12397-12 Supplemental AQ & GHG Evaluation
REFERENCES
1. Air Resources Board. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving Carlifornia's 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. [Online] https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf .
2. South Coast Air Quality Management District. Warehouse ISR Working Group. [Online] 2019. http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/planning/fbmsm-docs/whse_isr_8- 23-19_fi na I. pdf?sfvrsn=6.
URBAN
CROSSROADS
12397-12 Supplemental AQ & GHG Evaluation
ATTACHMENT A
EV CHARGING STATION CALCULATIONS
URBAN
CROSSROADS
12397-12 Supplemental AQ & GHG Evaluation
GHG Emissions Reduction from Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Parameters
Unit
Estimating GHG Emissions Reductions from Replacement of Gasoline Vheicles with Electric Vehicles SCE Electricity Emission Factor'
0.16 MT CO2e/MWH
Fuel Economy of Electric Vehicle2
2.50E-04
MWh/mi
Gasoline/Diesel CO2e Emission while Running3
280
g/mi
Annual Energy Delivery per Parking Spot4
7.06 MWh/charging station/yr
Annual VMT Reduction per Parking Spots
28,224
mi/charging station/yr
Number of Parking Spots Provided Chargers6
175
charging stations
Annual VMT Reduction from All Stations (Based on Charge) 4,939,200
mi/yr
Estimated Benefit from Installing On -Site Electric Vehicle Chargin Stations GHG Emissions of Gasoline/Diesel Vehicle'
1,382
MTCO2e/yr
GHG Emissions of Electric Vehicle
194
Annual GHG Emissions Reductions
1,188
MTCO2e/yr
1 CO2e weighted intensity factor for SCE accounts for CO2 and CH4 emissions rates under the 33% RPS for 2020. 2 US Department of Energy, 2013. Benefits and Considerations of Electricity as a Vehicle Fuel. Available at:
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity benefits.html 3 Running exhaust emission rates for CO2, CH4, and N20 were estimated using EMFAC2021 for light -duty gasoline and diesel -powered vehicles in Riverside County, aggregated for all models and speeds, averaged over all seasons in calendar year 2020. Emission rate was converted to CO2e using the 4th Assessment Report Global Warming Potentials. Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/ou r-work/programs/mobile-sou rce-emissions-inventory 4Annual Energy Delivery and VMT reduction based on an average monthly energy delivery of 588 kWh per charging station for conventional Level 2 chargers, as estimated by the California Energy Commission. Available at:
https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/2018publ ications/CEC-500-2018-020/CEC-500-2018-020.pdf 6Annual VMT reduction calculated as the annual energy delivery divided by the fuel economy of an electric vehicle. 6 Number of charging stations based on project commitment. ' GHG emissions calculated using annual VMT reduction at all stations and CO2e emission rate. 8 GHG emissions calculated using annual VMT reduction at all stations , fuel economy of electric vehicles, along with SCE electricity CO2e emission factor.
GHG Emissions Reduction from Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Parameters Unit
Estimating GHG Emissions Reductions from Replacement of Gasoline Veeicles with Electric Vehicles SCE Electricity Emission Factor'
0.16 MT CO,e/MWH
Fuel Economy of Electric Trucks'
2.25E-03
MWh/mi
Gasoline/Diesel CO,e Emission while Running'
873
6/.1
Annual Energy Delivery per Parking Spot°
126.00
MWh/charging station/yr
Annual VMT Reduction per Parking Spots
56,000
mi/charging station/yr
Number of Parking Spots Provided Chargers'
50 charging stations
Annual VMT Reduction from All Stations (Based on Charge) 2,800,000
mi/yr
Estimated Benefit from Installing On -Site Electric Vehicle Charg n Stations GH5 Emissions of Gasoline/Diesel Vehicle'
2,444
MTCO7e/yr
GHG Emissions of Electric Vehicles
989
Annual GHG Emissions Reductions
1,455
MTCO,e/yr
CO,e weighted intensity factor for SCE accounts for CO, and CH emissions rates under the 33% RPS for 2020 2 Fuel Economy of Trucks available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/defa ult/files/2018-11/180124hd bevefficiency. pdf 'Running exhaust emission rates for CO,,CH,,, and N,O were estimated using EMFAC2O21 for LHDT, MHDT, and HHDT gasoline and diesel -powered vehicles in Riverside County, aggregated for all models and speeds, averaged over all seasons in calendar year 2020. Emission rate was converted to Cole using the 4' Assessment Report Global Warming Potentials. Available at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/progra ms/mobi le -source -em issions-inventory °Annual Energy Delivery and VMT reduction based on an average monthly energy delivery of 588 kWh per charging station for conventional Level 2 chargers, as estimated by the California Energy Commission. Available at:
https://ww2.energv.ca.gov/2O18oublications/CEC-500-2018-020/CEC-500-2018-020.odf 'Annual VMT reduction calculated as the annual energy delivery divided by the fuel economy of an electric vehicle. 'Number of charging stations based on project commitment. 'GHG emissions calculated using annual VMT reduction at all stations and Cote emission rate.
GHG emissions calculated using annual VMT reduction at all stations, fuel economy of electric vehicles, along with SCE electricity CO2e emission factor.
Charger Type
Typical Power Output
Daily
Monthly
Annual
Level 2
19 570
6,840
DC Fast
350
10,500
126,000
PRIOR ASSUMPTION
19.6 588
7,056
6300
DC east Charging
connec1OrType'
21772
connector
[CS connect.,
CHAdeMO
connector
Testa connector
•
Voltage' 120 VAC 200.240 VAC 4000.10000 DC
Typical Power Output 1kW 7NW-19 kW 50350 kW
Estimated PHEV Charge Time liven 5-6hours 1-3 hours N/A Empty°
Estimated BEVCharge Time from 40-50 hours 4-10h20r5
Empty'
20 minutes -1
Iwur°
Estimated Electric Range per Hour of 2- 5mlles 10- 20 miles 180. 240 miles Charging
Typical locations
Home Home, Workplace, and Public
Public
1 BEAUMONT POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN SUPPLEMENTAL CEQA MEMORANDUM I
I
PLANNING
Attachment B:
Truck Traffic Demand Management Plan
www.tbplanning.cam
certified
WBENC
PLANNING • DESIGN • ENVIRONMENTAL • GRAPHICS
Wty.,4141 1 [MUMMA
URBAN C
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Philip W. Cyburt, CH Realty Partners, LLC
FROM: Jose Alire, Urban Crossroads Inc.
BOSS
EXHIBIT F
'DADS
BEAUMONT POINTE TRUCK TRAFFIC DEMAND MANAGEMENT
PLAN MEMORANDUM
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to submit this Truck Traffic Demand Management Plan (TTDMP) memorandum for the Beaumont Pointe development (Project). The development will be annexed into the City of Beaumont, as shown on Exhibit 1 below. Measures proposed in the TTDMP focus on managing truck trips and preferred routes for the proposed Project and may be implemented following occupancy of the proposed Project. The TTDMP will also address recommendations for routing of Project truck traffic to the Project site before and after construction of Phase 2 of the Potrero Interchange improvements. This memorandum is intended to only describe elements typically included in TTDMP's. A full report will be provided when directed by the Client.
Philip W. Cyburt, CH Realty Partners, LLC
December 19, 2023
EXHIBIT 1: PROJECT LOCATION
A: 10
A,0 Al o ewmenae
Oroperry BounEary
D
moqa
11.4 lD
Limas al Disturbance
overlaps AAP
rope !y eauntlary
Legend
TnEs WOW BASIN
■ SEWPR UPI STATION
0, OPTIONAL WATER TANK
PA 10
ILrm�_m ,1E
11 STATAST/CAL SUMMARY
m
0 a
a
a
Min
m
Nam
MEM
lEAPAPIAL
FERAL
!SAS
CAMAS
SEMPAL
Noosfflue Juror.. EOM
MEE
PROJECT -MT. $®
(FEN SPACE - CCES.ATQI
MEM
IEEN
PA
PA In
A9,
L.. —
CIO 1,111.11
BEAUMONT POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN
xre n DATE'. 00..11.1022
HEI
LAND USE PLAN
TRUCK TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN SCOPE
As previously stated, measures proposed in the TTDMP focus on managing truck traffic for the proposed Project and may be implemented following occupancy for each Phase of development.
The following measures are typically included in TTDMP's:
1. For the Opening Day/Phase 1 of the Project (Interim) - Truck routes before construction of the Phase 2 Portero Interchange improvements will be developed. The interim truck route shall be developed with input from City staff to ensure sensitive land use receptors are considered, and consistent with Planning Commission/City Council direction. The interim truck route will be consistent with the Project truck trip Distribution Without Potrero Boulevard Interchange Improvements per Exhibit 4-2 of the approved Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) shown below. This interim truck route may also be used during construction of the Project.
URBAN
CROSSROADS
12396-02 TTDMP Brief
Philip W. Cyburt, CH Realty Partners, LLC
December 19, 2023
EXHIBIT4-2: PROJECT (TRUCK) TRIP DISTRIBUTION WITHOUT POTRERO BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE LEGEND:
10 • PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT
• OUTBOUND
t-- • INBOUND
12396 - trip-b.dwg
2. Project Build -Out of the Project (Ultimate) - Truck route after construction of the Phase 2 Portero Interchange improvements will be developed. Similar to the interim phase, the ultimate truck route shall be developed with input from City staff to ensure sensitive land use receptors are considered, and consistent with Planning Commission/City Council direction. The ultimate truck route will be consistent with the Project truck trip Distribution With Potrero Boulevard Interchange Improvements per Exhibit 4-4 of the approved TIA shown below. This ultimate truck route may also be used during construction of the Project depending on the Project development schedule and the Phase 2 Potrero Interchange improvement schedule.
URBAN
CROSSROADS
12396-02 TTDMP Brief
Philip W. Cyburt, CH Realty Partners, LLC
December 19, 2023
EXHIBIT 4-4: PROJECT (TRUCK) TRIP DISTRIBUTION WITH POTRERO BOULEVARD INTERCHANGE OAK VALLEY PKWY.
10 - PERCENT TO/FROM PROJECT
r • OUTBOUND
f-- • INBOUND
12396 • trip-b.dwg
3. Truck route maps shall be provided to all truck drivers.
4. Truck route signage shall be provided at each exit point/gate for loading areas.
5. Identify and provide recommendations for physical improvements (if any) to be implemented as part of the TTDMP program. Improvements to deter truck traffic may be implemented on routes where trucks should avoid, minimizing impacts of truck traffic to sensitive receptors. Additionally, improvements on preferred truck routes may be implemented to promote truck traffic on the City identified and preferred routes. The City Planning/Building Department may verify completion of physical TTDMP improvements as part of the Certificate of Occupancy process.
6. On -site traffic signing and striping should be implemented consistent with the provisions of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD) and in conjunction with detailed plans for the Project site. Sight distance at each project access point should be reviewed with respect to Caltrans and City of Beaumont sight distance standards at the time of preparation of final grading, landscape, and street improvement plans.
7. The warehouse building user/tenant shall also be required, by its lease agreement, to provide educational information to truck drivers about the required truck route as a normal course of the building's operational management.
8. Each warehouse building user/tenant shall also be required, by its lease agreement, to provide a TTDMP coordinator position. This position may be included as part of the TTDMP. The position of TTDMP coordinator for each Phase or building may be fulfilled by URBAN
CROSSROADS
12396-02 TTDMP Brief
Philip W. Cyburt, CH Realty Partners, LLC
December 19, 2023
the building owner/lessee, an employee, or third -party provider. The TTDMP coordinator responsibilities shall include:
Identify proposed on -site TTDMP measures to be implemented and provide a list of the implementation measures to the City Planning Department.
Develop and implement a TTDMP monitoring program. The TTDMP monitoring program shall identify truck route information, delivery hours, alternative routes, loading bay locations, trailer storage areas, and on -site circulation.
Provide truck drivers with the necessary truck route information. ■ Maintain on -site emergency vehicle access routes.
■ Ensure all pedestrian routes are clear.
■ Ensure all on -site bicycle routes are clear.
■ Coordinate with the Logistics managers to minimize impacts to peak hour traffic flow and monitor freeway conditions.
■ Periodically meet with City staff and local law enforcement to discuss issues, impacts due to trucks, and adherence to the designated truck routes.
Coordinate with City staff and local law enforcement staff on any changes to city policies regarding truck routes, enforcement, and adjust information and signage for truck drivers as necessary.
Develop site -specific enforcement mechanisms to manage truck deliveries, and adherence to the approved truck routes based on input from local law enforcement.
Recommend technologies to monitor Project truck traffic such as License Plate Readers (LPR's) for specific locations.
CLOSING
Urban Crossroads, Inc. is pleased to provide this TTDMP memorandum for the proposed Project.
If you have any questions or comments, I can be reached [email protected].
Respectfully submitted,
URBAN CROSSROADS, INC.
Jose Alire, P.E.
Senior Traffic Engineer
URBAN
CROSSROADS
12396-02 TTDMP Brief
1 BEAUMONT POINTE SPECIFIC PLAN SUPPLEMENTAL CEQA MEMORANDUM I
I
PLANNING
Attachment C:
Updated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
www.tbplanning.cam
certified
WBENC
PLANNING • DESIGN • ENVIRONMENTAL • GRAPHICS
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
State Clearinghouse No. 2020099007
Prepared for:
City of Beaumont
550 E. 6th Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Prepared by:
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
714-505-6360
February 2024
CEQA Requirements
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that when a public agency completes an environmental document that includes measures to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects, the public agency must adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the changes to the project that it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant environmental impacts. The appropriate reporting or monitoring plan must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation (Public Resources Code §21081.6).
The City of Beaumont will coordinate the monitoring of the mitigation measures and regulatory requirements with each applicable City department or division, while various City departments/divisions would be responsible for monitoring and verifying compliance of specific mitigation measures and regulatory requirements (see the beginning on page 4). Monitoring will include: 1) verification that each mitigation measure and regulatory requirement has been implemented; 2) recordation of the actions taken to implement each mitigation measure and regulatory requirement; and 3) retention of records in the project file.
Project Objectives
The objectives of the proposed Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (the "Project") include the following:
1. Develop large land areas in the City and particularly south of SR -60 and adjacent to existing industrial uses, infrastructure, and truck routes to meet the growing demand for large scale industrial and warehouse development in the City while minimizing impacts of industrial development on residential and other sensitive receptors in the City, which are primarily located north of SR -60.
2. Providing for conservation of open space habitat within MSHCP criteria cells in a manner consistent with the MSHCP requirements and providing access for wildlife movement to Caltrans constructed and proposed wildlife under -crossings along the SR -60 Freeway that abut the northern Project boundary to accommodate wildlife movement.
3. Maximizing opportunities to develop land in the City's sphere of influence to provide job opportunities and economic benefit to the City and its residents, including new sales and property tax revenues that can be used for City services and providing sufficient fiscal benefit to permit annexation of the Project site into the City.
4. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont which improves the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.
5. Fulfilling a need in the City and region wellness -based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
6. Developing a center that will accommodate a variety of future tenants, including light manufacturing, warehouse, distribution tenants and other businesses that rely on transportation efficiency within an industrial corridor in a location with superior access to the local and regional transportation network, thereby minimizing truck traffic on local streets and reducing vehicle miles traveled in the region.
7. Developing a project that utilizes existing investment in capital improvements for water, reclaimed water, sewer, storm drain and circulation facilities to further the planned development of land in the City and in its sphere of influence.
8. Developing a range of warehouse facility options, such as varying structure sizes and building configurations within the City with high quality businesses to facilitate local and regional distribution of goods while minimizing vehicle miles traveled, air quality and greenhouse gas impacts.
9. Minimizing the demand for water resources by creating a development -wide landscape concept that features drought -tolerant plant materials to provide for an aesthetically pleasing outdoor environment and developing a project where recycled water is planned to be available.
Overview of the Project
The Project Applicant, JRT BP 1 LLC, proposes to entitle and develop the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project described below (Project) on a 539.9 -acre undeveloped site (Project site or site) located in unincorporated Riverside County, California (County) in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) of the City of Beaumont (City). The Project would allow for the development on the Project site of a maximum of 246,000 square feet (sf) of general commercial uses in addition to a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf) and a maximum of 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses. The Project would provide 124.7 acres of open space to accommodate landscaped manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, and natural open space as a buffer to adjacent conservation area and 152.4 acres of open space — conservation. The Project would conserve a total of 230.82 acres of lands that would support the function of Proposed Core 3 consistent with the MSHCP goals of providing live-in habitat and facilitating movement, including 152.42 acres on -site and 78.40 acres off -site. Associated improvements to the Project site would include, but are not limited to, paved roads, paved parking areas, drive aisles, truck courts, utility infrastructure, landscaping, water quality basins, signage, lighting, property walls, gates, and fencing, including perimeter fencing for the Project site.
The Project is primarily defined by the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is also available for review at the City of Beaumont Planning Division at the address above. The Specific Plan identifies ten (10) Planning Areas (PAs), of which two (2) are identified and zoned for General Commercial uses (PAs 1 and 2), six (6) are identified and zoned for Industrial uses (PAs 3 through 8), and the remaining two PAs are identified and zoned for Open Space (PA 9) and Open Space — Conservation (PA 10). Refer to EIR Section 3.0, Project Description, for a detailed description of the Project.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
This MMRP delegates responsibilities for monitoring the implementation of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project mitigation measures and applicable regulatory requirements and allows responsible City entities flexibility and discretion in determining how best to monitor implementation.
Monitoring procedures will vary according to the type of mitigation measure or regulatory requirement.
The timing for monitoring and reporting is described in the monitoring and reporting summary table, below. Adequate monitoring requires demonstration of monitoring procedures and implementation of mitigation measures and regulatory requirements.
In order to enhance the effectiveness of the monitoring program, the City will utilize existing systems where appropriate. These inspectors are familiar with a broad range of regulatory issues and will provide first line oversight for much of the monitoring program during construction activities.
Program Changes
If minor changes are required to this MMRP, they will be made in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and would be permitted after further review by the City. Such changes could include reassignment of monitoring and reporting responsibilities and/or minor modifications to mitigation measures that achieve the same or better end results. No change will be permitted unless the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program continues to satisfy the requirements of Public Resources Code §21081.6.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
4.1 AESTHETICS
Threshold a: Would the Project have a
substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
PDF 1-1 Development implementing the
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan shall comply
with the Development Standards set forth in
Chapter 3 and the Design Guidelines related to
Architectural Design and Landscape Design in
Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan. Conformity to
the Development Standards and Design
Guidelines would be addressed by the City's
future review of implementing building permits
for compliance with the Specific Plan's
requirements and would serve to reduce and/or
avoid impacts relating to aesthetics.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project
substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings
within a state scenic highway?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project in non-
urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of
public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage points.) If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
PDF 1-1 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project create a
new source of substantial light or glare
that would adversely affect daytime or
nighttime views in the area?
RR 1-1 The Project is required to comply with
City of Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter
8.50, which establishes specific design,
construction, and performance standards
applicable to lighting and lighting fixtures
within the City to reduce "skyglow" or light
pollution that affects day or nighttime views of
the Mt. Palomar Observatory.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Threshold a: Would the Project convert
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Threshold b: Would the Project conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project 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))?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project result in
the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non -forest use?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold e: Would the Project 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?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
4.3 AIR QUALITY
Threshold a: Would the Project conflict
with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
RR 3-1 The Project shall comply with the
provisions of South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rule 403, "Fugitive
Dust." Rule 403 requires implementation of best
available dust control measures during
construction activities that generate fugitive
dust, such as earth moving and stockpiling
activities, grading, and equipment travel on
unpaved roads, including limiting vehicle
speeds to 15 miles per hour.
RR 3-2 The Project shall comply with the
provisions of South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rule 1186 "PM10
Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads and
MM 4.3-1 The Project shall utilize "Super -Compliant" low VOC paints for nonresidential interior and exterior surfaces and low VOC paint for parking lot surfaces. Super -Compliant low VOC paints have been reformulated to be more
stringent than the regulatory VOC limits put forth by
South Coast AQMD's Rule 1113. Super- Compliant low
VOC paints shall be no more than log/L of VOC.
Alternatively, the applicant may utilize tilt -up concrete buildings that do not require the use of architectural
coatings.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
construction
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Livestock Operations" and Rule 1186.1, "Less-
MM 4.3-2
Prior to the start of construction activities, the project Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Prior to
Polluting Street Sweepers." Adherence to Rule
1186 and Rule 1186.1 reduces the release of
criteria pollutant emissions into the atmosphere
during construction.
applicant, or its designee, shall ensure that all 50-
horsepower or greater diesel -powered equipment is
powered with California Air Resources Board (CARB)-
certified Tier 4 Final engines, except where the project applicant establishes to the satisfaction of the City of Planning Department
construction
RR 3-3 The Project shall comply with the
provisions of South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rule 402 "Nuisance."
Adherence to Rule 402 reduces the release of
odorous emissions into the atmosphere.
Beaumont (City) that Tier 4 Final equipment is not
available. An exemption from these requirements may be
granted by the City if the City documents that equipment with the required tier is not reasonably available and
corresponding reductions in criteria air pollutant emissions are achieved from other construction equipment to the
extent feasible. Before an exemption may be considered by the City, the applicant shall be required to demonstrate that two construction fleet owners/operators in Riverside
County were contacted and that those owners/operators
confirmed Tier 4 Final equipment could not be located
within Riverside County. In order to meet this requirement to demonstrate that such equipment is not available, the Project Applicant must seek bids/proposals from
contractors of large fleets, defined by the California Air Resources Board as, "A fleet with a total max hp (as
defined below) greater than 5,000 hp." In addition, this should not be limited to Riverside County but statewide. In the event that Tier 4 Final equipment is not feasible, then Tier 4 interim equipment shall be required. In the event that Tier 4 Interim equipment is not available, Tier 3
equipment shall be used. All construction equipment shall be tuned and maintained in accordance with the
manufacturer's specifications.
MM 4.3-3
All on -site outdoor cargo -handling equipment (including yard trucks, hostlers, yard goats, pallet jacks, forklifts, and other on -site equipment) shall be electric or non -diesel fueled. All on -site indoor forklifts shall be powered by electricity.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
construction and
operation
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
MM 4.3-4
Legible, durable, weather-proof signs shall be placed at truck access gates, loading docks, and truck parking areas that identify applicable CARB anti -idling regulations. At a minimum, each sign shall include: 1) instructions for truck drivers to shut off engines when not in use; 2) instructions for drivers of diesel trucks to restrict idling to no more than three (3) minutes once the vehicle is stopped, the transmission is set to "neutral" or "park," and the parking brake is engaged; and 3) telephone numbers of the
building facilities manager and the CARB to report
violations. Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit, the City shall conduct a site inspection to ensure that the signs are in place.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During operation;
Prior to the
issuance of an
occupancy permit
MM 4.3-5
Prior to tenant occupancy, the Project Applicant or
successor in interest shall provide documentation to the City demonstrating that occupants/tenants of the Project site have been provided documentation on funding
opportunities, such as the Carl Moyer Program and other Programs promulgated by South Coast AQMD (which can
be found at the SCAQMD Incentives & Programs landing
page, http://www.aqmd.gov/home/programs) that provide incentives for using cleaner -than -required engines and equipment.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
occupancy permits
MM 4.3-6
Prior to issuance of occupancy permits for the
industrial/warehouse buildings, the Project operator shall prepare and submit a Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) program detailing strategies that would reduce the use of single occupant vehicles by employees by
increasing the number of trips by walking, bicycle,
carpool, vanpool and transit. The TDM shall include, but is not limited to the following:
• Provide a transportation information center and on -site TDM coordinator to educate employers, employees,
and visitors of surrounding transportation options.
• Promote bicycling and walking through design features such as showers for employees, self-service bicycle
repair area, etc. around the project site.
Project Operator
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
occupancy permits
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
• Provide secure bicycle storage space equivalent to 2% of the automobile parking spaces provided.
• Provide on -site car share amenities for employees who make only occasional use of a vehicle, as well as others who would like occasional access to a vehicle of a
different type than they use day-to-day.
• Promote and support carpool/vanpool/rideshare use
through parking incentives and administrative support,
such as ride -matching service.
• Incorporate incentives for using alternative travel
modes, such as preferential load/unload areas or
convenient designated parking spaces for
carpool/vanpool users.
• Provide meal options on -site or shuttles between the facility and nearby meal destinations.
• Each building shall provide preferred parking for
electric, low -emitting and fuel - efficient vehicles
equivalent to at least 8% of the required number of
parking spaces.
MM 4.3-7
For the warehouse/industrial portion of the Project, the Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
During
buildings' electrical room shall be sufficiently sized to hold additional panels that may be needed to supply power for the future installation of electric vehicle (EV) truck charging stations on the site. Conduit should be installed from the electrical room to tractor trailer parking spaces in logical location(s) on the site determined by the Project Planning Department
Construction
Document Plan
Check
Applicant during construction document plan check, for
the purpose of accommodating the future installation of EV truck charging stations at such time this technology becomes commercially available and the buildings are
being served by trucks with electric -powered engines.
The buildings' electrical room shall be sufficiently sized to hold additional panels that may be needed in the future to supply power to trailers with transport refrigeration units (TRUs) during the loading/unloading of refrigerated
goods. Conduit should be installed from the electrical
room to the loading docks determined by the Project
Applicant during construction document plan check as the logical location(s) to receive trailers with TRUs.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
MM 4.3-8 Final Project designs shall provide for installation of conduit in tractor trailer parking areas for the purpose of accommodating potential installation of EV truck charging stations.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During Project
Design
MM 4.3-9 All truck/dock bays that serve cold storage facilities within the proposed buildings shall be electrified to facilitate plug-in capabilities and support use of electric standby and/or hybrid electric transport refrigeration units (TRUs).
All site and architectural plans submitted to the City
Planning Department shall note all the truck/dock bays
designated for electrification. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the City Building Department
shall verify electrification of the designated truck/dock bays.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to the
issuance of
occupancy permits
MM 4.3-10 All landscaping equipment (e.g., leaf blower) used for property management shall be electric powered only. The property manager/facility owner shall provide
documentation (e.g., purchase, rental, and/or services
agreement) to the Planning Department to verify, to the City's satisfaction, that all landscaping equipment utilized will be electric powered.
Property Manager
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During Operation
MM 4.3-11 If the Project constructs a go-kart facility in the commercial area, all go-karts would be required to be electric or zero emissions.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During Project
Design
MM 4.3-12 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for any of the industrial/warehouse buildings, the Planning Department shall confirm that tenant lease agreements require the
Project Applicant to provide $1.00 per square foot in
funding for fleet upgrade financing to be used over the term of their lease on Zero Emissions (ZE) and Near Zero Emissions (NZE) delivery vans or trucks. This requirement shall apply to new leases only (not renewals) and for the first 10 years of the Project's life. The funding shall be provided in the form of lease allowance/concession. The allowance shall be a reimbursement once ZE or NZE
medium/heavy duty vehicles are purchased and can be
used at any time during the lease term (i.e., the landlord shall reimburse the tenant once the tenant provides receipt of paid invoice for the order). If a tenant leases their fleet, this allowance shall also cover the cost to lease ZE or NZE trucks. This measure would also facilitate compliance with South Coast AQMD Rule 2305.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
occupancy permits
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
MM 4.3-13
Plans submitted for grading permit issuance and building permit issuance shall specify a designated area of the
construction site where electric or non -diesel vehicles, equipment, and tools can be fueled or charged. The
provision of temporary electric infrastructure for such purpose shall be approved by the utility provider, Southern California Edison (SCE). If SCE will not approve the
installation of temporary power for this purpose, the
establishment of a temporary electric charging area will not be required. If electric equipment will not be used on the construction site because the construction contractor(s) does not have such equipment in its fleet (as specified in Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-14), the establishment of a
temporary electric charging area also will not be required.
If electric powered equipment is in the contractor(s)
equipment fleet, and SCE approval is secured, the
temporary charging location is required to be established upon issuance of grading permits and building permits.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
grading and
building permits
MM 4.3-14
If electric or non -diesel off -road trucks and construction support equipment, including but not limited to hand tools, forklifts, aerial lifts, materials lifts, hoists, pressure washers, plate compactors, and air compressors are
available in the construction contractor's equipment fleet and can fulfill the Project's construction requirements during the building construction, paving, and architectural coating phases of Project construction, such equipment
shall be used during Project construction. This requirement shall be noted on plans submitted for building permit
issuance.
Project Applicant/
Construction
Contractor
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
Construction
MM 4.3-15
Project construction contractors shall maintain records of all off -road diesel construction equipment associated with Project construction to document that each off -road diesel construction equipment used meets emission standards.
Records shall be kept on -site for the duration of
construction activities and shall be made available for periodic inspection by City of Beaumont staff or their
designee.
Construction
Contractor
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
Construction
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
MM 4.3-16 During construction activities, the City shall conduct periodic inspections to verify compliance with
construction -related mitigation measures pursuant to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
Construction
MM 4.3-17 Prior to building final, the Project Applicant or successor in interest shall install signs at each truck exit driveway that provides directional information to the City's truck route. Text on the sign shall read "To Truck Route" with a directional arrow.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to building
final
Threshold b: Would the Project 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?
RRs 3-1 through 3-3, and PDFs 8-1 through 8-5
shall apply.
MMs 4.3-1 through 4.3-17 shall apply.
Refer to MMs 4.3-1
through 4.3-17
above.
Refer to MMs 4.3-1
through 4.3-17
above.
Refer to MMs 4.3-
1 through 4.3-17
above.
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project expose
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
RRs 3-1 through 3-3 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project result in
other emissions (such as those leading to
odors adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
RR 3-3 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Threshold a: Would the Project have a
substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
RR 4-1 The Project Applicant is required to
pay MSHCP development fees.
MM 4.4-1 Prior to initial ground -disturbing activities (including vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering, equipment staging, grading, etc.), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre -construction presence/absence survey for crotch bumble bee prior to site disturbance. If the bumble bee were to be detected (or assumed present) within the development footprint, then the Project
proponent shall coordinate with CDFW to address the
extent of impacts and determine whether an Incidental
Take Permit (ITP) would be required. If an ITP were
required, then mitigation may be required by CDFW as
part of the ITP process, and the conservation of the
comparable open space habitat within PA 10 would be
presented to support the ITP.
Project Biologist
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to ground-
disturbing
activities
Less than Significant
Impact
MM 4.4-2 Prior to initial ground -disturbing activities (including vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering, equipment staging, grading, etc.), a qualified biologist will conduct a pre -construction presence/absence survey for burrowing owls within 30 days to ensure that no owls have colonized the site in the days or weeks
preceding the ground -disturbing activities. If burrowing Project Biologist
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to ground -
disturbing
activities
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
owls have colonized the project site prior to the initiation of ground -disturbing activities, the project proponent will immediately inform and coordinate with the RCA and the
Wildlife Agencies (CDFW, USFWS) to prepare a
Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation Plan (if
required), prior to initiating ground disturbance. If ground - disturbing activities occur, but the site is left undisturbed for more than 30 days, a pre -construction survey will again be necessary to ensure burrowing owl has not colonized
the site since it was last disturbed. If burrowing owl is found, the same coordination described above will be
necessary. The Burrowing Owl Protection and Relocation
Plan, if necessary, will describe methods to safely relocate burrowing owls from the Project site (if avoidance were infeasible) and to monitor burrowing owls with an
adequate setback buffer if construction would proceed at the site until the owls could be relocated.
MM 4.4-3
Prior to the issuance of grading permits or other permits Project Contractor
City of Beaumont
Prior to issuance of
allowing for ground -disturbing activities or the removal of vegetation on -site, the City of Beaumont Department of Department of Public
Works
grading permits
Public Works shall ensure that the following note is
included on the grading plans. Project contractors shall be required to ensure compliance with this note and permit periodic inspection of the construction site by City of Beaumont staff or its designee to confirm compliance.
This note also shall be specified in bid documents issued to prospective construction contractors.
Ground -disturbing activities (including vegetation
removal) within the Criteria Area (Criteria Cells) shall be conducted outside of the coastal California gnatcatcher breeding season (between March 1 and August 15) if
occupied by coastal California gnatcatcher. If ground - disturbing activities (including vegetation removal)
cannot be limited to outside the coastal California
gnatcatcher breeding season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre -construction presence/absence survey for coastal California gnatcatcher within 14 days prior to site disturbance. If the species is found, the Project proponent shall immediately inform the Wildlife Agencies (CDFW,
USFWS) and ground disturbing activities within these
areas will be postponed to outside of the coastal
California gnatcatcher breeding season. If the species is not found, no further action is needed.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Threshold b: Would the Project have a
substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
PDF 4-1 The Project would conserve 230.82
acres of open space, including 80.63 acres of
native vegetation communities (1.20 acres of
Southern Riparian Scrub, 1.28 acres of
Chaparral and 78.15 acres of Riversidean Sage
Scrub).
PDF 4-2The Project would result in permanent
impacts to vegetation communities described for
conservation by the MSHCP associated with
Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125 totaling
109.69 acres and would impact the following
communities: chaparral (0.21 acre), Riversidean
sage scrub (24.40 acres), non-native grassland
(82.13 acres), and southern riparian scrub (0.03
acre). To offset these impacts, the Project will
conserve 133.62 acres of replacement lands
through the Criteria Refinement Process,
including 0.32 acre of chaparral, 45.85 acres of
Riversidean sage scrub, 86.03 acres of non-
native grassland, and 0.22 acre of southern
riparian scrub. These replacement lands are in
areas that are not described for conservation by
the Cell Criteria for Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032,
and 1125.
MM 4.4-4 Prior to issuance of grading permits or other permits authorizing ground disturbance (e.g., vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering,
equipment staging), the Project Applicant shall provide evidence to the City of Beaumont that impacts to 0.31
acre of Corps jurisdiction and Regional Board
jurisdiction, and 0.43 acre of CDFW jurisdiction and
MSHCP riparian/riverine resources (including 0.03 acre
of riparian habitat) have been mitigated through either the purchase wetland/riparian habitat establishment and/or
rehabilitation credits from an approved mitigation
bank/in-lieu fee program at a minimum 1:1 ratio.
Approved mitigation banks and/or in -lieu fee programs
include, but are not limited to, the Riverpark Mitigation Bank, the Inland Empire Resource Conservation District
In -Lieu Fee Program, and the Riverside -Corona Resource Conservation District In -Lieu Fee Program. In addition, and also prior to issuance of grading permits, the Project Applicant shall provide the City of Beaumont of a copy of the Project's CWA Section 404 permit from the Corps,
Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the
Regional Board, Waste Discharge Order from the
Regional Board, and Fish and Game Code Section 1602
Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW,
as applicable.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
grading permits
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project have
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?
RR 4-1, PDF 4-1 and PDF 4-2 shall apply.
MM 4.4-4 shall apply.
Refer to MM 4.4-4
above.
Refer to MM 4.4-4
above.
Refer to MM 4.4-4
above.
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project 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?
N/A
MM 4.4-5 Prior to the issuance of grading permits or other permits allowing for ground -disturbing activities or the removal of vegetation on -site, the City of Beaumont Department of Public Works shall ensure that the following note is
included on the grading plans. Project contractors shall be required to ensure compliance with this note and permit periodic inspection of the construction site by City of Beaumont staff or its designee to confirm compliance.
This note also shall be specified in bid documents issued to prospective construction contractors.
As feasible, vegetation clearing shall be conducted
outside of the nesting season, which is generally identified as February 1 through September 15. If avoidance of the Project Contractor
City of Beaumont
Department of Public
Works
Prior to issuance of
grading permits
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
nesting season is not feasible, then a qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within three days
prior to any disturbance of the site, including disking, demolition activities, and grading. If active nests are identified, the biologist shall establish suitable buffers around the nests, and the buffer areas shall be avoided until the nests are no longer occupied and the juvenile birds can survive independently from the nests
Threshold e: Would the Project conflict
with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold f: Would the Project conflict
with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
RR 4-1 shall apply.
MM 4.4-2 shall apply.
Refer to MM 4.4-2
above.
Refer to MM 4.4-2
above.
Refer to MM 4.4-2
above.
Less than Significant
Impact
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ir
I
Threshold a: Would the Project cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource in
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
N/A
MM 4.5-1 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall provide written verification in the form of a letter from the archaeologist to the City's Community Development Director stating that a certified
archaeologist that meets the U.S. Secretary of Interior Standards has been retained to implement the monitoring program. The archaeologist shall be present during all
ground -disturbing activities to identify any known or
suspected archaeological and/or cultural resources. The archaeologist will conduct a Cultural Resource Sensitivity Training, in conjunction with the consulting Native
American Tribe(s) Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
(THPO), and/or designated Tribal Representative. The
training session will focus on the archaeological and tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground - disturbing activities as well as the procedures to be
followed in such an event. The certified archaeologist and consulting tribe(s) representative shall attend the pre - grading meeting with the contractors to explain and
coordinate the requirements of the monitoring program.
•
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Community
Development
Department
Prior to issuance of
grading permit
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
MM 4.5-2
Prior to any ground -disturbing activities the project
Project Archaeologist
City of Beaumont
Prior to ground -
archaeologist shall develop a Cultural Resource
Management Plan (CRMP) and/or Archaeological
Planning Department
disturbing
activities
Monitoring and Treatment Plan (AMTP) to address the
details, timing, and responsibilities of all archaeological and cultural resource activities that occur on the project site. This Plan should be written in consultation with the consulting Tribe[s] and shall include the following:
approved mitigation measures, conditions of approval,
contact information for all pertinent parties, parties' responsibilities, procedures for each mitigation measure and condition of approval, and an overview of the project schedule. The monitoring program shall include the
following requirements for each phase of ground
disturbance:
a) During all ground -disturbing activities the qualified archaeologist and the Native American monitor shall be
on -site full-time The frequency of inspections will
depend upon the rate of excavation, the materials
excavated, and any discoveries of tribal cultural
resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section
21074. Archaeological and Native American
monitoring will be discontinued when the depth of
grading and the soil conditions no longer retain the
potential to contain cultural deposits. The qualified
archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, shall be responsible for determining the
duration and frequency of monitoring.
b) In the event that previously unidentified cultural
resources are discovered, the qualified archaeologist
and Native American monitor shall have the authority
to divert or temporarily halt ground disturbance
operation in the area of discovery to allow for the
evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources.
Isolates and clearly non -significant deposits will be
minimally documented in the field so the monitored
ground disturbance activities can proceed. If a
potentially significant cultural resource(s) is
discovered, work shall stop within a 60 -foot perimeter of the discovery and an environmentally sensitive area
physical demarcation/barrier constructed. The
archaeologist shall contact the City and consulting
tribe(s) at the time of discovery. The archaeologist, in consultation with the City, the consulting tribe(s), and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Native American monitor, shall determine the
significance of the discovered resources.
c) A recommendation for the treatment and disposition of the tribal cultural resource shall be made by the
qualified archaeologist in consultation with the tribe(s) and the Native American monitor and be submitted to
the City for review and approval. Treatment and
disposition may include full avoidance; preservation in place; reburial in a permanent conservation easement or deed restriction away from future impact areas; or
excavation and curation in a facility that meets Federal Curation Standards (CFR 79.1).
d) The City must concur with the evaluation before
ground disturbance activities will be allowed to resume in the affected area. For significant cultural resources meeting the definition of a historical resource per
CEQA Section 15064.5(a) or a unique archaeological
resource per CEQA Section 21083.2(g), a Research
Design and Data Recovery Program to mitigate impacts
shall be prepared by the consulting archaeologist and
approved by the City before being carried out using
professional archaeological methods.
e) Before ground disturbance activities are allowed to
resume in the affected area, the artifacts shall be
recovered and features recorded using professional
archaeological methods. The archaeologist shall
determine the amount of material to be recovered for an adequate artifact sample for analysis.
f) All cultural material collected during the grading
monitoring program shall be processed and curated
according to the current professional repository
standards. The collections and associated records shall be transferred, including title, to an appropriate
curation facility, to be accompanied by payment of the
fees necessary for permanent curation.
g) A report documenting the field and analysis results and interpreting the artifact and research data within the
research context shall be completed and submitted to
the City's Community Development Director for
approval and subsequently submitted to the Eastern
Information Center, and consulting tribe(s), prior to the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first
building in each phase of ground disturbance.
Threshold c: Would the Project disturb
any human remains, including those
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
RR 5-1 The Project shall comply with the
applicable provisions of California Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 as well as Public
Resources Code Section 5097 et. seq., which
requires the County Coroner be contacted if
human remains are discovered. If the Coroner
recognizes the human remains to be those of a
Native American, or has reason to believe that
they are those of a Native American, the
Coroner is required to contact the NAHC by
telephone within 24 hours. Whenever the
NAHC receives notification of a discovery of
Native American human remains from a county
coroner, the NAHC is required to immediately
notify those persons it believes to be most likely
descended from the deceased Native American.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.6 ENERGY
Threshold a: Would the Project result in
potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or
operation?
PDF 8-1 Office space within the warehouses
shall be insulated with a minimum R-13 value
in the walls and R-30 in the attic, and all
windows will have a minimum 0.57 U -factor
and 0.32 SHGC or greater.
PDF 8-2 All roofs within the Project shall be
rated at 0.15 aged solar reflectance and 0.75
thermal emittance or greater.
PDF 8-3Occupant sensing lighting that dims to
at least 50% when unoccupied shall be installed
within the interior areas of warehouses. All
interior lighting shall be LED lighting with 40
lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50
lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, and 60
lumens/watt for all fixtures exceeding 40 watts.
PDF 8-4Office space heating within
warehouses must utilize heat pumps with
ducting insulation of R-4.2 or greater.
PDF 8-5Tenant lease agreements for the Project
shall include contractual language restricting
trucks and support equipment from nonessential
idling longer than 3 minutes while on site in
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
exceedance of the City of Beaumont Idling
Ordinance.
Threshold b: Would the Project conflict
with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Threshold a: Would the Project 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?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42; strong seismic
ground shaking; seismic -related ground
failure, including liquefaction; landslides?
RR 7-1 The Project shall comply with CBSC
(Chapter 18) (adopted by the City of Beaumont
as Municipal Code Section 15.04.010) and
Municipal Code Section 17.11.040, which
requires development projects to evaluate and
identify site -specific geologic and seismic
conditions. The report must provide site -specific
recommendations to preclude adverse effects
involving unstable soils and strong seismic
ground -shaking, including, but not limited to,
recommendations related to ground
stabilization, selection of appropriate foundation
type and design criteria, and selection of
appropriate structural systems.
RR 7-2 Prior to grading plan approval and the
first issuance of a grading permit for the
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development,
the Project proponent shall provide evidence to
the City that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been
filed with the Regional Water Quality Control
Board for coverage under the State National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) General Construction Permit for
discharge of stormwater associated with
construction activities.
RR 7-3 Prior to grading plan approval and the
first issuance of a grading permit by the City for
the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
development, the Project proponent shall submit
to the City of Beaumont a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall
include a surface water control plan and
erosion -control plan citing specific measures to
control erosion during the entire grading and
construction period. Additionally, the SWPPP
shall identify structural and non-structural Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to control
sediment and nonvisible discharges from the
site. BMPs to be implemented in the SWPPP
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
may include (but shall not be limited to) the
following:
•Sediment discharges from the site may be
controlled by the following:
❑ Perimeter protection to prevent sediment
discharges through silt fences, fiber rolls, gravel
bag berms, sand bag barriers, and compost
socks.
❑ Sediment capture and drainage control
through sediment traps, storm drain inlet
protection, and sediment basins.
❑ Velocity reduction through check dams,
sediment basins, and outlet protection/velocity
dissipation devices.
Reduction in off -site sediment tracking
through stabilized construction entrance/exit,
construction road stabilization, and
entrance/exit tire wash.
❑ Slope interruption at permit -prescribed
intervals (fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag
berms, compost socks, biofilter bags).
•The construction and condition of the BMPs
will be periodically inspected during
construction, and repairs will be made when
necessary, as required by the SWPPP.
•No materials of any kind shall be placed in
drainage ways.
•Materials that could contribute nonvisible
pollutants to stormwater must be contained,
elevated, and placed in temporary storage
containment areas.
•All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris,
and other earthen material shall be protected per
RWQCB standards to eliminate any discharge
from the site. Stockpiles will be surrounding by
silt fences.
•The SWPPP will include inspection forms for
routine monitoring of the site during the
construction phase to ensure NPDES
compliance.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
•Additional BMPs and erosion -control measures
will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized
if necessary.
•The SWPPP will be kept on -site for the entire
duration of project construction and will also be
available to the local RWQCB for inspection at
any time.
In the event that it is not feasible to implement
the above BMPs, the City of Beaumont can
make a determination that other BMPs will
provide equivalent or superior treatment either
on or off -site.
RR 7-4 Prior to grading plan approval and
issuance of a grading permit by the City of
Beaumont for the Beaumont Pointe Specific
Plan development, the Project proponent shall
receive approval from the City of Beaumont for
Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final
WQMP). The Final WQMP shall specifically
identify pollution -prevention, site -design,
source -control, and treatment -control BMPs that
shall be used on -site to control predictable
pollutant runoff to reduce impacts to water
quality to the maximum extent practicable.
Source control BMPs to be implemented in the
Final WQMP may include (but shall not be
limited to) those listed in Table G.1 of the
Preliminary WQMP (Technical Appendix I2).
Treatment -control BMPs shall include on -site
detention/sand filtration basins to treat the site's
runoff; these facilities shall be maintained and
inspected at least twice per year and prior to
October 1. Additional BMPs will be
documented in the WQMP and utilized if
necessary. In the event that it is not feasible to
implement the BMPs identified in the Final
WQMP, the City of Beaumont can make a
determination that other BMPs provide
equivalent or superior treatment either on or off -
site.
Threshold b: Would the Project result in
substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
RR 7-1 through RR 7-4 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Threshold c: Would the Project be
located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable
as a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse?
RR 7-1 through RR 7-4 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project 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?
RR 7-1 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold e: Would the Project 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?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold f: Would the Project directly
or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
N/A
MM 4.7-1 Prior to issuance of grading permits, the Project Applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist. Paleontological monitoring of the young alluvial fan deposits is not
warranted, since their potential to yield fossils is low.
However, if, during earth disturbance activities, the San Timoteo Foundation or older Quaternary alluvial deposits is exposed beneath the overlying young alluvial fan
deposits, monitoring should be initiated during periods in which the San Timoteo Formation or older Quaternary
alluvial deposits will be impacted. Monitoring shall be conducted during any grading or excavation in
undisturbed sediments of the San Timoteo Foundation.
Complete grading plans for each phase shall be made
available to the City of Beaumont and to the
paleontologist/ paleontological monitor prior to the start of any earth -moving activities for each phase.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
grading permits
Less than Significant
Impact
MM 4.7-2 Prior to initiation of any grading and/or excavation activities, a preconstruction meeting shall be held and attended by the paleontologist of record, representatives of the grading contractor and subcontractors, the project owner or developer, and a representative of the lead
agency. The nature of potential paleontological resources shall be discussed, as well as the protocol that is to be implemented following discovery of any fossiliferous
materials.
Project Paleontologist
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to grading
and/or excavation
activities
MM 4.7-3 Paleontological monitors shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays.
Project Paleontologist
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During
construction
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
The monitor shall be empowered to temporarily halt or
divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large
specimens in a timely manner. Monitoring may be
reduced if the potentially fossiliferous units are not
present in the subsurface, or if present, are determined upon exposure and examination by qualified
paleontological personnel to have low potential to contain fossil resources. Fossil discovery and salvage shall occur as follows:
a) Notification of fossil discoveries shall be immediately reported by the paleontologist or paleontological
monitor to the City of Beaumont, the Project owner or
developer, and the consulting company overseeing
development of the Project.
b) Paleontological salvage shall complete with
professional standard protocols, as detailed in Section VII, Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation
Program in Technical Appendix F2 of this Draft EIR.
c) In the laboratory, individual fossils shall be cleaned of extraneous matrix, any breaks are repaired, and the
specimen, if needed, is stabilized by soaking in an
archivally approved acrylic hardener (e.g., a solution of acetone and Paraloid B-72).
d) The recovered specimens shall be prepared to a point of identification and permanent preservation (not
display), including screen -washing of sediments to
recover small invertebrates and vertebrates.
e) The prepared specimens, along with relevant
information, shall be curated into a professional,
accredited public museum repository with a
commitment to archival conservation and permanent
retrievable storage (e.g., the Western Science Center in Hemet, California). The paleontological program
should include a written repository agreement prior to
the initiation of mitigation activities. The City of
Beaumont may select another repository if it so desires. f) A final monitoring and mitigation report of findings and significance, including lists of all fossils recovered and necessary maps and graphics to accurately record
their original location, shall be prepared. The report, when submitted to, and accepted by, the City of
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Beaumont, shall signify satisfactory completion of the
project program to mitigate impacts to any potential
non-renewable paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) that might have been lost or otherwise adversely
affected without such a program in place.
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS •
Threshold a: Would the Project generate
greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
PDFs 8-1 through 8-5 shall apply.
MMs 4.3-3 through 4.3-17 shall apply.
MM 4.8-1 Prior to issuance of building permits, the Project shall provide documentation to the City as part of the plan
check process, demonstrating that the Project will
implement measures identified in the Riverside County
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables. 2019 up to
a minimum of 1,850 points. The Project may also achieve equivalent emission reductions from other measures
approved by the City. Implementing these mitigation
measures shall be verified by the City prior to the
issuance of final Certificate of Occupancy.
Refer to MMs 4.3-3
through 4.3-17
above.
Project Applicant
Refer to MMs 4.3-3
through 4.3-17
above.
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Refer to MMs 4.3-
3 through 4.3-17
above.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
MM 4.8-2 The Project shall prohibit the use of natural gas in the industrial and warehouse components of the Project
within Planning Areas 4 through 8, which shall be
verified during plan check.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
During Plan Check
Process
Threshold b: Would the Project conflict
with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
N/A
MMs 4.3-3 through 4.3-17 and MM 4.8-1 shall apply.
Refer to MMs 4.3-3
through 4.3-17 and
4.8-1 above.
Refer to MMs 4.3-3
through 4.3-17 and
4.8-1 above.
Refer to MMs 4.3-
3 through 4.3-17
and 4.8-1 above.
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Threshold a: Would the Project create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project emit
hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Threshold d: Would the Project 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?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold 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?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold f: Would the Project impair
implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
impact
Threshold g: Would the Project expose
people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Threshold a: Would the Project violate
any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality?
RR 10-IPrior to grading plan approval and the
issuance of a grading permit for the Beaumont
Pointe Specific Plan developments, the Project
proponent shall provide evidence to the City
that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with
the Regional Water Quality Control Board for
coverage under the State National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Construction General Permit for discharge of
stormwater associated with construction
activities.
RR 10-2Prior to grading plan approval and the
first issuance of a grading permit by the City for
the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
development, the Project proponent shall submit
to the City of Beaumont a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall
include a surface water control plan and
erosion -control plan citing specific measures to
control erosion during the entire grading and
construction period. Additionally, the SWPPP
shall identify structural and non-structural Best
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Management Practices (BMPs) to control
sediment and nonvisible discharges from the
site. BMPs to be implemented in the SWPPP
may include (but shall not be limited to) the
following:
•Sediment discharges from the site may be
controlled by the following:
-Perimeter protection to prevent sediment
discharges through silt fences, fiber rolls, gravel
bag berms, sand bag barriers, and compost
socks;
-Sediment capture and drainage control through
sediment traps, storm drain inlet protection, and
sediment basins;
-Velocity reduction through check dams,
sediment basins, and outlet protection/velocity
dissipation devices;
-Reduction in off -site sediment tracking through
stabilized construction entrance/exit,
construction road stabilization, and
entrance/exit tire wash;
-Slope interruption at permit -prescribed
intervals (fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag
berms, compost socks, biofilter bags).
•The construction and condition of the BMPs
will be periodically inspected during
construction, and repairs will be made when
necessary as required by the SWPPP.
•No materials of any kind shall be placed in
drainage ways.
•Materials that could contribute nonvisible
pollutants to stormwater must be contained,
elevated, and placed in temporary storage
containment areas.
•All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris,
and other earthen material shall be protected per
RWQCB standards to eliminate any discharge
from the site. Stockpiles will be surrounding by
silt fences.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
•The SWPPP will include inspection forms for
routine monitoring of the site during the
construction phase to ensure NPDES
compliance.
•Additional BMPs and erosion -control measures
will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized
if necessary.
•The SWPPP will be kept on site for the entire
duration of project construction and will also be
available to the local RWQCB for inspection at
any time.
In the event that it is not feasible to implement
the above BMPs, the City of Beaumont can
make a determination that other BMPs will
provide equivalent or superior treatment either
on or off site.
RR 10-3Prior to the issuance of each grading
permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase
of the Project, the Project proponent shall
provide evidence to the City that the following
provisions have been added to the construction
contracts for the proposed work:
•The Construction Contractor shall be
responsible for performing and documenting the
application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP.
Weekly inspections shall be performed on
sediment -control measures called for in the
SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained by
the Contractor and submitted to the City for
inspection. In addition, the Contractor will also
be required to maintain an inspection log and
have the log on site to be reviewed by the City
of Beaumont and the representatives of the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
RR 10-4Prior to issuance of each grading
permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase
of the Project, the Project proponent shall
receive approval from the City of Beaumont of
a Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final
WQMP). The Final WQMP shall specifically
identify pollution -prevention, site -design,
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
source -control, and treatment -control BMPs that
shall be used on site to control predictable
pollutant runoff to reduce impacts to water
quality to the maximum extent practicable after
construction is completed and after the facilities
or structures are occupied and/or operational.
Source control BMPs to be implemented in the
Final WQMP may include (but shall not be
limited to) those listed in Table 4.10-3.
Treatment -control BMPs shall include on -site
detention/sand filtration basins to treat the site's
runoff; these facilities shall be maintained and
inspected at least twice per year and prior to
October 1. Additional BMPs will be
documented in the WQMP and utilized if
necessary. In the event that it is not feasible to
implement the BMPs identified in the Final
WQMP, the City of Beaumont can make a
determination that other BMPs shall provide
equivalent or superior treatment either on or off
site.
RR 10-5Prior to the issuance of each building
permit for the Project, the Project proponent
shall provide evidence to the City that the
Project complies with the requirements of the
RWQCB Municipal Permit General MS4
Permit. The MS4 Permit requirements for new
development calls for compliance with water
quality regulatory requirements applicable to
stormwater runoff and waste discharge.
Specifically, the MS4 permit would require the
Project proponent to develop and implement a
comprehensive Stormwater Management
Program (SWMP) that must include pollution
prevention measures, treatment or removal
techniques, monitoring, use of legal authority,
and other appropriate measures to control the
quality of stormwater discharged to the storm
drains.
Threshold b: Would the Project
substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
Threshold c: Would the Project
substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would: result in substantial erosion or
siltation on or off site; substantially
increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on or off site; create or
contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted
runoff; or impeded or redirect flood
flows?
RR 10-1 through RR 10-5 shall apply.
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project in flood
hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold e: Would the Project conflict
with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Threshold a: Would the Project
physically divide an established
community
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
impact
Threshold b: Would the Project cause a
significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental
effect?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Threshold a: Would the Project result in
the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the
region or the residents of the State?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project result in
the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan,
specific plan or other land use plan?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
4.13 NOISE
Threshold a: Would the Project generate
substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
N/A
No feasible mitigation measures exist.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project generate
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: For a project located within
the vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of
a public airport or public use airport,
would the Project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Threshold a: Would the Project induce
substantial unplanned population growth
in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through extension
of roads or other infrastructure?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project displace
substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Threshold a: Would the Project result in
substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities or
the need for new or physically altered
governmental facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire Protection Services;
ii. Police Protection Services;
iii. School Services;
iv. Parks; or
v. Other Public Facilities
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
4.16 RECREATION
Threshold a: Would the Project increase
the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Threshold a: Would the Project conflict
with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
RR 17-IPrior to issuance of any building
permits, the Project Applicant shall make
required per -unit fee payments associated with
the Western Riverside County Transportation
Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF) and the City
of Beaumont Development Impact Fee (DIF).
RR 17-2Prior to the issuance of grading or
building permits, the Project Applicant shall
prepare and the City of Beaumont shall approve,
a temporary traffic control plan for construction.
The temporary traffic control plan shall comply
with the applicable requirements of the
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices. A requirement to comply with the
temporary traffic control plan shall be noted on
all grading and building plans and also shall be
specified in bid documents issued to prospective
construction contractors.
MM 4.17-2 Prior to the issuance of occupancy permits for the first buildings in Planning Areas 4-8 (i.e., industrial/warehouse buildings), the Project Applicant shall prepare and submit a Truck Traffic Demand Management Plan to the Planning
Depaitciient for approval in order to prohibit Project trucks from driving on Oak Valley Parkway or on Potrero
Boulevard north of the Potrero/SR-60 Interchange. The
Truck Traffic Demand Management Plan shall include, but is not limited to the following:
• Lease provisions clearly identifying the required truck routes;
• CC&R restrictions with financial penalties for violations and City ability to enforce as third -party beneficiary; • Truck route maps provided to all drivers and posted in breakrooms and throughout the Project;
• Designation of a Traffic Coordinator contact for the City to notify in the event of traffic issues;
• Annual reports to the City's Planning Department.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Planning Department
Prior to issuance of
occupancy permits
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project conflict
or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
N/A
MM 4.17-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Project Applicant shall incorporate the TDM measures identified below. Verification that the TDM measures completed
shall be verified by the City's Public Works Director.
a. Where applicable ensure design of key intersections and roadways encourage the use of walking, biking and,
where applicable, transit.
b. Collaborate with the Riverside Transit Authority (RTA) to determine the feasibility of providing new or re-route existing transit services to the site.
c. Commute trip reduction (CTR) programs offered to
encourage the use of biking.
Project Applicant
City of Beaumont
Department of Public
Works
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Significant and
Unavoidable Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
d. Encourage CTR programs may also provide for
alternative work or compressed work schedules to
reduce the number of days an employee commutes to
work.
Threshold c: Would the Project
substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project result in
inadequate emergency access?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Threshold a: Would the project cause a
substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code Section
21074 as either a site, feature, place,
cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of
the landscape, sacred place, or object with
cultural value to a California Native
American tribe, and that is:
1) Listed or eligible for listing
in the California
Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local
register of historical
resources as defined in
Public Resources Code
Section 5020.1(k), or
2) A resource determined by
the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the
criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency
shall consider the
significance of the resource
RR 18-1Inadvertent Discovery of Human
Remains. Should human remains and/or
cremations be encountered on the surface or
during any and all ground -disturbing activities
(i.e., clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal,
grading, trenching, fence post placement and
removal, construction excavation, excavation
for all water supply, electrical, and irrigation
lines, and landscaping phases of any kind),
work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery
shall immediately stop within a 100 -foot
perimeter of the discovery. The area shall be
protected; project personnel/observers will be
restricted. The County Coroner is to be
contacted within 24 hours of discovery. The
County Coroner has 48 hours to make his/her
determination pursuant to State and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98.
In the event that the human remains and/or
cremations are identified as Native American,
the Coroner shall notify the Native American
Heritage Commission within 24 hours of
determination pursuant to subdivision (c) of
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5.
The Native American Heritage Commission
shall immediately notify the person or persons it
believes to be the Most Likely Descendant
(MLD). The MLD has 48 hours, upon being
granted access to the Project site, to inspect the
site of discovery and make his/her
recommendation for final treatment and
MMs 4.5-1 and 4.5-2 shall apply.
Refer to MMs 4.5-1
and 4.5-2 above.
Refer to MMs 4.5-1
and 4.5-2 above.
Refer to MMs 4.5-
1 and 4.5-2 above.
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
to a California Native
American tribe?
disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the
remains and all associated grave goods pursuant
to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98
Unless otherwise required by law, the site of
any reburial of Native American human remains
or associated grave goods shall not be disclosed
and shall not be governed by public disclosure
requirements of the California Public Records
Act. Pursuant to the specific exemption set forth
in California Government Code Section 6254(r),
the sheriff -coroner, parties, and lead agencies
will be asked to withhold public disclosure
information related to such reburial.
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Threshold a: Would the Project require
or result in the relocation or construction
of new or expanded water, wastewater
treatment or stormwater drainage, electric
power, natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or relocation of
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project have
sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project result in
a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's
existing commitments?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project generate
solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold e: Would the Project comply
with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
Potential Impacts
Regulatory Requirements (RR) and Project
Design Features (PDF)
Mitigation Measures (MMs)
Responsible Party
Monitoring Party
Implementation
Stage
Level of Significance
After MMs, RRs,
and PDFs
4.20 WILDFIRE
Threshold a: Would the Project
substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
No Impact
Threshold b: Would the Project, due to
slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildlife risks, and thereby
expose Project occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold c: Would the Project require
the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines, or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Threshold d: Would the Project expose
people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post -fire instability or drainage
change?
N/A
No mitigation is required.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Less than Significant
Impact
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the:
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
State Clearinghouse No. 2020099007
Lead Agency
City of Beaumont
550 East 6th Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
CEQA Consultant
T&B Planning, Inc.
3200 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92602
Lead Agency Discretionary Permits
General Plan Amendment PLAN2019-0284
Pre -Zone PLAN2019-0283
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan SP2019-0003
Beaumont Pointe Sign Program PLAN2022-0856
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 38161 PM2022-0012
Development Agreement PLAN2023-0906
Minor Amendment to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
March 2024
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Table of Contents
Section Page
1.0 Introduction and Purpose 3
1.1 Findings Required Under CEQA 3
1.2 Project Summary 4
1.3 Environmental Review and Public Participation 8
2.0 Environmental Impacts and Findings 12
3.0 Environmental Impacts not Requiring Mitigation 13
3.1 Aesthetics 13
3.2 Agricultural and Forestry Resources 19
3.3 Air Quality 23
3.4 Biological Resources 30
3.5 Cultural Resources 31
3.6 Energy 34
3.7 Geology and Soils 38
3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials 48
3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality 60
3.10 Land Use and Planning 73
3.11 Mineral Resources 76
3.12 Noise 78
3.13 Population and Housing 84
3.14 Public Services 89
3.15 Recreation 96
3.16 Transportation 99
3.17 Utilities and Service Systems 105
3.18 Wildfire 115
4.0 Environmental Impacts Mitigated to a Level of Less -than -Significant 130
4.1 Biological Resources 130
4.2 Cultural Resources 143
4.3 Geology and Soils 146
4.4 Tribal Cultural Resources 150
5.0 Environmental Impacts That Remain Significant and Unavoidable After Mitigation 154 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Page 1
"ATTACHMENT 1"
5.1 Air Quality 154
5.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 168
5.3 Noise 198
5.4 Transportation 203
6.0 Other CEQA Considerations 208
6.1 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes 208
6.2 Growth -Inducing Impacts 209
7.0 Alternatives 214
8.0 General CEQA Findings 229
9.0 Statement of Overriding Considerations 231
10.0 Additional Facts on Record 243
10.1 Custodian of Record 243
Attachments
Exhibit A — Fiscal Impact Analysis
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT I"
1 .0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The 539.9 -acre Project site, as described under Section 1.2.1 below, is in unincorporated Riverside County at the western edge of the City and in the City's sphere of influence. The City of Beaumont (the "City") in approving the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project (the "Project") makes the Findings described below. The Findings are based upon the entire record before the City, as described in Subsection 1.3 below, including the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the Project with the City acting as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA").
Hereafter, the Notice of Preparation ("NOP"), Notice of Availability ("NOA"), Draft EIR ("DEIR"), Technical Studies, and Final EIR ("FEIR") (containing responses to public comments on the DEIR and textual revisions to the FEIR), will be referred to collectively herein as the "EIR" unless otherwise specified.
1 .1 FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
Public Resources Code Section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects[.]" The statute also provides that the procedures required by CEQA are "intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects." Finally, Section 21002 indicates that "in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof."
The mandate described in Public Resources Code Section 21002 is implemented, in part, through the requirement that for projects with one or more significant environmental effects, agencies must adopt written findings before approving projects for which EIRs are required. For each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. The second finding is that such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. The third finding is that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, legal, and technological factors." As stated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 (a), "[i]f the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered 'acceptable.'"
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
1 .2 PROJECT SUMMARY
1 .2.1 SITE LOCATION
The 539.9 -acre Project site is located in unincorporated Riverside County at the western edge of the City and in the City's sphere of influence. The City is located east of the City of Moreno Valley and unincorporated Riverside County, west of the City of Banning and unincorporated Riverside County, north of the City of San Jacinto and unincorporated Riverside County, and south of the City of Calimesa and unincorporated Riverside County. The Project site is situated astride the regional transportation network which connects the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, both major gateways for international trade, to the Inland Empire and the Western United States. State Highway (SR -60) abuts the Project site to the north, Interstate 10 (I-10) is located approximately 1.5 miles to the north of the site, and Interstate 79 (I-79) is located approximately 1.5 miles to the east of the site. The Project site is located west of Jack Rabbit Trail and south of SR -60.
1.2.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The Project Applicant, JRT BP 1 LLC, proposes to entitle and develop the Project on a 539.9 -acre undeveloped site (Project site or site) and allow for the development on the Project site of a maximum of 246,000 square feet (sf) of general commercial uses in addition to a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf) and a maximum of 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses. The Project would provide 124.7 acres of open space to accommodate landscaped manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, and natural open space as a buffer to adjacent conservation area and 152.4 acres of open space — conservation. The Project would conserve a total of 230.82 acres of lands that would support the function of Proposed Core 3 consistent with the MSHCP goals of providing live-in habitat and facilitating movement, including 152.42 acres on site and 78.40 acres off site. This 78.40 -acre off -site area is outside of the Project boundary and is in Riverside County and not within the City's SOI. Associated improvements to the Project site would include, but are not limited to, paved roads, paved parking areas, drive aisles, truck courts, utility infrastructure, landscaping, water quality basins, signage, lighting, property walls, gates, and fencing, including perimeter fencing for the Project site.
The Project is primarily defined by the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan. The Specific Plan is also available for review at the City's Planning Division at 550 East 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 and on the City's website. The Specific Plan identifies ten (10) Planning Areas (PAs), of which two (2) are identified and zoned for General Commercial uses (PAs 1 and 2), six (6) are identified and zoned for Industrial uses (PAs 3 through 8), and the remaining two PAs are identified and zoned for Open Space (PA 9) and Open Space — Conservation (PA 10).
1.2.3 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The fundamental purpose and goal of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan is to accomplish the orderly development of General Commercial, Industrial, Open Space, and Open Space -Conservation land uses over the approximately 539.9 -acre Project site. The Project would achieve this goal through the following Project Objectives:
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
1. Develop large land areas in the City and particularly south of SR -60 and adjacent to existing industrial uses, infrastructure, and truck routes to meet the growing demand for large scale industrial and warehouse development in the City while minimizing impacts of industrial development on residential and other sensitive receptors in the City, which are primarily located north of SR -60.
2. Providing for conservation of open space habitat within MSHCP criteria cells in a manner consistent with the MSHCP requirements and providing access for wildlife movement to Caltrans constructed and proposed wildlife under -crossings along the SR -60 Freeway that abut the northern Project boundary to accommodate wildlife movement.
3. Maximizing opportunities to develop land in the City's sphere of influence to provide job opportunities and economic benefit to the City and its residents, including new sales and property tax revenues that can be used for City services and providing sufficient fiscal benefit to permit annexation of the Project site into the City.
4. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont which improve the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.
5. Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness -based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants.
6. Developing a center that will accommodate a variety of future tenants, including light manufacturing, warehouse, distribution tenants, and other businesses that rely on transportation efficiency within an industrial corridor in a location with superior access to the local and regional transportation network, thereby minimizing truck traffic on local streets and reducing vehicle miles traveled in the region.
7. Developing a project that utilizes existing investment in capital improvements for water, reclaimed water, sewer, storm drain and circulation facilities to further the planned development of land in the City and in its sphere of influence.
8. Developing a range of warehouse facility options, such as varying structure sizes and building configurations within the City with high quality businesses to facilitate local and regional distribution of goods while minimizing vehicle miles traveled, air quality, and greenhouse gas impacts.
9. Minimizing the demand for water resources by creating a development -wide landscape concept that features drought -tolerant plant materials to provide for an aesthetically pleasing outdoor environment and developing a project where recycled water is planned to be available.
1.2.4 CITY OF BEAUMONT ACTIONS COVERED BY THE EIR
The following discretionary and administrative actions are required of the City to implement the Project. The EIR prepared for the Project covers all discretionary and administrative approvals which Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
may be needed to construct or implement the Project, whether or not they are explicitly listed. They include:
• General Plan Amendment (PLAN2019-0284)
• Pre -Zone (PLAN2019-0283)
• Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (SP2019-0003)
• Beaumont Pointe Sign Program (PLAN2022-0856)
• Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (VTPM) No. 38161 (PM2022-0012) • Development Agreement (PLAN2023-0906)
• Approval by the City and LAFCO of annexation to the City of Beaumont and approval by BCVWD and LAFCO of annexation to the Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District • Minor Amendment to the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
1.2.5 APPROVALS FROM OTHER AGENCIES
The California Public Resource Code (Section 21104) requires that all EIRs be reviewed by responsible and trustee agencies (see also CEQA Guidelines Section 15082 and Section 15086(a)). As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15381, "the term `Responsible Agency' includes all public agencies other than the Lead Agency which have discretionary approval power over the project." A "Trustee Agency" is defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15386 as "a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California." The anticipated agencies expected to use the EIR are described below. However, the EIR can be used by any Trustee Agency or Responsible Agency, whether identified in the EIR or not, as part of their decision -making processes in relation to the proposed Project.
Public Agency
Approvals and Decisions
City of Beaumont
Proposed Project — City of Beaumont Discretionary Approvals Planning Commission
• Provide recommendation to the Beaumont City
Council regarding whether to certify the Project's EIR. • Provide recommendations to the Beaumont City
Council regarding whether to approve:
o General Plan Amendment (PLAN2019-0284),
o Pre -Zone (PLAN2019-0283).
o Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (SP2019-0003),
o Beaumont Pointe Sign Program (PLAN2022-
0856)
o Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
o Development Agreement
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Public Agency
Approvals and Decisions'
City Council
• Certify the Project's EIR (ENV2019-0008) and adopt
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
• Approval or Adoption of:
o General Plan Amendment (PLAN2019-0284),
o Pre -Zone (PLAN2019-0283).
o Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (SP2019-0003),
o Beaumont Pointe Sign Program (PLAN2022-
0856)
o Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
o Development Agreement
City of Beaumont
• Annexation Application
• Joint Project Review (as Permittee)
• Minor Amendment to the MSHCP (submitted by the
City with approval by the Wildlife Agencies)
Subsequent City of Beaumont Discretionary and Ministerial Approvals City of Beaumont
Subsequent Implementing Approvals
• Approve Final Phased Parcel Maps
• Approve Plot Plans
• Approve Landscaping/Irrigation Plan
• Approve Conditional or Temporary Use Permits, if
required.
• Issue Grading Permits
• Issue Building Permits
• Approve Road Improvement Plans
• Approve Infrastructure Plans
• Issue Encroachment Permits
• Approve public right-of-way dedications
• Approve Water Quality Management Plan
• Approve connections to the municipal sewer system
Responsible Agencies — Approvals and Permits
Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD)
• Annexation
• Adoption of the Water Supply Assessment
• Approvals for construction of water infrastructure and connection to water distribution system.
Eastern Municipal Water District
• Approvals for construction of sewer infrastructure and connection to sewer distribution system.
Riverside County Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO)
• Approval of the BCVWD and City annexation
applications.
Western Riverside County Regional Conservation
Authority
• Approval of Criteria Refinement
• Minor Amendment to the MSHCP
• Approval of Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition
Negotiation Strategy
• Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior
Preservation
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)
• Issuance of a Construction Activity General
Construction Permit.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Public Agency
Approvals and Decisions
•
Issuance of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Permit.
•
Issuance of a Section 401 Permit pursuant to the Clean
Water Act
Riverside County Flood Control and Water
•
Approval of master plan of drainage infrastructure
Conservation District
Southern California Gas Company and Southern
•
Issuance of approvals necessary for the installation of California Edison
new SoCalGas and SCE facilities/connections to
service the Project.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
•
Issuance of permits that allow for the construction and operation of the proposed Project.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
•
Issuance of a Section 404 Permit pursuant to the Clean
Water Act
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
•
Approval of Criteria Refinement
•
Minor Amendment to the MSHCP
•
Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior
Preservation
•
Trustee Agencies — Approvals and Permits
Native American Heritage Commission
•
Ensuring California Native American tribes have
accessibility to ancient Native American cultural
resources on public lands overseeing the treatment and
disposition of inadvertently discovered Native
American human remains and burial items, and
administering the California Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
•
Approval of Criteria Refinement
•
Minor Amendment to the MSHCP
•
Determination of Biologically Equivalent or Superior
Preservation
•
Issuance of a Section 1602 Streambed Alteration
Agreement
1 .3 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City conducted an extensive environmental review of the Project to ensure that the City's decision makers and the public are fully informed about the potential significant environmental effects of the Project; to identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; and to prevent significant, avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in the Project using mitigation measures which have been found to be feasible. To do this, the City, acting as lead agency under CEQA, undertook the following:
• Circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) to the California Office of Planning and Research (the "State Clearinghouse"), Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other interested parties on September 7, 2020 for a 30 -day review period between September 7, 2020 and October 6, 2020;
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
• The NOP was posted on the City's website and Beaumont City Hall Planning Department, and at the Riverside County Clerk's office on September 7, 2020; • The NOP was posted at the Riverside County Clerk's office on September 2, 2020 • Published the NOP in the Press -Enterprise Newspaper, which is the newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the Project, Publish Date September 7, 2020; • Held a publicly noticed EIR Scoping Meeting via teleconference communications (live streaming), recorded for the City's official YouTube webpage, and open to public attendance subject to social distancing and applicable health orders, on September 17, 2020, to solicit comments from the public on the environmental issue areas that should be analyzed in the EIR; • Sent a Notice of Availability (NOA) and Notice of Completion (NOC) and electronic copies of the DEIR to the California Office of Planning and Research, State Clearinghouse, on December 21, 2022;
• Mailed via certified mail a copy of the NOA to all Responsible Agencies, Trustee Agencies, and other interested parties and organizations to inform recipients that the DEIR was available for a 45 -day review period beginning on December 22, 2022, and ending on February 8, 2023; • The NOA was posted on the City's website and at the Riverside County Clerk's office on December 21, 2022;
• Published the NOA in the Press -Enterprise Newspaper, which is the newspaper of general circulation in the area affected by the Project, on December 22, 2022; • The DEIR was posted on the City's website at https://www.beaumontca.gov/1143/Beaumont- Pointe-SpecificPlan during the public review period for the DEIR. • Prepared responses to comments on the DEIR received during the 45 -day comment period on the DEIR, which have been included in the FEIR;
• Distributed the FEIR, including individual responses to agencies that commented on the DEIR on November 17, 2023; and
• Held a Planning Commission hearing on November 29, 2023; • Held a Planning Commission hearing on January 10, 2024; • Held a City Council hearing on March 19, 2024.
For the purposes of CEQA and the Findings herein set forth the Record of Proceedings for the Project and consists of those items listed in CEQA Section 21167.6(e), along with other items contained within the City's files that are relevant to the consideration of the Project. The Record of Proceedings for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
City's decision on the Project consists of the following documents, at a minimum and without limitation, which are herein incorporated by reference and made part of the record supporting these Findings:
• The Notice of Preparation, Notice of Availability, and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the Project;
• The DEIR for the Project and all technical appendices and documents cited, relied upon or incorporated by reference;
• All written comments submitted by agencies, organizations, or members of the public during the public review comment period on the DEIR and the City's responses to those comments (FEIR), as well as the Memoranda entitled: "Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan — Supplemental CEQA Memorandum" (herein "Supplemental CEQA Memorandum"), and "Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project — Response to Comment Letter" (comments from the Sierra Club), and other responses provided to address late comments;
• The DEIR for the Project and all technical appendices and documents cited, relied upon or incorporated by reference;
• The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project; • All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the City or consultants to the City with respect to the City's compliance with the requirements of CEQA and with respect to the City's action on the Project; • All documents submitted to the City by public agencies, organizations or members of the public in connection with the DEIR, up through the close of the public review period for the project on February 8, 2023;
• Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the Project; • Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information sessions, public meetings, and public hearings;
• All findings and resolutions adopted by the City regarding the project, all documents, cited or referred to therein and all staff reports, analyses, and summaries related to the adoption of those resolutions;
• Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state, and local laws and regulations;
• Any documents expressly cited in these Findings, in addition to those cited above; and any other materials required for the record of proceedings by CEQA Section 21167.6(e).
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
All the documents identified above and all the documents which constitute the Record of Proceedings for the City's actions related to the Project and are required to be part of the record pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e) are located at the City, 550 East 6th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223, Department of Planning. Questions should be directed to Carole L. Kendrick, Planning Manager.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT I"
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS
The EIR was prepared by T&B Planning, Inc., an independent, professional consulting firm. The professional qualifications and reputation of the EIR Consultant, the supervision and direction of the EIR Consultant by City staff, the thorough and independent peer review of the DEIR and DEIR, including comments and responses by City staff, and the review and careful consideration of the DEIR by the City, including comments and responses; all conclusively show that the DEIR is the product of and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the City as the Lead Agency.
Based on the NOP, Technical Appendix A to the DEIR, and the responses of the NOP, the EIR analyzed 20 potential areas where significant environmental impacts could result from implementation of the Project. These environmental topics were analyzed in the EIR and include aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.
Having received, reviewed, and considered the information in the DEIR, as well as any and all other information in the record, the City hereby makes findings pursuant to and in accordance with CEQA Sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21081.6.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT I"
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS NOT REQUIRING MITIGATION
The City hereby finds that the following potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project are less -than -significant and therefore do not require the imposition of mitigation measures.
3.1 AESTHETICS
Project impacts for Aesthetics do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.1.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES The Project will comply with Regulatory Requirements and Project Design Features that serve to reduce any potential impacts to less than significant. RR 1-1, which is applicable regardless of CEQA and would apply to any project under similar circumstances. RR 1-1 does not constitute a mitigation measure but will nonetheless be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure implementation of mandated RRs.
RR 1-1
The Project is required to comply with City of Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter 8.50, which establishes specific design, construction, and performance standards applicable to lighting and lighting fixtures within the City to reduce "skyglow" or light pollution that affects day or nighttime views of the Mt. Palomar Observatory.
The Project includes the following Project Design Feature (PDF 1-1) that serves to reduce the Project's impacts. PDFs will be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure their implementation.
PDF 1-1
Development implementing the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan shall comply with the Development Standards set forth in Chapter 3 and the Design Guidelines related to Architectural Design and Landscape Design in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan.
Conformity to the Development Standards and Design Guidelines would be addressed by the City's future review of implementing building permits for compliance with the Specific Plan's requirements and would serve to reduce and/or avoid impacts relating to aesthetics.
3.1.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.1.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a; therefore, no mitigation is required.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
The City has not designated any portion of the Development Site as a scenic resource. Accordingly, the Development Project will not physically alter a designated scenic resource. With respect to the ability of the Development Project to block a scenic vista, although landforms in mid -ground views (PAs 1-8) would be altered for the development, the Project would not allow grading within PA 10, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and ridgeline background views behind the development. Landform would not change along the north-northeast edge of the Project site between the site's north-northeast property line to the SR -60 Freeway. Additionally, the Project's proposed structures, which would reach a maximum height of 60 feet above finished grade, are not anticipated to block major views to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains due to the Project site's orientation and topography in relation to SR -60 and Frontage Road. Specifically, the topography to the north near SR -60 will be higher than the finished grade building pads for the proposed industrial uses, which would limit the views of the proposed structures from SR -60. Under Project conditions, SR -60 and Frontage Road are anticipated to continue to provide intermittent and partial views to the existing ridgelines.
Proposed signage, due to its small size in comparison to panoramic ridgelines views, would not block views to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains. The southern portion of the Project site and the areas surrounding the proposed structures will be designated as Open Space and Open Space - Conservation, which will also help preserve the scenic views within this area. The Project's proposed Industrial and General Commercial land uses are in proximity to developing areas that are designated for Industrial uses. In accordance with the Beaumont General Plan goals and policies, the Project's design will be reviewed to ensure that the Project is attractive and cohesive, without diminishing the quality of the natural beauty of the general vicinity. The Beaumont General Plan goals and policies are intended to ensure that urbanization of the City will not result in significant visually intrusive or incompatible development. As such, through compliance and implementation of the Beaumont General Plan goals, policies, and implementation strategies, and consistency with the established Specific Plan Development Standards and Design Guidelines and the Sign Program, impacts on scenic vistas would be less than significant. (DEIR pp. 4.1-8 to 4.1-10) View simulations were presented at the Planning Commission Hearing on January 10, 2024 and are shown in the Supplemental CEQA Memorandum submitted by T&B Planning to the City of Beaumont to incorporate changes requested by the Planning Commission and provided to the City Council. These simulations reflect the design grading plan, the conceptual building architecture and colors, and the Landscape Screen Plan with five -years and 10 years of plant growth after initial planting. The view simulations reinforce the analysis of aesthetic impacts in DEIR and the conclusion that there will be no significant visual impact with respect to preservation of scenic views within the area or scenic vistas (Supplemental CEQA Memorandum).
3.1.3 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.1.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts with respect to Threshold b; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
According to the Caltrans List of Eligible and Designated State Scenic Highways, there are no designated or eligible State scenic highways within or adjacent to the Project site. The nearest officially designated State scenic highway is CA -243 located approximately 9.5 miles east of the Project site (Caltrans, 2019). At this distance, the Project would not be within the corridor of CA -243 and would not have any effect on views of the scenic resources available in CA -243 corridor. The nearest eligible State scenic highway is CA -74 located approximately 13.0 miles south of the Project site. Additionally, at this distance the Project would not be within the viewing corridor of this eligible State scenic highway and would not have any effect on views of the scenic resources available from this highway corridor. Accordingly, the Project would not have the potential to substantially damage scenic resources within a State scenic highway and no impacts would occur.
According to Figure C-8, Scenic Highways, of the Riverside County General Plan, the nearest Riverside County eligible scenic highway to the Project site is San Timoteo Canyon Road/Redlands Boulevard, located approximately 2.1 miles northeast. San Timoteo Canyon Road/Redlands Boulevard is an east -west oriented roadway that provides views to San Gorgonio Mountains and San Bernardino Mountains. Due to distance, intervening topography, and the relatively low profile of the Project's proposed structures and signage, the Project is not anticipated to substantially damage scenic resources within the San Timoteo Canyon Road/Redlands Boulevard corridor and impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR pp. 4.1-10 to 4.1-12)
3.1.4 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not, in a non -urbanized area, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.1.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site is within a non -urbanized area of the City's sphere of influence and unincorporated Riverside County. As such, the Project's potential to degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings is analyzed.
The Project site is vacant and undeveloped, consisting of a mixture of flat to rolling terrain along the south side of SR -60, with steep hillsides and various canyons throughout. The Project site includes Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
various unmarked trails and is covered in ground covering, trees, and shrubs. Under existing conditions, the Project site has a rural character and includes natural features that the City classifies as scenic resources. The areas surrounding the Project site include vacant undeveloped land, residential land uses, and industrial/commercial uses. Industrial/commercial uses to the east include the Hidden Canyon Industrial Park project, currently under construction, visible from SR -60 and the Project site.
Due to the topographic constraints of the Project area, public views of the Project site are limited to SR -60 and Frontage Road. There are limited distant views of the Project site from Oak Valley Parkway north of SR -60.
The Project Applicant proposes to develop the 539.9 -acre Project site with Industrial, General Commercial, Open Space and Open Space - Conservation land uses. The conceptual grading design provides for an overall balanced earthwork condition. Development of the Project site would require a substantial amount of earthwork, and earthwork activities are expected to balance on site. The boundary between PA 9 and PA 10 is designated as the "Limits of Disturbance" on the Land Use Plan, meaning that no grading, fuel management, or development activities will occur beyond the location of that line.
Construction activities at the Project site would be visible from public vantage points. The most visible construction activities would occur during mass grading activities, when constructing slopes and leveling higher elevations to create building pads and within PAs 2 and 8, which have the greatest visibility from SR -60. However, overall views of construction activities would be limited due to distance to SR -60 and the surrounding topography. Although landforms in mid -ground views (PAs 1- 8) would be altered for development, no grading would occur between the Project site's north-northeast property line and SR -60 or within PA 10, which would preserve existing foreground landforms along SR -60 and distant ridgeline background views to the south. Specifically, building pad elevations would range from approximately 2,348 to 2,410 feet above msl, while the existing landform between the north -northeastern boundary of the Project site and SR -60 would be maintained with elevations ranging between approximately 2,220 to 2,300 feet above msl.
During grading and construction, various pieces of heavy machinery would be used. All Project -related construction activities would be temporary and all construction equipment would be removed from the Project site following the completion of the Project's construction activities. As such, Project -related changes to local visual character as viewed from SR -60 and Frontage Road during near -term construction activities would be less than significant due to limited views of construction equipment and the low profile of construction equipment compared to future development. The construction of the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the Project site and its surroundings.
Although the Project would convert undeveloped hillside areas to industrial and commercial development, it would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the Project site and its surroundings because the existing hillsides surrounding the Project site would be maintained, limiting views of the development. Additionally, the Project's proposed structures, which would reach a maximum height of 60 feet above finished grade, would not block views to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains due to Project site's Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
orientation and topography in relation to SR -60 and Frontage Road. Additionally, the Project's proposed structures, which would reach a maximum height of 60 feet above finished grade, would not block views to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains due to Project site's orientation and topography in relation to SR -60 and Frontage Road. The Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings.
The Beaumont General Plan goals and policies are intended to ensure that urbanization of the City will not result in substantial degradation to the existing visual character or quality of the Project site and its surroundings. The Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, Project impacts would be less than significant.
The Project does not conflict with any General Plan policies in the land use and community design element. (DEIR pp. 4.1-12 to 4.1-24)
3.1.5 THRESHOLD D
Impact Statement: The Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold d are discussed in detail in Section 4.1.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold d; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Currently, the Project site does not have any sources of artificial light. The Project site is within Zone B of the Mt. Palomar Nighttime Lighting Policy Area (RCIT, 2020). Development projects within Zone B of the Mt. Palomar Nighttime Lighting Policy Area are required to adhere to the requirements of Riverside County Ordinance No. 655, which controls artificial lighting sources to protect the Observatory (Riverside County, 1988). Compliance with the Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 would ensure compliance with Ordinance No. 655.
Implementation of the Project would introduce new sources of light on the Project site that may affect the nighttime sky. Lighting will be installed on buildings and along streets, parking areas, loading dock areas, and pedestrian walkways for the security and safety of future employees and visitors. Exterior lighting fixtures shall be downward directed. Pole -mounted lights shall be shielded with the light source oriented away from public streets, open space, SR -60, and/or adjacent properties. Additionally, new sources of light from glare may also arise from the use of reflective materials on building exteriors from the Project's proposed structures. Industrial building facades may include freeway visible business identification signs, murals, or other visual works to be used to enhance building walls, particularly along SR -60. Murals may include down -lighting only, to allow passing motorists views of the signs or murals. Uplighting is not permitted. Such signs, murals or other visual works are prohibited Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
from including moving, flashing, or otherwise visually distracting elements, or materials that are highly reflective.
According to the Project's Conceptual Lighting Study, which was prepared in compliance with Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter 8.50, lighting generated from the proposed industrial and general commercial uses to the trespass line is at an average of zero footcandles and a maximum of 0.7 footcandles. The trespass line is within the edge of PA 9, which is designated as Open Space and serves as a buffer between the Specific Plan's developed areas and the Open Space — Conservation in PA 10.
No light trespass would reach PA 10. (Visual Concepts Lighting, 2021) Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with the Development Standards and Design Guidelines established in the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (refer to PDF 1-1). The Design Guidelines contain standards related to architecture to provide specific guidance for future implementing development. None of the Project's proposed building materials would consist of large expanses of reflective materials, except for proposed windows, which would not be mirrored and would have low - potential glare characteristics. Compliance with the Development Standards and compliance with the Design Guidelines of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, the Sign Program, and Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 would ensure that all lighting and building design elements proposed by the Project are designed to prevent the creation of substantial light or glare that could affect day or nighttime views in the area, Therefore, the implementation of the Project would not create a new source of substantial light or glare in the area and, as such, the Project's impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR pp.
4.1-24 and 4.1-25)
3.1 .6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts related to aesthetics.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related aesthetics are discussed in detail in Section 4.1.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to aesthetics; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project's potential to result in cumulatively considerable visual quality impacts would be limited to a geographic area that extends a relatively short distance from the Project site. Under existing conditions, the Project site is visible from SR -60 to the north, and Frontage Road to the northeast, which are located at relatively the same elevations as the Project site. Accordingly, for purposes of analysis herein, the Project's cumulative study area for the purposes of scenic vistas is limited to the Project site and immediately surrounding area, as areas beyond this study area would not be in the same viewshed as the Project.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
As previously discussed under Threshold a, the City is within the Pass area. Although the City has not designated the nearby mountain ranges or foothills as scenic vistas, the Pass area does provide scenic vistas to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, San Jacinto Mountains, and Badlands. The implementation of the Project with related projects would not result in substantial adverse effects on scenic vistas, as the orientation of the Project site and the Project's proposed buildings would not substantially obstruct or contribute to the obstruction of views to prominent scenic vistas open to the public and impacts would be less -than -cumulatively considerable. Additionally, the Project and other development projects in the area would be required to comply with the goals, policies, and implementation strategies identified in the Beaumont General Plan, MSHCP and Riverside County General Plan to ensure that urbanization of the City will not result in significant visually intrusive or incompatible development. Therefore, the Project is not anticipated to result in a cumulatively considerable impact on scenic vistas.
As discussed under Threshold b, the Project site is not within or adjacent to any designated or eligible State scenic highway. Therefore, the Project would not have the potential to degrade any scenic resources within a State scenic highway. As such, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact on scenic resources within a State scenic highway.
As discussed under Threshold c, the Project site is within a rural, yet developing portion of the City's SOI. Although the Project would require substantial landform modification and mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project would preserve foreground landforms along the SR - 60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. There are no components of the Project that would substantially degrade public views. The Project would be required to adhere to the Development Standards established in Chapter 3 and Design Guidelines established in Chapter 4 in the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, which contains standards related to architecture, landscaping, walls/fences, and other elements of the physical environment. Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to the visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings.
As discussed under Threshold d, the Project incorporates Development Standards and Design Guidelines for exterior lighting and would be required to comply with the regulations of the City's Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 and the Sign Program. All development to the north and east (development to the west and south being precluded by conservation requirements) in the vicinity of the Project site would be in the City and would also be required to comply with the City's Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 regarding lighting. The Project is designed to ensure that Project lighting elements do not adversely affect nighttime views in the local area. Additionally, there are no components of the Project that would produce substantial amounts of glare, such as mirrored windows or reflective glass.
Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to light and glare. (DEIR pp. 4.1-25 and 4.1-26)
3.2 AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Project impacts for Agricultural and Forestry Resources do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.2.1 THRESHOLDA
Impact Statement: The Project would not 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. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Based on the most recent Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) data available for Riverside County (2016) the Project site does not contain any "Prime Farmland," "Unique Farmland," or "Farmland of Statewide Importance." The majority of the Project site is designated as "Other Land" and the remaining portions (approximately 60.9 acres) of the site, areas located around the northeastern boundary of the Project site and along SR -60, is designated "Farmland of Local Importance" (CDC, 2016b). The Project site has not been used for agriculture. Therefore, the Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the maps pursuant to the FMMP of the California Resource Agency to non-agricultural use, and less than significant impacts would result. (DEIR pp. 4.2-8 and 4.2-9)
3.2.2 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold b; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project is zoned under the County of Riverside as "Controlled Development Area" (W-2-20), which is intended for one -family dwellings but includes a broad number of permitted uses, including light agriculture, aviaries, apiaries, grazing of farm animals, and animal husbandry. Additionally, the W-2-20 zone allows the following with a Plot Plan approval: guest ranches, educational institutions, country clubs, churches, and meat cutting/packing plants without slaughtering. The County of Riverside does not consider W-2-20 to be primarily an agricultural use. Additionally, the Project would result in annexation of the Project site to the City. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use by the City. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
The Project site is not located within an agricultural preserve and is not under a Williamson Act contract (RCIT, 2021); therefore, impacts resulting from a conflicting existing Williamson Act contract would be less than significant. (DEIR p. 4.2-9)
3.2.3 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not 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)).
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site does not contain any 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)). Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberland and would not result in the loss or conversion of forest land. Accordingly, no impacts relating to existing zoning, or rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production would occur. (DEIR p. 4.2-9)
3.2.4 THRESHOLD D
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold d are discussed in detail in Section 5.4.2 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold d; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site and surrounding areas do not consist of forest land. Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of forest land or result in the conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Accordingly, no impact would occur and no further analysis of this topic is required. (DEIR, p. 4.2-9)
3.2.5 THRESHOLD E
Impact Statement: The Project would not 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.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold e are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold e; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project would not result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Additionally, the Project would not result in the indirect conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural use as a result of land use incompatibilities where agricultural and urban uses interface. There are no agricultural uses on the Project site or its surrounding area. The only location in the City with Prime Farmland is the Dowling Farms site, which is now vacant and no longer growing row crops. Therefore, the Project would not result in the conversion of Farmland to non- agricultural uses and no impact would occur.
The Project site and surrounding areas do not consist of forest land; therefore, the Project would not convert forest land to non -forest use.
The Project would not result in changes in the environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Accordingly, no impact would occur and no further analysis of this topic is required. (DEIR, pp. 4.2-9 and 4.2-10)
3.2.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to agricultural and forestry resources.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related agricultural and forestry resources are discussed in detail in Section 4.2.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to agricultural and forestry resources; therefore, no mitigation is required.
❑ Substantial Evidence
This cumulative impact analysis considers development of the proposed Project in conjunction with other development projects and planned development in the Project area.
The proposed Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the maps pursuant to the FMMP of the California Resource Agency to non- agricultural use. Therefore, the Project would not contribute to the cumulative loss of farmland or conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. No cumulative impacts would result.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
The Project site is located in the City's SOI and is not currently zoned by the City. As noted previously, the County of Riverside does not consider W-2-20 to be primarily an agricultural use. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with zoning for an agricultural use. Furthermore, the Project site does not contain a Williamson Contract under existing conditions. Accordingly, the Project would not have cumulative significant impact due to conflicting with a Williamson Contract.
Additionally, there are no forest lands, timberlands, or Timberland Production zones on the Project site or in the Project site's vicinity, nor are any nearby lands under active production as forest land.
Therefore, cumulatively significant impacts to forest land would not occur and the Project has no potential to result in a cumulatively considerable impact to the loss of these lands. (DEIR, p. 4.2-10)
3.3 AIR QuALITY
Project impacts for CEQA Air Quality Thresholds c and d do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.3.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES The Project will comply with Regulatory Requirements RRs 3-1 through 3-3, which are applicable regardless of CEQA and would apply to any project under similar circumstances. RRs 1 through 3-3 do not constitute a mitigation measure but will nonetheless be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure implementation of mandated RRs.
RR 3-1 The Project shall comply with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403, "Fugitive Dust." Rule 403 requires implementation of best available dust control measures during construction activities that generate fugitive dust, such as earth moving and stockpiling activities, grading, and equipment travel on unpaved roads, including limiting vehicle speeds to 15 miles per hour.
RR 3-2 The Project shall comply with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1186 "PMIo Emissions from Paved and Unpaved Roads and Livestock Operations" and Rule 1186.1, "Less -Polluting Street Sweepers." Adherence to Rule 1186 and Rule 1186.1 reduces the release of criteria pollutant emissions into the atmosphere during construction.
RR 3-3 The Project shall comply with the provisions of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 402 "Nuisance." Adherence to Rule 402 reduces the release of odorous emissions into the atmosphere.
3.3.2 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required.
D Substantial Evidence
Construction Localized Emissions Impact Analysis
Criteria Pollutant Emissions
DEIR Table 4.3-9, Localized Significant Summary - Construction, identifies the localized impacts at the nearest receptor location in the vicinity of the Project. For analytical purposes, emissions associated with peak grading activities are considered for purposes of LSTs since these phases represent the maximum localized emissions that would occur. Any other construction phases of development that overlap would result in lesser emissions and consequently lesser impacts than what is disclosed herein.
As shown in DEIR Table 4.3-9, Project -related construction emissions would not exceed the applicable South Coast AQMD LSTs for CO, NOx, PM10, or PM2s at the maximally impacted receptor location.
All other modeled locations in the study area would experience a lesser concentration and consequently a lesser impact. Accordingly, construction of the Project would not result in the exposure of any sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, localized emissions from construction of the Project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to Threshold c.
DPM Source Cancer and Non -Cancer Risks Impact Analysis The land use with the greatest potential exposure to Project construction DPM source emissions is Location R4, which represents the existing residence at 14157 Bosana Lane, approximately 1,151 feet north of the Project site. At this maximally exposed individual receptor (MEIR), the maximum incremental cancer risk attributable to Project DPM source emissions is estimated at 0.47 in one million, which is less than the South Coast AQMD's significance threshold of 10 in one million. At this same location, non -cancer health risks were estimated to be < 0.01, which would not exceed the applicable threshold of 1.0. As such, the Project would not cause a significant human health or cancer risk to people in adjacent land uses as a result of Project construction activity. All other receptors during construction activity (even if they are located at a nearer distance to the site) would experience less risk than what is identified for the MEIR due to modeled meteorological conditions, source locations, and relative spatial distance from emission sources to other receptor locations. Detailed analysis for construction DPM emissions can be found in the Project's HRA (DEIR Technical Appendix B2).
Operational Emissions Localized Emissions Impact Analysis Criteria Pollutant Emissions
The LST analysis generally includes on -site sources (area, energy, mobile, and on -site cargo handling equipment). However, it should be noted that the CatEEMod outputs do not separate on -site and off - site emissions from mobile sources. As such, to establish a maximum potential impact scenario for analytic purposes, the modeled emissions include all on -site Project -related stationary (area) sources and 5% of the Project -related mobile sources. Applying the trip length applied in the CatEEMod Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
analysis for the Project (approximately 17.54 miles for passenger cars and 40.0 miles for all trucks), 5% of this total would represent an on -site travel distance of approximately 0.9 mile/4,631 feet for passenger cars and 2 miles/10,560 feet for trucks. It should be noted that the longest on -site distance is roughly 0.5 miles for both trucks and passenger cars. As such, the 5% assumption is conservative and would tend to overstate the actual impact because it is not likely that every single passenger car would drive 0.9 mile on the site or that every truck would drive 2 miles on the site.
DEIR Table 4.3-10, Localized Significant Summary — Operation, presents the results of the LST analysis for long-term operation of the Project. As shown, operational emissions would not exceed the South Coast AQMD's LSTs at the maximally impacted receptor location. All other modeled locations in the study area would experience a lesser concentration and consequently a lesser impact. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant localized impact during operational activity.
CO Hot Spot Impact Analysis
The Project would not result in potentially adverse CO concentrations or "hot spots." Detailed modeling of Project -specific CO "hot spots" is not needed to reach this conclusion. An adverse CO concentration, known as a "hot spot," would occur if an exceedance of the state one -hour standard of 20 ppm or the eight -hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.
It has long been recognized that CO hotspots are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at congested intersections. In response, vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the allowable CO emissions standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams/mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels, and implementation of increasingly sophisticated and efficient emissions control technologies, CO concentration in the SCAB is now designated as attainment.
To establish a more accurate record of baseline CO concentrations affecting the SCAB, a CO "hot spot" analysis was conducted in 2003 for four busy intersections in Los Angeles at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. This "hot spot" analysis did not predict any violation of CO standards. For example, 8.4 ppm 8 -hr CO concentration measured at the Long Beach Boulevard/Imperial Highway intersection (highest CO generating intersection within the "hot spot" analysis), only 0.7 ppm was attributable to the traffic volumes and congestion at this intersection; the remaining 7.7 ppm were due to the ambient air measurements at the time the 2003 AQMP was prepared. In contrast, an adverse CO concentration, known as a "hot spot," would occur if an exceedance of the state one -hour standard of 20 parts per million (ppm) or the eight -hour standard of 9 ppm were to occur.
The ambient 1 -hr and 8 -hr CO concentration within the Project study area is estimated to be 2.0 ppm and 1.3 ppm, respectively (data from Hemet/San Jacinto Valley station for 2019). Therefore, even if the traffic volumes for the proposed Project were double or even triple of the traffic volumes generated at the Long Beach Boulevard/Imperial Highway intersection, coupled with the on -going improvements in ambient air quality, the Project would not be capable of resulting in a CO "hot spot" at any study area intersections.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Furthermore, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) concluded that under existing and future vehicle emission rates, a given project would have to increase traffic volumes at a single intersection by more than 44,000 vehicles per hour (vph)—or 24,000 vph where vertical and/or horizontal air does not mix —in order to generate a significant CO impact. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire Blvd and Veteran Ave., which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day and AM/PM traffic volumes of 8,062 vph and 7,719 vph respectively. The 2003 AQMP estimated that the 1 -hour concentration for this intersection was 4.6 ppm; this indicates that, should the daily traffic volume increase four times to 400,000 vehicles per day, CO concentrations (4.6 ppm x 4= 18.4 ppm) would still not likely exceed the most stringent 1 - hour CO standard (20.0 ppm).
The highest trips on a segment of road for the Project (Opening Year 2023) during AM and PM traffic is 2,433 vph on Beaumont Avenue/Interstate 10 (I-10) Eastbound Ramps and 3,156 vph on Potrero Boulevard/I-10 Eastbound Ramps, respectively. The highest trips on a segment of road for the proposed Project (Opening Year 2025) during AM and PM traffic is 2,531 vph on Beaumont Avenue/I- 10 Eastbound Ramps and 3,254 vph on Potrero Boulevard/I-10 Eastbound Ramps, respectively. The highest trips on a segment of road for the proposed Project (Buildout Year 2027) during AM and PM traffic is 3,412 vph and 4,187 vph on Potrero Boulevard/I-10 Eastbound Ramps, respectively. As such, Project -related traffic volumes are less than the traffic volumes identified in the 2003 AQMP. The proposed Project would not produce the volume of traffic required to generate a CO "hot spot" either in the context of the 2003 Los Angeles hot spot study or based on representative BAAQMD CO threshold considerations. Therefore, CO "hot spots" are not an environmental impact of concern for the Project. Localized air quality impacts related to mobile -source emissions would therefore be less than significant. Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project would result in less -than -significant impacts related to the creation of CO Hot Spots.
Individual Exposure Scenario
The residential land use with the greatest potential exposure to Project DPM source emissions is Location R4, which represents the existing residence at 14157 Bosana Lane, approximately 1,151 feet north of the Project site. At this maximally exposed individual receptor (MEIR), the maximum incremental cancer risk attributable to Project DPM source emissions is estimated at 0.86 in one million, which is less than the South Coast AQMD's significance threshold of 10 in one million. At this same location, non -cancer health risks were estimated to be <0.01, which would not exceed the applicable significance threshold of 1.0. As such, the Project will not cause a significant human health or cancer risk to nearby residences. All other receptors during operational activity (even if they are located at a nearer distance to the site) would experience less concentration and consequently less risk than what is identified for the MEIR due to modeled meteorological conditions, source locations, and relative spatial distance from emission sources to other receptor locations. A detailed analysis of Individual Exposure Scenario for construction and operational DPM emissions can be found in the HRA, DEIR Technical Appendix B2.
Worker Exposure Scenario
The worker receptor land use with the greatest potential exposure to Project DPM source emissions is Location R6, which represents the Hidden Canyon Industrial Building 2, approximately 305 feet east Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
of the Project site. R6 is placed at the building facade where a worker could remain for a typical workday. At the maximally exposed individual worker (MEIW), the maximum incremental cancer risk impact is 0.23 in one million which is less than the South Coast AQMD's threshold of 10 in one million.
Maximum non -cancer health risks at this same location were estimated to be <0.01, which would not exceed the applicable significance threshold of 1.0. As such, the Project will not cause a significant human health or cancer risk to adjacent workers. All other receptors during operational activity (even if they are located at a nearer distance to the site) would experience less concentration and consequently less risk than what is identified for the MEIW due to modeled meteorological conditions, source locations, and relative spatial distance from emission sources to other receptor locations.
School Child Exposure Scenario
There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the Project site. As such, there would be no significant impacts that would occur to any schools in the vicinity of the Project. Proximity to sources of toxics is critical to determining the impact. In traffic -related studies, the additional non -cancer health risk attributable to proximity was seen within 1,000 feet and was strongest within 300 feet. California freeway studies show about a 70% drop-off in particulate pollution levels at 500 feet. Based on California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast AQMD emissions and modeling analyses, an 80% drop-off in pollutant concentrations is expected at approximately 1,000 feet from a distribution center. The 1,000 -foot evaluation distance is supported by research -based findings concerning TAC emission dispersion rates from roadways and large sources showing that emissions diminish substantially between 500 and 1,000 feet from emission sources. For purposes of this assessment, a one -quarter mile radius or 1,320 feet geographic scope is utilized for determining potential impacts to nearby schools. This radius is more robust than, and therefore provides a more health protective scenario for evaluation than the 1,000 -foot impact radius identified above.
Combined Construction and Operational Impacts
The land use with the greatest potential exposure to Project construction and operational DPM source emissions is Location R4. At the MEIR, the maximum incremental cancer risk attributable to Project construction and operational DPM source emissions is estimated at 1.33 in one million, which is less than the threshold of 10 in one million. At this same location, non -cancer health risks were estimated to be < 0.01, which would not exceed the applicable threshold of 1.0. As such, the Project will not cause a significant human health or cancer risk to adjacent land uses as a result of Project construction and operational activity. All other receptors during operational activity (even if they are located at a nearer distance to the site) would experience less concentration and consequently less risk than what is identified for the MEIR due to modeled meteorological conditions, source locations, and relative spatial distance from emission sources to other receptor locations.
Potential Health Impacts of the Project
The potential impact of Project -generated air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors has also been considered. Results of the LST analysis indicate that the Project will not exceed the South Coast AQMD localized significance thresholds during construction. Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations during Project construction. Additionally, the Project will not exceed the South Coast AQMD localized significance thresholds during operational Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
activity. Further, Project traffic would not create or result in a CO "hotspot." Therefore, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial pollutant concentrations as the result of Project operations. However, as described in DEIR Table 4.3-7 , the Project would exceed the South Coast AQMD's significance threshold with respect to VOCs, NOx, CO, PMIo and PM2 5 from operational emissions and this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. Likewise, the Project would not be consistent with elements of the 2016 AQMP.
If a project in the SCAB exceeds the regional significance thresholds, the project could contribute to an increase in health effects in the basin until such time the attainment standard are met in the SCAB.
The project exceeds the emissions in DEIR Table 4.3-7 for the following: VOCs, NOx, CO, PMIo and PM2.5. These emissions would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment status and would contribute to elevating health effects associated to these criteria air pollutants. However, because of the relatively small amount of emissions from the Project relative to regional -wide emissions, it would be speculative to assess whether or the extent to which the Project would contribute to adverse health effects. South Coast AQMD has not provided methodology, and modeling does not currently exist, to assess the specific correlation between mass emissions generated, cumulative increases from individual projects, and the effect on health or even to determine how exceeding the regional thresholds by small amounts would affect the number of days the region is in nonattainment. For extremely large regional projects (unlike the proposed Project), the South Coast AQMD states that it has been able to correlate potential health outcomes for very large emissions sources — as part of their rulemaking activity, specifically 6,620 lbs./day of NOx and 89,180 lbs./day of VOC were expected to result in approximately 20 premature deaths per year and 89,947 school absences due to 03.
The Project would generate up to 189.40 lbs/day of NOx during construction and 494.43 lbs/day of NOx during operations (2.86% and 7.47% of 6,620 lbs/day, respectively). Additionally, the Project would also generate a maximum of 34.96 lbs/day of VOC emissions during construction and 179.96 lbs/day of VOC emissions during operations (0.04% and 0.20% of 89,190 lbs/day, respectively).
Therefore, the Project is not expected to have a measurable effect on human health and the Project's emissions are not sufficiently high enough to use a regional modeling program to correlate health effects on a basin -wide level. (DEIR, pp. 4.3-42 to 4.3-48)
3.3.3 THRESHOLD D
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold d are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold d; therefore, no mitigation is required.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses (livestock and farming), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities. The Project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors.
Potential odor sources associated with the Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The Project would be subject to standard construction requirements, including the use of low-VOC architectural coatings as required by South Coast AQMD Rule 113, Table of Standards; compliance with low sulfur fuel requirements pursuant to South Coast AQMD Rule 431.2, Low Sulfur Fuel; and compliance with South Coast AQMD Rule 402, Nuisance, which requires that a person shall not discharge air contaminants or other materials that would cause health or safety hazards to any considerable number of persons or the public. Compliance with these standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature, and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction; thus, they are considered less than significant.
Potential sources of operational odors generated by the Project would include disposal of commercial and industrial refuse and the use of diesel equipment. It is expected that Project -generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with City's solid waste regulations, thereby precluding substantial generation of odors due to temporary holding of refuse on site. Additionally, the Project includes the construction of a sewer lift station. However, the location of the sewer lift station, which is located more than 1/4 mile or 1,320 feet from the nearest residential land use, would not result in the potential odor source affecting a substantial number of people. The proposed Project also would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed Project operations would not adversely affect a substantial number of people, and Project impacts during long-term operations would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.3-48 and 4.3-49)
3.3.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to air quality (exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and odors; CEQA Air Quality Thresholds c and d).
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative air quality impacts of the Project related to exposure of substantial pollutant concentrations and odors are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to these impacts; therefore, no mitigation is required.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
As shown in DEIR Table 4.3-9, Localized Significant Summary - Construction, emissions would not exceed the South Coast AQMD Localized Threshold for CO, NOx, PM10, or PM2.5. Pursuant to the South Coast AQMD's CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds, projects with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant impact; therefore, the Project's emissions during construction would be less than significant on a direct and cumulative basis.
As shown in DEIR Table 4.3-10, Localized Significant Summary — Operation, under long-term operating conditions, the Project's localized operational emissions would not exceed any of the South Coast AQMD LST thresholds. Pursuant to the South Coast AQMD's CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds, the Project would have a less -than -cumulatively considerable LST impact during long- term operation. Additionally, the Project would have no potential to result in or contribute to a CO "Hot Spot." Accordingly, impacts associated with CO "Hot Spots" would be less than cumulatively considerable. (DEIR, pp. 4.3-49 to 4.3-50)
The Project would not result in a source of odors that would adversely affect a substantial number of people during construction or operation. Compliance with these standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts from construction. The construction odor emissions would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction. Further, potential sources of operational odors generated by the Project would include disposal of commercial and industrial refuse and the use of diesel equipment. It is expected that Project - generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with City's solid waste regulations, thereby precluding substantial generation of odors due to temporary holding of refuse on site. Additionally, the Project includes the construction of a sewer lift station, however the location of the sewer lift station, which is located more than 1/4 mile or 1,320 feet from the nearest residential land use, would not result in the potential odor source affecting a substantial number of people. The Project also would be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed Project would not adversely affect a substantial number of people; and Project impacts during short-term construction or long-term operations would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.3-49 to 4.3-49) There are no nearby projects with sources of odors that the Project odors would combine with to adversely affect a substantial number of people; therefore, impacts would be less than cumulatively considerable.
3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Project impacts for CEQA Biological Resources Threshold e do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.4.1 THRESHOLD E
Impact Statement: The Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold e are discussed in detail in Section 4.4.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold e; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project would be consistent with all applicable General Plan policies pertaining to biological resources. The City does not have a tree preservation policy or ordinance. The Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Therefore, no impacts would occur. (DEIR p. 4.4-59)
3.4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to biological resources (conflict with policies or ordinances protecting biological resources). ❑ Findings
Potential cumulative biological resources impacts of the Project related to policies and ordinances are discussed in detail in Section 4.4.8 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to these impacts; therefore, no mitigation is required.
❑ Substantial Evidence
The proposed Project would impact local movement routes for wildlife but would conserve lands contributing to the assembly of the adjacent Proposed Core 3 and would therefore support the MSHCP goals for Proposed Core 3, including the movement of wildlife through Proposed Core 3. As such, the Project would not result or contribute to a cumulative impact to wildlife movement or corridors. (DEIR, pp. 4.4.-61 and 4.4.-62)
3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Project impacts for CEQA Cultural Resources Thresholds a and c do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.5.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
The following Regulatory Requirements (RRs) are applicable regardless of CEQA and would apply to any project under similar circumstances and, therefore, do not constitute mitigation measures.
However, they will nonetheless be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure the implementation of the mandated RRs.
RR 5-1 The Project shall comply with the applicable provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 as well as Public Resources Code Section 5097 et. seq., which Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
require the County Coroner be contacted if human remains are discovered. If the Coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Coroner is required to contact the NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. Whenever the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner, the NAHC is required to immediately notify those persons.
3.5.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.5.6 of the DEIR. No historic resources, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, are present on the Project site; therefore, no historic resources could be altered or destroyed by construction or operation of the Project. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
A direct and/or indirect impact to a listed or eligible NRHP or CRHR resource, if they occurred, would result in a potentially significant impact.
BFSA reviewed the NRHP Index and Office of Historic Preservation, Built Environment Resources Directory, which did not indicate the presence of any historical resources within the Project boundaries.
The Project site contains the following six potentially historic resources: RIV-5060 (historic trash scatter), RIV-5061 (historic trash scatter), P-33-006229 (historic Jack Rabbit Trail Road alignment), P-33-009027 (prehistoric isolate), P-33-015672 (potentially historic water storage tank and valves), and P-33-015673 (concrete pads and trash scatter). Phase II significance testing consisted of archaeological testing at the two archaeological sites, RIV-5060 and RIV-5061, which were previously identified as having historic trash scatter, while survey information and the already presented archival data was utilized for the remaining resources. Results of the Phase I and Phase II study determined that the six potentially historic resources were not eligible for listing under the CRHR or NRHP.
The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project will result in direct impacts to recorded cultural resources RIV-5060, RIV-5061, P-33-006229, P-33-009027, P-33-015672, and P-33-015673. However, all of these have been evaluated as not significant and ineligible for listing on the CRHR or NRHP.
Therefore, there are no significant historical resources located within the Project site, and no impact to historical resources would occur. (DEIR pp. 4.5-14 to 4.5-16)
3.5.3 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.5.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site does not contain a cemetery and no known formal cemeteries are located within the immediate site vicinity. Field surveys conducted on the Project site did not identify the presence of any human remains and no human remains are known to exist beneath the surface of the site. Nevertheless, the remote potential exists that human remains may be unearthed during ground disturbance activities associated with Project construction.
If human remains are unearthed during Project ground disturbance activities, the contractor would be required by law to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 "Disturbance of Human Remains." According to Section 7050.5(b) and (c), if human remains are discovered, the County Coroner must be contacted and if the Coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, the Coroner is required to contact the NAHC by telephone within 24 hours. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, whenever the NAHC receives notification of a discovery of Native American human remains from a county coroner, the NAHC is required to immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American. The descendants may, with the permission of the owner of the land, or his or her authorized representative, inspect the site of the discovery of the Native American human remains and may recommend to the owner or the person responsible for the excavation work means for treatment or disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the human remains and any associated grave goods. The descendants shall complete their inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. According to Public Resources Code Section 5097.94(k), the NAHC is authorized to mediate disputes arising between landowners and known descendants relating to the treatment and disposition of Native American human burials, skeletal remains, and items associated with Native American burials. With mandatory compliance to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98 as set forth in RR 5-1 , any potential impacts to human remains, including human remains of Native American ancestry, that may result from development of the Project would be less than significant. (DEIR pp. 4.5-16 to 4.5-17)
3.5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to cultural resources for Thresholds a and c.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to cultural resources are discussed in detail in Section 4.5.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
result in significant cumulative impacts related to cultural resources; therefore, no mitigation is required.
❑ Substantial Evidence
The potential for implementation of the Project to contribute to cumulative impacts to historical resources was analyzed in conjunction with other projects located in areas that were once similarly influenced by the historical agricultural industry of the City and the region. There are no historically significant resources on the Project site. Therefore, implementation of the Project has no potential to contribute towards a significant cumulative impact to historical sites and/or resources.
Mandatory compliance with the provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 as well as Public Resources Code Section 5097 et seq. (see Regulatory Requirement 5-1), would assure that all future development projects within the region treat human remains that may be uncovered during development activities in accordance with prescribed, respectful, and appropriate practices, thereby avoiding significant cumulative impacts. (DEIR, p. 4.5-17)
3.6 ENERGY
Project impacts for CEQA Energy Thresholds a and b do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.6.1 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
The Project includes the following Project Design Features (PDFs) that serve to reduce the Project's impacts. The PDFs will be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure implementation.
PDF 8-1
Office space within the warehouses shall be insulated with a minimum R-13 value in the walls and R-30 in the attic, and all windows will have a minimum 0.57 U -factor and 0.32 SHGC or greater.
PDF 8-2 All roofs within the Project shall be rated at 0.15 aged solar reflectance and 0.75 thermal emittance or greater.
PDF 8-3
Occupant sensing lighting that dims to at least 50% when unoccupied shall be installed within the interior areas of warehouses. All interior lighting shall be LED lighting with 40 lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50 lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, and 60 lumens/watt for all fixtures exceeding 40 watts.
PDF 8-4 Office space heating within warehouses must utilize heat pumps with ducting insulation of R-4.2 or greater.
PDF 8-5
Tenant lease agreements for the Project shall include contractual language restricting trucks and support equipment from nonessential idling longer than 3 minutes while on site in compliance with the City of Beaumont Idling Ordinance.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.6.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.6.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a; therefore, no mitigation is required.
D Substantial Evidence
Construction
The total electricity usage during construction is 5,846,660 kWh. Additionally, construction equipment used by the Project would result in single event consumption of approximately 1,942,071 gallons of diesel fuel. Construction equipment use of fuel would not be atypical for the type of construction proposed because there are no aspects of the Project's proposed construction process that are unusual or energy -intensive, and Project construction equipment would conform to the applicable CARB emissions standards, acting to promote equipment fuel efficiencies.
CCR Title 13, Title 13, Motor Vehicles, Section 2449(d)(3) Idling, limits idling times of construction vehicles to no more than 5 minutes, thereby precluding unnecessary and wasteful consumption of fuel due to unproductive idling of construction equipment. BACMs inform construction equipment operators of this requirement. Enforcement of idling limitations is realized through periodic site inspections conducted by City building officials, and/or in response to citizen complaints. Construction worker trips for full construction of the proposed Project would result in the estimated fuel consumption of 1,244,925 gallons of fuel. Additionally, fuel consumption from construction vendor trips (MHDTs and HHDTs) will total approximately 692,294 gallons. Diesel fuel would be supplied by City and regional commercial vendors. Indirectly, construction energy efficiencies and energy conservation would be achieved using bulk purchases, transport, and use of construction materials. The 2020 IEPR released by the CEC has shown that fuel efficiencies are getting better within on and off - road vehicle engines due to more stringent government requirements. Therefore, Project construction energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
Operations
The total estimated annual fuel consumption from Project -generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) would result in a fuel demand 5,318,792 gallons of fuel. Trip generation and VMT generated by the Project are consistent with other industrial uses of similar scale and configuration, as reflected respectively in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (10th Ed., 2017); and Ca1EEMod. That is, the Project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips and VMT, nor associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption. Enhanced fuel economies realized pursuant to federal and state regulatory Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
actions, and related transition of vehicles to alternative energy sources (e.g., electricity, natural gas, biofuels, hydrogen cells) would likely decrease future gasoline fuel demands per VMT. Furthermore, location of the Project proximate to regional and local roadway systems tends to reduce VMT within the region, acting to reduce regional vehicle energy demands. The Project would include sidewalks, facilitating and encouraging pedestrian access. Facilitating pedestrian and bicycle access would reduce VMT and associated energy consumption. In compliance with the California Green Building Standards Code, the Project would promote the use of bicycles as an alternative mean of transportation by providing short-term and/or long-term bicycle parking accommodations. As supported by the preceding discussions, Project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
With respect to Project building operation, the Project facility operational energy demands are estimated at: 53,857,582 kBTU/yr of natural gas; and 25,747,206 kWh/yr of electricity. The Project proposes conventional industrial uses reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy conserving designs and operational programs. Uses proposed by the Project are not inherently energy intensive, and the Project energy demands in total would be comparable to, or less than, other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration. Last, the Project will comply with the applicable Title 24 standards, such as installing on -site renewable energy. Compliance itself with applicable Title 24 standards will ensure that the Project energy demands would not be inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
Implementation of the Project would increase the demand for electricity and natural gas at the Project site and petroleum consumption in the region during operation. However, the electrical and natural gas consumption demands of the Project during operation would conform to the state's Title 24 and to CALGreen standards, which implement conservation measures and are made further efficient by application of CAP points to the Project. Further, the proposed Project would not directly require the construction of new energy generation or supply facilities and providers of electricity and natural gas are in compliance with regulatory requirements that assist in conservation, including requirements that electrical providers achieve state -mandated renewal energy production requirements.
Further, the energy demands of the Project can be accommodated within the context of available resources and energy delivery systems. The Project would therefore not cause or result in the need for additional energy producing or transmission facilities. The Project would not engage in wasteful or inefficient uses of energy and aims to achieve energy conservations goals within the State of California.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The amount of energy and fuel consumed by construction and operation of the Project would not be inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary. Furthermore, the Project would not cause or result in the need for additional energy facilities or energy delivery systems. Accordingly, the Project's impacts associated with energy consumption would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-9 to 4.6-32)
3.6.3 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would not conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.6.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold b; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project was analyzed for consistency with the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, Integrated Energy Policy Report, State of California Energy Plan, California Code Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards, Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, California Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), SB 350, SCAG's 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Plan (RTP/SCS), the County of Riverside Climate Action Plan and General Plan, and the City'sGeneral Plan.
The Project would not conflict with any federal, State or local plans for renewable energy and energy efficiency. The Project would be consistent with the County's Climate Action Plan strategies and with the City's General Plan policies as well as all state energy efficiency requirements. Furthermore, the Project would minimize construction and operational energy use through energy reduction strategies pursuant to project design features which include measures from the County's CAP. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-32 to 4.6-38)
3.6.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to energy.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to energy are discussed in detail in Section 4.6.8 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to energy; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Cumulative impacts result if the Project, along with cumulative projects, taken together could result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy. Future projects would be subject to CEQA and would require an energy analysis, consistency with existing plans and policies for renewable energy and energy efficiency, and implementation of control measures and mitigation if necessary to avoid wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. The areas considered for cumulative impacts to electricity and natural gas supplies are the service areas of the SCE and SoCalGas, respectively, described above in Section 4.6.1.
Buildout of the Project, related projects, and additional forecasted growth in SCE's service area would cumulatively increase the demand for electricity supplies and infrastructure capacity. As with the Project, during construction and operation, other future development projects would be expected to incorporate energy conservation features and comply with applicable regulations including CALGreen Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
and state energy standards under Title 24, which would contribute in minimizing wasteful energy consumption. As such, the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of electricity would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant.
Buildout of the Project, related projects, and additional forecasted growth in SoCalGas' service area would cumulatively increase the demand for natural gas supplies and infrastructure capacity. Based on the 2018 California Gas Report, the CEC estimates natural gas consumption within SoCalGas' planning area will be approximately 2,519 million cf per day in 2022 (CEC, 2018). Based on the Project's estimated natural gas consumption of 53,857,582 kBTU/yr the Project would account for approximately 2.1% of SoCalGas' anticipated annual consumption. Although Project development would result in the use of natural gas resources, the use of such resources would be on a relatively small scale, reduced by measures rendering the Project more energy -efficient, and consistent with regional and local growth expectations for SoCalGas' service area. Furthermore, future development projects would be expected to incorporate energy conservation features and comply with applicable regulations including CALGreen and state energy standards under Title 24. As such, the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of natural gas would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant.
Buildout of the Project, related projects, and additional forecasted growth would cumulatively increase the demand for transportation -related fuel in the state and region. As described above, the Project would consume 1,942,071 gallons of diesel fuel during construction. The Project's operation would result in an estimated fuel consumption 5,318,792 gallons of fuel per year. For comparison, the CEC Transportation Energy Demand Forecast estimates that between 12.3 billion to 12.7 billion gallons of gasoline and 3.7 billion to 4.7 billion gallons of diesel will be consumed in the year 2030. As with the Project, other future development projects would be expected to reduce VMT by encouraging the use of alternative modes of transportation and other design features that promote VMT reductions.
Therefore, the Project's contribution to cumulative impacts related to wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary use of transportation fuel would not be cumulatively considerable and, thus, would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.6-38 and 4.6-39)
3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Project impacts for CEQA Geology and Soils Thresholds a through e do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
3.7.1 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
The following Regulatory Requirements (RRs) are applicable regardless of CEQA and would apply to any project under similar circumstances and, therefore, do not constitute mitigation measures.
However, they will nonetheless be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure the implementation of the mandated RRs.
RR 7-1 The Project shall comply with CBSC (Chapter 18) (adopted by the City of Beaumont as Municipal Code Section 15.04.010) and Municipal Code Section 17.11.040, which Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
requires development projects to evaluate and identify site -specific geologic and seismic conditions. The report must provide site -specific recommendations to preclude adverse effects involving unstable soils and strong seismic ground -shaking, including, but not limited to, recommendations related to ground stabilization, selection of appropriate foundation type and design criteria, and selection of appropriate structural systems.
RR 7-2 Prior to grading plan approval and the first issuance of a grading permit for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit for discharge of stormwater associated with construction activities.
RR 7-3 Prior to grading plan approval and the first issuance of a grading permit by the City for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development, the Project proponent shall submit to the City of Beaumont a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion -control plan citing specific measures to control erosion during the entire grading and construction period.
Additionally, the SWPPP shall identify structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and nonvisible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented in the SWPPP may include (but shall not be limited to) the following:
• Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following:
o Perimeter protection to prevent sediment discharges through silt fences, fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag barriers, and compost socks. o Sediment capture and drainage control through sediment traps, storm drain inlet protection, and sediment basins.
o Velocity reduction through check dams, sediment basins, and outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices.
o Reduction in off -site sediment tracking through stabilized construction entrance/exit, construction road stabilization, and entrance/exit tire wash. o Slope interruption at permit -prescribed intervals (fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag berms, compost socks, biofilter bags).
• The construction and condition of the BMPs will be periodically inspected during construction, and repairs will be made when necessary, as required by the SWPPP. • No materials of any kind shall be placed in drainage ways. • Materials that could contribute nonvisible pollutants to stormwater must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
• All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected per RWQCB standards to eliminate any discharge from the site.
Stockpiles will be surrounding by silt fences.
• The SWPPP will include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase to ensure NPDES compliance.
• Additional BMPs and erosion -control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary.
• The SWPPP will be kept on -site for the entire duration of project construction and will also be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time.
In the event that it is not feasible to implement the above BMPs, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off -site.
RR 7-4 Prior to grading plan approval and issuance of a grading permit by the City of Beaumont for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development, the Project proponent shall receive approval from the City of Beaumont for Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final WQMP). The Final WQMP shall specifically identify pollution -prevention, site -design, source -control, and treatment -control BMPs that shall be used on -site to control predictable pollutant runoff to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable. Source control BMPs to be implemented in the Final WQMP may include (but shall not be limited to) those listed in Table G.1 of the Preliminary WQMP (Technical Appendix I2). Treatment -control BMPs shall include on -site detention/sand filtration basins to treat the site's runoff; these facilities shall be maintained and inspected at least twice per year and prior to October 1. Additional BMPs will be documented in the WQMP and utilized if necessary. In the event that it is not feasible to implement the BMPs identified in the Final WQMP, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off -site.
3.7.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, and/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).
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking.
iii. Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv. Landslides.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a; therefore, no mitigation is required.
D Substantial Evidence
Rupture of a Known Earthquake Fault
There are no known active or potentially active faults on or trending toward the Project site, the Project site is not located within a mapped Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and County Fault Hazard Zones are located within the subject site or adjacent properties (KCG, 2021). Because there are no known faults located on or trending towards the Project site, there is no potential for the Project to directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects related to ground rupture. No impact would occur.
Strong Seismic Ground Shaking
Similar to all properties throughout southern California, the Project site is located in a seismically active area and is expected to experience moderate to severe ground shaking during the lifetime of the Project. The Project's buildings will be required by Title 15 of the City's Municipal Code to be constructed in accordance with the CBSC and the City's Building Code. The CBSC and City's Building Code provide building standards that must be met to safeguard life or limb, health, property, and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy, location, and maintenance of all buildings and structures. The CBSC and City's Building Code building standards have been specifically tailored for California earthquake conditions. In addition, the CBSC (Chapter 18) (adopted by the City's as Municipal Code Sections 15.04.010 and
17.11.040) requires development projects to evaluate and identify site -specific geologic and seismic conditions. The report must provide site -specific recommendations to preclude adverse effects involving unstable soils and strong seismic ground -shaking, including, but not limited to, recommendations related to ground stabilization, selection of appropriate foundation type and depths, and selection of appropriate structural systems.
A Geotechnical Report was prepared for the Project site complies with the requirements of Chapter 18 of the CBSC and Titles 15 and 17 of the City's Municipal Code. In conformance with the CBSC, the City will condition the Project to comply with the site -specific ground preparation and construction recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report, including any updates thereto, as required in Regulatory Requirement RR 7-1. Recommendations are based on the site seismic parameters to ensure that structures are designed for earthquake induced strong ground motions in accordance with CBSC.
The Geotechnical Report includes requirements for: supplemental subsurface exploration, general earthwork and grading, fill placement and compaction, remedial grading, manufactured slopes, surface drainage, subdrainage, oversized rock materials, deep fill areas/settlement monitoring, preliminary foundation recommendations, retaining walls, sulfate potential, corrosion potential, preliminary pavement design, and temporary excavations. Mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC and Beaumont Municipal Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
Code and Building Code) would ensure that the impact remains less than significant. Additionally, grading plan review is required to verify that the geotechnical requirements are updated specific to the detailed rough grading plans. Furthermore, geotechnical observation and testing shall be conducted during the following stages of grading:
o Upon the completion of clearing and grubbing;
o During all phases of grading, including benching, backcut and key excavation, cut slope excavation, remedial removals of surficial soils, backdrain/subdrain/filter material installation and engineered fill placement;
o During Settlement Monument placement;
o During roadway subgrade preparation and compaction of roadway aggregate base; o When any unusual conditions are encountered during grading Future development accommodated by the Specific Plan would be required to have site -specific geotechnical investigation reports prepared by the Project applicant's/developer's geotechnical consultant, in accordance with the CBC and Beaumont Municipal Code Section 17.1.040. The geotechnical investigations would determine seismic design parameters for the site and the proposed building type per CBC requirements. With mandatory compliance with these standard and site -specific design and construction measures, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial adverse effects, including loss, injury or death, involving seismic ground shaking. Impacts would be less than significant.
Seismic -Related Ground Failure, Including Liquefaction According to available mapping data, the Project site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone (California Geologic Survey (CGS)/California Department of Conservation) indicating a susceptibility for liquefaction potential (CGS, 2019a). However, the City's General Plan Safety Element and the RCIT identify the Project site as located within an area of "moderate" susceptibility to liquefaction (RCIT, 2021; City of Beaumont, 2020a). Therefore, the Project site appears to be susceptible to relatively minor amounts of liquefaction settlement. The magnitudes of seismic —induced liquefaction settlement are relatively minor and somewhat localized, occurring generally below depths of 40 feet where groundwater was encountered in the northern and northeastern portion of the Project site (KCG, 2021).
The Geotechnical Report prepared for the Project calculated the total earthquake -induced liquefaction settlement potential using the LiquefyPro software. The evaluation was based on the site class and adjusted peak ground acceleration of 0.705g, as shown in Section 2.5 of the Geotechnical Report, DEIR Technical Appendix F1, of the DEIR (KCG, 2021). The analysis indicates that the estimated settlement due to earthquake -induced liquefaction is approximately 0.00 inches to approximately one (1) inch.
Differential settlements are estimated to be negligible to approximately a little over 0.5 inches over a distance of 50 feet. Due to the lack of a shallow static groundwater level and the materials encountered, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
the materials are not susceptible to significant seismic induced ground failure. With the proposed fill depths and loads imposed from the fill, liquefaction is considered to be negligible (KCG, 2021).
Lateral spreading is primarily associated with liquefaction hazards. Implementation of the Project would result in a less than significant impact associated with liquefaction; thus, the potential for lateral spreading is low (KCG, 2021). Accordingly, impacts associated with lateral spreading would be less than significant.
Furthermore, the Project would be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable seismic safety guidelines, including the requirements of the CBSC and City's Municipal Code and Building Code. As stated previously, the City will condition the Project to comply with the site -specific ground preparation and construction recommendations contained in Section 5 of Technical Appendix F1 of the DEIR, which will further reduce the risk of seismic -related ground failure due (see Regulatory Requirement RR 7-1). Mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC and Beaumont Municipal Code and Building Code) would ensure that the impacts remain less than significant. As such, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly expose people or structures to substantial hazards associated with seismic -related ground failure and/or liquefaction hazards. Impacts would be less than significant.
Landslides
The Project site is not identified within a State of California designated Hazard Zone for Slope Instability (CGS, 2019a). Information available in the Riverside County Safety Element indicates that portions of the site may have "low" to "moderate" susceptibility for seismic induced slope instability (Riverside County, 2019b).
Approximate 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) cut and fill slopes of variable height are proposed throughout the site. The Geotechnical Report provided an analysis of deep-seated slope stability on selected geologic cross -sections (including both cut and fill slopes) considered representative of the various proposed conceptual slope configurations. The full results of the analysis are presented in the Geotechnical Report, Section 3.2 and Appendix E. Based on the analysis, proposed 2:1 cut and fill slopes are considered grossly stable in the absence of adverse geologic conditions and considered surficially stable.
Furthermore, mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project site's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC, Beaumont Building Code, and conditions of approval) would ensure that the Project is engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on -site and abutting off -site areas. Accordingly, the Project would not be exposed to substantial landslide risks, and implementation of the Project would not pose a substantial direct or indirect landslide risk to surrounding properties. Impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-16 to 4.7-19)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.7.3 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold b; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Construction -Related Erosion Impacts
Under existing conditions, the Project site is largely undeveloped and contains only a few remnants of past development within the Project site. As identified in Section 4.9.1 of the DEIR, items related to historic use of the Project site include a water storage tank and associated valves and a concrete pad.
Development of the Project site would result in the demolition of these items and grading and construction activities would occur that would further disturb soils on the property. Disturbed soils would be subject to potential erosion during rainfall events or high winds due to the removal of stabilizing vegetation and building materials (e.g., existing concrete foundations) and exposure of these erodible materials to wind and water.
Fill slopes constructed with granular materials derived from on -site sandstone bedrock may be susceptible to erosion. The San Timoteo Formation bedrock on the Project site was moderately hard and considered to be slightly to moderately erodible. The surficial soils, including undocumented artificial fill, colluvium, and alluvium, encountered are typically granular and appear to be readily erodible as evidenced by their soft to loose state and localized erosion gullies. Therefore, the erosion potential of cut slopes exposing on -site bedrock materials may range from low to medium depending on the bedrock materials exposed on the cut slope, as well as the orientation of bedding and joint planes within the slope. In general, cut slopes exposing well -indurated and/or cemented sandstones should have a low to moderate susceptibly to erosion. Friable, poorly cemented, sandstones should have a moderate to high erosion susceptibility.
Pursuant to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Project Applicant would be required to obtain coverage under the State's General Construction Stormwater Permit for construction activities (NPDES permit). The NPDES permit is required for all development projects that include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation, that disturb at least one (1) acre of total land area (see Regulatory Requirement RR 7-2). In addition, the Project would be required to comply with the Santa Ana RWQCB's Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program. Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for construction -related activities (see Regulatory Requirement RR 7-3). The SWPPP will specify the Best Management Practices (BMPs) that the Project Applicant will be required to implement during construction activities to ensure that waterborne pollution — including erosion/sedimentation — is prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to surface runoff being discharged from the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
subject property. Examples of BMPs that may be utilized during construction include, but are not limited to, sandbag barriers, geotextiles, storm drain inlet protection, sediment traps, rip rap soil stabilizers, and hydro -seeding. Lastly, the Project would be required to implement erosion and dust control measures pursuant SCAQMD Rule 403 to minimize water- and windborne erosion. Mandatory compliance with the SWPPP and SCAQMD Rule 403 would ensure that the Project's implementation does not result in significant soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Further, the City will condition the Project to comply with the site -specific ground preparation and construction recommendations contained in the Project's Geotechnical Report. Mandatory compliance with the recommendations (as amended by the final Geotechnical Report) relating to cut slopes will ensure that potential impacts related to erosion would be less than significant. Therefore, erosion and loss of topsoil loss impacts associated with construction activities would be less than significant.
Post -Development Erosion Impacts
Upon Project buildout, the Project site would be covered by buildings, landscaping, and impervious surfaces. Stormwater runoff from the Project site would be captured, treated to reduce waterborne pollutants (including sediment), and conveyed off site via an on -site storm drain system. Accordingly, the amount of erosion that occurs on the Project site would be minimized upon build out of the Project and would be reduced relative to existing conditions.
Additionally, to meet the requirements of the City's Municipal Stormwater Permit, the Project Applicant is required to prepare and implement a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), which is a site -specific post -construction water quality management program designed to minimize the release of potential waterborne pollutants, including pollutants of concern for downstream receiving waters, under long-term conditions via BMPs. The WQMP is required to identify an effective combination of erosion control and sediment control measures (i.e., Best Management Practices) to reduce or eliminate sediment discharge to surface water from stormwater and non-stormwater discharges. The WQMP also is required to establish a post -construction implementation and maintenance plan to ensure on -going, long-term erosion protection. Compliance with the WQMP will be required as a condition of approval for the Project, as will the long-term maintenance of erosion and sediment control features.
A Project -specific Preliminary WQMP was prepared for the Project to identify appropriate BMPs for the Project. A Final Project -specific WQMP that is in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Project -Specific WQMP shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits (see Regulatory Requirement RR 7-4). As identified in the Project's Preliminary WQMP, low - impact development (LID) BMPs (e.g., bioretention and biotreatment) are required to detain stormwater on site for runoff mitigation. Additionally, the Project's Preliminary WQMP identifies site - design BMPs, structural and non-structural source -control BMPs, and treatment -control BMPs that would be implemented for the Project.
The Project's drainage system would route runoff from the proposed impervious surfaces to the four detention basins. Each basin would provide stormwater treatment and peak flow mitigation for each of their respective tributaries. The detention basins would remove pollutants from runoff, including sediment, thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
is discharged from the Project site. Additionally, basin vegetation provides erosion protection, which is required to be maintained regularly (PECW, 2023b).
By complying with the NPDES permit and WQMP requirements, the Project would be required to utilize erosion and sediment control measures to preclude substantial, long-term soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Therefore, the Project would result in less than significant impacts related to soil erosion and/or loss of topsoil. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-19 to 4.7-21)
3.7.4 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not 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 -site or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
As discussed under Threshold b, above, the Project's proposed 2:1 cut and fill slopes are considered grossly stable and surficially stable; and, as discussed under Threshold a, above, impacts relating to landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, and liquefaction would be less than significant.
The undocumented artificial fill soils, colluvium, and loose younger alluvial soils present on the Project site have settlement potential and portions of the younger alluvium are prone to hydro -collapse. The volume of change of excavated on -site materials upon excavation and placement as engineered fill will vary with bedrock and/or soil type, location, and compaction effort. Alluvial soils would have the greatest shrinkage potential and could shrink up to 15%. Further, laboratory testing indicates that the young alluvium on site exhibits a collapse potential of zero to as much as 4.5%, which is respectively considered slight to moderate (KCG, 2021). The majority of the settlement is expected to occur during grading and within a few months thereafter. However, the majority of the alluvium that is potentially susceptible to seismic induced dry settlement would be removed during remedial earthwork and would also be subject to additional settlement during construction due to fill loads, which would reduce the settlement significantly.
Further, the City will condition the Project to comply with the site -specific ground preparation and construction recommendations contained in the Project's Geotechnical Report (DEIR Technical Appendix F1). Recommendations in the preliminary Geotechnical Report and any updates thereto relating to settlement monitoring (i.e., installation of surface monuments), fill placement, and compaction will ensure that potential impacts related to settlement, soil shrinkage, and collapse would be less than significant. (DEIR pp. 4.7-21)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.7.5 THRESHOLD D
Impact Statement: The Project would not be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), and would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold d are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold d; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Due to the limited presence of siltstone and clay layers, and the known presence of mostly sandstone generated soils within the Project site, the expansion potential of on -site soils is considered low.
However, siltstone/clay layers subject to excavation would produce clayey soils, which would be expansive. Minor amounts of siltstone exist on site; however, if siltstone is placed at pad grade, it would produce moderately expansive soils. The Project's Geotechnical Report (DEIR Technical Appendix F1) requires evaluation of potential expansive soil at completion of grading pursuant to ASTM D-4829, to ensure that expansive soils would not create a substantial risk to life or property.
Mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC and Beaumont Municipal Code and Building Code) would ensure that the impact remains less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.7-22)
3.7.6 THRESHOLD E
Impact Statement: The Project would not 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.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold e are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold e; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project is designed to connect to the City -owned municipal wastewater conveyance system, with wastewater treatment services supplied by the City's Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Project does not include septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Accordingly, no impact related to the use of or performance of septic tanks and/or alternative wastewater systems would occur. (DEIR, p. 4.7-22)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.7.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to geology and soils (risk of loss due to earthquakes, substantial loss of topsoil, unstable soil, expansive soil or septic tanks).
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative geology and soils impacts of the Project related to risk of loss due to earthquakes, substantial loss of topsoil, unstable soil, expansive soil or septic tanks are discussed in detail in Section
4.7.7 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to these topics; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
As noted in the foregoing analysis, all potential Project -related direct and indirect impacts related to geology and soils would be addressed through mandatory conformance with the CBSC, City's Municipal Code, other standard regulatory requirements, and the site -specific recommendations identified in the Geotechnical Report in Technical Appendix F of this EIR, including any updates thereto, as required in Regulatory Requirement RR 7-1.
With the exception of erosion hazards, potential hazardous effects related to geologic and soil conditions addressed under Thresholds "a," "c," "d," and "e" are unique to the Project site, and inherently restricted to the specific property proposed for development. That is, issues including fault rupture, seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, landslides, and expansive soils would involve effects to (and not from) a proposed development project, are specific to conditions on the subject property, and are not influenced or exacerbated by the geologic and/or soils hazards that may occur on other, off -site properties. Because of the site -specific nature of these potential hazards and the measures to address them, there would be no direct or indirect connection to similar potential issues or cumulative effects to or from other properties.
As discussed under Threshold b, regulatory requirements mandate that the Project incorporate design measures during construction and long-term operation to ensure that significant erosion impacts do not occur. Other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site would be required to comply with the same regulatory requirements as the Project to preclude substantial adverse water and wind erosion impacts. Because the Project and other projects within the cumulative study area would be subject to similar mandatory regulatory requirements to control erosion hazards during construction and long- term operation, cumulative impacts associated with wind and water erosion hazards would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-23 to 4.7-24)
3.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Project impacts for CEQA Hazards and Hazardous Materials Thresholds a through g do not result in significant impacts and findings are discussed below.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.8.1 THRESHOLD A AND THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement (Threshold A): The Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Impact Statement (Threshold B): 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.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a and Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section
4.9.5 of the DEIR. During Project construction and operation, mandatory compliance to federal, State, and local regulations would ensure that the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the environment due to routine transport, use, disposal, or upset of hazardous materials and to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project will not result in significant impacts related to Threshold a or Threshold b; therefore, no mitigation is required.
❑ Substantial Evidence
Implementation of the Project would result in the construction and long-term operation of industrial and commercial uses within the Project site. The Project would have the potential to expose workers on site, the public, and/or the environment to a substantial hazard if there are any hazards or hazardous materials on the Project site or if hazardous materials are used/stored or manufactured/shipped on the Project site during construction or long-term operation.
There are no Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) and Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) associated with the Project site. Therefore, the existing site condition is considered to be free from any environmental concern associated with hazards or hazardous materials. Grading and hauling of on -site soils would have no hazardous risk to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; and there would be no risk of upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
During construction, heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated on the Project site. This heavy equipment likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum -based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other substances typically used in building construction would be located on the Project site during construction. These materials would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety hazard to on -site construction workers or the general public. Construction contractors would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws and regulations regarding the transport, use, and storage of hazardous construction -related materials, including but not limited Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
requirements imposed by the EPA and DTSC. With mandatory compliance of applicable hazardous materials regulations, the Project would not create significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during the construction phase.
Improper use, storage, or transportation of hazardous materials can result in accidental releases or spills, potentially posing health risks to workers, the public, and the environment. This is a standard risk on all construction sites, and there would be no greater risk for improper handling, transportation, or spills associated with the Project than would occur on any other similar construction site. Thus, impacts due to construction activities would not cause a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions, and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, temporary construction -related impacts would be less than significant.
Long-term operation of the Project site would include industrial and commercial land uses. The future occupants of the proposed buildings are not yet known. However, the building occupants within the industrial land use will include warehousing, manufacturing, fulfillment, parcel hub and/or similar uses. Manufacturing uses may include manufacturing on site and shipment of goods and/or shipment/transport of goods to the Project site for manufacturing on site. Building occupants within the commercial land uses will include restaurants, recreation, and entertainment (e.g., athletic fields, batting cages, miniature golf courses, health clubs, etc.). The full list of permitted, conditionally permitted, and ancillary uses allowed within the Project site are listed on Table 3-1 of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan. Based on the facilities and uses that would be allowed at the Project site, hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, solvents, corrosives, hazardous materials, etc.) could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. It is possible that other hazardous materials also could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. In the event that hazardous materials, other than those common materials described above, are associated with future operations, the hazardous materials would only be stored and transported to and from the Project site.
General cleaning activities on site that contain toxic substances are usually low in concentration and small in amount; therefore, there is no significant risk to humans or the environment from the use of such cleaning products.
Exposure of people or the environment to hazardous materials during operation of the Project may result from (1) the improper handling or use of hazardous substances; (2) transportation accidents; or (3) an unforeseen event (e.g., fire, flood, or earthquake). The severity of any such exposure is dependent upon the type and amount of the hazardous material involved, the timing, location, and nature of the event, and the sensitivity of the individuals or environment affected. As previously discussed, the U.S. Department of Transportation prescribes strict regulations for hazardous materials transport, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (i.e., the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act); these are implemented by Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. It is possible that vendors may transport hazardous materials to and from the Project, and the drivers of the transport vehicles must comply with the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act. Hazardous materials or wastes stored on site are subject to requirements associated with accumulation time limits, amounts, and proper storage locations and containers, and proper labeling. Additionally, for removal of hazardous waste from the site, hazardous waste generators are required to use a certified hazardous Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
waste transportation company which must ship hazardous waste to a permitted facility for treatment, storage, recycling, or disposal.
State and federal Community -Right -to -Know laws allow the public access to information about the amounts and types of chemicals that may be used by businesses on the Project site. Laws also are in place that require businesses to plan and prepare for possible chemical emergencies through preparation of a Hazardous Materials Inventory and a Hazardous Materials Business Plan. Any businesses that occupy the buildings on the Project site and that handles/stores substantial quantities of hazardous materials (as defined in Section 25500 of California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95) will require a permit from the RCDEH in order to register the business as a hazardous materials handler. Such businesses also are required to prepare and comply with Hazardous Materials Inventory and a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, which requires immediate reporting to the RCDEH and the State Office of Emergency Services regarding any release or threatened release of a hazardous material, regardless of the amount handled by the business, and to prepare a Hazardous Materials Business Emergency Plan (HMBEP). An HMBEP is a written set of procedures and information created to help minimize the effects and extent of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material. The intent of the HMBEP is to satisfy federal and State Community Right -To - Know laws and to provide detailed information for use by emergency responders.
The RCDEH implements the Hazardous Materials Business Plan for the County. The Hazardous Materials Business Plan is required to contain basic information on the location, type, quantity, and health risks of hazardous materials stored, used, or disposed of on development sites. The plan also contains an emergency response plan, which describes the procedures for mitigating a hazardous release, procedures, and equipment for minimizing the potential damage of a hazardous materials release, and provisions for immediate notification of emergency -response personnel, such as the local fire agency having jurisdiction. Implementation of the emergency response plan facilitates rapid response in the event of an accidental spill or release, thereby reducing potential adverse impacts.
If businesses that use or store hazardous materials occupy the future buildings on the Project site, the business owners and operators would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper transport, use, storage, use, emission, and disposal of hazardous substances (as described above). With mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, storage, emission, or disposal of hazardous materials, nor would the Project increase the potential for accident conditions which could result in the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Based on the foregoing information, potential hazardous materials impacts associated with long-term operation of the Project are regarded as less than significant and no mitigation is required.
With mandatory regulatory compliance with federal, State, and local laws, potential hazardous materials impacts associated with long-term operation of the Project are regarded as less than significant and mitigation is not required. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-12 to 4.9-15) Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
3.8.2 THRESHOLD C
Impact Statement: The Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold c are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.5 of the DEIR. The Project site is not located within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned school; therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in an impact associated with hazardous emissions or the handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold c; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project's eastern boundary is located approximately three (3) miles west of Three Rings Ranch Elementary School at 1040 Calumet Avenue in Beaumont, California (Google Earth Pro, 2021). There are no proposed schools in closer proximity to the Project site. Accordingly, the Project does not have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Impacts related to on -site construction and operational uses are considered less than significant.
The vast majority of passenger car and truck travel to and from the Project site will be from 4th Street to Potrero Avenue to access SR -60. There are no existing or proposed schools within one -quarter mile of these roadways or the Potrero Avenue/SR-60 interchange. Additionally, and as described above under the analysis for Thresholds a and b, the use of and transport of hazardous substances or materials to and from the Project site during construction and long-term operational activities would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations that are designed to preclude substantial public safety hazards. Accordingly, there would be no significant potential for existing or proposed schools to be exposed to substantial safety hazards associated with emission, handling of, or the routine transport of hazardous substances or materials to and from the Project site. Impacts related to off -site construction and operational uses are considered less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-15) As discussed in DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality, there are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the Project site. As such, there would be no significant impacts that would occur to any schools in the vicinity of the Project. Proximity to sources of toxics is critical to determining the impact. In traffic -related studies, the additional non -cancer health risk attributable to proximity was seen within 1,000 feet and was strongest within 300 feet. California freeway studies show about a 70% drop-off in particulate pollution levels at 500 feet. Based on California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast AQMD emissions and modeling analyses, an 80% drop-off in pollutant concentrations is expected at approximately 1,000 feet from a distribution center. The 1,000 -foot evaluation distance is supported by research -based findings concerning TAC emission dispersion rates from roadways and large sources showing that emissions diminish substantially between 500 and 1,000 feet from emission sources. For purposes of this assessment, a one -quarter mile radius or 1,320 feet geographic scope is utilized for Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
determining potential impacts to nearby schools. This radius is more robust than, and therefore provides a more health protective scenario for evaluation than the 1,000 -foot impact radius identified above for analysis pertaining to human health risks associated with air pollutant emissions associated with the Project, including risks to sensitive receptors such as school children. (DEIR, p. 4.3-46)
3.8.3 THRESHOLD D
Impact Statement: The Project site is not 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 not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold d are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.5 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold d; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Based on a site search on November 6, 2019, the Project site is not listed on any federal, State, or local regulatory agency databases or any list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. There are no Federal National Priorities List (NPL), Federal Delisted NPL, Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), Federal Superfund Enterprise Management System Archive (SEMS-ARCHIVE), Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action (CORRACTS), Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD), Federal RCRA Large Quantity Generator (LQG), Federal RCRA Small Quantity Generator (SQG), Federal RCRA Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator (CESQG), and Federal Institutional Controls/ Engineering Controls (IC/EC) sites listed on the Project site. There are also no State and Tribal Equivalent to NPL or CERCLIS sites; State and Tribal Landfill; State and Tribal Solid Waste Disposal; State and Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST); State or Tribal Spills, Leak Investigation and Cleanups (SLIC); State and Tribal Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCO); and State and Tribal Brownfield sites within Project site. The Project site is not located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District's Facility Information Detail (FIND) database (McAlister GeoScience, 2019). Accordingly, no impact would occur. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-15 to 4.9-16)
3.8.4 THRESHOLD E
Impact Statement: The Project site is not within two miles of an airport and the Project site is not identified as within an airport influence area.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold e are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.5 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold e; therefore, no mitigation is required.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area for the nearest airport to the Project site, Banning Municipal Airport, located approximately 10 miles to the east of the Project site (RCALUC, 2004). Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area. No impact would occur. (DEIR, p.
4.9-16)
3.8.5 THRESHOLD F
Impact Statement: The Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold f are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.5 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold f; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site does not contain any emergency facilities, nor does it serve as an emergency evacuation route. During an emergency in the City, operations are coordinated from the City's Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in accordance with the City's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP). The primary EOC location is at the Chatigny Recreation Center (CRC) located on the northeast corner of Oak Valley Parkway and Cherry Avenue. The alternate EOC location is the Beaumont City Hall Facility located at 550 E 6th Street. Additionally, according to the City's General Plan Safety Element, The City has major evacuation routes which include I-10 and SR -60 as well as several major roadways.
The following existing major roadways are emergency evacuation routes: Brookside Avenue, Oak Valley Parkway, Highland Spring Avenue, and Beaumont Avenue. An interchange at Potrero Boulevard and SR -60 is under construction and an extension of Potrero eastward to connect to Highland Springs Avenue is planned. Following the completion of the extension, Potrero Boulevard will be designated by the City as an evacuation route. Additionally, SR -60, immediately north of the Project site, serves as an evacuation route for the City (City of Beaumont, 2020a).
During Project construction, travel lanes along Frontage Road would be maintained, and construction materials and equipment would be staged on site. The Project is not anticipated to result in a substantial alteration to the design or capacity of an existing road that would impair or interfere with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan. No impacts would occur.
Under operational conditions, the Project would be required, by Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, Section 21.32a, Emergency Access, to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles on site. The Project provides for two avenues of egress in the event of an emergency, with primary access provided at 4th Street and emergency access provided via the Jack Rabbit Trail interchange with SR -60. The Project does not include any features that would physically impair or otherwise conflict Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
with an emergency response plan or evacuation plan. Additionally, as part of the City's discretionary review process, the City reviewed the Project's application materials to ensure that the design of the Project would meet City requirements, appropriate emergency ingress and egress would be available to and from the Project site and that the Project would not substantially impede emergency response times in the local area. According to the Project's Fire Protection Plan, Station 66 would respond within approximately 7 minutes to the Project's entrance, Station 20 would respond within approximately 9 minutes, and Station 106 would respond within approximately 3.54 minutes (Dudek, 2023, p. 37).
The Project's proposed industrial/commercial development is anticipated to increase the call volume at a rate of up to 191 calls per year (4 calls per week or 16 calls per month). Fire Stations 66 and 20 combined emergency responses in 2017 totaled 4,943 calls per year or 5.43 and 8.11 calls per day per station, respectively. The level of service demand for the Project would increase overall call volume; however, the increase is not anticipated to impact the existing fire stations to a point that they cannot meet the demand (Dudek, 2023, p. 40). Furthermore, the Project would be required by City Chapter
3.36, Emergency Preparedness Facilities Fees, to contribute costs to improve Emergency Preparedness Centers.
The Project will maintain a conservative approach to fire safety, including maintaining the landscape and structural components according to the standards described above and embracing a "Ready, Set, Go!" stance on evacuation.
The time to evacuate under multiple scenarios was calculated via traffic simulations. DEIR Table 4.9- 1, Evacuation Time Summary, displays the calculated evacuation roadway capacity and the time it would take to evacuate for the Project and surrounding land uses for 17 different scenarios. During a Project evacuation, law enforcement would shut down traffic along SR -60 to prevent people from entering an active wildfire area, diverting traffic away from the evacuation area, as well as to keep it open to evacuees who may be in harm's way during mass evacuation scenarios. Evacuees from the Project would need to travel along both or one of the adjacent evacuation routes, SR -60 or West 4th Street, to reach more urban landscapes and the travel way is hardened (low fuel loading, converted landscapes, developed ignition resistant buildings and hardscape on both sides) and exposure during an evacuation would be limited. Currently, there is no population relying on the emergency egress points at Jack Rabbit Trail and the SR -60 Freeway or 4th Street. However, future development (Hidden Canyon Industrial Park) would use these routes for evacuation during some wildfire scenarios. In the scenario where Hidden Canyon evacuates simultaneously with the Project, evacuation of the Project site and Hidden Canyon is possible in all modeled scenarios; therefore, the Project would not substantially impair an emergency evacuation plan (CRA Mobility, 2022). Details of each scenario are found in the Project's evacuation analysis. (DEIR Technical Appendix M2) According to the Project's evacuation analysis, the Project site can be safely evacuated under the worst - case scenarios:
1) When the Project site and Hidden Canyon are fully occupied (all parking spaces occupied) and need to be evacuated concurrently, within 3 hours and 36 minutes using SR -60 only, 3 hours Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
and 32 minutes using 4th Street only, or 2 hours and 1 minute when all evacuation routes are available (Scenarios 13-15).
2) When the Project site, Hidden Canyon Industrial Park, and Olive Wood are fully occupied (all parking spaces occupied) and need to be evacuated concurrently, within 2 hours 4 minutes when all evacuation routes are available (Scenario 17).
These scenarios will require additional emergency management pre -planning and "in the field" determinations of when evacuations are needed and how they are phased to maximize efficiency.
However, as shown above, the current evacuation time for the surrounding communities ranges from 27 minutes to 35 minutes (Scenarios 10 and 16), adding the maximum number of vehicles from the Project's site increases the evacuation time between 16 minutes and 26 minutes.1 In the event that the time to evacuate is considered too long to evacuate safely by police and fire personnel in the field at the time of the evacuation event, then Project site employees and visitors can be ordered not to evacuate and to shelter -in -place in the specific locations that were constructed to allow for safe sheltering in place. In accordance with the Fire Protection Plan (DEIR Technical Appendix M1), a shelter -in -place plan will be prepared and provided to all on -site personnel outlining the actions to take if a shelter -in -place notification is provided by emergency management sources.
The project buildings will be constructed of concrete which is non- combustible and highly resistant to heat. Because of the concrete/ignition resistant construction, fuel modification zone setbacks and the type of lower fire intensity vegetative fuels in the vicinity of the site, sheltering in place is considered to be a safe option if a fast-moving wildfire precludes complete evacuation of the Project site. The City has adopted the Emergency Operations Plan and Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS)/National Incident Management System (NIMS). This plan establishes the emergency organization, assigns tasks, specifies policies and general procedures, and provides for coordination of planning efforts of the various emergency staff and service elements. Emergency responders will utilize this plan to determine whether the Project's visitors and employees should shelter -in -place or evacuate under an emergency scenario.
Evacuations are fluid events and evacuation timeframes may vary widely, depending on a variety of factors including the number of vehicles evacuating, the road capacity to move those vehicles, employees' or patrons' awareness and preparedness, evacuation messaging and direction, and on -site law enforcement control. Deferring to actual evacuation results and similar project analysis is a typical approach. In the case of historical wildfire evacuations in Riverside County, there are several notable examples that indicate the extremely high success rate for evacuating large numbers of people and doing so in a managed and strategic way through the available technological innovations available to emergency managers. While large-scale evacuations may take several hours or more and require moving people long distances to designated areas, the success rate in Riverside County is nearly 100% safe evacuations. Comparing similar project analysis indicates that it is common to increase evacuation ' Increase in evacuation time determined by comparing no project scenarios (Scenarios 10-12 and 16) to with project and surrounding land use scenarios (Scenarios 13-15 and 17). For example, Scenario 13 (43 minutes) — Scenario 10 (27 minutes) = 16 minutes; and Scenario 14 (59 minutes) — Scenario 11 (33 minutes) = 26 minutes.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
times when new communities are built and the increase in time can be 45 minutes or more based on lack of road capacity to absorb and facilitate movement of the additional vehicles. However, as indicated above, the Project can be safely evacuated under the worst -case scenarios and would not interfere or impede with an emergency evacuation route.
When an evacuation is ordered, it will occur according to pre -established evacuation decision points or as soon as notice to evacuate is received, which may vary depending on many environmental and other factors. Additionally, although the Project is not to be considered a shelter -in -place development, because the Project site would be highly ignition resistant in terms of its buildings and landscape/hardscape, it is anticipated that an additional option available to emergency managers in some wildfire and other emergency scenarios will be directing people to temporarily remain on site and seek refuge within the ignition resistant buildings or other safe areas on the site.
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project is not anticipated to interfere or impede an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation route during construction or operation. As such, impacts would be less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.9-16 to 4.9-20)
3.8.6 THRESHOLD G
Impact Statement: The Project would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold g are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.5 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant impacts related to Threshold g; therefore, no mitigation is required. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project site is designated within a "High" and "Very High" Fire Hazard Severity Zone within a state responsibility area (SRA) by the Riverside County General Plan and CalFire. CalFire has released an updated version of their fire hazard severity zone maps that, if adopted, would revise the fire hazard designation of the Project and its surroundings to all Very High rather than the current combination of Very High and High. (CalFire, 2023). Because of these designations, a Fire Protection Plan (FPP) was prepared. Adoption of CalFire's new fire hazard zone maps would not change the findings in the FPP, which was planned and prepared for the Project as if it was entirely within the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. After being annexed into the City of Beaumont, it is possible that Project could be re- designated as Local Responsibility Area (LRA) in a future update of CalFire's hazard severity zone maps, which would mean the City of Beaumont would have the primary responsibility for the prevention and suppression of wildland fires at the Project site.
The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan includes project design features to protect people and structures from wildfires. Currently, the Project site is undeveloped, disturbed, vacant and has hills in the south.
The Project site's hills would remain undeveloped and would contain existing native and non-native Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
"ATTACHMENT 1"
vegetation that would be susceptible to wildfire. Defensible space is defined as managed and maintained areas adjacent to structures that enable fire suppression activities through the removal of flammable fuels and maintenance of landscapes that would not readily transmit wildfire. The Project would incorporate defensible space in the form of modified fuel areas in two managed zones, a fuel maintenance zone and a fuel modification area (FMA). The Project would provide a fuel maintenance zone with 20 feet of irrigated vegetation around the perimeter of the Project site and a 100 -foot FMA of paved surface and/or irrigated landscape. The implementation of the on -site defensible space (FMA and fuel maintenance zone) would reduce the risk of wildfire at the Project site and would improve the ability of firefighters to fight fires and protect the Project site and neighboring resources, irrespective of the cause or location of ignition. Additionally, all Project related plans will be reviewed and approved by the City and Riverside County Fire Department to ensure the safety of future Project occupants and structures. Accordingly, impacts due to wildland fires would be less than significant. (DEIR, p. 4.9-21)
3.8.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to hazards and hazardous materials.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to hazards and hazardous materials are discussed in detail in Section 4.9.6 of the DEIR. The City finds that the development of the proposed Project would not result in significant cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials; therefore, no mitigation is required.
❑ Substantial Evidence
As discussed above under the responses to Thresholds "a" and "b," the Project's construction and operation would be required to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local regulations to ensure proper use, storage, and disposal of hazardous substances. Such uses also would be subject to additional review and permitting requirements by the RCDEH. Similarly, any other developments in the area proposing the construction of uses with the potential for use, storage, or transport of hazardous materials also would be required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, and such uses would be subject to additional review and permits from their local oversight agency.
Therefore, the potential for release of hazardous materials into the environment, either through accidents or due to routine transport, use, or disposal of such materials would be mitigated for each development and would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact.
The Project site is not located within one -quarter mile of an existing or planned school. The nearest school, Three Rings Ranch Elementary School, is located approximately three (3) miles east of the Project site. Accordingly, the Project was determined to not have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, and/or wastes due to routine transport, use, or disposal of such materials within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations