of the largest service provider s in the nation, providing service to over 5 million customers throughout nearly a dozen c ounties in southern California.

Telephone and Cable
Telephone service is primarily provided to the Project site and surrounding areas by Verizon. Cable television service is primarily provided to the Project site and surrounding areas by Time Warner Cable.

Currently, Time Warner Cable provides cable television to the City, and would provide service once the Project site is annexed. Verizon currently operates copper and fiber optic facilities from its Coachella Central Office in the City. Verizon also provides high speed fiber optic communications and internet services to residences and businesses throughout southern California, including to the City.

4.17.3 Regulatory Setting
Federal
Safe Drinking Water Act
The U.S. EPA administers the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), the primary federal law that regulates the quality of drinking water and establishes standards to protect public health and safety. The Federal Department of Health Services (DHS) implements the SDWA and oversees public water system quality statewide. DHS establishes legal drinking water standards for contamina nt s that could threaten public health.

Clean Water Act
In 1972, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments were enacted to address water pollution problems. After an additional amendme nt in 1977, this law was re-named the Clean Water Act (CWA).

Thereafter, it established the regulation of discharges of pollutants into waters of the United States by the U.S. EPA. Under the CWA, the U.S. EPA can implement pollution control programs and se t water quality standards. Additionally, the CWA makes it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters unless a permit is obtained pursuant to its provisions State
Water
Senate Bill (SB) 610 requires the preparation of a WSA to examine existing water supply entitlements, water rights, and water service contracts relevant to the water supply for a proposed project. Projects required to prepare a WSA must meet one of the following criteria as defined by SB 610:
(a) “Project” means any of the following:

Page 2062 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -10 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems

1. Residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.

2. Shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor area.

3. Commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor area.

4. Hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms.

5. Industrial, manufacturing or processing plant, or industrial park planned to employ more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.

6. Mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified above.

7. Project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount o f water required for 500 dwelling units.
(b) If a public water system has fewer than 5,000 service connections, then "project" means any proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would account for an increas e of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections, or a mixed-use project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by residential development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections.

Under Assembly Bill (AB) 325, all developer -installed landscaping must be accompanied by a landscape package that documents how water use efficiency would be achieved through design. In addition, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations incorporates the California Building Standards, included as the California Plumbing Code (Part 5), which promotes water conservation. Title 20 addresses public utilities and energy and includes appliance and efficiency standards that promote water conservation. A number of state laws require water -efficient plumbing fixtures in structures. The California Fire Code, Appendix B, outlines fire flow and stora ge reserve requirements for fire protection.

Solid Waste
AB 939
The Integrated Waste Management Act (AB 939) mandates that communities reduce their solid waste.

AB 939 required local jurisdictions to divert 25 percent of their solid waste by 1995 and 50 percent by 2000, compared to a baseline of 1990. AB 939 also established an integrated framework for program implementation, solid waste planning, and solid waste facility and landfill compliance.

AB 341
AB 341 focuses on increased commercial waste recycling as a method to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The regulation requires businesses and organizations that generate four or more cubic yards of waste per week to recycle. AB 341 requires businesses to do at least one of the following:

Page 2063 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -11 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems • Source separate recyclable and/or compostable material from solid waste and donate or self -haul the material to recycling facilities.
• Subscribe to a recycling service with waste hauler.
• Provide recycling service to tenants (if commercial or multi -family complex). • Demonstrate compliance with requirements of California Code of Regulations Title 14.

AB 1826
AB 1826 requires businesses and multifamily complexes to arrange for organic waste recycling services.

Businesses subject to AB 1826 are required to do at least one of the following:
• Source separate organic material from all other recyclables and donate or self -haul to a permitted organic waste processing facility.
• Enter into a contract or work agreement with gardening or landscaping service provider or refuse hauler to ensure the waste generated from those services meet the requirements of AB 1826.

Urban Water Management Planning Act
In 1983, the California legislature enacted the Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code [CWC], §§ 10610–10656), which requires specified urban water suppliers within the state to prepare an UWMP and update it every five years. Specifically, §§ 10610.04 et seq. as amended, of the California Urban Water Management Planning Act specifies that:
“Urban Water Suppliers shall be required to develop water management plans to actively pursue the efficient use of available supplies. As such, UWMPs serve as an important element in documenting water supply availability and reliability for purposes of compliance with SBs 610 and 221, which link water supply sufficiency to large land-use development project approvals. Urban water suppliers also must prepare UWMPs, pursuant to the Urban Water Management Planning Act, in order to be eligible for state funding and drought assistance”.

In Aug ust 2021, the BCVWD Board of Directors adopted the District’s 2020 UWMP. This plan details BCVWD's water demand projections and provides information regarding BCVWD's water supply. BCVWD's 2020 UWMP relies heavily on information and assurances included in the following documents:
• 2015 BCVWD Potable Water Master Plan Update (January 2016) • 2016 BCVWD Non-Potable Water Master Plan (January 2017) • Recycled Water Facilities Planning Report for Recycled Water Pipeline and Pump Station (June 2014)
• BCVWD White Paper s No. 1-7 (Published dates vary, range September 2017 – September 2018) • City of Beaumont, General Plan (December 2020)
• Pass Area Land Use Plan (December 6, 2016), part of Riverside County General Plan (December 8, 2015)

Page 2064 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -12 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems • 2020 Urban Water Management Plan for the SGPWA (June 2020) State Water Resources Control Board
The SWRCB is the California (State) agency focused on providing and ensuring clean sustainable water for all state residents. This s tate agency works alongside other federal programs like the CWA to regulate water sources and uses. The SWRCB regulates water consumption for irrigation and drinking, as well as water discharges from construction, municipal uses, storm water, and other sources.

The Water Conservation Act of 2009 (CWC §§ 10608–10608.64). The Water Conservation Act of 2009 (often referred to as “SBx7-7” or the “20 by 2020 law”) establishes the goal of achieving a 20 percent reduction in statewide urban per capita water use by December 31, 2020, and the interim goal of achieving a 15 percent reduction by 2015. In an effort to achieve those goals, SBx7-7 requires urban retail water suppliers to develop technical information (e.g., baseline daily per capita water use, water use targets, and interim water use targets) and to report that information in their UWMPs. As further discussed below, two of the primary calculations required by SBx7-7 are Base Daily Per Capita Water Use (average gallons per capita per day [gpcd] used in prior years), and Compliance Water Use Targets (gpcd targets for 2015 and 2020). The Base Daily Per Capita Water Use calculation is based on gross water use by an agency in each year and can be based on a 10 -year average ending no earlier than 2004 and no later than 2010, or on a 15-year average if 10 percent of the agency’s 2008 municipal demand was met by recycled water. Using this Base Daily Per Capita Water Use figure, an urban retail water supplier must then determine its urban water use target for 2020 and its interim water use target for 2015, both in terms of “gpcd.” Section 10608.20(b) of SBx7 -7 establishes four alternative methods for calculating the Compliance Water Use Targets. Generally, the alternative methods are: (1) 80 percent of Base Daily Per Capita Water Use; (2) adherence to certain water use performance standards; (3) 95 percent of the applicable s tate hydrologic region target as set forth in the State’s draft 20 by 2020 Water Conservation Plan; or (4) the provisional target method and procedures developed by the Department of Water Resources pursuant to SBx7-7.1. Importantly, per capita reductions under SBx7-7 can be accomplished through any combination of increased water conservation, improved water use efficiency, and increased use of recycled water to offset potable demands. Potable demand offsets can occur through direct reuse of recycled water, such as for irrigation, or indirect potable reuse through groundwater recharge and reservoir augmentation. SBx7-7 provides additional flexibility by allowing compliance on an individual agency basis or through collaboration with other agencies in a region. The City of Beaumont’s compliance with and application of SBx7-7 requirements are further discussed below.

SB 610: Water Supply Planning (CWC §§ 10910 through 10915). Signed into law October 9, 2001, SB 610 resulted in additions and amendments to CWC §§ 10910 to 10915 and Public Resource Code (PRC) § 21151.9. As noted above, SB 610 provides that when a city or county determines that a “project” as defined in CWC § 10912 is subject to review under CEQA, the city or county must identify the water supply agency that would provide retail water service to the Project and request that water supplier to prepare a WSA.

Page 2065 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -13 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Regional
Beaumont Basin Watermaster
The Beaumont Basin Watermaster was formed on February 4, 2004 as a result of a negotiated Stipulated Agreement between several parties with interests in the Beaumont Groundwater Basin, including the City.

The Judgment entered in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside (Case No. RIC 389197), provides the Watermaster with the authority a nd responsibility to administer the adjudicated water rights within the Beaumont Basin. Pursuant to the Judgment, the Court appointed a five-member Watermaster committee consisting of representatives from the cities of Banning and Beaumont, the BCVWD, the Yucaipa Valley Water District, and South Mesa Water Company.

The Beaumont Basin encompasses approximately 26 square miles, has a current safe yield of approximately 8,650 AF, a total storage capacity available of up to 200,000 AF for conjunctive use. By approving the Stipulated Judgment, the Court approved the responsibility for the management of the Beaumont Basin to the Watermaster. The Court retained its continuing jurisdiction should there be any need in the future to resolve difficult questions.

Master Drainage Plan
The RCFCWCD adopted the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan (MDP, July 1983), the boundaries of which include the Planning Area. Many cities within the RCFCWCD boundary that have a MDP will also establish an Area Drainage Plan (ADP), which is the financing mechanism used to offset taxpayer costs for proposed drainage facilities. According to the ADP, fees to support construction of MDP facilities are assessed on new development within the plan area. Currently, an ADP has not been established for th e City of Beaumont.5
Local
Beaumont Municipal Code
The following chapters of the Beaumont Municipal Code (MC) address utilities and service system topics:

Title 8 – Health and Safety, Chapter 8.12 – Solid Waste Management Establishes mandatory solid waste collection in the City for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of the City's residents, and to carefully control the collection and disposal of solid waste so that the reductions required to be made by PRC § 40000 et seq. (AB 939) can be planned for and accurately measured.

5 Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Master Drainage Plan. Available at http://content.rcflood.org/MDPADP/ .

Accessed March 4, 2022.

Page 2066 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -14 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Title 8 – Health and Safety, Chapter 8.14 – Mandatory Recycling Requirements for Commercial Facilities
Establishes requirements for the recycling of recyclable materials generated from comm ercial facilities.

These requirements are intended to increase the diversion of recyclable materials from landfills, conserve capacity and extend the useful life of landfills utilized by the City, reduce GHG emissions, and avoid the potential financial and other consequences to the City of failing to meet s tate law diversion requirements.

Title 13 – Public Services, Chapter 13.04 – Sewage Discharges Restricts the types of discharges allowed in the sanitary sewer system.

Title 13 – Public Services, Chapter 13.08 – Sewer System Establishes the methods by which sewage will be handled and restricts deposition in any unsanitary manner upon public or private property any human fecal matter, garbage, or other objectionable waste.

It is also unlawful to discharge to the ground or to a natural watercourse any sewage, including, but not limited to, domestic or industrial wastewater or other polluted water, in a manner that would create a hazard or nuisance or that would impair the usefulness of groundwater or surface w ater.

Title 13 – Public Services, Chapter 13.09 – Regulating Fats, Oils and Grease (F.O.G.) Management in Food Service Establishments
Demonstrates compliance with the Order No. DWQ 2006 -0003 adopted by the SWRCB in May 2006, mandating implementation of various tasks associated with the City's sanitary sewer systems.

Title 13 – Public Services, Chapter 13.20 – Pretreatment and Regulation of Wastes (Ordinance No. 1094, adopted Nov. 7, 2017)
Describes the City’s wastewater pretreatment ordinance that identifies and regulates certain facilities that have the potential to discharge undesirable pollutants that may interfere with or damage the W WTP, and/or pass through untreated into the environment. The ordinance incorporates the National Categorical Pretreatment Standards located in 40 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter N, Parts 405 —471. Regulated users can include, but are not limited to industrial fac ilities, vehicle servicing facilities, water -softening wastes, food processing facilities, medical waste, spent solutions and sludge, and recovered pretreatment wastes.

All regulated users are noticed by the City to obtain an individual wastewater discharge permit before connecting to or discharging to the WWTP. Each permittee is required to comply with the provisions of the permit. The City may conduct inspections, monitoring, flow metering, sampling, collection of compensation, and enforcement procedures including cease and desist orders and permit revocation.

Title 13 – Public Services, Chapter 13.24 – Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls
Protects and enhances the water quality of watercourses, water bodies, groundwater, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal CWA, the State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the conditions of any NPDES permit applicable to the City.

Page 2067 of 2513 ends

City of Beaumont Draft
Beaumont Summit Station Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report

April 2022 4.17 -15 4.17 | Utilities and Service Systems Title 16 – Subdivisions, Chapter 16.44 – Flood Control and Tract Drainage Establishes the minimum facilities required for the control of tract drainage and floodwaters.

Title 16 – Subdivisions, Chapter 16.48 – Dry Sewers
Establishes that if a land division is filed that proposes a density of two or more lots per acr es, and if connection to a wet sewerage system is not required, the installation of a dry sewer system may be required. Installation of the sewer mains, laterals and connections shall be completed prior to the installation of street improvements.

Title 17 – Zoning, Chapter 17.04.083 – Inclusion of Recycling Receptacles in Building Design Establishes that office, commercial and retail, industrial and large -scale residential development projects shall include appropriately-sized receptacles for recyclable mat erials adjacent to trash containers in all common areas. Signs shall be posted to instruct users as to the proper separation of trash and recyclable materials.

City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan
Land Use and Design Element
Goal 3.2: A City that ensures t he timely provision of services with phased development.

Policy 3.2.1 Ensure that there will be adequate water and wastewater system capacity to meet projected demand. Coordinate with BCVWD to ensure access to clean and adequate water supply.

Policy 3.2.2 Continue to implement comprehensive water and wastewater management programs and ensure that future developments pay their fair share for any needed infrastructure improvements.

Policy 3.2.3 Continue to oversee the development of adequate and dependable public services and facilities to support both existing and future development.

Implementation LUCD-6 Development Fees. Update citywide development impact fees for infrastructure, affordable housing, other community benefits, and long -range planning.

Goal 3.6: A City with active and comfortable places that encourage social interaction and community gathering.

Policy 3.6.3 Require project developers to establish mechanisms, such as a Community Facilities District, to adequately maintain new parks, recreational facilities, and infrastructure.

Implementation LUCD-13 Coordination of Development Plans and Infrastructure Funding. Phase development based on availability of infrastructure and only allow annexation to occur only when the full range of urban services is available or funded.

Page 2068 of 2513 ends

Beaumont City CouncilOctober 18, 2022

Beaumont City Council
October 18, 2022