TITLE SHEET - LOCATION MAPVICINITY MAP - GENERAL NOTESKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405909.335-6120stantec.comLOCATION MAP1PRIVATE STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANSTRACT NO. 27971-4SITE LOCATIONN"DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE"HEARTPARKWAYSOUTHLANDHEARTLAND PARKWAY NORTHSAN TIMOTEO CREEKHEARTPARKWAYSOUTHLANDPARKWAYS O
U
T
HHEARTLAND TRACT NO. 27971-7TRACT NO. 27971-9TRACT NO. 27971-10TRACT NO. 27971-1TRACT NO. 27971-8TRACT NO. 27971-4TRACT NO. 27971-6TRACT NO. 27971-3TRACT NO. 27971-2TRACT NO. 27971-5TRACT NO. 27971-11TRACT NO. 27971-12CO L
U
M
B
U
S
C
O
U
R
T
MON
R
O
E
C
O
U
R
T
CANFI
E
L
D
C
O
U
R
T
SAN
T
A
F
E
C
O
U
R
T
WIN
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
P
L
A
C
E
LITTL
E
R
O
C
K
P
L
A
C
E
HARRISBURG PLACE
MONTGOMERY PLACE
HAMILTON PLACELANSING STREETTOPEKA WAYALBANY LANEKIM
B
A
L
L
C
O
U
R
THOPEWELL TRAILH
A
R
T
F
O
R
D
L
A
N
E
CA
R
S
O
N
W
A
Y
A
M
H
E
R
S
T
W
A
Y
SP
R
I
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
W
A
Y
RI
C
H
M
O
N
D
W
A
Y
RALEIGH STREET CUMBERLAND WAYTACOMA COURTVANDERBILT WAYGOLDEN GATE WAYPLACE B
A
L
T
I
M
O
R
E
W
A
Y
POWELL DENVERCOURTHOMESTEAD WAY
VICTORIA PLACE
T
A
L
L
A
H
A
S
S
E
E
W
A
Y
WAY
BISM
A
R
K
WAY
HOPEWELL
PROVIDENCE COURTBELLINGHAM COURTDENVER COURTSALEM COURTPOTRERO BOULEVARD
CONCORD PLACE
CLE
V
E
L
A
N
D
P
L
A
C
E
AUS
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
MA
D
I
S
O
N
P
L
A
C
E
STO
N
E
W
A
L
L
P
L
A
C
E
CLI
F
T
O
N
P
L
A
C
E
BLU
F
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
MELON PLACE
RAINER PLACE
CHARLSTON PLACEMARYLAND PLACEPLEASANT STREETBRISTOL PLACE PEACOCK COURTADMIRAL WAYTRAIL HOPEWELLPARK SITEPARCEL 14PARK SITEPARCEL 19PARK SITEPARCEL 19PARK SITEPARCEL 20COMMERCIALPARCEL 13PARCEL 176 AUG 20206 AUG 20203229A8/27/208/27/208/27/2009/04/2020Page 180 of 865
STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS
TRACT NO. 27971-4
2 CONSTRUCTION NOTES, TYPICAL SECTION,
QUANTITIES, & INDEX MAP
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
TOTAL
SPRINGFIELD WAY, RICHMOND WAY,
BALTIMORE WAY, HOPEWELL TRAIL
TYPICAL 56' SECTION
AC PAVEMENT MATCH AND OVERLAY17
UNDERGROUND
UTILITY LOCATIONS
TYPICAL 56' SECTION W/ 8" CURB
SPRINGFIELD WAY, RICHMOND WAY,
BALTIMORE WAY, HOPEWELL TRAIL
HE
A
R
T
L
A
N
D
P
A
R
K
W
A
Y
S
O
U
T
H
H
O
P
E
W
E
L
L
T
R
A
I
LSPRINGFIELD WAYRICHMOND WAYBALTIMORE WAYTRACT BOUNDARYSHEET 3T R
A
C
T
B
O
U
N
D
A
R
YTRACT BOUNDARYTRA
C
T
B
O
U
N
D
A
R
Y
SHEET 4SHEET 5S
H
E
E
T
3 S
H
E
E
T
4 SH
E
E
T
5 LIN
E
A
R
P
A
R
K
AMHERST WAY6 AUG 2020
3229A
8/27/20
09/04/2020
55 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47
38 39 40 41 42
43 44 45 46
58 59
60 LINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
PARCEL
19 PARCEL
MAP NO.
34880
58 59 60 61 62
37 55 38
56 57
TRACT 27971-8
LOT 68
11+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 24+00
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
SPRINGFIELD WAY
SPRINGFIELD WAY 3
HOPEWELL TRAIL
HOPEWELL TRAIL
2385
RIGHT
2385
C.L.
2385
LEFT
25+00 26+00 27+0023+67.52 MATCHLINE27+25.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4SEE TRACT 27971-827+25.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4SEE TRACT 27971-8HOPEWELL TRAIL SPRINGFIELD WAY 2375
RIGHT
2375
C.L.
2375
LEFT
POINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
EXIST
GROUND
@ C.L.
EXIST
GROUND
@ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFTEND CONSTRUCTIONSEE TRACT 27971-8END CONSTRUCTION22+09.38 MATCHLINE22+09.38 MATCHLINE END CONSTRUCTIONNN23+0022+00
AMHERST W
A
Y SEE TRACT 27971-823+67.52 MATCHLINE END CONSTRUCTIONPOINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALIDENTICALPOINTS 2385 RIGHT
2385
C.L.
2385
LEFT
6 AUG 2020
3229A
8/27/20
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
3637 35 34 33 32 31 30 29
2625242322
21 20 27
28 63
64 65
LINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
PARCEL 19
PARCEL MAP NO.
34880
63 64 65 66 67
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
13+00 27+00 29+0028+00 30+0011+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 16+00
RICHMOND WAY
RICHMOND WAY 4
HOPEWELL TRAIL
HOPEWELL TRAIL
2395
RIGHT
2395
C.L.
2395
LEFT
27+25.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 327+25.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 330+03.07 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 530+03.07 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 5HOPEWELL TRAIL
RICHMOND WAY
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
EXIST.
GROUND
@ C.L.
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
EXIST.
GROUND
@ C.L.
2390
RIGHT
2390
C.L.
2390
LEFT
IDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPOINTS 2395
RIGHT
2395
C.L.
2395
LEFT
2390
RIGHT
2390
C.L.
2390
LEFT
N
N6 AUG 2020
3229A
8/27/20
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
19 18 17 16 15 14 13
12 1
11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
68 69
70 71
LINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
TR. NO. 27971-4TR. NO. 27971-9PARCEL
19 PARCEL
MAP NO.
34880
67 68
69 70 71 72
119
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
BALTIMORE WAY
BALTIMORE WAY 5
HOPEWELL TRAIL
HOPEWELL TRAIL
11+0010+00 12+00 13+00 15+0014+00 31+0030+0010+00 11+00 12+00 13+00 15+0014+00 33+0032+00 2410
RIGHT
2410
C.L.
2410
LEFT
2410
RIGHT
2410
C.L.
2410
LEFT
2405
RIGHT
2405
C.L.
2405
LEFT
RIGHT
2405
2405
C.L.
2405
LEFT
30+03.07 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 430+03.07 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 433+39.85 - MATCHLINEBALTIMORE WAY 33+28.03 MATCHLINEHOPEWELL TRAIL
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
EXIST.
GROUND
@ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
16+00
SEE TRACT 21971-6END CONSTRUCTION33+34.33 MATCHLINESEE TRACT 21971-6END CONSTRUCTIONSEE TRACT 21971-6END CONSTRUCTIONIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPOINTS EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.NN 6 AUG 2020
3229A
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
70 68
TRACT 27971-8
LOT 68
NOTES
FINISHING SPECIFICATIONS
STREET LIGHT DETAIL
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
AMHERST WAY
6 11+0010+00 12+0011+0010+00 12+00
2375
RIGHT
2375
C.L.
2375
LEFT
AMHERST WAYHEARTLAND PKWY SOUTH
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.NHOPEWELL TRAIL
AMHERST WAY
VERT: 1"=4'
HORIZ: 1"=40'
PROFILE SCALE:CURB RAMP DETAILS
6 AUG 2020
3229A
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
A
PW2022-0896R01252368
3,484.43
7/18/2022
27971-6 Streets and Drainage Improvements Bond # PB03010407116
HEARTPARKWAYSOUTHLANDCO
L
U
M
B
U
S
C
O
U
R
T
MON
R
O
E
C
O
U
R
T
CANFI
E
L
D
C
O
U
R
T
SAN
T
A
F
E
C
O
U
R
T
WIN
C
H
E
S
T
E
R
P
L
A
C
E
LITTL
E
R
O
C
K
P
L
A
C
E
HARRISBURG PLACE
MONTGOMERY PLACE
HAMILTON PLACELANSING STREETTOPEKA WAYALBANY LANEKIM
B
A
L
L
C
O
U
R
THOPEWELL TRAILH
A
R
T
F
O
R
D
L
A
N
E
CA
R
S
O
N
W
A
Y
A
M
H
E
R
S
T
W
A
Y
SP
R
I
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
W
A
Y
RI
C
H
M
O
N
D
W
A
Y
RALEIGH STREET CUMBERLAND WAYTACOMA COURTVANDERBILT WAYGOLDEN GATE WAYPLACE B
A
L
T
I
M
O
R
E
W
A
Y
POWELL DENVERCOURTHOMESTEAD WAY
VICTORIA PLACE
T
A
L
L
A
H
A
S
S
E
E
W
A
Y
WAY
BISM
A
R
K
WAY
HOPEWELL
PROVIDENCE COURTBELLINGHAM COURTDENVER COURTSALEM COURTPOTRERO BOULEVARD
CONCORD PLACE
CLE
V
E
L
A
N
D
P
L
A
C
E
AUS
T
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
MA
D
I
S
O
N
P
L
A
C
E
STO
N
E
W
A
L
L
P
L
A
C
E
CLI
F
T
O
N
P
L
A
C
E
BLU
F
F
S
T
R
E
E
T
MELON PLACE
RAINER PLACE
CHARLSTON PLACEMARYLAND PLACEPLEASANT STREETBRISTOL PLACE PEACOCK COURTADMIRAL WAY TRACT NO. 27971-7HEARTLAND PARKWAY NORTHTRACT NO. 27971-9TRACT NO. 27971-10SAN TIMOTEO CREEKTRACT NO. 27971-1TRACT NO. 27971-8TRACT NO. 27971-4HEARTPARKWAYSOUTHLANDTRACT NO. 27971-6TRACT NO. 27971-3TRACT NO. 27971-2TRACT NO. 27971-5TRACT NO. 27971-11TRACT NO. 27971-12PARKWAYSOUTHHEART LAND PARK SITEPARCEL 14PARK SITEPARCEL 19PARK SITEPARCEL 19PARK SITEPARCEL 20COMMERCIALPARCEL 13PARCEL 17LOCATION MAP1PRIVATE STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANSTRACT NO. 27971-6TITLE SHEET - LOCATION MAPVICINITY MAP - GENERAL NOTESKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallR735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405909.335-6120stantec.comSITE LOCATIONN"DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE"6 AUG 20206 AUG 20208/27/208/27/208/27/208/27/2009/04/2020Page 219 of 865
1 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 37
38 39
4041
42 43
44 45
46 47
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
2 3 4 5
6 7 8
9 HEARTLAND
HOPEWEL
L
T
R
A
I
LTALLAHASSEE WAYBISMARK WAYHOPEWELL TRAILADMIRAL WAYTRACT NO. 27971-4TRACT BOUNDARYTRACT NO. 27971-5 TRACT
B
O
U
N
D
A
R
Y TRACT BOUNDARYTRACT BOU
N
D
A
R
Y
SHEET 3SHEET 3 SHEET 5SHEET 5SHEET 4 SHEET
4 24
LIN
E
A
R
P
A
R
K
TRA
C
T
N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
9 PHA
S
E
2 TRACT NO. 2
7 9
7 1
-
1 0
PHASE 2
SITE
PARK
PARKWA
Y
SOUTH
PAR
C
E
L
1 9
2 CONSTRUCTION NOTES, QUANTITIES,
TYPICAL SECTION, & INDEX MAP
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
N
TOTAL
TALLAHASSEE WAY, BISMARK WAY,
MODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY STD. 106, SECTION A
HOPEWELL TRAIL
PAVEMENT AND AC BERM REMOVAL17
TYPICAL 56' SECTION UNDERGROUND
UTILITY LOCATIONS
6 AUG 2020
A
8/27/20
09/04/2020
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
10+00 12+00 14+0013+00 34+00
3 TALLAHASSEE WAY
TALLAHASSEE WAY 3
HOPEWELL TRAIL
HOPEWELL TRAIL
2420
RIGHT
2420
C.L.
2420
LEFT
11+00 15+00 33+00 36+0035+00 23+0037+0033+28.03 MATCHLINE33+28.03 MATCHLINESEE TRACT 27971-433+41.89 MATCHLINE SEE TRACT 27971-437+30.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4POINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICAL 2415 RIGHT
2415
C.L.
2415
LEFT
2415
RIGHT
2415
C.L.
2415
LEFT
HOPEWE
L
L
T
R
A
I
L
TALLAHASSEE WAY
37+30.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 4PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ CL
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ CL
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
EXIST. GROUND
@ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.POINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICAL 2430 RIGHT
2430
C.L.
2430
LEFT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.END CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION NOTES:
NN33+41.89 MATCHLINE41
42 43 44 45 46 47 48
49 50
51525354555657585960
61 64
65 66
67 LINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
PARCEL
19 4161
62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
6 AUG 2020
A
8/27/20
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com HOPEWELL TRAIL 4
HOPEWELL TRAIL
37+00 38+00 41+00 43+0042+0039+00 40+00 11+0010+00 23+0012+00 SEE SHEET 3ADMIRAL WAY
ADMIRAL WAY37+30.00 MATCHLINE - 2425
C.L.
2425
LEFT
2425
RIGHT
2425
C.L.
ADMIRAL
W
A
Y
BISMARK WAY HOPEWELL TRAIL
HEARTLAND PARKWAY SOU
T
H
2425
LEFT
2425
RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
SEE SHEET 542+88.44 MATCHLINE - PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.37+30.00 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 342+29.17 MATCHLINE - SEE SHEET 52425 C.L.
2425
LEFT
2425
RIGHT
2425
C.L.
2425
LEFT
2425
RIGHT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
N
NS T O PS T O PS T O PS T O P
6 AUG 2020
A
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
LINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
PARCEL
19 S T O PLINEAR PARK
OPEN SPACE
PARCEL
19 PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
11+0010+00 13+0012+00 14+00 11+0010+00
BISMARK WAY
BISMARK WAY 5
HOPEWELL TRAIL
HOPEWELL TRAIL
2430
RIGHT
2430
C.L.
2430
LEFT
2440
RIGHT
2440
C.L.
2440
LEFT
HOPE
W
E
L
L
T
R
AI
L
2440
RIGHT
2440
C.L.
2440
LEFT
12+00 13+00
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
42+8
8. 4
4 -
M
A
T
C
H
LI
N
E
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
442+88.44 BCSEE SHEET 4POINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALMATCHLINE PROPOSED T.C. @ LEFT
POINTSIDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
6 AUG 2020
8/27/20
8/27/20
8/27/20
8/27/20
09/04/2020
6 SIGNAGE AND STRIPING
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com S T O PS T O PS T O PS T O PPARK SITE TR. NO
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
5 1
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 4041
42 43
44 45
46 47
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
2 3 4
5 6
7 8
9 31
LINEAR PAR
K
TR. NO. 27971-4TR.
N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
9 TR. NO. 2797
1 -
1 0
PHASE 2
PH
A
S
E
2 TR. NO. 27971-3 HEARTLA
N
D
HOPEWELL T
R
A
I
LTALLAHASSEE WAYBISMARK WAYHOPEWELL TRAILADMIRAL WAY PARKW A
Y
SOUTH
6 AUG 2020
09/04/2020
NOTES
FINISHING SPECIFICATIONS
STREET LIGHT DETAIL
7 DETAILS
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
CURB RAMP DETAILS
6 AUG 2020
A
8/27/20
09/04/2020
PW2022-0898R01252370
3,484.43
7/18/2022
27971-8 Streets and Drainage Bond # PB03010407117
LOCATION MAPKnow what'sRSITE LOCATIONN1 SEP 20201 SEP 20209/2/209/2/209/2/2009/03/2020Page 257 of 865
HARTFORD LANECARSON WAYAMHERST WAYSPRINGFIELD WAYMONROE COURTCOLUMBUS COURTHEART L
A
N
D
VICT
O
RI
A
P
L
A
C
E
H
O
P
E
W
E
L
L
T
R
A
I
L
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
697071727374
75 76
77 78
79 80
TRACT BOUNDARYTR
A
C
T
N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
2 SEE SHEET 5SEE SHEET 4SEE SHEET 3SEE SHEET 6SEE SHEET 7TRACT BOUNDARYTRACT NO. 27971-4TRA C
T
N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
7 TR
A
C
T
B
O
U
N
D
A
R
Y
PARKWAY SOUTHHEARTLAND PARKWAY SOUTH
PAR
C
E
L
1 9
PAR
C
E
L
M
A
P
N
O
.
3488
0 Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
STREET IMPROVEMENT PLANS
TRACT NO. 27971-8
N
TOTAL
HOPEWELL TRAIL, HARTFORD LANE,
MODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY STD. 106, SECTION A
CARSON WAY, AMHERST WAY
2 CONSTRUCTION NOTES, QUANTITIES,
TYPICAL SECTIONS, & INDEX MAP
TYPICAL 56' SECTION
UNDERGROUND
UTILITY LOCATIONS
AC PAVEMENT MATCH AND OVERLAY17
TYPICAL 56' SECTION W/8" CURB
MODIFIED RIVERSIDE COUNTY STD. 106, SECTION A
PORTION OF HOPEWELL TRAIL,
HARTFORD LANE,
2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
09/03/2020
1 2
3 4
1 16 17 18 19 20
21 22
23 24252627282930
31 79
80 PARCEL 19PARCEL MAP NO.34880PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
HARTFORD LANE
3 HARTFORD LANE
11+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 17+0016+00 18+00
2350
C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
2350
LEFT
2350
RIGHT
HE
AR
T
L
AND
P
KW
Y
SOU
TH
HOPEWELL TRA
IL IDENTICALPOINTSIDENTICALPOINTS EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L. 2350
C.L.
2350
LEFT
2350
RIGHT
N2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
9/2/20
09/03/2020
4849
50 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41
42 4344454647
74 73
72 HOPEWELL TRAI
L
PARCEL 19
PARCEL MAP NO.
34880
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
CARSON WAY
4 CARSON WAY
11+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 16+0015+00
2365
C.L.POINTSIDENTICAL 2365
LEFT
2365
RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.POINTSIDENTICAL EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
2365
C.L.
2365
LEFT
2365
RIGHT
N2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
09/03/2020
69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60
5958575655535251
PARCEL 19
PARCEL MAP NO.
34880
56 54
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
AMHERST WAY
5 AMHERST WAY
11+0010+00 12+0011+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 16+00
2375
RIGHT
2375
C.L.
2375
LEFT
HOPEWEL
L
T
R
A
I
L
HEARTLAN
D
P
K
W
Y
S
O
U
T
H
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.POINTSIDENTICALIDENTICAL EXIST. GROUND @ C.L. 2375
RIGHT
2375
C.L.
2375
LEFT
NPOINTS2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
9/2/20
09/03/2020
15 1413
1211
10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3 2 1
80 79
78 77
31 16
76 32
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
HOPEWELL TRAIL
6 HOPEWELL TRAIL
9+00 11+0010+00 13+0012+00 15+0014+00 17+0016+00
HARTFORD LA
N
E
HARTFORD LA
N
E
1 7
+
5 0
.
0 0
-
M
A
T
C
H
L
I
N
E
-
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
717+50.00 - MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 7 2345
C.L.
2345
LEFT
2345
RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
EXIST.
GROUND
@ C.L.
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
IDENT
ICALPOINTS IDENTICALPOINTS 2345
C.L.
2345
LEFT
2345
RIGHT
N2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
09/03/2020
32 50 51 68
69 70717273747517+50.00 - MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 656 57
HOPEWELL TRAIL
7 HOPEWELL TRAIL
PROFILE SCALE:
HORIZ: 1"=40'
VERT: 1"=4'
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
20+00 22+0021+00 24+0023+0018+0017+00 19+00
AMHERST WAY
AMHERST WAY
CARSON WAY17+50.00 - MATCH LINE - SEE SHEET 6 2355
C.L.
2355
LEFT
2355
RIGHT
IDENTICAL
POINT
IDENTICAL
POINT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ RIGHT
PROPOSED
F.S. @ C.L.
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
PROPOSED
T.C. @ LEFT
2370
C.L.
2370
LEFT
2370
RIGHT
EXIST. GROUND @ C.L.23+67.52-MATCHLINE- END CONSTRUCTIONIDENTICAL POINTIDENTICAL POINTIDENTICAL POINTNSEE TRACT 27971-422+09.38-MATCHLINE- END CONSTRUCTIONSEE TRACT 27971-423+67.52-MATCHLINE- END CONSTRUCTIONSEE TRACT 27971-422+09.38-MATCHLINE- END CONSTRUCTIONSEE TRACT 27971-42 SEP 2020 9/2/20
09/03/2020
TR.
N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
7 TR. NO. 27971-1TR. NO. 27971-2TR. N
O
.
2 7
9 7
1 -
3 TR. NO. 27971-4HEA
R
T
L
A
N
D AMHERST WAYCARSON WAYHARTFORD LANEH
O
P
E
W
E
L
L
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
21 22
23 24
25 26
27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34
35 36
37 38
39 40
41 42
43 44
45 46
47 48
49 50
51 52
53 54
55 56
57 58
59 60
61 62
63 64
65 66
67 68
69707172737475
76 77
78 79
80 TRA
I
L
PARKWA
Y
SOUTH
PARCEL 19
PARCEL MAP NO.
34880
S T O PS T O
P S T O PS T O PS T O PS T O P8
SIGNAGE AND STRIPING
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
2 SEP 2020
09/03/2020
9 DETAILS
Know what's below.
before you dig.Call
R
735 E. CARNEGIE DR., #280
SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92405
909.335-6120 stantec.com
CURB RAMP DETAILS
2 SEP 2020
9/2/20
09/03/2020
Staff Report
TO: City Council
FROM: Kari Mendoza, Administrative Services Director
DATE January 17, 2023
SUBJECT: Authorize Changes to Position Allocation
Description Staff and administration have been continuously evaluating current positions and staffing levels. As vacancies arise individual department organizational structures are being evaluated and discussed. Finance, Public Works, and the Police Department seek to make changes to their position allocations. The Finance Department seeks to change a Senior Accountant to an Accountant. The Police Department seeks to add an additional Lead Dispatcher and Police Corporal. Public Works seeks to change a Senior Engineer to an Associate Engineer.
Background and Analysis:
On June 21, 2022, Council adopted the FY 22/23 budget with 212.5 full time equivalent employees. On October 4 and November 1, 2022, Council approved changes to the position allocation table, authorizing a second Engineering Development Technician, a second Assistant Planner, and second Lead Bus Driver and two Police Captains.
The Finance Department is requesting one organizational change to accurately reflect the organizational structure of the department. They are currently allotted one Senior Accountant. The Senior Accountant position is currently vacant, and the department has requested this position be eliminated and replaced with an Accountant. This change eliminates an unnecessary level of supervision in the department while accomplishing the needs of the position. A salary survey was completed, and the new Accountant position pay scale will be adjusted 15% lower than the previously approved Senior level.
The Police Department currently has nine (9) full-time dispatchers which includes one (1) Lead Dispatcher. They are requesting to eliminate one part-time / on-call dispatcher position and add one (1) additional Lead Dispatcher position for seven days a we ek cover shift and first level supervision within the dispatch center.
The Police Department currently has six (6) Police Corporals to assist in the supervision of sworn personnel and professional staff. The supervision of sworn personnel / teams /
shifts is best shared between a Police Sergeant and a Police Corporal. The department’s four core patrol teams were staffed with both a sergeant and a corporal.
The creation of the motor / traffic unit and the complexities of their duties, including vehicular homicides, fatal collisions, risk management, all collision report reviews and approvals to name a few, necessitates having a Police Corporal assigned to this unit.
This left one patrol team without a Police Corporal (the fifth is assigned to Investigation s and the sixth to K9/Asset Forfeiture).
The Corporal is expected to act in the capacity of a Sergeant, performing supervisory responsibilities in the absence of, or at the direction of, the Sergeant. The Corporal is expected to perform field supervision of patrol activities, supervise, and personally perform investigative work and perform assigned administrative activities in carrying out the direction of the Chief of Police.
The Public Works Department is requesting one organizational change due to recruitment challenges for their allotted Senior Engineer position. Staff has been actively recruiting for this position since June 23, 2022, and have been unable to fill the position despite social media and various advertisement sites. A salary survey was completed, and the new Associate level position pay scale will be adjusted 15% lower than the previously approved Senior level.
Fiscal Impact:
The elimination of the Senior Accountant and the addition of an Accountant position will result in a 15% cost savings.
The elimination of the Part-Time / On-Call Dispatcher and the addition of a Lead Dispatcher position is estimated at $42,500 for the remainder of the fiscal year.
The elimination of a Police Officer position and the addition of a Police Corporal (PC-07) position is estimated at $4,000 for the remainder of the fiscal year.
The police personnel increase will be absorbed within the current budge t due to vacancies.
The elimination of the Senior Engineer and the addition of an Associate Engineer position will result in a 15% cost savings.
Recommended Action:
Approve the elimination of one Senior Accountant (SA-01).
Approve the addition of one Accountant (AC-01).
Approve the elimination of one Part Time/On-Call Dispatcher (PSD OC-02).
Approve the addition of one additional Lead Dispatcher (PSD LD-02).
Approve the elimination of one Police Officer (PO-35).
Approve the addition of one Police Corporal (PC-07).
Approve the elimination of one Senior Engineer (SE -01).
Approve the addition on one Associate Engineer (AE-01).
Attachments:
A. Finance Organizational Chart
B. Accountant job description
C. Police Department Organization Chart
D. Personnel Projection Costs
E. Public Works Organizational Chart
F. Associate Engineer job description
CITY MANAGER
FINANCE
DIRECTOR
Assistant Finance
Director
Accountant
Account Tech (2)
Budget Specialist Procurement Specialist
CITY OF BEAUMONT
ACCOUNTANT
Class specifications are intended to present a descriptive list of the range of duties performed by employees in the class. Specifications are not intended to reflect all duties performed within the job.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION
Under direct supervision of the Assistant Finance Director, performs a variety of advanced level professional accounting, auditing, and statistical work involving in preparing, maintaining, analyzing, verifying and reconciling complex financial transactions, statements, records, and reports. Performs a variety of grant management and reporting; administers all grants Citywide; assists in preparing year-end audit reports and schedules, as assigned and provides highly responsible staff assistance to assigned management staff.
REPRESENTATIVE DUTIES The following duties are typical for this classification. Incumbents may not perform all the listed duties and/or may be required to perform additional or different duties from those set forth below to address business needs and changing business practices.
1. Prepares, maintains, analyzes, verifies and reconciles complex financial transactions, statements, records, and reports; reconciles assigned accounts and makes adjustments as necessary.
2. Prepares journal entries and reconciles general ledger and subsidiary accounts by analyzing and reordingrecording postings from payroll, accounts payable, cash receipts, accounts receivable, trial balance reports, grants, bonds, debt service payments, and interest income,; analyzed expenditures and revenues,; reconciles accounts
3. Performs a variety of grant management and reporting; assumes responsibility for administering all grants Citywide; interprets grant award agreements and ensures compliance with applicable laws and regulations; maintains accounting records and documentation related to state, federal, local, and other funding sources; ensures proper billing, collection, and spending of grant funds.
4. Performs specific tracking for capital projects including maintaining documentation in accordance with funding source (federal, state or local) reporting requirements.
5. Oversees, reviews, and tracks all bank transactions; reconciles bank balance to general ledger and ensures accurate cash management reports; identifies and resolves bank adjustments and discrepancies.
6. Assists in preparing audit schedules and reports for external auditors and assists the Assistant Finance Director during the annual financial audit, single audit, and special aud its.
7. Participates in the preparation of year-end financial statements, schedules, and reports.
8. Prepares a variety of financial reports as mandated by state, local, and other governmental agencies; participates in the preparation of year-end financial statements, schedules, and reports.
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Accountant (Continued)
9. Troubleshoots and resolves problems with the City’s computerized financial system.
10. Audits internal financial documents and transactions, including but not limited to contract, grant and purchasing functions; researches and resolves problems to ensure compliance with applicable policies and procedures.
11. Participates in developing, implementing, and maintaining administrative policies and procedures; evaluates internal control procedures including identifying areas of concern and making recommendations.
12. Provides professional and technical guidance and training to other departments to include cash handling and purchasing.
13. Serves as a backup for accounts payable, accounts receivable and payroll review.
14. Assists the Assistant Finance Director with special projects as required.
15. Performs related duties, as assigned.
SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED
Receives supervision from the Assistant Finance Director. Does not directly or indirectly supervise other professional staff but may provide work direction to subordinate technical or clerical employees.
QUALIFICATIONS
The following generally describes the knowledge and ability required to enter the job and/or be learned within a short period of time in order to successfully perform the assigned duties.
Knowledge of:
Operations, services, and activities of a municipal accounting program.
Principles and practices of governmental accounting, public finance administration and budgeting, auditing, reconciliation; federal and state regulations and guidelines as they pertain to municipal finance, municipal taxation and revenue management.
Practices and techniques of automated financial systems.
Methods and techniques of financial research and report preparation.
General principles of risk management related to the functions of the assigned areas.
Principles and practices of grant accounting.
Principles of municipal budget preparation and control.
Office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and applicable software applications including word processing, spreadsheet and database applications.
Principles and practices of records management.
Techniques for effectively representing the City in contacts with governmental agencies, community groups and various business, professional, regulatory, educational and legislative organizations.
Techniques for providing a high level of customer service to the public and City staff, in person, over the telephone, and through electronic communication.
Pertinent federal, state, and local laws, codes, and regulations.
Ability to:
Independently perform the most difficult professional accounting assignments.
Examine and verify financial documents, reports, and transactions.
Prepare a variety of budgets, financial statements, reports, and analyses.
Analyze, post, balance, and reconcile financial data, ledgers, and accounts.
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Accountant (Continued)
Analyze and draw conclusions from financial data.
Interpret financial data and recognize accounts that need detailed investigation.
Understand the organization and operation of the City and of outside agencies as necessary to assume assigned responsibilities.
Understand, interpret, and apply general and specific administrative and departmental policies and procedures as well as applicable federal, state, and local policies, laws, and regulations.
Participate in the preparation and administration of assigned budgets.
Prepare clear and concise financial statements and reports.
Analyze complex issues, evaluate alternatives, and reach sound conclusions.
Manage multiple projects simultaneously and be sensitive to changing priorities and deadlines.
Plan and organize work to meet changing priorities and deadlines.
Effectively represent the City to outside individuals and agencies to accomplish the goals and objectives of the unit.
Work cooperatively with other departments, City officials, and outside agencies.
Respond tactfully, clearly, concisely, and appropriately to inquiries from the public, City staff, or other agencies on sensitive issues in area of responsibility.
Operate office equipment including computers and supporting word processing, spreadsheet, and database applications.
Work independently in the absence of supervision.
Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing.
Establish and maintain effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work.
Education and Experience Guidelines - Any combination of education and experience that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be:
Education/Training:
A Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university with major course work in accounting, business administration, public administration, or an equivalent field.
Experience:
Two years of increasingly responsible professional accounting experience, preferably in a public agency.
License or Certificate:
Must possess a valid California Class C Driver’s License and maintain possession of such license during the course of employment.
Must have an acceptable driving record, be insurable at standard rates by City’s insurance carrier, and maintain such insurability during the course of employment.
SALARY RANGE: Step 55—Step 65, Currently $5,716 – 7,316.40
PHYSICAL, MENTAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS: The conditions herein are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job.
Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential job functions:
Must be found to be free from any physical, emotional or mental conditions, as determined by a qualified physician and/or psychologist, which with or without accommodation might affect the ability of the employee
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Accountant (Continued)
to perform essential job functions. The position may require prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting, and stooping in the performance of daily office activities.
Additionally, the position requires grasping, repetitive hand movement, and fine coordination in retrieving and entering data using a computer keyboard. Near and far vision is required in order to read work related documents and use the computer. Acute hearing is required when providing phone and personal service. The position requires lifting, carrying, pushing, and/or pulling objects weighing up to 25 pounds.
This classification is not intended to be all-inclusive. An employee may be required to perform other reasonable duties as assigned by management. The City reserves the right, with the concurrence of the department head, to revise or change classification duties and responsibilities as the need arises and as consistent with the meet and confer process.
Nov 2022
BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT
ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
Operations Captain
Sr. Investigators
Chuck Cervello (Gangs/SAU)
Joe Hensley (Trl Prep.)
Bruce Moore (Blythe)
John Morrison (Trial Prep)
Patti Phoenix (Trial Prep)
Jeff Reed (Trial Prep) eff.2/16
Tom Reid (Hom/SAU)
Rich Twiss (Trial Prep)
Steve Williams (Elder Abuse)
I.T.s
Sr. – Sara Gil (Trial Prep)
Lorena Avina (Subs)
Sandra Brown (Dispatch)
Judy Smith (Subs)
Claudio Tagle (Trial Prep)
Maggie Duran
Toni Flores (Ch.Rec.)
Forensic Techs
Marvin Spreyne
John Bullard
Public Safety
Dispatchers
(8)
Chief of Police
Jim Bayne
Supervising Investigator
Sr. Investigators III/II
III –Jose Rodriguez (Hom/SAU)
III–Javier Garcia (Trib. Gaming)
II – Mark Tate (Ch. Rec. Unit)
Citizen
Volunteers
(varies)
Explorers
(varies)
Patrol
Sergeant
Dayshift
Detective Sergeant
Detectives (3)
GIT Detective
(1)
Property &
Evidence (1.5)
Business Liaison
Officer (1)
Support
Services
(3.5)
School Resource
Officer (2)
Support
Lieutenant
Operations
Lieutenant
Corporal
s MET Officers
(3)
Cadets
Part-time (3)
Part-time
Public Safety
Dispatchers
(1)
RAID
Detective (1)
Rick Nelson
Assistant Chief
PACT Detective
(1)
MET Team
Sergeant
Dispatch
Lead
(2)
COPPS Sergeant
Motor/Traffic
Cpl (1) / Officer (3)
Animal Control
(2)
Patrol
Officers
(3)
GTF Detective
(1)
Support
Services
Supervisor
CSO
Corporal (1)
Homeless Liaison
Officer (1)
K-9
Corporal (1)
Admin Sergeant / PSB Support Captain
Support Services (1)
Swing Shifts (2)
CSO
Administrative Services Manager / PIO
Backgrounds, Training,
and Internal Affairs
Corporal
Corporal Corporal
Patrol
Officers
(3)
Patrol
Officers
(3)
Patrol
Officers
(3)
Patrol
Sergeant
Nightshift
Patrol
Sergeant
Nightshift
Patrol
Sergeant
Dayshift
Swing Shifts (2)
CSO
K-9 Officer
(1)
FUND 100 100.0% of Payroll Completed
2090 Police Support 100.0% of Year Complete
1.5 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 3.5
APPROPRIATIONS
60 - PERSONNEL SERVICES YTD
%
Expended
2022/2023
CURRENT
TOTAL
BUDGET
ACTUAL
JULY
ACTUAL
AUG
ACTUAL
SEPT
ACTUAL
OCT
ACTUAL
NOV
ACTUAL
DEC
MID YEAR
TOTALS JAN FEB MAR APRIL MAY JUNE
2022/2023
TOTAL
ESTIMATED
EXPENDITURES
BUDGET
REMAINING
Full Year
Projected
% Expended NOTES
Salaries/Sick Leave/Holiday/Vacation 38.3% 1,521,398.00 58,298.33 83,905.85 100,445.39 94,382.18 93,792.02 151,233.14 582,056.91 97,360.42 97,360.42 97,360.42 97,360.42 97,360.42 170,380.74 1,239,239.74 282,158.26 81.5% NEW PERSONNEL COSTS 0.0% - 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 7,000.00 42,000.00 (42,000.00) 0.0% Overtime 165.0% 35,000.00 4,664.24 7,664.12 6,872.61 8,515.42 9,292.53 20,757.27 57,766.19 9,654.90 9,654.90 9,654.90 9,654.90 9,654.90 16,896.08 122,936.77 (87,936.77) 351.2% Accrued Time CO/Other Comp/WC/Disability/Life Ins 34.3% 187,014.00 4,437.00 489.75 38,467.41 660.64 18,830.00 1,200.00 64,084.80 6,000.00 25,000.00 6,000.00 6,000.00 25,000.00 6,750.00 138,834.80 48,179.20 74.2% Health/Dental/Vision 43.5% 329,165.00 4,723.97 18,279.53 20,286.17 58,245.28 20,002.72 21,567.48 143,105.15 23,850.00 23,850.00 23,850.00 23,850.00 23,850.00 23,850.00 286,205.15 42,959.85 86.9% PERS/PEPRA 54.3% 310,680.00 112,073.91 9,508.06 10,895.25 9,888.72 10,543.73 15,835.98 168,745.65 10,904.37 10,904.37 10,904.37 10,904.37 10,904.37 33,394.62 256,662.11 54,017.89 82.6% Medicare/FICA/PARS 39.7% 26,600.00 981.72 1,392.18 2,183.30 1,562.19 1,838.10 2,597.86 10,555.35 1,800.23 2,085.23 1,800.23 1,800.23 2,085.23 3,015.40 23,141.90 3,458.10 87.0% Health/Fitness 7.6% 13,500.00 452.93 - - 574.65 - - 1,027.58 - 600.00 - - 600.00 - 2,227.58 11,272.42 16.5% Uniforms 38.0% 22,800.00 325.00 1,550.00 1,800.00 1,600.00 1,600.00 1,800.00 8,675.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 1,800.00 19,475.00 3,325.00 85.4% TOTAL PERSONNEL SERVICES 42.4%2,446,157.00 185,957.10 122,789.49 180,950.13 175,429.08 155,899.10 214,991.72 1,036,016.62 158,369.92 178,254.92 158,369.92 158,369.92 178,254.92 263,086.84 2,130,723.04 315,433.96 87.1% # of Payperiods per month --->
CITY
MANAGER
PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER
Assistant Director of
Public Works/City
Engineer
Public Works Inspector Street Maintenance
Supervisor
Street Maintenance
Workers (6)
Administrative
Services Manager
Permit Technician (2)
Principal Engineer
Associate Engineer
Public Works Inspector
Solid Waste and
Recycling Manager
CITY OF BEAUMONT
ASSOCIATE ENGINEER
Class specifications are intended to present a descriptive list of the range of duties performed by employees in the class. Specifications are not intended to reflect all duties performed within the job.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION
Under general administrative direction, participates in complicated engineering planning, design, and investigation of the Public Works Department. Assignments are general and of a continuing nature, requiring the exercise of independent judgment and initiative. Incumbents are expected to perform the most complex professional engineering work, requiring a substantial level of professional training and experience, and do other related work as required.
REPRESENTATIVE DUTIES The following duties are typical for this classification. Incumbents may not perform all of the listed duties and/or may be required to perform additional or different duties from those set forth below to address business needs and changing business practices.
1. Perform studies of technical, environmental, and economic feasibility, engineering field studies, and related studies pertaining to proposed and existing municipal facilities; use experience and engineering related skills to make recommendations based on strong research, investigation, and data gathering.
2. Prepare, draft, and review contracts and specifications for engineering and construction services.
3. Plan and perform daily work and may determine and delegate work to others; complete special projects requiring engineering and technical ability as assigned.
4. Provide background information and documentation for management consideration on various projects; communicate and work closely with upper management to determine status on work, monitor general quality, and ensure all engineering activities are professionally performed.
5. Make sound decisions on minor problems related to the work being performed based on established guidelines and principles and supervisor guidance; identify issues, determine discrepancies, and ensure professional resolution.
6. Complete special projects requiring advanced engineering and technical ability.
7. Develop and update written directives for the department and for use by other employees to include engineering guidelines, standard material lists, standard specifications, and other technical and administrative policies and procedures as applicable.
8. Research activities pertaining to public works materials and engineering practices; prepare economic environmental and technical engineering analyses and project justification reports.
9. Develop major engineering projects and other engineering projects with unique problems which have an important effect on major public works projects.
10. Provide background information and documentation for management consideration on major projects and technical matters involving advanced engineering theories, concepts, and principles.
11. Perform other duties as assigned.
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Associate Engineer (Continued)
QUALIFICATIONS
The following generally describes the knowledge and ability required to enter the job and/or be learned within a short period of time in order to successfully perform the assigned duties.
Knowledge of:
Principles and practices of civil engineering and other engineering disciplines used in the municipal engineering field.
Modern methods and techniques used in the design and construction of a wide variety of municipal projects.
Modern developments, current literature and sources of information regarding civil and municipal engineering.
Applicable laws and regulatory codes relevant to design and construction of municipal facilities.
Technical report writing.
Computers and computer programs.
Ability to:
Make complex engineering computations and to check, design, and supervise the construction of a wide variety of municipal facilities.
Communicate clearly and concisely, orally and in writing.
Supervise, train and evaluate professional and technical subordinates.
Apply technical insight and sound judgment necessary in the solution of difficult and complex problems.
Complete projects which require research of current and past technical literature and the adaption of information in order to fit the kinds of situations encountered.
Use and apply engineering economic principles.
Accommodate existing delivery timelines of varying workloads.
Education and Experience Guidelines - Any combination of education and experience that would likely provide the required knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be:
Education/Training:
A Bachelor's degree in civil or mechanical engineering or in a closely related area from an accredited college or university AND registration in California as a Professional Engineer.
Experience:
Three years of experience in professional engineering work comparable to that of an Assistant Engineer.
License or Certificate:
Must possess a valid California Class C Driver’s License and maintain possession of such license during the course of employment;
SALARY RANGE: Step 62-72 Currently $6,794—$8,697.87 per month
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Associate Engineer (Continued)
PHYSICAL, MENTAL, AND ENVIRONMENTAL REQUIREMENTS: The conditions herein are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job.
Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential job functions:
Must be found to be free from any physical, emotional or mental conditions, as determined by a qualified physician and/or psychologist, which with or without accommodation might affect the ability of the employee to perform essential job functions. The position may require prolonged sitting, standing, walking, reaching, twisting, turning, kneeling, bending, squatting, and stooping in the performance of daily office activities.
Additionally, the position requires grasping, repetitive hand movement, and fine coordination in retrieving and entering data using a computer keyboard. Near and far vision is required in order to read work related documents and use the computer. Acute hearing is required when providing phone and personal service. The position requires lifting, carrying, pushing, and/or pulling objects weighing up to 25 pounds. Incumbent must be willing to work shift work, including nights, weekends, and holidays. Must be able to work in adverse weather conditions, including extreme heat and cold.
This classification is not intended to be all-inclusive. An employee may be required to perform other reasonable duties as assigned by management. The City reserves the right, with the concurrence of the department head, to revise or change classification duties and responsibilities as the need arises and as consistent with the meet and confer process.
Staff Report
TO: City Council
FROM: Christina Taylor, Deputy City Manager
DATE January 17, 2023
SUBJECT: Approve the City of Beaumont 2023 Legislative Platform and Establish Funding Priorities for City Projects
Description Establish the City Council’s position on various legislative topics and identify funding priorities for the legislative session.
Background and Analysis:
Each year, City Council reviews and updates, the City’s legislative platform. The purpose of a legislative platform is to establish City Council’s position on various legislative topics and issues. This will allow City staff as well as the City’s representatives to act quickly on behalf of the City when legislation is proposed which either agrees or conflicts with the City’s position as described in the platform.
With regard to specific issues not included in the legislative platform, no official City position will be established until City Council discusses the topic and comes to a consensus.
Guiding principles of the legislative platform remain the same as in previous years with the exception of Number III - Support Funding Opportunities, which was slightly modified. The principles are as follows:
I. PRESERVE LOCAL CONTROL
Preserve and protect the City’s powers, duties and prerogatives to enact local legislation and policy direction concerning local affairs and oppose legislation that preempts local authority. Local agencies should preserve authority and accountability for revenues raised and services provided.
II. PROMOTE FISCAL STABILITY
Support measures that promote fiscal stability, predictability, financial independence, and preserve the City’s revenue base and maximum local control over local government budgeting. Oppose measures that shift local funds to the County, State or Federal governments and/or make cities more dependent on the County, State or Federal
governments for financial stability, such as unfunded mandates or mandated costs with no guarantee of local reimbursement or offsetting benefits.
III. SUPPORT FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
Support opportunities that allow the City to compete for its fair share of regional, State and Federal funding. Support funding for programs with combined benefits to transportation, public safety, and water/wastewater.
IV. ENHANCE QUALITY OF LIFE THROUGH ADEQUATE PUBLIC SAFETY
Reform recently enacted criminal justice laws — enacted by both statute and initiative — that have eroded public safety protections of Beaumont residents. Protect existing city authority to deliver local emergency services.
The platform policy statements have been paired down from previous years and cover the following areas:
1. Administration
2. Community and Economic Development
3. Water and Wastewater
4. Parks and Recreation
5. Public Safety
6. Public Works (Transportation and Infrastructure)
7. Finance
Staff will compose a legislative tracking list for the current year along with any carryover bills from the previous session and provide it to City Council. The tracking will highlight those bills that may have significant impacts on the City and provide a recommended position on the bills. These positions will be used to either support, oppose, or monitor each bill as it makes it way though the legislative process.
In addition to the concepts in the Legislative Platform, staff recommends identifying key areas for which to seek funding. In previous years, funding priorities for projects have not been formally established or tied to the legislative platform. As City Council, staff, and the City’s lobbying representatives increase interaction with elected of ficials at the State and Federal level, it is important that the City has identified significant projects for which funding is needed. Identifying a few key project areas allows both staff and the City’s representatives to prepare informational materials and focus on securing funding as the opportunities present.
The projects categories staff has identified as funding priorities are:
Recycled Water Projects
Infrastructure for retention or distribution of recycled water Pond recharge
Infrastructure rehabilitation
Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS) Mitigation
Transportation Projects
Grade separations
Freeway on/off ramps
Fiscal Impact:
The cost to prepare this staff report is approximately $175. Current lobbying services are budgeted at $2,000 per month and are paid out of General Fund revenue s.
Recommended Action:
Approve the proposed 2023 Legislative Platform and funding priorities.
Attachments:
A. 2023 Draft Legislative Platform
Staff Report
TO: City Council
FROM: Carole Kendrick, Planning Manager
DATE January 17, 2023
SUBJECT: Fairway Canyon - Meritage Development Agreement Amendment PLAN2022-0776
Description: Consideration of an amendment to the Fairway Canyon Development Agreement. The proposed amendment includes revisions to Planning Area 20 that subdivide Planning Area 20B into 20B and 20D; and revise the unit count and density within all subareas of Planning Area 20. The subject property is located northwe st of Sorenstam Drive in Phase 4 of the Oak Valley & SCPGA Golf Course Specific Plan.
Background and Analysis:
The Oak Valley SCPGA Specific Plan #318 encompassing 1,747.9 acres allowing 4,355 dwelling units was adopted by the County of Riverside on August 14, 2001. The property was annexed into the City of Beaumont on April 9, 2003, by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) by LAFCO 2002-43-5. The Oak Valley SCPGA Specific includes the developments of Fairway Canyon and Tournament Hills. Th e subject property is located within the Fairway Canyon portion of the specific plan.
The site was also subject to a development agreement originally entered into in November 2003 and amended in July 2004 and June 2020. Meritage Homes has purchased Planning Areas 18A, 18B, 20A1, 20A2, 20B1, 20B2, 20C1, 20C2, 21B, 22A, 22B, 22C, and 22D, which are shown in Exhibit D in the purple and blue areas. The partial assignment and assumption of the development agreement transferred rights from SDC Fairway Canyon LLC to Meritage Homes of California, Inc. and was approved by the City Council on September 21, 2021.
On May 9, 2022, Meritage Homes of California, Inc. submitted a request to amend the existing Development Agreement regarding Planning Area 20 including the sub planning area boundaries, maximum unit count and density. Planning Area 20 as currently approved includes three (3) sub planning areas. The existing and proposed changes are shown in the table below and as Exhibit D to this staff report:
The proposed changes will include updating Exhibit 3 “Operative Planning Area Summary Table” of the development agreement, which is attached as Exhibit E to this staff report. The amendments proposed are due to Beaumont Unified School Districts interest in 12.56 acres located within the Specific Plan. Planning Area 20B is proposed to be subdivided into two Planning Areas, that would retain Planning Area 20B for residential development and Planning Area 20D would be identified as a school site.
The revisions to the Planning Areas slightly alter the acreage by 0.2 acres due to boundary line updates for the overall Planning Area, which are shown in Attachmen t D.
In addition, the overall density for Planning Areas 20A, 20B and 20C will be increased to absorb the density from proposed Planning Area 20D (School Site).
The entirety of the Specific Plan that includes Fairway Canyon and Tournament Hills allowed for a total of 4,355 dwelling units. A majority of Fairway Canyon Development was considered under Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 31462 that limited the number of dwelling units to 3,300. Under the existing approvals, the dwelling unit count is projected to be at 3,001. The proposed amendment will increase the projected number of dwelling units at 3,014, which is still below the 3,300 -threshold established by Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 31462.
The Specific Plan document indicates that if a transfer of dwelling units is proposed between planning areas, the Master Developer or his assignee shall be responsible for preparing a “Development Transfer Status Report”. The report shall include specific plan planning area allocation of dwelling units and must demonstrate that the total number of dwelling units shall not exceed 4,355, per Section III.A.2.b of the Oak Valley & SCPGA Golf Course Specific Plan. The applicant prepared Development Transfer Status Report is attached as Exhibit E to this staff report.
Public Communications Received:
Property owners located within a 300-foot radius of the project site were notified of the public hearing on January 5, 2023, with a 10-day hearing notice in addition to a public notice in the Press Enterprise. At the time of report preparation, the Planning Department has not received any letters of comment from the public in favor or Approved per Development Agreement Proposed Amendment
PA Acreage Unit Count Density PA Acreage Unit Count Density 20A 37.7 127 3.4 20A 37.5 146 3.9
20B 24.5 125 5.1 20B 14.6 86 5.9
20C 47.6 164 3.4 20C 44.7 197 4.4
20D 12.8 0 0
Totals 109.8 416 4.0 Totals 109.6 429 4.7
opposition to the project. Any comments received prior to the time of the scheduled City Council meeting will be provided to the Council at the time of the public hearing. A proof of publication is included as Attachment F to this staff report.
Findings:
The guidelines for development agreements are established in City of Beaumont Resolution No. 1987-34. This resolution requires City Council to make the following findings:
1. The proposed agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land use and programs specified in the General Plan.
The proposed amendment of the development agreement is consistent with the General Plan and its goals, objectives and policies.
2. The proposed agreement facilitates land uses which are compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use districts in which the real property is located.
The proposed amendment to the development agreement has no impact on zoning or land use on the property or in the surrounding area. There are no proposed changes to the zoning, land use or project approvals as a result of this amendment.
3. The proposed agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice.
The proposed amendment of the development agreement has no impact on land use or compatibility with the surrounding area.
4. The proposed agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare.
Approval of the proposed amendment to the development agreement will have no impact on the health, safety or welfare of the City, the surrounding area or its residents.
The proposed amendment of the development agreement, through the imposition of conditions will ensure the existing and proposed infrastructure can adequately serve the public.
5. The proposed agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values.
Approval of this development agreement will help facilitate the orderly development of infrastructure and related facilities. Approval of the amendment of the development agreement will not have a negative effect on orderly development or preservation o f property rights and is agreed to by both the City and the property owner.
There are no unusual or changed circumstances at this site which would affect the entitlements or consideration of amendment to the development agreement. All of the required findings can be made in a positive manner.
Fiscal Impact:
Cost to prepare this report and associated documents is approximately $2,500 and is covered by the Development Agreement Amendment deposit on file under the previous Development Agreement Assignment PLAN2021-0625.
Recommended Action:
Hold a public hearing; and
Waive the first full reading and approve by title only, an “Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California, Approving an Amended Development Agreement by and between the City of Beaumont and Meritage Homes of California, Inc.” Attachments:
A. Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Beaumont adopting the Amendment of the Development Agreement between the City of Beaumont and Meritage Homes of California, Inc.
B. Aerial Photograph
C. Fairway Canyon Phase 4 Map
D. Fairway Canyon Planning Area 20 Approved vs Proposed Map E. Density Transfer Status Report
F. Proof of Publication
Incorporated herein by Reference:
City of Beaumont General Plan
City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance
Project Site’s Riverside Conservation Authority Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Informational Map
Contents of City of Beaumont Planning Department Project File Development Agreement Amendment (PLAN2022-0776), Partial Assignment & Assumption of
Development Agreement (PLAN2021-0625) Tentative Tract Map No. 31462, Tentative Parcel Map No. 38090 (PM2021-0008), LAFCO 2002-43-5, 02-ANX- 02, Development Agreement dated November 18, 2003, Oak Valley SCPGA Specific Plan 318 and Environmental Impact Report 418.
1 ORDINANCE NUMBER 2023-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF
BEAUMONT AND MERITAGE HOMES OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
WHEREAS, City is a general law city and a municipal corporation of the State of California; and; WHEREAS, Meritage Homes of California, Inc. (“Owner”) relating to the development of that certain real property commonly known as the Fairway Canyon Project (the “Project”), located in the City, County of Riverside, State of California , described in Exhibit “A” ("Subject Property"); and
WHEREAS, Development Agreement between City and LB/L – Suncal Oak Valley LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, and its successors and assigns (“Developer”), dated November 18, 2003, and recorded at Document No. 2003-977700, Official Records of Riverside County, California, and re-recorded on February 26, 2004, as Instrument No. 2004- 0131329, as amended by the Administrative Amendment No. 1 to the Development Agreement recorded in the Official Records of the County on July 15, 2020, as Instrument No. 2020-0309850 (the “Development Agreement”), and was partially reassigned to the Owner on June 30, 2021, as Instrument No. 2021-0396265 relating to the development of that certain real property commonly known as the Fairway Canyon Project (the “Project”), located in the City, County of Riverside, State of California.
WHEREAS, the property owner and the City agree to transfer densities within Planning Areas in the Fairway Canyon Project consistent with Oak Valley & SCPGA Specific Plan and within the maximum development threshold of 3,011 dwelling units; and
WHEREAS, to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Sections 65864 et seq. of the California Government Code, "Development Agreement Statute" which authorizes cities to enter into property development agreements with any person(s) or entity(ies) having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such real property in order to establish certain development rights in the real property; and
WHEREAS, under Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. and Beaumont City Council Resolution No. 1987-34 a development agreement is intended to provide assurances to developer that an approved project may proceed subject to the policies, rules, regulations, and conditions of approval applicable to the project at the time of approval, regardless of any changes to City policies, rules, and regulations after project approval, and provide assurances that City cannot otherwise unilaterally impose conditions of approval of the project outside the context of a negotiated development agreement; and
2 WHEREAS, based on the foregoing recitals, City has determined that this Agreement is appropriate under Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. and Beaumont City Council Resolution No. 1987-34; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement is voluntarily entered into in consideration of the benefits to and the rights created in favor of each of the parties hereto and in reliance upon the various representations and warranties contained herein; and
WHEREAS, City, as "Lead Agency" under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines, has determined that the "Project," as more fully described in this Ordinance, has been fully analyzed under CEQA and CEQA Guidelines and is subject to a certified EIR and addendum.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BEAUMONT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. RECITALS
That the above Recitals are true and correct and are incorporated as though fully set forth herein.
SECTION 2. APPROVAL OF AMENDED DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT EXHIBIT C
That the City Council hereby approves the Amended Development Agreement updating Exhibit C by and Between the City of Beaumont and Meritage Homes of California, Inc. ("Development Agreement"), a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and incorporated herein by this reference, subject to the terms and conditions stated therein.
SECTION 3 . SEVERABILITY
That the City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this Ordinance as hereby adopted shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE OF ORDINANCE
That this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its second reading by the City Council.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The Development Agreement shall not be executed by the City until on or after the effective date of the Ordinance.
3 SECTION 6. REPEAL OF CONFLICTING PROVISIONS
That all the provisions of the Beaumont Municipal Code as heretofore adopted by the City of Beaumont that are in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby superseded to the extent of such inconsistency.
SECTION 7. RECORDATION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
The City Clerk is hereby directed to record the fully executed Amended Development Agreement with the Riverside County Recorder no later than ten (10) days after its execution.
SECTION 8. CERTIFICATION
That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published according to law.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 17th day of January, 2023.
CITY OF BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL
____________________________
Julio Martinez, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________, City Clerk
AJ Patel
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
John Pinkney, City Attorney
EXHIBIT “A”
4 EXHIBIT “B”
5 EXHIBIT “B”
Development Agreement - Exhibit C
Planning
Area
Reference Map
or Tract No. Acreage Number of
DUs Land Use(2) Density
(DU/Acre)
15 31462-1 27.53 107 Medium 3.89
12C 31462-2 25.03 118 Medium 4.71
12B 31462-3 14.32 87 Medium High 6.08
12A 31462-4 12.8 76 Medium High 5.94
8B 31462-5 18.28 79 Medium 4.32
11C 31462-6 19.63 79 Medium 4.02
16 31462-7 41.62 148 Medium 3.56
19 31462-8 34.89 130 Medium 3.73
11B 31462-9 31.71 87 Medium 2.74
8A 31462-10 36.93 88 Medium 2.38
3B/7B/11A 31462-11 51.05 83 Low 1.63
2A/3A/4 31462-12 51.13 137 Medium 2.68
2B 31462-13 12.96 63 Medium 4.86
6 31462-14 20.37 74 Medium 3.63
1 31462-15 31.1 133 Medium 4.28
18A VTTM 31462-26 20.51 81 Medium 3.95
18B VTTM 31462-16 26.62 108 Medium 4.01
20A VTTM 31462 37.5 146 Medium 3.9
20B VTTM 31462 14.6 86 Medium High 5.9
20C VTTM 31462 44.7 197 Medium 4.4
20D VTTM 31462 12.8 School
21B VTTM 31462 7.07 Park
22 VTTM 31462 see
below
0 see below
22A VTTM 31462-20 17.19 67 Medium 3.9
22B VTTM 31462-23 13.76 55 Medium 4
22C VTTM 31462-24 11.8 55 Medium 4.66
22D VTTM 31462-25 11.25 54 Medium 4.8
26A 31462-21 33.65 167 Medium 4.96
26C 31462-22 20.48 101 Medium 4.93
14 36558 21.88 94 Medium 4.3
21A 36783 13.73 53 Medium 3.86
25 see
below
0 see below
25A 37698 22.09 126 Medium High 5.7
25B 37697 13.11 73 Medium High 5.57
25C 37696 13.58 62 Medium 4.57
5 N/A 22.5 Park
Development Agreement - Exhibit C
7A N/A 55.55 Open Space
13 N/A 4.06 Park
17 N/A 6.68 Park
23A/23B N/A 98.96 Open Space
24 N/A 6.47 Park
27 N/A 3.92 Rec. Center
35A N/A 5.8 Commercial
35B N/A 24.58 Commercial
San
Timoteo
N/A 10.37 Right of
Way
Totals 1024.56 3,014(3)
(1) Based upon the Development Agreement and Development Plan, including original VTTM 31462 approved in October 2003, VTTM 31462 Amendments and Substantial Conformances, and Final Tract Maps.
(2) Low Density is defined as 0.2 to 2 Dus/acre; Medium Density is 2 to 5 DUs/acre; Medium High Density is 5 to 8 DUs/acre; High Density is 8 to 12 DUs/acre; and Mixed Use is 12 to 20 DUs/acre.
(3) The Development Agreement and VTTM 31462 limit the total number of DUs in Fairway Canyon to 3,300 DUs. Current projections estimate a total of 3,001 DUs, which is 299 DUs less than the 3,300 DUs allowed.
*IMPORTANT* Maps and data are to be used for reference purposes only. Map features are approximate, and are not necessarily accurate to surveying or engineering standards. The County of Riverside makes no warranty or guarantee as to the content (the source is often third party), accuracy, timeliness, or completeness of any of the data provided, and assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. Any use of this product with respect to accuracy and precision shall be the sole responsibility of the user. © Riverside County GIS
Legend
PLAN2022-0776
Notes
REPORT PRINTED ON...1/3/2023 3:28:47 PM
Aerial Photograph
0 3,0791,
539
Feet
County Centerline Names
County Centerlines
Blueline Streams
City Areas
World Street Map
GBGBGBGB25109 jefferson Ave. Suite 200Murrieta, CA 92562951-200-684037.5 AC20A146 DU14.6 AC20B86 DU44.7 AC20C197 DU12.8 AC20D0 DU37.7 AC20A127 DU24.5 AC20B125 DU47.6 AC20C164 DU3.4 DU/ACMDR5.1 DU/ACMHDR3.4 DU/ACMDR3.9 DU\ACMDR5.9 DU\ACMHDR4.4 DU/ACMDRSCHOOLPage 301 of 865
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
FAIRWAY CANYON DEVELOPMENT TRANSFER STATUS REPORT
Amendment No. 2 to Specific Plan 318 proposes the transfer of 13 dwelling units between Planning Areas utilizing unused dwelling units with the Specific Plan concurrently with the processing of implementing subdivision Vesting Tentative Tract Map 31462.
The Land Use Development Standards (Chapter III.A, Section 2, b. 1) of the approved Oak Valley Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 1, requires that if a transfer of dwelling units is proposed between planning areas, the Master Developer, shall provide the City with a “Development Transfer Status Report” at the time implementing subdivisions are submitted. Pursuant to the requirements stated in Section 2, b.1) the Development Transfer Status Report will specify the entitlement and development status of each planning area including the following information:
a) Specific Plan Planning Area allocation of dwelling units. b) Number of dwelling units entitled under an Implementing Subdivisions by Planning Area. c) Number of dwellings units transferred to or from each Planning Area that is already entitled or proposed to be entitled with an implementing subdivision.
This “Development Transfer Status Report” demonstrates that the total number of dwelling units for the project will not exceed 4,355 with the proposed transfer.
Amendment No. 2 would increase the total combined dwelling unit count for Planning Areas 20A, 20B, and 20C from 416 to 429, a total of 13 dwelling units. These 13 units would be allocated to these three Planning Areas from unused dwelling units in Planning Area 16, as described below and in “Table 1, Development Transfer from SP 318 to SP 318 A2”.
The Oak Valley Specific Plan 318 approved in 2003 provided for 4,355 residential units, including 217 dwelling units for Planning Area 16. Amendment No. 1 to Specific Plan 318 approved in 2020, reduced the number of dwelling units within the Specific Plan from 4,355 to 3,011, including a reduction of the number of units in Planning Area 16 from 217 to 148 dwelling units to reflect the number of units included in TM 31462-7.
Therefore only 148 of the originally approved 217 dwelling units in Planning Area 16 were utilized, leaving 69 dwelling units available for transfer. Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 2 proposes to transfer 13 of those units to Planning Areas 20A, 20B and 20C, as depicted below in Table 1, Development Transfer from SP 318 to SP 318 A2.
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
Table 1 Development Transfer from SP 318 to SP 318 A2 (VTM 31462) Oak Valley Specific Plan No. 318
Specific Plan No. 318
Amendment No. 1
Specific Plan No. 318
Amendment No. 2
(Planning Areas after Transfer)
PA Land Use Units PA Land Use Units PA Land Use Units
16 Medium Density
Residential 217 16
Medium
Density
Residential
148 16 Medium Density
Residential 148
Total: 217 Units Available for Transfer (217-148) Units Available for Transfer 69 Units Available for Transfer 69
- - Receiving Planning Areas - Total Units Transferred 13 - - - 20A
Medium
Density
Residential
127 20A Medium Density
Residential 146
- - - 20B
Medium High
Density
Residential
125 20B Medium High
Density Residential 86
- - - 20C
Medium
Density
Residential
164 20C Medium Density
Residential 197
- - Total: 416 Total: 429
Additionally, to provide a clear portrayal of the allocation and availability of the dwelling units in Specific Plan 318, Table 2, Oak Canyon Specific Plan 318 (2003), Table 3, Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 1 (2020), and Table 4, Fairway Canyon Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 2, provided below, depict the changes in unit count and allocation for the originally approved SP 318 in 2003, Amendment No. 1 in 2020 and proposed Amendment No. 2.
Table 2, Oak Canyon Specific Plan 318 (2003), below, depicts the unit counts and allocation in the originally approved SP 318 in 2003.
Table 2 Oak Canyon Specific Plan 318 (2003)
Planning
Area Acreage Number of
DUs Land Use
1 8.6 52 Medium High
2 11.8 47 Medium
3 13.0 53 Medium
4 12.9 129 High
5 5.0 - Parks
6 20.0 - Junior High School
7A 123.4 - Open Space
7B 33.5 34 Low
8 48.0 195 Medium
9 12.0 - Neighborhood Commercial
10 10.8 108 High
11 56.3 225 Medium
12 42.2 169 Medium
13 5.0 - Parks
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
14 25.0 500 Mixed Use
15 26.6 106 Medium
16 54.2 217 Medium
17 6.0 - Parks
18 27.1 130 Medium High
19 26.5 53 Low
20 79.0 316 Medium
21A 10.0 - Elementary School
21B 6.0 - Parks
22 37.3 149 Medium
23A 89.9 - Open Space
23B 60.0 60 Low
24 5.0 - Parks
25 46.5 558 High
26 59.0 236 Medium
27 4.0 - Neighborhood Commercial
28 500.0 - Golf Course
29 17.9 - Community Commercial
30 55.1 220 Medium
31A 10.0 - Elementary School
31B 5.0 - Parks
32 27.5 165 Medium High
33A 3.0 - Community Commercial
33B 4.5 - Community Commercial
34 5.0 - Open Space
35 5.0 - Community Commercial
36 33.0 198 Medium High
37 6.0 - Parks
38 22.7 272 High
39 40.9 164 Medium
Major Roads 52.4 - Major Roads
Totals 1752.6 4,355
Table 3, Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 1 (2020), below, depicts the unit counts and allocation in SP318 A1 in 2020.
Table 3 Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 1 (2020)
Planning
Area
Reference
Map or Tract
No.
Acreage Number of
DUs Land Use(2) Density
(DU/Acre)
15 31462-1 27.53 107 Medium 3.89
12C 31462-2 25.03 118 Medium 4.71
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
12B 31462-3 14.32 87 Medium High 6.08
12A 31462-4 12.8 76 Medium High 5.94
8B 31462-5 18.28 79 Medium 4.32
11C 31462-6 19.63 79 Medium 4.02
16 31462-7 41.62 148 Medium 3.56
19 31462-8 34.89 130 Medium 3.73
11B 31462-9 31.71 87 Medium 2.74
8A 31462-10 36.93 88 Medium 2.38
3B/7B/11A 31462-11 51.05 83 Low 1.63
2A/3A/4 31462-12 51.13 137 Medium 2.68
2B 31462-13 12.96 63 Medium 4.86
6 31462-14 20.37 74 Medium 3.63
1 31462-15 31.1 133 Medium 4.28
18 VTTM 31462 47.13 189 Medium 4.01
20A VTTM 31462 37.65 127 Medium 3.37
20B VTTM 31462 24.46 125 Medium High 5.11
20C VTTM 31462 47.59 164 Medium 3.45
20D
21B VTTM 31462 7.07 Park
22 VTTM 31462 see below 0 see below
22A (3) 17.19 67 Medium 3.9
22B (3) 13.76 55 Medium 4
22C (3) 11.8 55 Medium 4.66
22D (3) 11.25 54 Medium 4.8
26A 31462-21 33.65 167 Medium 4.96
26C 31462-22 20.48 101 Medium 4.93
14 36558 21.88 94 Medium 4.3
21A 36783 13.73 53 Medium 3.86
25 see below 0 see below
25A 37698 22.09 126 Medium High 5.7
25B 37697 13.11 73 Medium High 5.57
25C 37696 13.58 62 Medium 4.57
5 N/A 22.5 Park
7A N/A 55.55 Open Space
13 N/A 4.06 Park
17 N/A 6.68 Park
23A/23B N/A 98.96 Open Space
24 N/A 6.47 Park
27 N/A 3.92 Rec. Center
35A N/A 5.8 Commercial
35B N/A 24.58 Commercial
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
San Timoteo N/A 10.37 Right of
Way
Totals 1024.66 3,011(4)
(1) Based upon the Development Agreement and Development Plan, including original VTTM 31462 approved in October 2003, VTTM 31462 Amendments and Substantial Conformances, and Final Tract Maps.
(2) Low Density is defined as 0.2 to 2 DUs/acre; Medium Density is 2 to 5 DUs/acre; Medium High Density is 5 to 8 DUs/acre; High Density is 8 to 12 DUs/acre; and Mixed Use is 12 to 20 DUs/acre.
(3) Per Amendment No. 3 to VTTM 31462, approved in July 2014. (4) The Development Agreement and VTTM 31462 limit the total number of DUs in Fairway Canyon to 3,300 DUs. Current projections estimate a total of 3,011 DUs, which is 289 DUs less than the 3,300 DUs allowed.
Table 4, Fairway Canyon Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 2, below, depicts the unit counts and allocation proposed in SP318 A2.
Table 3 Fairway Canyon Specific Plan 318 Amendment No. 2 Planning
Area
Reference Map
or Tract No. Acreage Number of
DUs Land Use(2) Density
(DU/Acre)
Min. Pad
Dimensions
15 31462-1 27.53 107 Medium 3.89 65 x 100
12C 31462-2 25.03 118 Medium 4.71 50 x 100
12B 31462-3 14.32 87 Medium High 6.08 42 x 100
12A 31462-4 12.8 76 Medium High 5.94 42 x 100
8B 31462-5 18.28 79 Medium 4.32 55 x 100
11C 31462-6 19.63 79 Medium 4.02 60 x 100
16 31462-7 41.62 148 Medium 3.56 60 x 100
19 31462-8 34.89 130 Medium 3.73 70 x 100
11B 31462-9 31.71 87 Medium 2.74 70 x 100
8A 31462-10 36.93 88 Medium 2.38 65 x 100
3B/7B/11A 31462-11 51.05 83 Low 1.63 80 x 120
2A/3A/4 31462-12 51.13 137 Medium 2.68 50 x 100
2B 31462-13 12.96 63 Medium 4.86 38 x 100
6 31462-14 20.37 74 Medium 3.63 60 x 100
1 31462-15 31.1 133 Medium 4.28 42 x 100
18A VTTM 31462-26 20.51 81 Medium 3.95 50 x 100
18B VTTM 31462-16 26.62 108 Medium 4.01 50 x 100
20A VTTM 31462 37.5 146 Medium 3.9 50 x 100
20B VTTM 31462 14.6 86 Medium High 5.9 40 x 80
20C VTTM 31462 44.7 197 Medium 4.4 55 x 100
20D VTTM 31462 12.8 School
21B VTTM 31462 7.07 Park
Specific Plan No. 318, Amendment No. 2
Development Transfer Status Report
22 VTTM 31462 see below 0 see below see below
22A VTTM 31462-20 17.19 67 Medium 3.9 60 x 100
22B VTTM 31462-23 13.76 55 Medium 4 60 x 100
22C VTTM 31462-24 11.8 55 Medium 4.66 55 x 100
22D VTTM 31462-25 11.25 54 Medium 4.8 55 x 100
26A 31462-21 33.65 167 Medium 4.96 45 x 100
26C 31462-22 20.48 101 Medium 4.93 50 x 100
14 36558 21.88 94 Medium 4.3 50 x 90
21A 36783 13.73 53 Medium 3.86 55 x 100
25 see below 0 see below see below
25A 37698 22.09 126 Medium High 5.7 47 x 80
25B 37697 13.11 73 Medium High 5.57 55 x 90
25C 37696 13.58 62 Medium 4.57 55 x 90
5 N/A 22.5 Park
7A N/A 55.55 Open Space
13 N/A 4.06 Park
17 N/A 6.68 Park
23A/23B N/A 98.96 Open Space
24 N/A 6.47 Park
27 N/A 3.92 Rec. Center
35A N/A 5.8 Commercial
35B N/A 24.58 Commercial
San Timoteo N/A 10.37 Right of Way
Totals 1024.56 3,014(3)
(1) Based upon the Development Agreement and Development Plan, including original VTTM 31462 approved in October 2003, VTTM 31462 Amendments and Substantial Conformances, and Final Tract Maps.
(2) Low Density is defined as 0.2 to 2 DUs/acre; Medium Density is 2 to 5 DUs/acre; Medium High Density is 5 to 8 DUs/acre; High Density is 8 to 12 DUs/acre; and Mixed Use is 12 to 20 DUs/acre. (3) The Development Agreement and VTTM 31462 limit the total number of DUs in Fairway Canyon to 3,300 DUs. Current projections estimate a total of 3,014 DUs, which is 286 DUs less than the 3,300 DUs allowed.
Meritage DAA (5209298) - Page 1 of 2
FILER
Carole Kendrick
[email protected]
(951) 572-3237
FILING FOR
The Press-Enterprise
Columns Wide:4 Ad Class:Legals
INTERIM AD DRAFT
T h i s is t he p r oo f o f yo ur a d sc he du l ed t o r u n in Th e Pr es s-E n t er pr i se on th e d at e s i n d i c a t ed b e l o w.
I f ch an ge s a re ne ed e d , p l ea se co n t ac t us pr i or t o d ea dlin e at (9 5 1) 3 6 8 -9 22 9.
Notice ID: wLvHLy9tclBVkFhbbz8a | Proof Updated: Jan. 03, 2023 at 01:36pm PST Notice Name: Meritage DAA (5209298) | Publisher ID: 0011579740 01/05/2023: City Notices 227.73
Subtotal $236.84
Tax %0
Total $236.84
See Proof on Next Page
Meritage DAA (5209298) - Page 2 of 2
Staff Report
TO: City Council
FROM: Carole Kendrick, Planning Manager
DATE January 17, 2023
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Review for the Second Street Extension Project
Description: Environmental review of a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) R-12 to extend Second Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue.
Background and Analysis:
The City of Beaumont has determined that the proposed Second Street Extension Project (Project), and the required discretionary actions of the City Council for the Project, require compliance with the guidelines and regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) addresses the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects associated with the proposed Project.
This IS/MND has been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.); Section 15070 of the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (“CEQA Guidelines”), as amended (CCR, Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.); and applicable requirements of the Lead Agency, the City of Beaumont.
This IS/MND has determined that the proposed Project would result in potentially significant environmental impacts; however, mitigation measures are proposed that would reduce any potentially significant impact to less than significance levels. As such, an IS/MND is deemed as the appropriate document to provide the necessary environmental review and clearance.
The City of Beaumont plans to alleviate traffic congestion on First Street between Highland Springs and Pennsylvania Avenue by extending Second Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue. The improvements include widening and extending Second
Street approximately 2,525 feet from the current terminus at the westerly boundary of First Street Self and RV Storage, to Pennsylvania Avenue. The Project site is relatively flat with elevations ranging from 2,576 feet to 2,593 feet above mean sea level (AMSL).
This Project also entails widening Second Street approximately 862 lineal feet and extending it lineal 1,663 feet from its current terminus to the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center. The Project will require construction of a new storm drain facility and may require improvements to existing drainage. The total potential disturbed Project site area is approximately 5.08 acres. The site is bounded by commercial uses on the east end and to southeast and by vacant land on the north, west, and southwest.
The General Plan land use and zoning designations of the adjacent land uses are General Commercial and Community Commercial with a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay.
Second Street is classified as a major roadway in the City’s General Plan Mobility Element. The proposed project will build within the existing right-of-way for a major roadway; however, this project will be an interim improvement built to secondary roadway standards. The proposed road cross section allows the south half to meet the curb alignment for a Major (38’) while the north half will need to be widened in the future (at developer’s expense to complete the Major section – this future improvement is not included as part of the proposed project. The interim condition is essentially a secondary road but shifted from centerline.
Environmental Documentation
An Environmental Analysis of this proposal was prepared by Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc. to assess the potential impacts that this project would have and mitigation measures which are required to mitigate identified impacts to a level of insignificance, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The areas that were covered within the analysis were:
Aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, air quality, biological resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, land use/planning, population/housing, transportation/traffic, agriculture/forestry resources, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, public services, utilities/service systems, geology/soils, noise, and recreation.
In general, the findings made in these areas found that the impacts would be either “less-than-significant” or “not an impact” to that particular area of study. Air quality is expected to improve because this extension will help alleviate traffic queuing at local railroad and freeway intersections.
Biological Resources
A multiple species habitat conservation plan (MSHCP) consistency analysis was prepared by Searl Biological Services on September 26, 2022, and a Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report was prepared by Caskey Biological Consulting, LLC on November 28, 2022. in conjunction with this review and mitigation measures are proposed to be incorporated into the project to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. The proposed mitigation measures include a pre - construction burrowing owl survey, that grading work shall done outside the nesting periods for sensitive species of birds, environmental regulatory permitting and the requirement for a determination of a biologically equivalent or superior preservation (DBESP) be obtained in the even that impacts to riparian/riverine habitat cannot be avoided. The mitigation is shown as MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, MM BIO-3, MM BIO-4 and MM BIO-5 on Pages 4-27 through 4-29 of Attachment A.
Cultural Resources
An archaeological report was prepared by CRM Tech on October 10, 2021, in conjunction with this review and mitigation measures are proposed to address the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources, treatment of tribal and non-tribal resources, and a measure to address if human remains are encountered, as shown as MM CUL-1, MM CUL-2, MM CUL-3 and MM CUL-4 on Pages 4-32 and 4-33 of Attachment A.
Geology and Soils
A geotechnical investigation was prepared by Sladden Engineering on August of 2020 in conjunction with this review and mitigation measures are proposed to implement a paleontological resource impact mitigation consistent with CEQA, as shown as MM GEO-1, MM GEO-2 and MM GEO-3 on Page 4-42 of Attachment A.
Public Communication
The draft initial study/mitigated negative declaration was circulated for a 30-day public review period from November 22, 2022, through December 21, 2022, and is included as Attachment A to this staff report. The project was advertised in the in the Press Enterprise on November 22, 2022, and the proof of publication is included as Attachment D to this staff report.
At the time of report preparation, the Planning Department has not received any letters of comment from the public in favor or opposition to the project. Any comments received prior to the time of the scheduled City Council meeting will be provided at the time of the public hearing.
Fiscal Impact:
City staff time to prepare this staff report is approximately $500.
Recommended Action:
Hold a public hearing; and,
Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program for the Second Street Extension Project; and,
Direct staff to prepare a Notice of Determination to be filed with the Riverside County Clerk Recorder.
Attachments:
A. Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration without Appendices (available on request)
B. Aerial Photograph
C. General Plan Roadway Classification
D. Proof of Publication
Incorporated herein by Reference:
City of Beaumont General Plan
City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance
Project Site’s Riverside Conservation Authority Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan Informational Map
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2ND Street Improvement Project
Lead Agency:
City of Beaumont
550 East 6th Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Prepared for:
City of Beaumont
550 East 6th Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Prepared by:
Matthew Fagan Consulting Services, Inc.
42011 Avenida Vista Ladera
Temecula, CA 92591
November 2022
Table of Contents i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Mitigated Negative Declaration – 2nd Street Improvement Project ............................................................... 1 Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects ............................................ 1 SECTION 1.0 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1-1
1. Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1-1
2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1
3. Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental Setting ............................................................... 1-1 SECTION 2.0 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 2-1 SECTION 3.0 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected and Determination....................................... 3-1
1. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ..................................................................... 3-1
2. Determination ................................................................................................................... 3-1 SECTION 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Discussion ......................................................................... 4-1
1. Aesthetics............................................................................................................................... 4-1
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ...................................................................................... 4-4
3. Air Quality............................................................................................................................... 4-7
4. Biological Resources ........................................................................................................... 4-17
5. Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................. 4-30
6. Energy .................................................................................................................................. 4-34
7. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................ 4-37
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................ 4-43
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...................................................................................... 4-49
10. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................... 4-54
11. Land Use and Planning........................................................................................................ 4-60
12. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................... 4-61
13. Noise .................................................................................................................................... 4-62
14. Population and Housing ....................................................................................................... 4-69
15. Public Services .................................................................................................................... 4-70
16. Recreational ......................................................................................................................... 4-72
17. Transportation ...................................................................................................................... 4-73
18. Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................... 4-77
19. Utilities and Service Systems............................................................................................... 4-83
20. Wildfire ................................................................................................................................. 4-89
21. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................................... 4-91 SECTION 5.0 List of Preparers ............................................................................................................... 5-1 SECTION 6.0 Sources ............................................................................................................................ 6-1 SECTION 7.0 List of Appendices ............................................................................................................ 7-1
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-1 Regional Construction Emissions ............................................................................................. 4-12 Table 3-3 Regional Operational Emissions ............................................................................................. 4-13 Table 3-3 Localized Significance Threshold Impacts.............................................................................. 4-14
Table 4-1 Local Vegetation ..................................................................................................................... 4-20
Table of Contents ii
Table 4-2 Jurisdictional Resources ......................................................................................................... 4-24 Table 6-1 Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Energy)................................................................. 4-36 Table 8-1 Construction GHG Emissions ................................................................................................. 4-45 Table 8-2 Operational GHG Emissions ................................................................................................... 4-46 Table 8-3 Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Greenhouse Gas) ................................................ 4-47 Table 13-1. Future Traffic Noise Levels .................................................................................................. 4-67
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Regional Location Map ............................................................................................................... 1-2 Figure 2 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................................. 1-3 Figure 3 Aerial Photo ................................................................................................................................ 2-2 Figure 4 Street Improvement Plan ............................................................................................................ 2-3
Figure 4-1 Biological Assessment Area .................................................................................................... 4-22 Figure 4-2 Local Drainages ....................................................................................................................... 4-25
Figure 9-1 Geotracker Site ........................................................................................................................ 4-51 Figure 9-2 Envirostor Site ......................................................................................................................... 4-52
Table of Contents iii
COMMONLY USED ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AB
ARB AQMP
Assembly Bill
Air Resources Board
Air Quality Management Plan
BCVWD Beaumont-Cherry Valley Water District
BUSD Beaumont Unified School District
BMP Best Management Practices
°C CalEEMod Celsius California Emissions Estimator Model Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDC California Department of Conservation
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4
CNDDB Methane California Natural Diversity Database
CNEL
CNPS
community noise equivalent
level California Native Plant
Society
CO Carbon Monoxide
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e
CO Plan
Carbon Dioxide Equivalents
Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide
CRHR California Register of Historic Places
CWA California Water Act
dB Decibel
dBA
DIF
DTSC
EIC
A-weighted sound level
Development Impact Fees
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Eastern Information Center
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
°F
FEMA Fahrenheit Federal Emergency Management Agency
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map
FTA
GHGs
Federal Transportation Administration
Greenhouse Gases
HeC2
IPCC
Hanford coarse sandy loam
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Ldn
Leq
Lmax
LSTs
Day-night average
level Equivalent sound
level Maximum noise
level Localized Significance Thresholds
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendent
MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table of Contents iv
MGD
MSHCP million gallons per day Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan NAHC Native American Heritage Commission
NEPSSA Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas
NOX Nitrogen Oxide
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
N2O Nitrous Oxide
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
OPR
OHWM
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
Ordinary High Water Mark
PM10 and PM2.5 Particulate Matter
PPV Peak particle velocity
RCALUC Riverside County Airport Land Use Compatibility
rms Root mean square
ROG Reactive Organic Gases
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RV
RWQCB Recreational Vehicle Regional Water Quality Control Board USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
SB
SCAG Senate Bill Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SIP State Implementation Plan
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SoCAB South Coast Air Basin
SRA Sensitive Receptor Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TCR Tribal Cultural Resource
TUMF
TvC
USDA
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Tujunga loamy sand United States Department of Agriculture USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS
VdB
VMT
WRCOG
United States Geological Survey
Vibration in decibels
Vehicle miles traveled West Riverside Council of Governments
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
MND 1
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
2ND STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
Project Proponent: City of Beaumont
Project Location: The Project is located on 2nd Street from Pennsylvania Avenue east approximately 1,200 feet to existing improvements adjacent to the Home Depot Center.
Project Description: The City of Beaumont plans to alleviate traffic congestion on 1st Street between Highland Springs and Pennsylvania Avenue by extending 2nd Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue. The improvements include widening and extending 2nd Street approximately 2,525 feet from the current terminus at the westerly boundary of First Street Self and RV Storage, to Pennsylvania Avenue.
This Project also entails widening 2nd Street approximately 862 lineal feet and extending it lineal 1,663 feet from its current terminus to the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center. The Project will require construction of a new storm drain facility and may require improvements to existing drainage. The total potential disturbed Project site area is approximately 5 acres.
Public Review Period:
Mitigation Measures Incorporated into the Project to Avoid Significant Effects:
Biological Resources
MM-BIO-1 Preconstruction Survey for Burrowing Owl. A 30-day preconstruction survey for burrowing owl is required by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to confirm the presence or absence of burrowing owl on the Project site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbance in accordance with MSHCP survey requirements to avoid direct take of burrowing owl. If burrowing owl are determined to occupy the Project site or immediate vicinity, the County will be notified, and avoidance measures will be implemented, as appropriate, pursuant to the MSHCP, the California Fish and Game Code, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the mitigation guidelines prepared by the CDFW (2012).
The following measures are recommended in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) guidelines to avoid impacts on an active burrow:
• No disturbance shall occur within 50 meters (approximately 160 feet) of occupied burrows during the non-breeding season.
• No disturbance shall occur within 75 meters (approximately 250 feet) of occupied burrows during the breeding season.
To prevent unavoidable impacts, passive or active relocation of burrowing owls shall be implemented by a qualified biologist outside the breeding season, in accordance with procedures set by the MSHCP and in coordination with the CDFW.
MM-BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Avoidance/Relocation. If active burrowing owl burrows are
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
MND 2
detected outside the breeding season (September through January) during the survey outlined in MM-BIO-1, or within the breeding season but owls are not nesting or in the process of nesting, passive relocation may be conducted following consultation with the CDFW and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Construction activity may not occur within 500 feet of the active burrow. If active nests are identified onsite, the nests shall be avoided, or the owls actively or passively relocated to an appropriate offsite location to the satisfaction of the USFWS or the CDFW. To avoid active nests adequately, no grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within 250 feet of an active nest during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) and 160 feet during the non-breeding season. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season, passive and/or active relocation may be undertaken following consultation with and approval by the CDFW and/or USFWS. One-way doors may be installed as part of a passive relocation program. Burrowing owl burrows shall be excavated with hand tools by a qualified biologist when determined to be unoccupied, and back filled to ensure that animals do not re-enter the holes/dens. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the County Resource Conservation Authority (RCA).
MM-BIO-3 Regulatory Permitting. Prior to the start of any clearing or grading on the Project site, the City shall obtain the necessary environmental regulatory permits from the affected federal and/or state resource agencies. This may include federal Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, with possible consultation with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, state permitting through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife relative to 1600 riparian resources and/or California Fish and Game codes, and federal Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification through the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director in consultation with the affected resource agencies.
MM-BIO-4 Offsite Riverine Habitat Compensation. Based on the grading footprint and ROW alignment as of September 2022, the Project will permanently impact 0.30-acre of ephemeral Riverine habitat in Features A and B by installing culverts, and temporarily impact 0.03-acre of ephemeral Riverine habitat in Feature C through minor grading activities. Based on these total impacts, the City will purchase offsite mitigation credits totaling 0.96-acre, a 3:1 mitigation to impact ratio for permanent impacts and 2:1 mitigation to impact ratio for the temporary impacts.
The City will purchase Permittee Responsible credits at the Wilson Creek Habitat Restoration Plan (WCHRP) site in Aguanga, California to offset said impacts. This mitigation would provide a superior resource for MSHCP Covered Species in perpetuity by enhancing and restoring this portion of Wilson Creek through the planting of the appropriate native species. The WCHRP has been approved as a Permittee Responsible mitigation site since 2011. It totals 19.4-acres of streambed habitat where 100% of the tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima) was already removed in 2011 and has been managed since to ensure tamarisk would not reestablish. Individual conservation easements are sold on a project-by-project basis within the 19.4-acre area. This measure shall implement directives outlined in the site-specific DBESP. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director in consultation with the affected resource agencies and mitigation bank management staff.
MM-BIO-5 Nesting Bird Survey. If construction activities occur during the nesting bird season (i.e., January 1 – August 31 for raptors and hummingbirds; February 1 – August 31 for all other birds), then a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to and within three days of construction activities. The biologist shall have the authority to establish no disturbance buffers with the distances determined by factors such as species, tolerance of disturbance, nest
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
MND 3
status, etc. If nesting bird surveys result in the need for a biological monitor to be present during construction activities, then one shall be present full-time to monitor construction activities to ensure no direct or indirect impacts occur to potential nest success. The biologist shall have the authority to suspend construction activities if potential impacts are observed
Surveys shall be conducted in proposed work areas, staging and storage areas, and soil, equipment, and material stockpile areas. For passerines and small raptors, surveys shall be conducted within a 250-foot radius surrounding the work area (in areas where access is feasible). For larger raptors, the survey area shall encompass a 500-foot radius. Surveys shall be conducted during weather conditions suited to maximize the observation of possible nests and shall concentrate on areas of suitable habitat. If a lapse in project-related work of five (5) days or longer occurs, an additional nest survey shall be required before work can be reinitiated.
If nests are encountered during any preconstruction survey, a qualified biologist shall determine if it may be feasible for construction to continue as planned without impacting the success of the nest, depending on conditions specific to each nest and the relative location and rate of construction activities.
If the qualified biologist determines construction activities have potential to adversely affect a nest, the biologist shall immediately inform the construction manager to halt construction activities within minimum exclusion buffer of 50 feet for songbird nests, and 200 to 500 feet for raptor nests, depending on species and location. Active nest(s) within the Project site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist during construction if work is occurring directly adjacent to the established no-work buffer. Construction activities within the no-work buffer may proceed after a qualified biologist determines the nest is no longer active due to natural causes (e.g., young have fledged, predation, or other non-human causes of nest failure).
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
MM-CUL-1 Inadvertent Cultural Resources Finds: For adequate coverage and the protection of possibly significant buried resources and tribal cultural resources, a qualified archaeologist and Native American Monitor provided by the consulting tribes shall be retained by the applicant to monitor all ground-disturbing construction activities, included but not limited to site preparation, grading and excavation. The applicant, archaeologist and consulting tribes will agree on a monitoring schedule based on the necessary days of ground-disturbance. In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project development/construction, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find.
Work on the overall project may continue during this assessment period. If significant Native American cultural resources are discovered, for which a Treatment Plan must be prepared, the developer or his archaeologist shall contact the Consulting Tribe(s) and shall, in good faith, consult on the discovery and its disposition (e.g., avoidance, preservation, return of artifacts to tribe, etc.). If avoidance is not possible, an avoidance plan will be prepared and implemented based on consultation between the archaeologist and tribes. If resources are found to be significant historical resources under CEQA then CUL 2 and/or CUL-3 shall apply. For the purposes of these measures, a Consulting Tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB52 tribal consultation process for the Project, has not opted out of the AB52 consultation process, and has completed AB52 consultation with the City as provided for in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52.
MM-CUL-2 Treatment and Disposition of Non-Tribal Cultural Resources: If significant resources are identified that are not identified by the qualified archaeologist and consulting
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
MND 4
tribe(s) as a Tribal Cultural Resources, and the resources is of scientific/historical value, recovered materials shall be deposited in a federal or state recognized curation facility. The curation of the recovered materials shall be identified and funded by the Applicant and approved by the City. The site record for the resource shall be updated to include the final disposition of the recovered materials and will be submitted to the Eastern Information Center (ECIC).
MM-CUL-3 Treatment and Disposition of Tribal Cultural Resources: In the event that Native American tribal cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during grading for this project.
The following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:
1. Documentation: In conjunction with the qualified archaeologist, the tribal cultural resource shall be documented to the extent deemed appropriate by the consulting tribe(s) on the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523-series forms. The final disposition of the materials shall also be included on the site form.
2. Temporary Curation and Storage: During construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location to be mutually agreed to by the City, Project Archaeologist, and consulting tribes. The removal of any artifacts from the Project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversite of the process; and
3. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and non-human remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City Planning Department with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for onsite reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing and basic recordation have been completed; b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository within Riverside County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and therefore would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility within Riverside County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation:
c. If more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to a consensus as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the Western Science Center by default; and.
d. At the completion of grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project Archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, Eastern Information Center and interested tribes:
MM-CUL-4 Human Remains: If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
MND 5
Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendants(s)" for purposes of receiving notification of discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and the agreement described in MM CUL-3. If the MLD fails to make a recommendation regarding the treatment or the recommendation is not feasible per the property owner, then the remains shall be reburied with appropriate dignity and respect on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance. In the event the MLD fails to make a recommendation - ESA should be set up to prevent further disturbance. The ESA should not indicate that remains are buried there. This should be conducted in coordination with the NAM/D63.
Geology and Soils
MM-GEO-1 Paleontological Monitor: All earth-moving operations associated with the project shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. The monitor should be prepared to quickly salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and should collect samples of sediments that are likely to contain fossil remains of small vertebrates or invertebrates.
However, the monitor must have the power to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for the removal of abundant or large specimens.
MM-GEO-2 Samples Processing: Collected samples of sediment should be processed to recover small fossils, and all recovered specimens should be identified and curated at repository with permanent retrievable storage.
MM-GEO-3 Report of Actions: A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered specimens, should be prepared upon completion of the procedures outlined above.
The report should include a discussion of the significance of the paleontological findings, if any.
The report and the inventory, when submitted to the City of Beaumont, would signify completion of the program to mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Background 1-1
SECTION 1.0 BACKGROUND
1.Summary
Project Title: City of Beaumont 2nd Street Improvements Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Beaumont 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Contact Person and Phone Number: Carole Kendrick
Planning Manager 951-769-8518
Project Location:
The Project is located on 2nd Street from Pennsylvania Avenue east approximately 1,200 feet to existing improvements adjacent to the Home Depot Center.
General Plan Designation:
Zoning:
2.Introduction
The City of Beaumont is the Lead Agency for this Initial Study. The Initial Study has been prepared to identify and assess the anticipated environmental impacts of the 2nd Street Improvement Project (Project). This document has been prepared to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Res. Code, Section 21000 et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.). CEQA requires that all state and local government agencies consider the environmental consequences of projects over which they have discretionary authority before acting on those projects. A CEQA Initial Study is generally used to determine which CEQA document is appropriate for a project (Negative Declaration [ND], Mitigated Negative Declaration [MND], or Environmental Impact Report [EIR]).
3.Surrounding Land Uses/Environmental Setting
The Project site encompasses approximately 5 acres and is located at 2nd Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue. The Project site is located within public right-of-way in the City of Beaumont in Riverside County, California, approximately 1,000 feet south of Interstate 10 (I-10) between Pennsylvania Avenue and Commerce Way. Reference Figure 1, Regional Location Map and Figure 2, Vicinity Map. The Project site is bounded by undeveloped land to the north, west, and southwest, a self-storage facility to the southeast, and existing commercial development to the east. The Project site is currently vacant land and does not contain any structures.
General Commercial and Community Commercial with a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay (adjacent land, streets have no GP designation) Community Commercial with a TOD
FIGURE 1
REGIONAL LOCATION MAP
Source: Map My County – https://gis.countyofriverside.us/Html5Viewer/?viewer=MMC_Public
APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION
Background Page 325 of 865
FIGURE 2
VICINITY MAP
Source: Project Plans – (Appendix J)
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Overview
The City of Beaumont plans to alleviate traffic congestion on 1st Street between Highland Springs and Pennsylvania Avenue by extending 2nd Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue. The improvements include widening and extending 2nd Street approximately 2,525 feet from the current terminus at the westerly boundary of First Street Self and RV Storage, to Pennsylvania Avenue. The Project site is relatively flat with elevations ranging from 2,576 feet to 2,593 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). Reference Figure 3, Aerial Photo. This Project also entails widening 2nd Street approximately 862 lineal feet and extending it lineal 1,663 feet from its current terminus to the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center. The Project will require construction of a new storm drain facility and may require improvements to existing drainage. The total potential disturbed Project site area is approximately 5 acres 1. The site is bounded by commercial uses on the east end and to southeast and by vacant land on the north, west, and southwest. The General Plan land use and zoning designations of the adjacent land uses are General Commercial and Community Commercial with a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay.
The new roadway will be an extension of the existing E. 2nd Street on the west boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to the proposed intersection at Pennsylvania Avenue. The new roadway and related improvements will provide safe and ready access to the commercial development for both pedestrians and vehicles from the west. The roadway will be designed to cross over the existing drainage culvert and have new culverts for the water crossings on the west side of the Project site. The new culverts will convey the anticipated water flows based on the requirements set forth by the City of Beaumont and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD). In addition, the Project will have an effective signage and striping plan for the planned phasing as well as any detour plans needed during construction to minimize the effects on local drivers or pedestrians.
There is also a proposed Pennsylvania Avenue Improvement Project that will widen the existing Pennsylvania Avenue from 1st Street to 6th Street (just west of the proposed Project). This improvement project will include new curb and gutter, a raised median, cross culvert extensions, and improvements at 6th Street intersection. The Pennsylvania project lies to the west of the proposed E. 2nd Street Improvement Project. An additional capital works project is currently being planned to expand the Pennsylvania Avenue interchange including a new westbound on-ramp and eastbound off-ramp to the I-10 Freeway just south of the site. These improvements depend on Caltrans and timing has not yet been determined.
2nd Street is classified as a major roadway in the City’s General Plan Mobility Element. The proposed Project will build within the existing right-of-way for a major roadway; however, this Project will be an interim improvement built to secondary roadway standards. The proposed road cross section allows the south-half to meet the curb alignment for a Major (38’) while the north-half will need to be widened in the future (at developer’s expense) to complete the Major section – this future improvement is not included as part of this proposed Project. The interim condition is essentially a secondary road but shifted from centerline. Reference Figure 4, Street Improvement Plan.
Project Description 2-1
1 The Project currently involves 172,932 square feet (approx. 5 acres) of roadway improvements. The air quality study used the previous estimated impact area of 162,578 square feet (3.7 acres) for its calculations. The air quality consultant (Urban Crossroads) has stated this discrepancy is minor and would not affect their conclusions regarding the Project emissions and impacts (i.e., less than SCAQMD thresholds and less than significant under CEQA). Page 327 of 865
FIGURE 3
AERIAL PHOTO
Source: Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps
SITE AREA
FIGURE 4
STREET IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Project Description 2-4
Right-of-Way
Right-of-way constraints were determined based on review of archival record research. Based on this review, it was determined that one right-of-way presented a potential constraint - the right-of-way associated with the westerly side of 2nd Street site. The westernmost section, to the north of E. 2nd Street, is dedicated to Loma Linda University. However, the Project will improve the current commercial site access and will benefit the existing commercial developments, the City, and local developers. The City will coordinate with Loma Linda University to obtain right-of-way and allow the City to proceed with the 2nd Street Improvement Project.
Potential Utility Conflicts
The City will coordinate the Project with local utility purveyors to prevent any conflicts with existing utility lines. Local utilities include but are not limited to the following: water lines, sewer lines, gas lines, electric lines and/or poles, cable lines, etc. Local utility purveyors were contacted and sent plans to identify any potential conflicts with their lines. After all existing utility lines were accurately plotted, only two potential conflicts were found:
• A sanitary sewer line extends from American Avenue to Commerce Way along E. 2nd Street. • A storm drain system is located in a segment at E. 2nd Street.
All other existing utilities in place do not pose a potential utility conflict especially along the western portion of E. 2nd Street where no development is present.
Landscaping
The Project is a street extension and widening so there will be minimal landscaping requirements; however, street trees will be installed per the City’s roadway standards.
Grading
This Project entails widening 2nd Street approximately 862 lineal feet and extending it lineal 1,663 feet from its current terminus to the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center. The Project will require construction of a new storm drain facility and requires improvements to existing drainage. The total potential disturbed Project site area is approximately 5 acres. The Project site will also require grading including 4,611 CY of cut and 12,607 CY of fill resulting an estimated 7,996 CY of soil to be imported. Assuming 14 CY per load, the importation of soil will require one way 571 truck trips which will require approximately 11 days to deliver assuming 8 hours per day and 6 days per week.
Construction
As described above, the design of 2nd Street will be to secondary street standards with 4 travel lanes 2 in each direction and a pavement width of 64 feet. The approximate length of the designed road is 2,525 feet but the width of the right-of-way is 100 feet and the City’s standard for a secondary street is a right-of-way width between 76-88 feet. On the east end, the asphalt concrete will be matched to the existing asphalt and concrete of the commercial center. On the west end, the drive intersection approach will be designed and constructed as part of the Pennsylvania Avenue Improvement Project described above. Per the Project plans, the cross section of the design shows that the asphalt concrete slopes away from the centerline at 2% for drainage purposes. On one side, water will be collected along the curb and gutter and on the other side along a dike. A 6-foot sidewalk is proposed for the
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Project Description 2-5
south side of the street which will slope at 2% toward the curb and gutter.
Schedule
At present, the Project is anticipated to be constructed beginning in 2022 and will require approximately one year to complete, although environmental constraints may delay the start of construction until mitigation is completed. Prior to construction of the new and expanded roadway sections, the existing roadway would have to be demolished. Construction of the new roadway will require new asphalt and
0.26 acre of new concrete sidewalks.
Regulatory Requirements, Permits, and Approvals
The following subsequent approvals would be required for implementation of the Project:
• Regulatory permitting from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for impacts to riparian resources and drainages
• Regulatory permits from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Regional Water Quality Control Board relative to the federal Clean Water Act
Consultation with California Native American Tribe(s):
The City submitted notification letters to 23 Native American tribal governments or designated tribal representatives on March 30-31, 2022. Responses were received from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians on April 29, 2022, and again on June 3, 2022, the Morongo Band of Mission Indians on May 15, 2022, and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians on May 9, 2022. A detailed summary of the consultation process is provided in Section 18 of this Initial Study.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS AND DETERMINATION
1. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Greenhouse Gas Emissions Population/Housing Agriculture Resources Hazards & Hazardous Materials Public Services Air Quality Hydrology/Water Quality Recreation
Biological Resources Land Use/Planning Transportation Cultural Resources Mineral Resources Tribal Cultural Resources Energy Noise Utilities/Service Systems
Geology/Soils Paleontological Resources Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
2. Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Environmental Factors and Determination 3-1
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the Project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Project, nothing further is required.
November 2022
Date
Carole Kendrick Planning Manager
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-1
SECTION 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION
1. Aesthetics
Environmental Setting
The City of Beaumont is located in the western portion of Riverside County, bounded by Cherry Valley to the north, City of Banning to the east, the City of San Jacinto to the south, and unincorporated areas and the City of Calimesa to the west. The most prominent natural feature near the City is the San Gorgonio Mountains which bound the City of Beaumont to the north and east.
State Scenic Highways
The California Scenic Highway Program protects and enhances the scenic beauty of California’s highways and adjacent corridors. A highway can be designated as scenic based on how much natural beauty can be seen by users of the highway, the quality of the scenic landscape, and if development impacts the enjoyment of the view. The Project site is located
0.6 mile east of State Highway 79 and 1,000 feet south of I-10. Neither of these highways is designated as a State Scenic Highway by Caltrans. The nearest State Scenic Highway to the Project site is Highway 243, located approximately 4 miles to the east.
Visual Character of the Project Site
The Project site is located within public right-of-way in the City of Beaumont in Riverside County, California, approximately 1,000 feet south of Interstate 10 (I-10) between Pennsylvania Avenue and Commerce Way. The Project site is bounded by undeveloped land to the north, west, and southwest, a self-storage facility to the southeast, and existing commercial development to the east. The Project site is currently vacant land and does not contain any structures.
Sources: Caltrans California Scenic Highway Mapping System 2021; Project Plans/Materials (Appendix J); and City of Beaumont’s Municipal Code.
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
X
The Project site is located south of the I-10 Freeway in a developing area of the City. The Project site is bounded by undeveloped land to the north, west, and southwest and developed commercial development to the southeast and east. The closest residential uses are located approximately 500 feet south of the site on the south side of East 1st Street. There are 6’ high block walls at the rear of these homes along the south side of East 1st Street. In addition, there are streetlights along East 1st Street.
The City of Beaumont General Plan does not identify scenic vistas within its planning area.
Current views of the San Gorgonio Mountains from the Project site are partially obstructed by
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-2
commercial development to the south of the Project site (i.e., between the Project site and existing homes). Development of the Project would not create additional obstructions since it would construct a flat street and not construct any new buildings or major improvements (other than streetlights) that could block views of the mountains to the north of the Project site. The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. No impacts will occur.
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
X
The Project site is located 1,000 feet south of I-10 and 0.6 mile east of State Highway 79.
Neither of these highways is designated or eligible as a State Scenic Highway by Caltrans. The nearest State Scenic Highway to the Project site is Highway 243, located approximately 4 miles to the east. Since the Project itself is essentially flat except for streetlights, the Project will not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. No impacts will occur.
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) In non-urbanized area, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
X
The Project itself will be flat (i.e., at grade level) except for planned streetlights (Figure 4, Street Improvement Plan) so the proposed improvements will not change the visual character of the Project site or surrounding area. The Project would not introduce structures or other built environment elements that would contrast with the existing development in the vicinity of the Project site. Furthermore, the design of the Project complies with all City street requirements (i.e., width, curbs/gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, etc.). Therefore, the Project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Lastly, the Project is not located in an urbanized area although the area could be classified as “urbanizing” and has a more “suburban” land pattern. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Any impacts will be less than significant.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-3
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
New permanent lighting sources will be created from additional streetlights. In addition, short- term lighting and glare will also be associated with construction activities. These additional artificial light sources are typically associated with security lighting since all street construction activities would be limited to daylight hours in the City. Workers either arriving to the site before dawn, or leaving the site after dusk, may also generate additional construction light sources.
These impacts will be temporary, of short-duration, and will cease when Project construction is completed. For these reasons, and because there are limited numbers of construction workers, these impacts are considered less than significant.
During operations, the Project would include streetlights for nighttime travelers along the roadway. There will also be signage that may result in minimal temporary glare during certain hours of the day. Streetlight fixtures would be shielded and directed downward to avoid spillover effects to surrounding properties.
All lighting associated with the Project will be required to comply with the City of Beaumont’s Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 “Outdoor Lighting” which establishes standards to reduce light pollution generated by outdoor lighting fixtures and devices. Compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Therefore, the Project will not create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-4
2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
Sources: City of Beaumont General Plan; Map My County; California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program; and Public Resources Code.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to
non- agricultural use?
X
The land use designation for the Project site is General Commercial with a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay. All land use designations adjacent to the Project site include Community Commercial with a TOD Overlay. The current zoning designation for the Project site is (CC) Community Commercial, also with a TOD Overlay.
The California Department of Conservation’s (CDC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) was established in 1982 to track changes in agricultural land use and to help preserve areas of Important Farmland. It divides the state's land into eight categories based on soil quality and existing agricultural uses to produce maps and statistical data. These are used to help preserve productive farmland and to analyze impacts on farmland. Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance are all Important Farmland and are collectively referred to as Important Farmland in this Initial Study.
The highest rated Important Farmland is Prime Farmland. Farmland maps are updated and released every two years. According to Map My County for the Project site, the Project site is located on land classified as Farmland of Local Importance. Therefore, the Project would not be located on land classified as prime farmland, unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance. No impact would occur.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-5
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract?
X
The Project site is not located on land zoned for agricultural use. According to Map My County, the Project site is mapped as Farmland of Local Importance and not within an agricultural preserve subject to a Williamson Act contract. The Project would not conflict with zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impact would occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland
(as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code
section 51104(g))?
X
Public Resources Code Section 12220(g) identifies forest land as land that can support 10- percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. The Project site and surrounding properties are not currently being defined, managed, or used as forest land as identified in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g). The Project site is located on land designated for commercial land uses within a Community Commercial zoning classification. The Project site is not located on land designated for forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned timberland production. No impact would occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion
of forest land to non-forest use?
X
As discussed in Threshold c., neither the Project site, or surrounding parcels are zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production. The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-6
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment, which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest
land to non-forest use?
X
The Project site and surrounding properties are not currently used for agriculture. Map My County has mapped the Project site and surrounding properties as Farmland of Local Importance. The Project site is not currently being used for agriculture; therefore, the Project would not result in the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. No impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-7
3. Air Quality
Environmental Setting
Both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established ambient air quality standards for common pollutants. These ambient air quality standards are levels of contaminants representing safe levels that avoid specific adverse health effects associated with each pollutant. The ambient air quality standards cover what are called criteria pollutants because the health and other effects of each pollutant are described in criteria documents. Areas that meet ambient air quality standards are classified as attainment areas, while areas that do not meet these standards are classified as nonattainment areas.
CARB divides the state into air basins that share similar meteorological and topographical features. The Project site lies in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SoCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for the federal ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standards and is also a nonattainment area for the state standards for state ozone, coarse particulate matter (PM10), and PM2.5 standards. The Project site is located in the SCAQMD Banning Pass General Forecast Area and the Banning Pass Monitoring Area-29.
Sources: 2nd Street Improvement Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering, 1-4-2022 (AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis, Appendix B); and the City of Beaumont 2040 General Plan and its EIR.
Note: Any tables or figures in this section are from the AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis, unless otherwise noted.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
X
To evaluate whether or not a project conflicts with or obstructs the implementation of the applicable air quality plan (2016 Air Quality Management Plan for the South Coast Air Basin), the South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Air Quality Handbook states that there are two key indicators. These indicators are identified by the criteria discussed below.
1. Indicator: Whether the project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).
2. Indicator: According to Chapter 12 of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the purpose of the General Plan consistency findings is to determine whether a project is inconsistent with the growth assumptions incorporated into the air quality plan, and thus, whether it would
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-8
interfere with the region’s ability to comply with federal and California air quality standards.
Considering the recommended criteria in the SCAQMD’s 1993 Handbook, the analysis below uses the following criteria to address this potential impact:
• Step 1: Project’s contribution to air quality violations (SCAQMD’s first indictor); • Step 2: Assumptions in AQMP (SCAQMD’s second indictor); and • Step 3: Compliance with applicable emission control measures in the AQMPs.
Step 1: Project’s Contribution to Air Quality Violations
According to the SCAQMD, the Project is consistent with the AQMP if the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. As shown in Thresholds 3.b and 3.c, the Project would not generate regional or localized construction or operational emissions that would exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.
If a project’s emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for volatile organic compounds (VOC), Nitrogen Oxide (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOX), PM10, or PM2.5, it follows that the project’s emissions would not exceed the allowable limit for each pollutant in order for the region to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards, which is the primary goal of air quality plans. As shown in Threshold 3.b, the Project’s regional construction and operational emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance.
Furthermore, as described in Threshold 3.c, the Project’s localized construction and operational emissions would not exceed the Project location-specific SCAQMD localized significance thresholds (LSTs). Considering this information, the Project’s construction and operational emissions would not contribute substantially to potential air quality violations and thus would comply with the applicable air quality plan.
Step 2: Assumptions in AQMP
The development of emission burdens used in AQMPs to demonstrate compliance with ambient air quality standards is based, in part, on land use patterns contained within local general plans.
Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that if a project is consistent with the applicable general plan land use designation or equivalent, and if the general plan was adopted prior to the applicable AQMP, then the growth of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and/or population generated by said project would be consistent with the growth in VMT and population assumed within the AQMP. The City of Beaumont adopted its most recent General Plan in 2020 although the designation for 2nd Street has not changed since the previous General Plan was adopted in 2006 which is prior to the adoption of the AQMP. The current City of Beaumont General Plan does not have a land use designation for streets, nor do they have any specific zoning designation. However, 2nd Street is shown fully improved as a secondary street (64-foot width) in the City’s Mobility Element of the General Plan.
The Project site itself is vacant since it is planned for the extension of a planned roadway. The
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-9
Project does not require a General Plan amendment or a change in zoning and is consistent with the Mobility Element of the General Plan. Therefore, development of the proposed Project is appropriately accounted for in the AQMP.
Step 3: Control Measures
The AQMP contains a number of control measures, which are enforceable requirements through the adoption of rules and regulations. The Project would comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations which are described below. Therefore, the Project complies with applicable emission control measures in the AQMPs.
SCAQMD Rule 402 prohibits a person from discharging from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.
SCAQMD Rule 403 governs emissions of fugitive dust during construction and operation activities. Compliance with this rule is achieved through the application of standard Best Management Practices, such as the application of water or chemical stabilizers to disturbed soils, covering haul vehicles, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour (mph), sweeping loose dirt from paved site access roadways, cessation of construction activity when winds exceed 25 mph, and establishing a permanent ground cover on finished sites.
Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with the best available control measures, so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 403 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off-site. Applicable dust suppression techniques from Rule 403 are summarized below. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PM10 component). Compliance with these rules would reduce impacts on nearby sensitive receptors.
Rule 403 measures may include but are not limited to the following:
• Apply nontoxic chemical soil stabilizers according to manufacturers’ specifications to all inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for 10 days or more). • Water active sites at least three times daily (Locations where grading is to occur will be thoroughly watered prior to earthmoving).
• Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials, or maintain at least 0.6 meters (2 feet) of freeboard (vertical space between the top of the load and top of the trailer) in accordance with the requirements of California Vehicle Code Section 23114. • Reduce traffic speeds on all unpaved roads to 15 mph or less. • Suspension of all grading activities when wind speeds (including instantaneous wind gusts) exceed 25 mph.
• Bumper strips or similar BMPs shall be provided where vehicles enter and exit the construction site onto paved roads or wash off trucks and any equipment leaving the site each trip.
• Replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-10
• During all construction activities, construction contractors shall sweep on-site and off-site streets if silt is carried to adjacent public thoroughfares, to reduce the amount of particulate matter on public streets. All sweepers shall be compliant with SCAQMD Rule 1186.1, Less Polluting Sweepers.
SCAQMD Rule 1108 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of asphalt and limits the volatile organic compound (VOC) content in asphalt used in the SoCAB. This rule would regulate the VOC content of asphalt used during construction. Therefore, all asphalt used during construction of the Project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1108.
SCAQMD Rule 1113 governs the sale, use, and manufacturing of architectural coating and limits the VOC content in paints and paint solvents. This rule regulates the VOC content of paints available during construction. Therefore, all paints and solvents used during construction and operation of the Project must comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113.
SCAQMD Rule 1186 limits the presence of fugitive dust on paved and unpaved roads and sets certification protocols and requirements for street sweepers that are under contract to provide sweeping services to any federal, state, county, agency or special district such as water, air, sanitation, transit, or school district.
In summary, the Project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP based on the City’s past and current General Plan (including the Mobility Element). The Project would not result in a regional or localized exceedance of criteria air pollutants and would comply with all applicable SCAQMD rules and regulations. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plans (2016 AQMP). Any impacts will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
This impact is related to regional criteria pollutant impacts and the nonattainment regional pollutants of concern are ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Ozone is not emitted directly into the air but is a regional pollutant formed by photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Ozone precursors, VOC and NOX, react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. Therefore, the SCAQMD does not have a recommended ozone threshold, but it does have thresholds of significance for VOC and NOX.
The Project proposes to extend 2nd Street from the westerly boundary of the Home Depot shopping center to Pennsylvania Avenue. Planned improvements include extending the street approximately 1,622 linear feet from its current terminus at the western boundary of First Street Self and RV Storage west to Pennsylvania Avenue and adding four new travel lanes and new concrete sidewalk. The Project also entails widening approximately 846 linear feet of 2nd Street from its current terminus to the western boundary of the Home Depot shopping center. The total
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-11
disturbance area is estimated at 5 acres.
The proposed road Project would generate regional criteria air pollutant and ozone precursor emissions resulting from short-term construction and long-term operational activities (i.e., travelers along the new roadway). SCAQMD has developed regional thresholds of significance for both construction and operational emissions. These thresholds are considered the allowable emissions limit for each project in order for the region to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards. Therefore, a project that would not generate daily regional emissions that exceed SCAQMD’s thresholds would also not violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The Project’s regional construction and operational emissions, which include both on-site and off-site emissions, are evaluated separately below.
Regional Thresholds
Construction Emissions
Projects in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) would generate significant construction-related regional emissions if daily emissions would exceed:
• 75 pounds per day of VOC, also known as reactive organic gases (ROG); • 100 pounds per day of NOX;
• 550 pounds per day of CO;
• 150 pounds per day of SOX;
• 150 pounds per day of PM10; and
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5.
Regional Thresholds for Operational Emissions
Projects in the SoCAB would generate significant operational regional emissions if daily emissions would exceed:
• 55 pounds per day of VOC;
• 55 pounds per day of NOX;
• 550 pounds per day of CO;
• 150 pounds per day of SOX;
• 150 pounds per day of PM10; and
• 55 pounds per day of PM2.5.
Construction Regional Emissions
Construction emissions are described as “short-term” or temporary in duration; however, they have the potential to represent a significant impact with respect to air quality. Construction of the Project would result in the temporary generation of VOC, NOX, CO, SOX, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions from construction activities such as grading, roadway construction, minor architectural coatings, and asphalt paving. Fugitive particulate matter dust emissions are primarily associated with earth disturbance and grading activities, and vary as a function of soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and miles traveled by construction vehicles on-site and off-site. Construction-related NOX emissions are primarily
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-12
generated by exhaust emissions from heavy-duty construction equipment, material and haul trucks, and construction worker vehicles. VOC emissions are mainly generated by exhaust emissions from construction vehicles, off-gas emissions associated with architectural coatings and asphalt paving.
Table 3-1, Regional Construction Emissions, presents the Project’s maximum daily construction emissions for each construction activity and during the entire construction period.
For detailed assumptions, methodologies, and models used to estimate emissions, please refer to the AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis.
Table 3-1
Regional Construction Emissions
Activity Air Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)1
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 2.71 26.47 21.34 0.04 1.95 1.30
Site Preparation 3.24 33.13 20.42 0.04 9.33 5.40
Grading 2.38 36.91 19.25 0.10 6.12 2.97
Construction 2.02 17.00 19.47 0.04 1.76 1.03
Paving 1.53 8.84 12.92 0.02 0.66 0.46
Architectural Coating 2.75 1.34 2.32 0.00 0.23 0.11
Daily Maximum1 3.24 36.91 20.42 0.10 9.33 5.40
SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold (?) No No No No No No
1 Air pollutant emissions include both on-site and off-site activities and represent the worst-case daily emissions during either summer or winter.
As shown in Table 3-1, the Project’s regional daily construction emissions would not exceed any of SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. Therefore, the short-term construction emissions would not violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The impact would be less than significant.
Operational Regional Emissions
Following construction of the Project, long-term operational emissions would be generated from daily travel along the completed roadway (i.e., daily operations). The Project is not expected to induce new automobile travel that would lead to area-wide increases in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) beyond what was already accounted for in the 2040 Beaumont General Plan EIR (adopted in 2020). The purpose of the Project is to alleviate traffic congestion on 1st street and provide more direct access to/from the commercial developments (Home Depot, etc.) and Pennsylvania Avenue.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-13
Table 3-2, Regional Operational Emissions, presents the Project’s maximum daily operational emissions relative to the applicable SCAQMD thresholds.
Table 3-2
Regional Operational Emissions
Activity Air Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)1
VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Area Sources 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 0.07 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00
SCAQMD Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold (?) No No No No No No
1 Air pollutant emissions represent the worst-case daily emissions during either summer or winter.
As shown in Table 3-2, the Project’s regional daily operational emissions would not exceed any of SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. Therefore, the long-term daily operational emissions of the road Project would not violate or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. The impact would be less than significant.
Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
As described above, the region is currently nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. However, by its nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact resulting from emissions generated over a large geographic region. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development within the air basin, and this regional impact is a cumulative impact. In other words, new development projects (such as the Project) within the air basin would contribute to this impact only on a cumulative basis. No single project would be sufficient in size, by itself, to result in nonattainment of regional air quality standards. Instead, a project’s emissions may be individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when taken in combination with past, present, and future development projects.
The cumulative analysis focuses on whether a specific project would result in cumulatively considerable emissions. According to Section 15064(h)(4) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone does not constitute substantial evidence that the project’s incremental effects would be cumulatively considerable.
Rather, the determination of cumulative air quality impacts for construction and operational emissions is based on whether the Project would result in regional emissions that exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance for construction and operations on a project level.
Projects that generate emissions below the SCAQMD significance thresholds would be considered consistent with regional air quality planning efforts and would not generate cumulatively considerable emissions.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-14
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
X
This impact evaluates the potential for the Project’s construction emissions to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Sensitive receptors are defined as those individuals who are sensitive to air pollution including children, the elderly, and persons with preexisting respiratory or cardiovascular illness. For purposes of CEQA, the SCAQMD considers a sensitive receptor to be a location where a sensitive individual could remain for 24 hours, such as residences, hospitals, or convalescent facilities. Commercial and industrial facilities are not included in the definition because employees do not typically remain on-site for 24 hours. However, when assessing the impact of pollutants with 1-hour or 8-hour standards (such as NO2 and CO), commercial and/or industrial facilities would be considered sensitive receptors.
For the Project, the closest sensitive receptors are residential land uses located south of 1st Street, approximately 550 feet from the project site (more than 25 meters away). This analysis evaluates the potential for construction-related criteria air pollutant, ozone precursor, and toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions to impact sensitive receptors.
Table 3-3, Localized Significance Threshold Impacts, illustrates the construction-related localized emissions and compares the results to the SCAQMD Localized Significance Thresholds (LST). As shown in Table 3-3, the Project’s maximum daily on-site emissions would not exceed any of the applicable SCAQMD LSTs. Therefore, the Project’s construction activities would not cause or contribute substantially to an existing or future ambient air quality standard violation. Accordingly, the Project’s construction-related criteria air pollutant and ozone precursor concentrations would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. It should be noted the Project must follow all standard SCAQMD rules and requirements with regards to fugitive dust control. The City considers compliance with SCAQMD dust control measures to be regulatory compliance and not unique mitigation under CEQA. With regulatory compliance, the Project’s short-term construction-related impact to localized SCAQMD thresholds is less than significant.
Table 3-3
Localized Significance Threshold Impacts
Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)1
Activity NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
On-site Emissions 33.08 20.59 9.13 5.35
SCAQMD Construction
LST Thresholds2
333.0 5,534.0 104.0 25.0
Exceeds Threshold (?) No No No No
1 Maximum daily emission during summer or winter; includes on-site project emissions only. 2 Reference 2006-2008 SCAQMD Mass Rate Localized Significant Thresholds for construction and operation. SRA-29, Banning Airport, 5-acre site, receptor distance 100 meters.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-15
Carbon Monoxide Hotspot Analysis
Project trips would contribute to vehicle volumes at existing and future local intersections. Local mobile-source CO emissions and concentrations near roadway intersections are a direct function of traffic volume, speed, and delay. Transport of CO is extremely limited because it disperses rapidly with distance from the source under normal meteorological conditions.
However, under specific meteorological conditions, CO concentrations near roadways and/or intersections may reach unhealthy levels with respect to local sensitive land uses, such as residential units, hospitals, schools, and childcare facilities.
With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of more stringent emissions control technology, CO concentrations in the SCAQMD have steadily declined. CO is not a pollutant of concern in the region and all air monitoring stations in the SoCAB have discontinued monitoring for this pollutant in the last 3 years.
Nevertheless, as part of the demonstration of CO attainment for the SoCAB (2003 Air Quality Management Plan and 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide), SCAQMD evaluated potential CO exceedance throughout the air basin. As discussed in the 1992 CO Plan, peak CO concentrations in the SoCAB are due to unusual meteorological and topographical conditions, and not due to the impact of particular intersections.
In the 1992 CO Plan, SCAQMD performed a CO hotspot analysis for the four busiest intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon peak-hours. The busiest intersection (Wilshire Boulevard and Veteran Avenue), which had traffic volumes of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day, was determined not to generate a CO hotspot even at peak morning and afternoon conditions. Thus, intersections with fewer than 100,000 vehicles per day would also not be anticipated to result in a CO hotspot.
The traffic impact report prepared as part of the Mobility Element and General Plan update in 2020 indicated peak hour traffic volumes for the intersections at the east and west ends of the Project to be well under 100,000 vehicles per day. Therefore, the Project and even cumulative traffic from General Plan growth to 2040, would not contribute a substantial amount of traffic to Project area intersections that could result in a CO hotspot. Thus, the operational CO impact would be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Result in substantial emissions (such as odors
or dust) adversely affecting a substantial number
of people?
X
The impact of an odor is dependent on interacting factors such as frequency (how often), intensity (strength), duration (in time), offensiveness (unpleasantness), location, and sensory perception. While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to considerable distress and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and regulatory agencies. Odor-related symptoms reported in a number of studies include nervousness, headache, sleeplessness, fatigue, dizziness, nausea, loss of appetite,
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-16
stomachache, sinus congestion, eye irritation, nose irritation, runny nose, sore throat, cough, and asthma exacerbation.
The SCAQMD’s role is to protect the public’s health from air pollution by overseeing and enforcing regulations. The SCAQMD’s resolution activity for odor compliance is mandated under California Health & Safety Code Section 41700 and falls under SCAQMD Rule 402. This rule on Public Nuisance Regulation states: “A person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public, or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public, or which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause, injury or damage to business or property.”
Potential sources that may emit odors during construction activities include exhaust from diesel construction equipment. However, because of the temporary nature of these emissions, the intermittent nature of construction activities, and the highly diffusive properties of diesel PM exhaust, nearby receptors would not be affected by diesel exhaust odors associated with Project construction. Odors from these sources would be localized and generally confined to the immediate area surrounding the Project site. The Project would utilize typical construction techniques, and the odors would be typical of most construction sites and temporary in nature.
Impacts would be less than significant.
The Project consists of the extension and widening of 2nd Street and roadway construction is not typically considered an odor-generating activity. Facilities or activities typically associated with strong odors include wastewater treatment facilities, waste-disposal facilities, or agricultural operations. Minor sources of odors, such as exhaust from mobile sources, are not typically associated with numerous odor complaints, but are known to have temporary and less concentrated odors. The vehicle trips generated by the Project would occur throughout the day, so the exhaust would not be heavily concentrated for extended periods.
Considering the low intensity of potential odor emissions and the distance to the nearest sensitive receptors, the Project’s operational activities would not expose receptors to objectionable odor emissions. Impacts would be less than significant.
Dust
As stated above, fugitive particulate matter dust emissions are primarily associated with earth disturbance and grading activities, and vary as a function of soil silt content, soil moisture, wind speed, acreage of disturbance area, and miles traveled by construction vehicles on-site and off- site.
As shown in Table 3-1, the Project’s regional daily construction emissions would not exceed any of SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance (including dust - PM10 and PM2.5). Impacts will be less than significant.
As shown in Table 3-3, the Project’s maximum daily construction emissions would not exceed any of the applicable SCAQMD LSTs. Therefore, the Project’s construction activities would not cause or contribute substantially to an existing or future ambient air quality standard violation (including dust - PM10 and PM2.5). Impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-17
4. Biological Resources
Source(s): Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Consistency Analysis, City of Beaumont, 2nd Street Improvements, prepared by Searl Biological Services, 9- 26-2022 (MSHCP Report, Appendix C1); Jurisdictional Delineation Report, 2nd Street Improvements, City of Beaumont, prepared by Searl Biological Services, 9-26-2022 (JD Report, Appendix C2); Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report, 2nd Street Improvements, City of Beaumont, prepared by Caskey Biological Consulting, 9-27-2022 (DBESP Report, Appendix C3); Least Bell’s Vireo Presence/Absence Protocol Survey Report, 2nd Street Expansion, City of Beaumont, prepared by Searl Biological Services, 9-2-2021 (LBV Survey, Appendix C4); and Ordinance No. 810.2 (An Ordinance of the County of Riverside Amending Ordinance No. 810 to Establish the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Mitigation Fee).
Would the Project? Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
The Project site is located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). The MSHCP Report evaluated all of the listed and sensitive species of plants and animals covered by the MSHCP that could potentially be impacted by the proposed Project (for additional discussion, see Threshold 4.f below). While some of these species have been observed in the surrounding area in the past, the Project site does not contain or support any of these species due to its historical and ongoing level of disturbance and human activity. Protocol surveys for burrowing owl (BUOW) and Least Bell’s Vireo (LBV) were conducted and found the Project area did not support these species. The MSHCP Report recommended Mitigation Measures MM BIO-1 and MM BIO-2 to address potential impacts to burrowing owl prior to grading.
In addition to species covered by the MSHCP, nesting bird species are protected by California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5 and by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918 (16 USC 703-711), which make it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any migratory bird or bird of prey. Under Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-5, if Project activity or vegetation removal must be initiated during the breeding season, a qualified biologist will check for nesting birds within three days prior to such activity. If active bird nests are found, avoidance buffers will need to be established and observed.
The Project will be required to pay applicable MSHCP Mitigation Fees. These are standard fees and are not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Based on this data, the Project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Wildlife Service. Mitigation Measures related to burrowing owl (MM-
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-18
BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2) and nesting birds (MM-BIO-5), as well as a standard condition for payment of the applicable MSHCP fee, will help reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
Would the Project? Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
The MSHCP Report and JD Report found four ephemeral water features (Drainages A-D), including Potrero Creek (Drainage C), within 100 feet of the Project ROW that potentially meet the criteria of a MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Area. The Project as proposed would impact 0.33-acre of three of the drainages (A-C). As a result, the MSHCP requires a DBESP be prepared to identify onsite preservation or offsite compensation to address impacts to identified jurisdictional drainages.
As discussed in Threshold 4.f below, potential MSHCP Section 6.1.2 resources were assessed within 100 feet of the Project ROW. Two of the ephemeral features on the Project, designated as Features A and B, are the result of storm runoff from roadways and railroads and total 0.82- acre. Potrero Creek, designated as Feature C, was observed to be ephemeral, although it is designated as a United States Geological Survey (USGS) blue line intermittent stream on the Beaumont 7.5 Minute USGS California Quadrangle. Feature C was located on the eastern end of the Project area and totals 0.30-acre. Feature D was observed to be a human-made earthen ditch for storm water runoff and totals 0.06-acre.
Per the MSHCP, a DBESP Report was prepared for the Project that demonstrates that offsite compensation proposed for impacts to the four ephemeral waterways, including Potrero Creek and a human-created ditch, present on the proposed Project, will provide biologically equivalent or superior resources compared to the onsite resources. Therefore, these impacts require subsequent regulatory permitting through affected resource agencies as described in Mitigation Measure MM BIO-3, and the offsite compensation is described in Mitigation Measure MM BIO-4.
With implementation of the recommended mitigation, the Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Impacts will be less than significant with mitigation.
Would the Project? Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-19
The MSHCP Report and JD Report found no evidence of any habitat meeting the criteria of a wetlands or vernal pool on the Project site (for additional discussion, see Threshold 4.f below).
Therefore, no impacts to vernal pools will occur with Project implementation. In addition, no suitable habitat for fairy shrimp was detected on the Project site. Therefore, the Project will not have a substantial adverse effect on State or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. No impact will occur, and no mitigation is required.
Would the Project? Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
X
Nesting bird species are protected by California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3503.5 and by the MBTA of 1918 (16 USC 703-711), which makes it unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any migratory bird or bird of prey. A number of resident and migratory birds utilize the general Project area although the site itself is disturbed and contains no native habitat. For additional discussion, see Threshold 4.f below.
The Project site does not contain any trees that could encourage bird nesting. However, due to its level of disturbance, the site contains no native wildlife nursery sites, and the site itself is not identified as being part of or functions as a migratory wildlife corridor for any fish or wildlife species.
Impacts to nesting bird species must be avoided at all times. The period from approximately February 1 to August 31 is the expected breeding season for bird species occurring in the Project area, including raptors. Under Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2, if Project activity or vegetation removal is initiated during the breeding season, a qualified biologist should check for nesting birds within three days prior to such activity. If active bird nests are found, avoidance buffers of 1,000 feet for large birds of prey, 500 feet for small birds of prey, and 250 feet for songbirds, decided by CDFW on a case-by- case basis, will need to be observed and implemented. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 and Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2, impacts to nesting birds (including burrowing owl) will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
X
The Beaumont Municipal Code (BMC) contains Chapter 12.20 - Trees which regulates tree removal in the City. If any trees are required to be removed by permanent or temporary construction activities of the Project, the City will comply with BMC requirements in terms of
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-20
documenting and replacing trees that need to be removed. This is considered regulatory compliance and not unique mitigation under CEQA. Therefore, impacts will be less than significant with regulatory compliance and no mitigation is required.
Would the Project? Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
X
The Project site is located within the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). This analysis was prepared to comply with the required MSHCP assessments to determine if the proposed Project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the MSHCP. A biological assessment of the property was conducted which included archival research, field surveys, and a search of governmental databases. The Project site is located in the City of Beaumont, west of the existing 2nd Street between 1st Street and Interstate 10 (I- 10) and east of Pennsylvania Avenue, approximately 0.2-mile aerial mile south/southeast of the Pennsylvania Avenue and I-10 intersection. The Project development footprint is approximately 5 acres while the right-of way (ROW) area covers a total of 6.44 acres, and the 100-foot survey buffer area covers 20.52 acres (see Figure 4-1, Biological Assessment Area). The Project site and most of the ROW area and 100-foot survey buffer area support mainly disturbed or weedy (ruderal) vegetation such as non-native grasslands (see Table 4-1, Local Vegetation).
Table 4-1
Local Vegetation
Vegetation Type
Project
Site1
Project
Right-of-Way1
100-Survey
Buffer Area1
Developed 0.77 acres 1.25 acres 3.97 acres
Disturbed Native Vegetation
(willow scrub, etc.)
0 acres 0 acres 0.99 acres
Ruderal (Disturbed) and
Non-Native Grasslands
4,31 acres 5.19 acres 16.46 acres
TOTAL 5.08 6.44 20.52
Source: Table 1, MSHCP Report, Appendix C1
1 See Figure 4-1 for boundaries of the biological assessment areas
The Project site is located in The Pass Area Plan (TPAP) of Riverside County but is not located within any MSHCP Subunit or a Criteria Cell. Therefore, no portion of the site is designated by the MSHCP for long-term conservation and no Reserve Assembly Analysis is required for the Project. The MSHCP also does not list the proposed Project as a “Covered Road” or “Covered Public access Facility” so a comprehensive MSHCP Consistency Analysis (MSHCP Report) was performed for the Project.
The MSHCP Report found four ephemeral water features (A-D), including Potrero Creek (Drainage C), within 100-feet of the Project ROW that potentially meet the criteria of a MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Area. The Project as proposed would impact 0.33-acre of three of the drainages. The Project site is relatively disturbed but is located within MSHCP-designated
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-21
assessment areas for the following specific resources which are analyzed in detail below:
• Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS) Assessment Area No. 8 (Section
6.1.3).
• Burrowing Owl (Athene cunicularia) (BUOW) (Section 6.3.2). • Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools (Section
6.1.2).
• Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface (Section 6.1.4).
The Project site and ROW area are not within designated survey areas for Criteria Area Plant Species (CAPS)(Section 7.1), Amphibians (Section 7.2), or Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly (DSFLF)(Section 8.1). Therefore, there will be no impacts in this regard and no mitigation is required.
FIGURE 4-1
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT AREA
Source: MSHCP Report – (Appendix C1)
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-23
Narrow Endemic Plant Species (NEPS)
The Project site and ROW areas within 100 feet of the site are located in NEPS Assessment Area No. 8. The MSHCP found a potential for 14 NEPS species but only two targeted NEPS species had a potential to occur on the Project site. Therefore, a habitat suitability assessment was conducted for the Many-Stemmed Dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) and the Yucaipa Onion (Allium marvinii). The MSHCP Report concluded the Project area lacked the necessary habitat requirements, specifically clay soils, for these two targeted NEPS species. Therefore, there will be no impacts in this regard and no mitigation is required.
Burrowing Owl (BUOW)
The Project site is located within a MSHCP-designated assessment area for BUOW which is a priority 2 California Species of Special Concern (SSC) and is a Covered species under the MSHCP. Habitat for the BUOW primarily consists of open grasslands but it can also occur in disturbed areas including agriculture. BUOW most often utilize burrows of other animals, mainly California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi) but can also use larger mammal burrows.
Per the MSHCP guidelines, a habitat suitability assessment for BUOW was conducted onsite and within 500 feet of the Project ROW. The MSHCP Report determined that 67.65-acres of suitable habitat for BUOW was present, so a BUOW protocol survey was then conducted.
BUOW was not detected and was determined to be absent from the area. However, the MSHCP Report recommended a 30-Day Pre-Construction BUOW Survey per the MSHCP be performed prior to ground disturbance due to the presence of suitable BUOW habitat (see Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2).
Riparian/Riverine/Vernal Pool Resources
The distribution of riparian plant species is largely driven by hydrological and soil variables and riparian plant communities frequently occur in relatively distinct zone along streamside elevational and soil textural gradients. Vernal pools, vernal swales, alkali scalds or flats, or other seasonal wet habitats were not identified during field surveys conducted by biologists. The survey area lacks suitable habitat for Riverside fairy shrimp, vernal pool fairy shrimp, Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp, or other vernal pool species (including plants). These species are absent from the survey area.
The soil profile indicates the Project area is underlain by moderately well to well drained sandy soils, so no vernal pools would be expected. Vernal pools are depressions in areas where a hard underground layer prevents rainwater from draining downward into the subsoils.
MSHCP Section 6.1.2 requires all subject properties under the jurisdiction of the MSHCP that are proposing a land use change/applying for a discretionary permit to conduct a MSHCP Section 6.1.2 assessment. This includes a habitat assessment for Riparian/Riverine Areas, Vernal Pools, three fairy shrimp species; 1) Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) (RFS); 2) vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)(VPFS); and 3) Santa Rosa Plateau fairy shrimp (Linderiella santarosae)(SRPFS), and three bird species; 1) Least Bell’s Vireo (LBV); 2) Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus)(SWFL); and 3) Yellow-billed Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus)(YBC). If the assessment identifies suitable habitat for any of the six-species associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools listed above, and the proposed project design does not incorporate avoidance of the identified habitat, focused surveys would be required, and avoidance and minimization measures will be implemented in
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-24
accordance with the MSHCP’s species-specific objectives for these species.
A habitat suitability assessment for MSHCP Riparian Birds was conducted within 500-feet of the ROW which determined that 0.75-acre of marginally suitable habitat for LBV was present within the 500-foot survey area but absent within the Project site boundaries. LBV has also been documented to occur within 0.5-mile of the Project. Therefore, a protocol LBV Survey was conducted but the species was not detected and was determined to be absent from the Project area.
The MSHCP Report found four ephemeral water features within 100-feet of the Project ROW area that potentially meet the criteria of a MSHCP Section 6.1.2 Riparian/Riverine Area. The Project as proposed would impact 0.33-acre of three of the four drainages (A-C) which will require subsequent regulatory permitting through one or more resource agencies as outlined in the Jurisdictional Delineation Report (JD Report) and the Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior Preservation Report (DBESP Report). Based on the Project design, the total potential impact to the three features was 0.33-acre (per Table 5, MSHCP Report).
In addition, the JD Report indicates that Project development will impact 0.17 acre of land considered “Waters of the United States” under federal jurisdiction and “Waters of the State” under state jurisdiction, as well as 1.17 acres of land considered “riparian resources” also under state jurisdiction (per Tables 3 and 4, JD Report), as summarized in Table 4-2, Jurisdictional Resources. These areas are delineated on Figure 4-2, Local Drainages.
Table 4-2
Jurisdictional Resources
Drainage
Feature
“Waters of the US” (WOTUS) or
“Waters of the State” (WOS)
Riparian Resources
(CDFW 1600 Jurisdiction)
Linear Feet Square Feet Acres Square Feet Acres
A 129.2 168.9 0.004 6,083.3 0.14
B 111.7 482.2 0.010 7,136.5 0.16
C 15.3 358.2 0.008 1,366.2 0.03
D 0 0 0 0 0
Total 256.4 1,009.3 0.02 14,586.0 0.33
Source: Table 5, JD Report, Appendix C2
The Project proposes the installation of culvert crossings within two of these features. Grading associated with the Project will cross a small portion of a third feature, where a culvert crossing is already present. The appropriate regulatory agencies will be consulted on the impacts to the potential Riparian/Riverine Areas. Offsite mitigation through an approved mitigation bank, in- lieu fee program, and/or permittee responsible conservation easement program is anticipated as described in the DBESP Report.
FIGURE 4-2
LOCAL DRAINAGES
Source: JD Report – (Appendix C2)
Environmental Checklist and Discussion Page 357 of 865
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-26
Based on the results of the JD Report and the DBESP Report, Mitigation Measures MM-BIO- 3 and MM-BIO-4 are recommended to reduce impacts to jurisdictional drainage features to less than significant levels.
Nesting Birds
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) created the following:
“Establishment of a Federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention . . . for the protection of migratory birds . . . or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird."
Further, the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC) states the following:
CFGC 3503: “It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.”
CFGC 3503.5: “It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.
Development of the proposed Project during resident or migratory bird nesting periods (February 1 through August 31) may have significant impacts on nesting birds if they are present onsite during grading or construction. Therefore, the MSHCP Report recommended subsequent regulatory permitting as outlined in Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-5 to prevent significant impacts to these resources.
Urban/Wildlands Interface
MSHCP Section 6.1.4 provides recommendations and guidelines to minimize potential “edge effects” resulting from development projects being located next to MSHCP Reserve Assembly or MSHCP conserved resources. Edge effects include adverse direct and indirect effects to species, habitats and vegetation communities along the natural urban/wildlands interface, predation by native and non-native predators, invasion by exotic species, noise, lighting, urban runoff and other human-related impacts such as trampling of vegetation, trash and toxic materials dumping. Physical measures such as buffers and/or barriers are typically installed to control drainage, toxics, lighting, noise, and invasive species. The MSHCP Report concluded the Project is not located adjacent to or near MSHCP Criteria Areas, so MSHCP Section 6.1.4 measures are not required. There will be no impacts in this regard and no mitigation is required.
MSHCP Conservation Goals
The Project site is not located within any MSHCP Subunit, or a Criteria Cell, and no portion of the site is designated by the MSHCP for long-term conservation. Therefore, no impacts to the MSHCP Conservation Goals are anticipated.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-27
Reserve Assembly Analysis
According to the MSHCP Report, the Project site is not located within any MSHCP Subunit, or a Criteria Cell, and no portion of the site is designated by the MSHCP for long-term conservation. Based on the MSHCP’s existing conservation goals, the proposed Project would have less than significant impacts on the MSHCP, so no mitigation is required or recommended for this Project relative to MSHCP reserve assembly.
MSHCP Mitigation Fee
Section 6 of the MSHCP requires:
“Payment of the mitigation fee and compliance with the requirements of Section 6.0 are intended to provide full mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Federal Endangered Species Act, and California Endangered Species Act for impacts to the species and habitats covered by the MSHCP pursuant to agreements with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and/or any other appropriate participating regulatory agencies and as set forth in the Implementing Agreement for the MSHCP.”
The MSHCP Mitigation Fee has been established to provide mitigation for biological impacts from projects within the MSHCP area. This is a standard City Condition of Approval – it is considered regulatory compliance and not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Summary
In conclusion, the proposed Project is consistent with all applicable sections of the MSHCP.
Adherence to standard conditions and implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-5 regarding protection of burrowing owl, jurisdictional drainage resources, and nesting birds will ensure consistency with the MSHCP. Thus, the proposed Project will not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan (i.e., impacts are less than significant with mitigation).
Mitigation Measures
MM-BIO-1 Preconstruction Survey for Burrowing Owl. A 30-day preconstruction survey for burrowing owl is required by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) to confirm the presence or absence of burrowing owl on the Project site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist no more than 30 days prior to ground disturbance in accordance with MSHCP survey requirements to avoid direct take of burrowing owl. If burrowing owl are determined to occupy the Project site or immediate vicinity, the County will be notified, and avoidance measures will be implemented, as appropriate, pursuant to the MSHCP, the California Fish and Game Code, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the mitigation guidelines prepared by the CDFW (2012).
The following measures are recommended in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) guidelines to avoid impacts on an active burrow:
• No disturbance shall occur within 50 meters (approximately 160 feet) of occupied burrows during the non-breeding season.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-28
• No disturbance shall occur within 75 meters (approximately 250 feet) of occupied burrows during the breeding season.
To prevent unavoidable impacts, passive or active relocation of burrowing owls shall be implemented by a qualified biologist outside the breeding season, in accordance with procedures set by the MSHCP and in coordination with the CDFW.
MM-BIO-2 Burrowing Owl Avoidance/Relocation. If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season (September through January) during the survey outlined in MM-BIO-1, or within the breeding season but owls are not nesting or in the process of nesting, passive relocation may be conducted following consultation with the CDFW and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Construction activity may not occur within 500 feet of the active burrow. If active nests are identified onsite, the nests shall be avoided, or the owls actively or passively relocated to an appropriate offsite location to the satisfaction of the USFWS or the CDFW. To avoid active nests adequately, no grading or heavy equipment activity shall take place within 250 feet of an active nest during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) and 160 feet during the non-breeding season. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Planning Department.
If active burrowing owl burrows are detected outside the breeding season, passive and/or active relocation may be undertaken following consultation with and approval by the CDFW and/or USFWS. One-way doors may be installed as part of a passive relocation program. Burrowing owl burrows shall be excavated with hand tools by a qualified biologist when determined to be unoccupied, and back filled to ensure that animals do not re-enter the holes/dens. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the County Resource Conservation Authority (RCA).
MM-BIO-3 Regulatory Permitting. Prior to the start of any clearing or grading on the Project site, the City shall obtain the necessary environmental regulatory permits from the affected federal and/or state resource agencies. This may include federal Clean Water Act Section 404 permitting through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, with possible consultation with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, state permitting through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife relative to 1600 riparian resources and/or California Fish and Game codes, and federal Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification through the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director in consultation with the affected resource agencies.
MM-BIO-4 Offsite Riverine Habitat Compensation. Based on the grading footprint and ROW alignment as of September 2022, the Project will permanently impact 0.30-acre of ephemeral Riverine habitat in Features A and B by installing culverts, and temporarily impact 0.03-acre of ephemeral Riverine habitat in Feature C through minor grading activities. Based on these total impacts, the City will purchase offsite mitigation credits totaling 0.96-acre, a 3:1 mitigation to impact ratio for permanent impacts and 2:1 mitigation to impact ratio for the temporary impacts.
The City will purchase Permittee Responsible credits at the Wilson Creek Habitat Restoration Plan (WCHRP) site in Aguanga, California to offset said impacts. This mitigation would provide a superior resource for MSHCP Covered Species in perpetuity by enhancing and restoring this portion of Wilson Creek through the planting of the appropriate native species. The WCHRP has been approved as a Permittee Responsible mitigation site since 2011. It totals 19.4-acres of streambed habitat where 100% of the tamarisk (Tamarix ramosissima) was already removed in 2011 and has been managed since to ensure tamarisk would not reestablish. Individual conservation easements are sold on a project-by-project basis within the 19.4-acre area. This measure shall implement directives outlined in the site-specific DBESP. This measure shall be
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-29
implemented to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director in consultation with the affected resource agencies and mitigation bank management staff.
MM-BIO-5 Nesting Bird Survey. If construction activities occur during the nesting bird season (i.e., January 1 – August 31 for raptors and hummingbirds; February 1 – August 31 for all other birds), then a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted prior to and within three days of construction activities. The biologist shall have the authority to establish no disturbance buffers with the distances determined by factors such as species, tolerance of disturbance, nest status, etc. If nesting bird surveys result in the need for a biological monitor to be present during construction activities, then one shall be present full-time to monitor construction activities to ensure no direct or indirect impacts occur to potential nest success.
The biologist shall have the authority to suspend construction activities if potential impacts are observed
Surveys shall be conducted in proposed work areas, staging and storage areas, and soil, equipment, and material stockpile areas. For passerines and small raptors, surveys shall be conducted within a 250-foot radius surrounding the work area (in areas where access is feasible). For larger raptors, the survey area shall encompass a 500-foot radius. Surveys shall be conducted during weather conditions suited to maximize the observation of possible nests and shall concentrate on areas of suitable habitat. If a lapse in project-related work of five (5) days or longer occurs, an additional nest survey shall be required before work can be reinitiated.
If nests are encountered during any preconstruction survey, a qualified biologist shall determine if it may be feasible for construction to continue as planned without impacting the success of the nest, depending on conditions specific to each nest and the relative location and rate of construction activities.
If the qualified biologist determines construction activities have potential to adversely affect a nest, the biologist shall immediately inform the construction manager to halt construction activities within minimum exclusion buffer of 50 feet for songbird nests, and 200 to 500 feet for raptor nests, depending on species and location. Active nest(s) within the Project site shall be monitored by a qualified biologist during construction if work is occurring directly adjacent to the established no-work buffer. Construction activities within the no-work buffer may proceed after a qualified biologist determines the nest is no longer active due to natural causes (e.g., young have fledged, predation, or other non-human causes of nest failure).
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-30
5. Cultural Resources
A Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey (Phase I H/ARS) was prepared by CRM TECH on October 10, 2021 for the Project to determine if cultural resources were present in or adjacent to the Project site and assess the sensitivity of the Project site for undiscovered or buried cultural resources. The cultural context of the Project site including regional and local prehistory, ethnography, and regional and Project site histories can be found in the Phase I H/ARA prepared for the Project.
The analysis of cultural resources was based on a records and literature search conducted at the Eastern Information Center (EIC) of the California Historical Resources Information System at University of California Riverside on June 9, 2021, and a site visit/pedestrian survey was conducted on July 1, 2021. The literature search included the results of previous surveys within a half-mile (800 meters) radius of the Project site.
A search of the Sacred Lands File by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) indicated no information regarding Sacred Lands or other cultural resources in the area. In addition to the search of the Sacred Lands File, the NAHC identified 13 Native American groups with historical and traditional ties to the Project site.
Sources: Phase I Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey, Second Street Improvement Project, prepared by CRMTECH 10-10-2021 (Phase I H/ARS, Appendix D).
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant
to § 15064.5?
X
A Phase I H/ ARS was prepared for the Project site to identify cultural resources that could be affected by the Project. A cultural resources record search was conducted at the EIC and a search of Sacred Lands File of the NAHC was requested. Sources consulted to identify historic properties included the current inventories of the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), California Historical Landmark (CHL), and California Point of Historical Interest (CPHI). The Historic Resource Inventory (HRI) and archival maps were also reviewed to determine the existence of previously documented cultural resources. The record search included a 1/2-mile buffer around the perimeter of the Project area. The results of the combined record searches for the Project indicate that at least 11 cultural resources investigations have been conducted within a 1/2-mile radius of the Project.
There have been eight cultural resources recorded within a 1/2-mile radius of the Project area.
All of the sites dated to the historic period, and no prehistoric (i.e., Native American) archaeological resources have been identified in the project vicinity. The eight known sites were primarily buildings and linear features such as the Southern Pacific Railroad, Sixth Street, and
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-31
the power transmission line along First Street. None of these sites were found in the immediate vicinity of the project area, and thus they require no further consideration.
On July 1, 2021, following the records search at the EIC, CRM Tech archaeologist visited the site to conduct an intensive pedestrian survey. Visibility was excellent along the east-west alignment of the project area but was poor along the north-south alignment. No cultural resources were observed during the site survey.
The archaeological sensitivity of the Project site is believed to be low; however, there always remains a possibility that unrecorded cultural resources are present beneath the ground surface, and that such resources may be exposed during project construction. If previously unrecorded historical resources are encountered during construction that could potentially be affected, implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5?
X
No archaeological resources have been previously recorded on the Project site and none were recorded during the site visit. However, there remains the possibility that unrecorded cultural resources could be present beneath the ground surface and, if present, may be exposed during Project construction. As previously stated in response to question 5.a, the Applicant would retain a qualified archaeologist to recover, identify, document, and deposit the find in a local institution for curation. With the implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-CUL-1 through MM-CUL-3 impacts to significant archaeological resources would be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
X
Based on the records search from EIC, no formal cemeteries are located in or near the Project site and no human remains have been reported in the Project vicinity. Most Native American human remains are found in prehistoric archaeological sites. No prehistoric archaeological sites have been recorded within the Project site. Therefore, the Project as little potential to disturb human remains. If potential human remains are encountered the Project would comply
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-32
with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) and Assembly Bill 2641 with the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4. With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-CUL-4 impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
MM-CUL-1 Inadvertent Cultural Resources Finds: For adequate coverage and the protection of possibly significant buried resources and tribal cultural resources, a qualified archaeologist and Native American Monitor provided by the consulting tribes shall be retained by the applicant to monitor all ground-disturbing construction activities, included but not limited to site preparation, grading and excavation. The applicant, archaeologist and consulting tribes will agree on a monitoring schedule based on the necessary days of ground-disturbance. In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project development/construction, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretary of Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the overall project may continue during this assessment period. If significant Native American cultural resources are discovered, for which a Treatment Plan must be prepared, the developer or his archaeologist shall contact Consulting Tribe(s) and shall, in good faith, consult on the discovery and its disposition (e.g., avoidance, preservation, return of artifacts to tribe, etc.). If avoidance is not possible, an avoidance plan will be prepared and implemented based on consultation between the archaeologist and tribes. If resources are found to be significant historical resources under CEQA then CUL 2 and/or CUL-3 shall apply.
For the purposes of these measures, a Consulting Tribe is defined as a tribe that initiated the AB52 tribal consultation process for the Project, has not opted out of the AB52 consultation process, and has completed AB52 consultation with the City as provided for in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.2(b)(1) of AB52.
MM-CUL-2 Treatment and Disposition of Non-Tribal Cultural Resources: If significant resources are identified that are not identified by the qualified archaeologist and consulting tribe(s) as a Tribal Cultural Resources, and the resources is of scientific/historical value, recovered materials shall be deposited in a federal or state recognized curation facility. The curation of the recovered materials shall be identified and funded by the Applicant and approved by the City. The site record for the resource shall be updated to include the final disposition of the recovered materials and will be submitted to the Eastern Information Center (EIC).
MM-CUL-3 Treatment and Disposition of Tribal Cultural Resources: In the event that Native American tribal cultural resources are inadvertently discovered during grading for this project. The following procedures will be carried out for treatment and disposition of the discoveries:
1. Documentation: In conjunction with the qualified archaeologist, the tribal cultural resource shall be documented to the extent deemed appropriate by the consulting tribe(s) on the appropriate Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523-series forms. The final disposition of the materials shall also be included on the site form.
2. Temporary Curation and Storage: During construction, all discovered resources shall be temporarily curated in a secure location to be mutually agreed upon by the City, Project Archaeologist, and consulting tribes. The removal of any artifacts from the Project site will need to be thoroughly inventoried with tribal monitor oversite of the process; and
3. Treatment and Final Disposition: The landowner(s) shall relinquish ownership of all
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-33
cultural resources, including sacred items, burial goods, and all archaeological artifacts and non-human remains as part of the required mitigation for impacts to cultural resources. The applicant shall relinquish the artifacts through one or more of the following methods and provide the City Planning Department with evidence of same:
a. Accommodate the process for onsite reburial of the discovered items with the consulting Native American tribes or bands. This shall include measures and provisions to protect the future reburial area from any future impacts. Reburial shall not occur until all cataloguing and basic recordation have been completed; b. A curation agreement with an appropriate qualified repository within Riverside County that meets federal standards per 36 CFR Part 79 and therefore would be professionally curated and made available to other archaeologists/researchers for further study. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate curation facility within Riverside County, to be accompanied by payment of the fees necessary for permanent curation:
c. If more than one Native American tribe or band is involved with the project and cannot come to a consensus as to the disposition of cultural materials, they shall be curated at the Western Science Center by default; and.
d. At the completion of grading, excavation and ground disturbing activities on the site, a Phase IV Monitoring Report shall be submitted to the City documenting monitoring activities conducted by the project Archaeologist and Native Tribal Monitors within 60 days of completion of grading. This report shall document the impacts to the known resources on the property; describe how each mitigation measure was fulfilled; document the type of cultural resources recovered and the disposition of such resources; provide evidence of the required cultural sensitivity training for the construction staff held during the required pre-grade meeting; and, in a confidential appendix, include the daily/weekly monitoring notes from the archaeologist. All reports produced will be submitted to the City, Eastern Information Center and interested tribes:
MM-CUL-4 Human Remains: If human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Riverside County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. If the Riverside County Coroner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission must be contacted within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission must then immediately identify the "most likely descendants(s)" for purposes of receiving notification of discovery. The most likely descendant(s) shall then make recommendations within 48 hours and engage in consultation concerning the treatment of the remains as provided in Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 and the agreement described in MM CUL-3. If the MLD fails to make a recommendation regarding the treatment or the recommendation is not feasible per the property owner, then the remains shall be reburied with appropriate dignity and respect on the property in a location not subject to further disturbance. In the event the MLD fails to make a recommendation - ESA should be set up to prevent further disturbance. The ESA should not indicate that remains are buried there. This should be conducted in coordination with the NAM/D63.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-34
6. Energy
The City of Beaumont General Plan does not have a specific land use designation or zoning classification for the Project (i.e., City streets). Electricity is provided to the Project area by Southern California Edison and natural gas is provided by Southern California Gas.
Sources: California Building Standards Code, Title 24; California Energy Commission; City of Beaumont Climate Action Plan; City of Beaumont Energy Action Plan; 2nd Street Improvement Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering, 1-4-2022 (AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis, Appendix B); and 2nd Street Improvement Project Traffic Assessment, City of Beaumont, CA, prepared by RK Engineering, 10-18-2021 (TA, Appendix I).
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful
use of energy resources, during Project
construction or operation?
X
The Project consists of extending 2nd Street, from the western boundary of the Home Depot shopping center west to Pennsylvania Avenue. The improvements include extending the road approximately 1,622 linear feet from its current terminus at the westerly boundary of First Street Self and RV Storage, to Pennsylvania Avenue to add four new travel lanes. This Project also entails widening approximately 846 linear feet of 2nd Street from its current terminus to the western boundary of the Home Depot shopping center.
The following qualitative energy conservation analysis documents that the Project will reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy during construction and operation.
CEQA Guidelines, Appendix F, Energy Conservation, describes the framework within which energy conservation is analyzed. Conserving energy implies the wise and efficient use of energy through decreasing overall per capita energy consumption, decreasing reliance on fossil fuels (such as coal, natural gas and oil), and increasing reliance on renewable energy sources.
Under CEQA, a potentially significant impact may occur due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation.
Temporary construction energy use would consist primarily of petroleum fuels (diesel and gasoline) for off-road equipment and worker/hauling vehicle trips. Several standard conditions of approval and City construction management practices will help minimize wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary energy consumption during construction. This includes minimizing engine idling times and the simultaneous operation of multiple pieces of equipment, establishing an electrical supply to the site and utilizing recycled aggregate as appropriate. With the implementation of these standard actions, Project impacts are considered less than significant.
Operational energy usage would primarily consist of electricity for street lighting. The Project proposes that all streetlight luminaires be LED (light-emitting diode) technology which at present is the most energy conserving design for streetlights. The Project is not expected to
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-35
induce new automobile travel that would lead to area-wide increases in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), therefore, any increased gasoline usage associated with vehicle trips from the buildout of the Project would be negligible. For these reasons, the Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary usage of energy during operation.
The construction of the street would meet applicable requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24, and energy efficient LED lighting technology would be used for new street lighting to reduce energy consumption. These standards would help reduce the amount of energy required for new streetlighting and promote energy conservation. The Project would comply with these standards and policies would, therefore, not result in an inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary use of energy.
Finally, travelers along the new roadway would spend less time on the more congested 1st Street which would reduce congestion at intersections along that street which contributes to cars idling longer and consuming more fuel. In this way the operational energy impacts of the Project would be less than significant.
Therefore, impacts from the Project that could result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources, during Project construction or operation will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
X
Under CEQA, a potentially significant impact may occur if the Project would conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The construction of the street would meet requirements of the California Building Standards Code, Title 24, and energy efficient LED lighting technology would be used for new streetlights to reduce energy consumption.
The Project will also comply with Senate Bill (SB) 100, the State’s landmark policy that require renewable energy and zero carbon resources supply 100 percent of electric retail sales by 2045.
By obtaining electricity used for street lighting through Southern California Edison (SCE), the project will ensure compliance with SB 100. Therefore, the project is not expected to conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Finally, the Project will have to comply with the City of Beaumont’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), Sustainable Beaumont: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions, which was adopted by the City in 2015. The City’s CAP is consistent with the State’s adopted AB 32 GHG reduction target to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. An important aspect of reducing GHG emissions state-wide is the efficient use of energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, and vehicle fuels). The following goals and policies of the Sustainable Beaumont Plan may be relevant to the Project:
• Goal 6: Decrease energy demand through reducing urban heat island effect
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-36
• Policy 6.1: Tree Planting for Shading and Energy Efficiency • Policy 6.2: Light‐reflecting Surfaces for Energy Efficiency • Goal 7: Decrease GHG emissions through reducing VMT
• Policy 10.1: Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy in new development
The Project’s consistency with the relevant goals and policies of that Plan is assessed in Table 6-1, Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Energy).
Table 6-1
Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Energy)
Reduction Goals and Policies Project Consistency
Goal 6: Decrease energy demand through
reducing urban heat island effect
Consistent. The Project will incrementally increase the amount of asphalt roadway in the City but would have
landscaping and white sidewalks to help reduce
potential reflective increases in localized heat. The
landscaping would provide shade, absorb carbon,
improve oxygenation, slow stormwater runoff, and help
reduce the local heat island effect.
Policy 6.1: Tree Planting for Shading and Energy
Efficiency
Consistent. The Project will install parkway trees
consistent with the City’s 2016 Landscape Standards.
Policy 6.2: Light-reflecting Surfaces for Energy
Efficiency
Not Applicable. The Statewide energy standards
outline minimum “cool roof performance” qualities for
roofing products. However, the Project has no roofing,
so this policy does not apply.
Goal 7: Decrease GHG emissions through
reducing VMT.
Does Not Conflict. The Project is intended to relieve
traffic congestion on 1st Street and is not proposed to necessarily reduce VMT. However, the Project will
connect 2nd Street to Pennsylvania Avenue and add
sidewalks so that buses, pedestrians and bicyclists can access the commercial uses. In that way the Project
will incrementally reduce individual vehicle trips and
may help decrease overall VMT in the City as well.
Goal 10: Decrease GHG emissions of new
development through application of CEQA
Screening Tables.
Not applicable. At the time of this writing, the City of Beaumont has not yet released Screening Tables.
Policy 10.1: Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy in new development
Not Applicable. The Project is an extended roadway
and so the Title 24 energy efficiency standards are not directly related except in terms of new streetlights. It is likely the new lighting will use LED fixtures which will conserve energy over the long-term.
Source: Sustainable Beaumont: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions. October 2015 Table 6-1 demonstrates the Project is consistent or at least does not conflict with the City’s Climate Action Plan which included energy conservation.
The preceding analysis demonstrates the Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-37
7. Geology and Soils
Geomorphic Setting
The City of Beaumont is located within the northern boundary of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of Southern California. The City of Beaumont boundaries are located within the San Gorgonio pass, a narrow, east-west trending valley separating the Peninsular Range Province (containing the San Jacinto Mountains) from the Transverse Range Province (containing the San Bernardino Mountains). The San Gorgonio Pass was created by faulting.
There are four faults located within or near the City of Beaumont: the San Jacinto Fault, the San Andreas Fault Zone, the Banning Fault, and the Beaumont Plains Fault Zone.
Regional Seismicity and Fault Zones
An “active fault,” according to California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, is a fault that has indicated surface displacement within the last 11,000 years. A fault that has not shown geologic evidence of surface displacement in the last 11,000 years is considered “inactive.” The City of Beaumont is located within a seismically active region at the meeting point of the Transverse Ranges and the Peninsular Ranges. These two provinces display continual seismic activity consisting of lateral movement of the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. This activity is attributed to the San Andreas Fault system, located northeasterly to the City of Beaumont. As described above, the City of Beaumont is located within or near four faults that could how effects from movement along the San Andreas Fault.
Soils
The soils on-site are made up primarily of fill material. According to the literature search, three types of soils are found on the Project site. A portion of the site consists of Terrace escarpments (TeG) throughout the improvement area, with the remainder consisting of a variety of Ramona sandy loams (RaB2, RaB3, and RaC3).
Paleontological Resources
A paleontological database search of the paleontology locality and specimen collection records for the Project site and surrounding area (one-mile radius) was requested from the Vertebrate Paleontology Section of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County on November 13, 2018.
Sources: City of Beaumont General Plan EIR; Geotechnical Investigation, Second Street Extension Project, prepared by Sladden Engineering, 8-25-2020 (Geo Report, Appendix E); Paleontological Resources Assessment Report, Second Street Improvement Project, prepared by CRMTECH 10-11-2021 (Appendix F); and Web Soils Survey Website.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-38
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
According to Geo Report, the Project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone. Potential for surface rupture, if any, should be relatively "low" considering the proximity of the nearest fault line at about 0.2 miles away.
i) Therefore, the Project will not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. No impacts will occur.
ii) Just like most of Southern California, in the event of an earthquake strong ground shaking is expected to occur on the Project site. The Project site is considered to be within Seismic Zone
4. As a result, it is likely that during the life expectancy of the road improvements planned moderate to severe ground shaking may be anticipated. The Project would result in more people using the Project site compared to existing conditions, which could potentially expose people to strong seismic ground shaking.
Design and construction of the Project would adhere to all applicable provisions of the recommendations contained in the Geo Report.
Recommendations contained in the Geo Report include the following, which pertain to Project site design requirements: asphalt concrete should conform to the latest edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Constructions (Greenbook) or Caltrans Standard Specifications, latest edition. The subgrade soil should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum density and the aggregate base material should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Method D 1557. Precise control of grades and thicknesses should be maintained throughout the paving operations.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-39
Please refer to the Geo Report for details pertaining to the above referenced site design requirements.
Grading and construction plans would be reviewed and approved by the City of Beaumont. This would ensure that all proposed improvements are adequately designed and constructed to reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death resulting from strong ground shaking. Compliance with the Geo Report is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA.
Impacts due to strong seismic ground shaking will be less than significant.
Liquefaction is caused by build-up of excess hydrostatic pressure in saturated cohesion-less soils due to cyclic stress generated by ground shaking during an earthquake. The significant factors on which soil liquefaction potential depends include, among others, the soil type, soil relative density, intensity of earthquake, duration of ground-shaking and depth of groundwater.
The liquefaction potential at this site is considered “low”.
Design and construction of the Project would adhere to all recommendations contained in the Geo Report. Grading and improvement plans would be reviewed and approved by the City of Beaumont. Compliance with the Geo Report is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. This would ensure that all proposed improvements are adequately designed and constructed to minimize impacts from seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. Impacts will be less than significant.
iii) The Project site is located on relatively flat land with general elevation of 2,580 feet above mean sea level (msl) with a general topographic slope towards the east. The City of Beaumont General Plan identifies the steep slopes within the city’s sphere of influence known as the “Badlands” as areas where ground motion caused by earthquake may result in landslides and/or slope failure. Seismically induced landslides and other slope failures are common occurrences during or soon after an earthquake. With the near level existing and future structural pad(s) as planned, the potential for seismically induced landslides may be considered as remote. Impacts will be less than significant.
iv) Due to the relatively flat characteristics of the Project site and its location outside of the “Badlands” area, no impacts due to landslide will occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
X
Implementation of the Project would require ground-disturbing activities, such as grading, that could potentially result in soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Construction of the Project would be required to comply with the Construction General Permit, either through a waiver or through preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Best Management Practices (BMPs) are included as part of the SWPPP prepared for the Project and would be implemented to manage erosion and the loss of topsoil during construction-related activities (see Hydrology and Water Quality Section) Project’s grading plan would also ensure
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-40
that the proposed earthwork is designed to avoid soil erosion. Soil erosion/loss of topsoil impacts will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
Strong ground shaking can cause settlement, lateral spreading, or subsidence by allowing sediment particles to become more tightly packed, thereby reducing pore space. The potential for a landslide and liquefaction were discussed in Thresholds ii and iii, above.
Seismically induced lateral spreading involves lateral movement of soils due to ground shaking.
Lateral spreading is demonstrated by near vertical cracks with predominantly horizontal movement of the soil mass involved. No such cracks were reported by the geotechnical study.
Accordingly, the potential for lateral spreading of the Project site is considered remote.
Design and construction of the Project would adhere to all recommendations contained in the Geo Report. Grading and construction plans would be reviewed and approved by the City of Beaumont. Compliance with the Geo Report is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. This would ensure that all proposed structures are adequately designed and constructed to minimize impacts from impacts related to an unstable geological unit or soul resulting in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. Impacts will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks
to life or property?
X
The soils on-site are made up primarily of natural material. According to the Web Soils Survey from the United States Department of Agriculture, three types of soils are found on the Project site. The majority of the site consists of Terrace escarpments (TeG) and Ramona sandy loams (RaB2, RaB3, and RaC3) throughout the improvement area. Silty sandy in nature, the site soils are considered “very low” in expansion characteristic with an Expansion Index, EI, less than 20.
Design and construction of the Project would adhere to all recommendations contained in the Geo Report. Grading and construction plans would be reviewed and approved by the City of Beaumont. Compliance with the Geo Report is a standard condition and is not considered unique mitigation under CEQA. This would ensure that all proposed improvements are
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-41
adequately designed and constructed to take into account the properties of soils on the Project site; thereby, reducing any substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property. Impacts will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting
the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
X
The Project does not include the installation of septic tanks or alternate waste water system.
Therefore, the issue as to whether the Project would have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water is not applicable. No impacts will occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
A paleontological records search was provided by the Division of Earth Sciences of the San Bernardino County Museum (SBCM) in Redlands and the Western Science Center (WSC) in Hemet. These institutions maintain files of regional paleontological localities as well as supporting maps and documents. The records search results were used to identify known previously performed paleontological resource assessments as well as known paleontological localities within a one-mile radius of the project location. Neither the SBCM nor the WSC identified any known paleontological localities within the project area. However, the SBCM found ten localities approximately two miles to the south of the project location, while the WSC reported “numerous” localities in the region from similar alluvial sediments to those known to be present in the project area.
The SBCM described the surface soils in the project area as Quaernary younger alluvial fan deposits of Holocene age, which are low in paleontological sensitivity, but notes that these soils sit atop older Pleistocene fan deposits, which are more fossiliferous and have previously yielded the remains of a wide variety of extinct mammals. In contrast, the WSC identified the surface geology of the project area as entirely Pleistocene alluvial fan deposits of high paleontological sensitivity.
A field survey was conducted by CRM TECH on July 1, 2021. Throughout the course of the field survey, no surface manifestation of any paleontological remains was observed within the Project area. It was noted during the survey that the ground surface in the east-west portion of the Project area had been extensively disturbed by heavy machinery, and ground visibility in the north-south portion was poor during the survey, which prevented an accurate assessment
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-42
of the paleontological sensitivity of the native soils in much of the Project area.
Any substantial excavations would be below the uppermost layers in the Project area; therefore, should be monitored closely to quickly and professionally recover any fossil remains discovered while not impeding development. In the event that substantial excavations are planned within the Project site, the Project could result in significant impacts to unknown paleontological resources. With the implementation Mitigation Measures MM-GEO-1 through MM-GEO-3, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures:
MM-GEO-1 Paleontological Monitor: All earth-moving operations associated with the project shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. The monitor should be prepared to quickly salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays and should collect samples of sediments that are likely to contain fossil remains of small vertebrates or invertebrates.
However, the monitor must have the power to temporarily halt or divert grading equipment to allow for the removal of abundant or large specimens.
MM-GEO-2 Samples Processing: Collected samples of sediment should be processed to recover small fossils, and all recovered specimens should be identified and curated at repository with permanent retrievable storage.
MM-GEO-3 Report of Actions: A report of findings, including an itemized inventory of recovered specimens, should be prepared upon completion of the procedures outlined above.
The report should include a discussion of the significance of the paleontological findings, if any.
The report and the inventory, when submitted to the City of Beaumont, would signify completion of the program to mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-43
8. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) are released as byproducts of fossil fuel combustion, waste disposal, energy use, land use changes, and other human activities. This release of gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), creates a blanket around the earth that allows light to pass through but traps heat at the surface, preventing its escape into space.
Each GHG differs in its ability to absorb heat in the atmosphere based on the lifetime, or persistence, of the gas molecule in the atmosphere. For instance, per the CalEEMod v. 2016.3.2 emissions modeling software, methane traps over 25 times more heat per molecule than CO2, and N2O absorbs 298 times more heat per molecule than CO2. Often, estimates of GHG emissions are presented in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which weigh each gas by its global warming potential. Expressing GHG emissions in CO2e takes the contribution of all GHG emissions to the greenhouse effect and converts them to a single unit equivalent to the effect that would occur if only CO2 were being emitted.
There is scientific consensus that the contribution of GHG emissions into the atmosphere is resulting in the change of the global climate. The global average temperature is expected to increase relative to the 1986–2005 period by 0.3 to 4.8 degrees Celsius (°C) (0.5–8.6 degrees Fahrenheit [°F]) by the end of the twenty-first century (2081–2100), depending on future GHG emission scenarios. According to the California Natural Resources Agency (2012), temperatures in California are projected to increase 2.7°F above 2000 averages by 2050 and, depending on emission levels, 4.1–8.6°F by 2100. Physical conditions beyond average temperatures could be indirectly affected by the accumulation of GHG emissions. For example, changes in weather patterns resulting from increases in global average temperature are expected to result in a decreased volume of precipitation falling as snow in California and an overall reduction in snowpack in the Sierra Nevada. The Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), is a legal mandate requiring that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. To extend California’s GHG reduction programs beyond 2020, Senate Bill 32 (SB 32) was signed, which contains language to authorize CARB to achieve a statewide GHG emission reduction of at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
The SCAQMD has not announced when it will present a finalized version of its GHG thresholds to the governing board. On September 28, 2010, the SCAQMD recommended an interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) and an efficiency-based threshold of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e per service population (project patrons plus employees) per year in 2020 and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035. These thresholds were developed as part of the SCAQMD GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group. This working group was formed to assist the SCAQMD’s efforts to develop a GHG significance threshold and is composed of a wide variety of stakeholders including the California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), CARB, the Attorney General’s Office, a variety of city and county planning departments in Southern California, various utilities such as sanitation and power companies throughout the region, industry groups, and environmental and professional organizations. The screening-level numeric bright-line thresholds and efficiency-based thresholds were developed to be consistent with CEQA requirements for developing significance thresholds, are supported by substantial evidence, and provide guidance to CEQA practitioners with regard to determining whether GHG
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-44
emissions from a Project are significant.
For the purposes of this evaluation, the Project is to be compared to the SCAQMD interim screening level numeric bright-line threshold of 3,000 metric tons of CO2e annually. In the case that the Project is estimated to exceed this screening threshold, it is then to be compared to the SCAQMD-recommended efficiency-based thresholds of 4.8 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2020 and 3.0 metric tons of CO2e per service population per year in 2035.
Sources: 2nd Street Improvement Project Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Analysis, prepared by RK Engineering, 1-4-2022 (AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis, Appendix B).
Note: Any Tables or Figures provided in this section are from the AQ/GHG/Energy Analysis, unless noted otherwise.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
X
The Project has the potential to generate GHG emissions during both construction and operation of the proposed roadway.
Construction Emissions
Although construction-related GHG emissions are temporary in nature, the total amount of emissions could have a substantial contribution to a project’s total GHG emissions. SCAQMD recommends that construction-related GHG emissions be amortized over the life of the project, which is defined as 30 years, and added to annual operational emissions. Construction-related GHG emissions were modeled using the same assumptions and model (CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2) as those for air quality emissions. Construction-related GHG emissions would occur from fossil fuel combustion for heavy-duty construction equipment, material delivery and haul trucks, and construction worker vehicles. Table 8-1, Construction GHG Emissions, presents the Project’s total construction-related GHG emissions and amortized construction emissions.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-45
Table 8-1
Construction GHG Emissions
Activity Emissions (MTC02e)1
Onsite Offsite Total
Demolition 34.23 4.38 38.61
Site Preparation 8.43 0.39 8.82
Grading 10.51 28.24 38.75
Building Construction 268.08 125.31 393.39
Paving 14.86 1.54 16.40
Architectural Coating 2.30 1.08 3.38
Total 338.41 160.94 499.35
30 Year Amortization2 11.28 5.36 16.65
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and/or hydrofluorocarbon). 2 The emissions are amortized over 30 years and added to the operational emissions, pursuant to SCAQMD recommendations.
Table 8-1 shows the construction greenhouse gas emissions, including equipment and worker vehicle emissions for all phases of construction. Construction emissions are amortized over 30 years and added to the long-term operational emissions, pursuant to SCAQMD recommendations.
Operational Emissions
The roadway Project is not expected to significantly change the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the vicinity of the site. Therefore, the operational impacts associated with mobile GHG emissions are considered to be nominal. The purpose of the Project is to alleviate traffic congestion on 1st street and provide more direct access to/from the commercial developments (Home Depot, etc.) and Pennsylvania Avenue. Table 8-2, Operational GHG Emissions, presents the Project’s annual operational emissions along with the amortized construction emissions. Pursuant to SCAQMD’s guidance, the sum of these emissions should be used to compare with the applicable threshold of significance.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-46
Table 8-2
Operational GHG Emissions
Emission Source
GHG Emissions
(MTCO2e)1
Energy Source2 13.78
Area Source 0.00
Construction (30-year amortization) 16.65
Total Annual Emissions 30.43
SCAQMD Tier 3 Screening Threshold3 3,000
Exceed Tier 3 Threshold? No
1 MTCO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents 2
Electricity usage from street lighting.
3 Per South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Draft Guidance Document - Interim CEQA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Significance Threshold, October 2008
As shown in Table 8-2, the Project’s annual operational plus amortized construction emissions would generate 30.43 MTCO2e per year, which would not exceed the SCAQMD’s screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. This would be considered a less than significant impact.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing
the emissions of greenhouse gases?
X
The City of Beaumont adopted its Climate Action Plan, Sustainable Beaumont: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions, in October 2015. Consistent with the State’s adopted AB 32 GHG reduction target, the City set a goal to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This target was calculated as a 15 percent decrease from 2005 levels, as recommended in the AB 32 Scoping Plan. The Plan also established a longer-term goal to reduce emissions 41.7 percent below 2012 levels by 2030, putting the City on a path towards the State’s long-term goal to reduce emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The Plan includes various goals and policies for reducing GHG emissions from community-wide sources as a means to meet their stated GHG reduction goals. The Project’s consistency with relevant goals and policies is assessed in Table 8-3, Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Greenhouse Gas).
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-47
Table 8-3
Consistency with Sustainable Beaumont (Greenhouse Gas)
Reduction Goals and Policies Project Consistency
Goal 4: Increase energy efficiency in new
commercial development.
Not Applicable. Although existing commercial
development is adjacent to the proposed road
Project, it does not propose new commercial
development. The project would comply with the
applicable Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards in
terms of new streetlights.
Policy 4.1: Encourage or Require Energy
Efficiency Standards Exceeding State
Requirements
Not Applicable. This policy calls for the City to
encourage or require energy efficiency standards
exceeding State requirements. The Climate Action
Plan intended for this policy to be implemented
through the use of Screening Tables; however,
Screening Tables are not currently available at this
time. Nonetheless, the Project will install energy
efficient streetlights, most likely LED fixtures, as
part of Project construction.
Goal 5: Increase Energy Efficiency through
Water Efficiency
Not Appliable. The Project does not involve any
uses that consume water so it does not have to
comply with the California Green Building
Standards Code in that regard. The Project
landscaping will comply with the Model Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance as required by the
City’s development code.
Goal 6: Decrease energy demand through
reducing urban heat island effect
Consistent. The Project will incrementally increase
the amount of asphalt roadway in the City but
would have landscaping and white sidewalks to
help reduce potential reflective increases in
localized heat. The landscaping would provide
shade, absorb carbon, improve oxygenation, slow
stormwater runoff, and help reduce the local heat
island effect.
Policy 6.1: Tree Planting for Shading and
Energy Efficiency
Consistent. The Project will install parkway trees
consistent with the City’s 2016 Landscape
Standards.
Policy 6.2: Light-reflecting Surfaces for Energy
Efficiency
Not Applicable. The Statewide energy standards
outline minimum “cool roof performance” qualities
for roofing products. However, the Project has no
roofing so this policy does not apply.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-48
Reduction Goals and Policies Project Consistency
Goal 7: Decrease GHG emissions through
reducing VMT.
Does Not Conflict. The Project is intended to
relieve traffic congestion on 1st Street and is not
proposed to necessarily reduce VMT. However, the
Project will connect 2nd Street to Pennsylvania
Avenue and add sidewalks so that buses,
pedestrians and bicyclists can access the
commercial uses. In that way the Project will
incrementally reduce individual vehicle trips and
may help decrease overall VMT in the City as well.
Goal 10: Decrease GHG emissions of new
development through application of CEQA
Screening Tables.
Not applicable. At the time of this writing, the City
of Beaumont has not yet released Screening
Tables.
Policy 10.1: Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy in new development
Not Applicable. The Project is an extended
roadway and so the Title 24 energy efficiency
standards are not directly related except in terms of
new streetlights. It is likely the new lighting will use LED fixtures which will conserve energy over the
long-term.
Source: Sustainable Beaumont: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions. October 2015
Table 8-3 demonstrates the Project is consistent or at least does not conflict with the City’s Climate Action Plan. Therefore, the Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Impacts are less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-49
9. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Sources: California Building Code; California Health and Safety Code; California Code of Regulations; Google Maps; and Map My County.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use,
or
disposal of hazardous materials?
X
During construction, there is the potential for the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes that are typical of construction projects. This would include fuels and lubricants for construction machinery, coating materials, etc. Routine construction control measures and best management practices for hazardous materials storage, application, waste disposal, accident prevention and clean-up, etc. would be sufficient to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level.
The Project would develop extension and related improvements for East 2nd Street from Pennsylvania Avenue and the boundary of Home Depot. As such, no hazardous materials are anticipated to be transported, used, or disposed of on-site other than those used in typical passenger autos and delivery vehicles servicing the retail establishments along E. 2nd Street.
Based on the uses that would be a part of the Project, and the existing regulatory structure related to these materials, the Project would not cause a threat to public safety during project construction or operation. Therefore, because the transport, use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials pertaining to the Project would be relatively minor and subject to regulatory oversight, the impact is considered less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
X
Reference the discussion in Threshold 9.a. The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Impacts would be less than significant.
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-50
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of
an existing or proposed school?
X
There are no schools located within a one-quarter mile radius of the Project site. The nearest school to the Project site is Sundance Elementary School, which is approximately 0.7 miles from the Project site. All other schools are located greater than 0.5 miles from the Project site.
No impacts will occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
X
The Project site is not located on any identified hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
The California State Waterboards GEOTRACKER website provides information regarding Leaking Underground Storage Tanks, Other Cleanup Sites, Land Disposal Sites, Military Sites, Waste Discharge Requirement (WDR) Sites, Permitted Underground Storage Tank (UST) Facilities, Monitoring Wells, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Cleanup Sites and DTSC Hazardous Waste Permit Sites.
According to the GEOTRACKER site, there are no active or open cases involving Leaking Underground Storage Tanks, Other Cleanup Sites, Land Disposal Sites, Military Sites, WDR Sites, Permitted UST Facilities, Monitoring Wells, DTSC Cleanup Sites and DTSC Hazardous Waste Permit Sites on the proposed Project site, or within one (1) mile of the Project site. Detailed information is shown on Figure 9-1, Geotracker Site.
Likewise, the DTSC’s EnviroStor site does not show any active Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites located within a 1-mile radius of the proposed Project site. This information was verified at the web-link cited in the sources, and shown on Figure 9-2, EnviroStor Site.
Based upon the available data, there is no evidence to support that hazardous wastes or contamination would be present on the site. No impacts will occur.
FIGURE 9-1
GEOTRACKER SITE
Source: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map
Environmental Checklist and Discussion Page 383 of 865
FIGURE 9-2
ENVIROSTOR SITE
Source: Envirostor https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map Environmental Checklist and Discussion Page 384 of 865
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
2nd Street Improvement Project
Environmental Checklist and Discussion 4-53
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
or excessive noise for people residing or working
in the project area?
X
Banning Municipal Airport, the nearest airport to the Project site, is a city-owned, public-use airport located 5.8 miles east of the Project site. As such, the Project is also not located within two miles of any existing public airports. This in not applicable to the Project; therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. No impact will occur.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
The Project would neither physically interfere with nor impair implementation of any existing emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Review of the City of Beaumont’s General Plan Figure 4.8-1 Evacuation Routes shows Interstate 10, Highland Springs Avenue and Beaumont Avenue as the designated evacuation routes in the vicinity of the Project site.
Access to the Project is from either Pennsylvania Avenue or via the existing improvements along East 2nd Street. Pennsylvania Avenue connects to Interstate 10, and East 2nd Street connects to Highland Springs. The Project would be required to in compliance with City standards to ensure a coordinated and effective planned response by the City Police and Fire Departments to extraordinary emergency situations and disasters and also to ensure the provision of adequate vehicular access. Impacts will be less than significant.
Would the Project?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires?
X
According to Map My County, the Project is not located within a “Fire Hazard Zone” or a “Fire Responsibility Area.” The Project Site is located in a generally flat and developing area in which wildfire fuels are generally maintained, which collectively reduce the risk of wildfire for the Project.
Impacts will be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures are required.