Beaumont City Council
May 21, 2024

"ATTACHMENT 1"
methods. The archaeologist shall determine the amount of material to be recovered for an adequate artifact sample for analysis.
e) 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.
f) 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 issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building in each phase of ground disturbance.

Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.5-1 and 4.5-2 would ensure the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant archaeological resources that may be encountered during ground -disturbing activities associated with implementation of the Project. With implementation of the required mitigation, the Project's potential impacts to important archaeological resources would be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR pp. 4.5-16 to 4.5-18, 4.5-20)

4.2.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would not result significant cumulative cultural resources impacts. ❑ Findings
As discussed, under Threshold b, above, there are no significant archaeological resources located on the Project site. Impacts to previously undiscovered subsurface archeological resources are typically site specific from ground disturbing activities and generally do not combine to result in cumulative impacts, unless resources are identified immediately adjacent to the Project site. The nearest development to the Project is Hidden Canyon Industrial Park to the east, which has been graded and is currently under development. Further, site -specific archeological resource investigations would be required for other projects before the City would permit ground disturbances or demolition or substantial alteration of existing structures. Such investigations would include some degree of surface - level surveying and identify resources on the affected project sites that are or appear to be eligible for listing on the national or state registers for historic resources. Such investigations would also recommend mitigation measures to protect and preserve cultural resources. Therefore, cumulative impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant.

4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.3.1 THRESHOLD F
Impact Statement: The Project would have potential to directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold f are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.6 of the DEIR. The Project site is identified as within an area of "High" Paleontological Sensitivity; therefore, implementation of the Project would result in potentially significant impacts associated with paleontological resources. The Project could result in direct impacts to paleontological resources within the Project site should such resources be discovered during Project -related construction activities. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1 to 4.7-3, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. The City has determined 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 DEIR.
❑ Substantial Evidence
Because the City does not have specific guidelines for the preservation of paleontological resources, the City elects to use Riverside County guidelines for rating the paleontological sensitivity of geologic formations. A paleontological sensitivity map generated by the Riverside County Land Information System in February 2021 ranks most of the Project area as having a High Paleontological Potential/Sensitivity (High A). The category "High A" indicates that fossils are likely to be encountered at the surface and may be impacted during excavation by construction activities.

The Project site has a high potential to contain paleontological resources due to the: 1) presence of the middle Pliocene to lower Pleistocene fossiliferous middle member of the San Timoteo Formation, 2) recovery of fossils from the formation within and nearby the Project site boundaries, and 3) "High" Paleontological Sensitivity assigned to the San Timoteo Formation for yielding paleontological resources. The San Timoteo Formation also extends below the cover of young alluvial fan deposits and would be exposed during grading activities. Areas having a low paleontological sensitivity are represented by Holocene (modern) young alluvial fan deposits lining the drainage valleys. Generally, these sedimentary deposits do not yield fossils, being too young.

A paleontological literature review and collections and records search was performed by the Los Angeles County Museum (LACM). The review did not find any documented paleontological localities (fossil sites) held by the LACM from within the Project site; however, six localities held by the LACM are just west of the southernmost portion of the Project site. Significant fossil vertebrate remains "may well" be encountered in any digging in the San Timoteo Formation, as well as in older Quaternary alluvial deposits that may underlie the younger alluvium mapped on the surface within the Project site.

However, based upon the topography and the distribution of the various Quaternary deposits in the Project vicinity, it is more likely that the San Timoteo Formation underlies the young alluvial fan deposits within the Project site.

Therefore, there is a high probably of encountering paleontological resources during grading activities that impact the San Timoteo Formation and Quaternary older alluvial fan sediments. Impacts to paleontological resources would be significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-22 to 4.7-23) Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
The following mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project:

MM 4.7-1
MM 4.7-2
MM 4.7-3
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.

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.

Paleontological monitors shall be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays. 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:
g)
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.
h) Paleontological salvage shall complete with professional standard protocols, as detailed in Section VII, Paleontological Resource Impact Mitigation Program in Technical Appendix F2 of the DEIR.
i) In the laboratory, individual fossils shall be cleaned of extraneous matrix, any breaks repaired, and the specimen, if needed, stabilized by soaking in an archivally approved acrylic hardener (e.g., a solution of acetone and Paraloid B-72).

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
j) 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.
k) 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. 1) 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 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.

Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1 through 4.7-3 would ensure the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant paleontological resources that may be encountered during ground -disturbing activities associated with implementation of the proposed Project. With implementation of the required mitigation, the Project's potential impacts to important paleontological resources would be reduced to less than significant. The Project's contribution to cumulative impacts would likewise be reduced to less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-25 to 4.7-26)

4.3.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACT
Impact Statement: The Project would have potential to result in cumulative impacts to paleontological resources.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to paleontological resources are discussed in detail in Section 4.7.7 of the DEIR. The Project site is identified as within an area of "High" Paleontological Sensitivity; therefore, implementation of the Project could result in potentially significant impacts associated with paleontological resources. The Project could result in direct impacts to paleontological resources within the Project site should such resources be discovered during Project -related construction activities. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1 to 4.7- 3, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. The City has determined 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 DEIR.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
The Project's potential to result in impacts to paleontological resources (Threshold f) is similar to that of other projects located in the region that are underlain by alluvial fan deposits. The Project -specific PRIMP, required as Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1 through MM 4.7-3, would ensure Project -specific paleontological impacts are reduced to less than significant. Therefore, the Project's contribution to a cumulatively considerable impacts is less than significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.7-23 to 4.7-24)

4.4 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

4.4.1 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 18-1
Inadvertent 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 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 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
sheriff -coroner, parties, and lead agencies will be asked to withhold public disclosure information related to such reburial.

4.4.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project has the potential to 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 to a California Native American tribe. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.18.7 of the DEIR. The NAHC SLF search did not indicate the presence of any sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius. Additionally, all previously recorded cultural resources were evaluated as not significant and ineligible for listing on the CRHR. There are no significant historical resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 located within the Project site. Although no tribal cultural resources are known to occur within the Project's impact limits, implementation of the Project has the potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of tribal cultural resources that may be buried beneath the site's surface or in on -site vegetation. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and 4.5-2 set forth in Section 4.2, above, and which ensure the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant resources that may be encountered during ground -disturbing activities associated with implementation of the Project. These mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. The City has determined 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 DEIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
As discussed in Phase I and Phase II Cultural Resources Assessment (DEIR Technical Appendix D), BFSA requested a review of the Sacred Lands Files (SLF) by the NAHC in March of 2019 to determine if any recorded Native American sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance are present within one mile of the project. The NAHC SLF search did not indicate the presence of any sacred sites or locations of religious or ceremonial importance within the search radius.

Additionally, all previously recorded cultural resources were evaluated as not significant and ineligible for listing on the CRHR and NRHP. There are no significant historical resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 located within the Project site. However, because multiple resources have been identified on Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
the Project site, and due to heavy vegetation during the survey, there remains the potential that previously unobserved resources may exist.

Native American Consultation
The City sent notification to the Native American tribes with traditional or cultural affiliation to the area that previously requested consultation pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 requirements.

Of the 10 tribes that were sent notifications letters, three requested government -to -government consultation: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, and Soboba Band of Mission Indians. In a letter dated December 15, 2020, the Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians stated that they were unaware of specific cultural resources that may be affected by the Project but would like to be notified in the event cultural resources are discovered during development.

The City submitted the Phase I and Phase II Cultural Resources Assessment (Technical Appendix D) to three tribes that requested consultation and conducted telephone consultations with Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians on March 2, 2021 and Morongo Band of Mission Indians on February 2, 2021. The Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Morongo Band of Missions Indians requested revisions to the cultural resources assessment and mitigation, which were incorporated into Technical Appendix D. To date the Soboba Band of Mission Indians have not responded to schedule consultation.

Based on information provided in DEIR Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, and consultation with Native American tribes, there is potential that buried tribal cultural resources could be encountered during ground -disturbing activities. Accordingly, there is a potential for significant impacts to occur during grading. (DEIR, pp. 4.18-13 to 4.18-14)
Refer to Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and MM 4.5-2, in Section 4.2, above which address archeological resources. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and MM 4.5-2, would ensure that grading and other ground -disturbing activities during construction are monitored by a qualified archaeologist as well as Native American monitors. The mitigation measures further require the proper treatment of any resources that may be uncovered, and the avoidance of disturbance in areas where potential resources are uncovered. With implementation of the required mitigation measures, the Project would not 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 potential Project and cumulative impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels. (DEIR, p. 4.18-15)

4.4.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACT
Impact Statement: The Project has the potential to result in cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Finding
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to tribal cultural resources are discussed in detail in Section 4.18.8 of the DEIR. Although no tribal cultural resources are known to occur within the Project's impact limits, implementation of the Project has the potential cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of tribal cultural resources that may be buried beneath the site's surface or in on -site vegetation. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and 4.5- 2, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. The City has determined 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 DEIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
This cumulative impact analysis considers development of the Project in conjunction with other development projects and planned development projects in the vicinity of the Project site that are in the western area of Riverside County and the traditional use of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Torres -Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians, Santa Rosa band of Cahuilla Indians, Ramona band of Cahuilla Indians, Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, Soboba Band of Mission Indians, Cahuilla Band of Indians, Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians, and Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians.

As noted previously, the City conducted Native American consultation with potentially culturally affiliated tribes, as required by AB 52 and SB 18. Although other development projects in the traditional use area for the above listed culturally affiliated tribes may impact significant tribal cultural resources, impacts are generally site -specific resulting from ground disturbing activities; however, discovery of resources could contribute knowledge regarding other resources farther away from the Project site. Therefore, cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources have the potential to occur.

However, with implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.5-1, Project impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant. Other projects will also be required to comply with all applicable existing statutes, regulations, procedures, and policies that address tribal cultural resources, including consultation under SB 18 and/or AB 52. Other development projects will also implement mitigation measures similar to Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and MM 4.5-2 to ensure impacts to tribal cultural resources are fully mitigated to a less than significant level. With implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.5-1 and 4.5-2, the Project would not to contribute towards a significant cumulative impact associated with the significance of a tribal cultural resource or a collection of resources pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Therefore, with mitigation, the Project would not result in a significant cumulative impact related to tribal cultural resources. (DEIR, po. 4.18-14 to

4.18-15)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT I"

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS THAT REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE

AFTER MITIGATION
The City finds the project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts in the following impact categories after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures: Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Noise, and Transportation. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b)(2), The City cannot approve the project unless it first finds (1) under Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(3), and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), that specific economic, legal, social technological, or other considerations, including provisions of employment opportunities to highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR; and (2) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15092(b), that the remaining significant effects are acceptable under CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 because the economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the proposed project outweigh its unavoidable adverse environmental effects. Therefore, a statement of overriding considerations has been prepared (see Section 9.0, herein).

5.1 AIR QUALITY

5.1.1 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.6 of the DEIR. The Project would be inconsistent with South Coast AQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) because 1) will would exceed regional significance thresholds, resulting in NAAQS and CAAQS violations; and 2) would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of project buildout phase. Specifically, the Project would exceed regional thresholds of significance for NOx during construction and for NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 during operation even after mitigation. The Project's regional exceedance for VOCs during construction would be mitigated to less than significant level with the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-1. Further, The Project would require a General Plan Amendment and therefore is inconsistent with the land use assumptions on which the AQMP was based and is conservatively assumed to generate operational source emissions not accounted for in the AQMP. As such, the Project is considered to be inconsistent with the AQMP and significant impacts would occur.

The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through 4.3-17, which includes all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the FEIR and would reduce impacts related to NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions during both construction and operation to the extent feasible. The implementation of mitigation measures, the Project's emissions -reducing design features and operational programs, including but not limited to South Coast AQMD Rule 2305 (WAIRE) are consistent with and support overarching AQMP air pollution reduction strategies. Project support of these strategies would globally promote timely attainment of AQMP air quality standards and would bring the Project into conformance with the AQMP to the extent feasible. However, impacts would Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
remain significant and unavoidable. The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce air quality impacts attributable to the proposed Project.

Several mitigation measures were recommended by commenters on the DEIR. These measures were evaluated in the FEIR and were: 1) already required through regulatory requirements, project design features, or mitigation; 2) added as mitigation and included, herein; or 3) determined to be infeasible.

For example, due to the reasons described under "Substantial Evidence below, the requirement that all heavy-duty vehicles must be zero emission was found to be economically and technologically infeasible because they are not commercially available for the foreseeable future. Additionally, regulations that control heavy-duty truck emissions are the responsibility of the State and outside of the responsibility and control of the City. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, control of tailpipe emissions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been adopted by that other agency. See FEIR, Response to Comments B-34 through B-63 and D-4 through D-29.

Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The South Coast AQMD's 2016 AQMP is the applicable air quality plan for the Project area, which estimates long-term air quality conditions for the SCAB. The 2016 AQMP continues to evaluate current integrated strategies and control measures to meet the NAAQS, as well as explore new and innovative methods to reach its goals. Some of these approaches include utilizing incentive programs, recognizing existing co -benefit programs from other sectors, and developing a strategy with fair -share reductions at the federal, state, and local levels. The 2016 AQMP incorporates scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016-2040 RTP/SCS), a planning document that supports the integration of land use and transportation to help the region meet the federal CAA requirements.

Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the 1993 CEQA Handbook. These indicators are discussed below:
• Consistency Criterion No. 1: The proposed project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP.

Consistency Criterion No. 1 refers to violations of the CAAQS and NAAQS. CAAQS and NAAQS, or violations would occur if LSTs or regional significance thresholds are exceeded. The Project's localized construction -source emissions would not exceed applicable LST thresholds. However, the Project's regional construction -source emissions would exceed the applicable regional thresholds for Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
emissions of VOCs and NOx. As such, the the Project has the potential to result in a significant impact with respect to this criterion and the Project would have the potential to conflict with the AQMP according to this criterion, and could be potentially significant.

The Project would not exceed the LST thresholds for operational activity. However, the regional operational -source emissions are anticipated to exceed the regional thresholds of significance for NOx, VOC, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions and would not be reduced to less than significant with imposition of mitigation measures. As such, the Project has the potential to result in a significant impact with respect to this criterion and the Project would have the potential to conflict with the AQMP according to this criterion.

Based on the preceding, the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the first criterion and impacts would be potentially significant.
• Consistency Criterion No. 2: The Project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP based on the years of project build -out phase.

The 2016AQMP demonstrates that the applicable ambient air quality standards can be achieved within the timeframes required under federal law. Growth projections from local general plans adopted by cities in the district are provided to the SCAG, which develops regional growth forecasts, which are then used to develop future air quality forecasts for the AQMP. Development consistent with the growth projections in City's General Plan is considered to be consistent with the AQMP.

Peak day emissions generated by construction activities are largely independent of land use assignments, but rather are a function of development scope and maximum area of disturbance.

Irrespective of the site's land use designation, development of the site to its maximum potential would likely occur, with disturbance of the entire site occurring during construction activities. As such, since the Project would exceed applicable NOx regional emissions thresholds during construction activity, a significant impact would result.

The Project is proposed to consist of a maximum of 246,000 sf of general commercial uses in addition to a 125 -room hotel 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 open space — conservation area would be preserved as natural habitat as required by the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP). 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.

Implementation of the Project would require approval of a General Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment would re -designate approximately 539.9 acres from "Rural Residential" to "General Commercial" (30.2 -acres), "Industrial" (232.6 -acres), "Open Space" (124.7 -acres), and "Open Space — Conservation." (152.4 -acres). Permitted uses within the "General Commercial" land use will include Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
a wide range of recreation and entertainment, retail, restaurant, hotel, service -oriented land uses, and self -storage. Examples of recreation and entertainment uses may include indoor and/or outdoor go kart racing, rock climbing, trampoline park, bowling alley, and miniature golf. Allowable uses within the "Industrial" land use designation primarily include high -cube warehousing (warehouse/distribution center for the receipt, storage, cold storage and distribution of goods, products, supplies) and general light industrial. Other uses also permitted include but are not limited to manufacturing, distribution warehouses, e -commerce fulfillment, research services and laboratories, repair services, and various indoor recreational uses. Lastly, areas designated for "Open Space" uses would include landscaped, manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, project signage, as well as the natural slopes which form a buffer between the Specific Plan's developed areas and the "Open Space — Conservation." Accordingly, the 2016 AQMP does not reflect the proposed land use designation for the Project site.

For this reason, there is the potential for the Project to exceed air quality impact assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of Project build -out phase. Consequently, the development of the Project is conservatively assumed to generate operational -source emissions not reflected within the current 2016 AQMP regional emissions inventory for the SCAB (Urban Crossroads, 2022a, pp. 68- 69).

Based on the preceding, the Project is determined to be inconsistent with the second criterion and impacts would be potentially significant. (DEIR pp. 4.3-36 to 4.3-38) The Project would be required to implement the following mitigation measures, as provided in DEIR Section 4.3.9, Mitigation, and updated in DEIR Section 3.0, Clarifications and Revisions:

MM 4.3-1
MM 4.3-2
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 10g/L of VOC. Alternatively, the applicant may utilize tilt -up concrete buildings that do not require the use of architectural coatings.

Prior to the start of construction activities, the project 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 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 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
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
MM 4.3-4
MM 4.3-5
MM 4.3-6
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.

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.

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.

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.

Provide secure bicycle storage space equivalent to 2% of the automobile parking spaces provided.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
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
MM 4.3-8
MM 4.3-9
MM 4.3-10
For the warehouse/industrial portion of the Project, the 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 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.

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.

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.

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 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Department to verify, to the City's satisfaction, that all landscaping equipment utilized will be electric powered.

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.

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.

MM 4.3-13
MM 4.3-14
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.

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.

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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
MM 4.3-16
MM 4.3-17
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.

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.

As part of the FEIR, the City considered a recommendation to require that all heavy-duty vehicles engaged in drayage to or from the Project site to be zero emission beginning in 2030. However, at present, requiring zero -emission vehicles is economically and technologically infeasible; also, such vehicles are not available on a large enough scale to be relied upon. In a report titled "Transitioning to Zero -Emission Heavy -Duty Freight Vehicles," the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) provides an overview of advancing technologies (ICCT, September 2017). The ICCT reports that although the technology is advancing and although at some point in the distant future non -diesel technology will likely be used in mass to power freight movement, "zero -emission vehicle technologies do present considerable challenges. They have a combination of near- and long-term barriers, issues, and questions that will have to be addressed before they can become widespread replacements for conventional trucks and tractor -trailers that are typically diesel fueled" (ICCT, p. 31). "Tesla's announced battery electric semi -tractor prototype is the only battery electric project we found in our [world-wide] assessment targeting long -haul heavy-duty applications" (ICCT, p. 31). Imposing extensive requirements on the proposed Project related to emerging technology, when the various types of technological advancements and their timeframes for common availability are not known with any certainty, is not a feasible mitigation measure.

Further, South Coast AQMD recently adopted a Warehouse Indirect Source Rule, Rule 2305, in May 2021. Rule 2305 applies to warehouse operators and owners of warehouses greater than or equal to 100,000 square feet of indoor floor space within a single building that may be used for warehousing activities. As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, of the DEIR, the Project would be subject to compliance with Rule 2305 (refer to Pages 4.3-22 and 4.3-23). Because compliance will be implemented by lessees, the specific measures that will be implemented to comply with Rule 2305 are not known at this time, although they potentially would include use of electric of heavy duty trucks.

Mitigation Measure 4.3-12 requires the City's Planning Department to confirm that tenant lease agreements requiring 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. Compliance with Rule 2305 would reduce air quality effects associated with the warehouse industry, including the Project, throughout the air basin, although quantification of such reductions is not feasible at this time.

The Project would be inconsistent with AQMP Criterion No. 1 and 2, resulting in a potentially impact significant. The Project would implement development -specific air quality mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through 4.3-17), to reduce the Project's construction -source and operational -source air pollutant emissions. A detailed explanation of why Mitigation Measures MM

4.3-1 through 4.3-17 would not reduce Project emissions to less than significant is provided in Section

5.1.2, "Substantial Evidence," below (see also DEIR pp. 4.3-54 to 4.3-58). Additionally, incorporation Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
of contemporary energy -efficient technologies and operational programs, and compliance with South Coast AQMD emissions reductions and control requirements would reduce Project air pollutant emissions. The implementation of mitigation measures, Project's emissions -reducing design features, and operational programs are consistent with and support overarching AQMP air pollution reduction strategies. Project support of these strategies would globally promote timely attainment of AQMP air quality standards and would bring the Project into conformance with the AQMP to the extent feasible.

However, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pp. 4.3-50 to 4.3-54)

5.1.2 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would 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.
❑ Findings
Air pollution by nature is largely a cumulative impact. The nonattainment status of regional pollutants is a result of past and present development, and the South Coast AQMD develops and implements plans for future attainment of ambient air quality standards. Based on these considerations, project - level thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants are used by the South Coast AQMD to determine whether a project's individual emissions would have a cumulatively significant impact on air quality.

The potential for the project to result in a cumulatively considerable impact, specifically a cumulatively considerable new increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable NAAQS and/or CAAQS is potentially significant. Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.6 of the DEIR. The Project -specific evaluation of emissions demonstrates that Project construction -source and operation -source air pollutant emissions would result in exceedances of regional thresholds for criteria pollutants VOCs, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 for which the project region is in non -attainment for ozone and particulate matter. Therefore, Project impacts would be significant on a project -specific and cumulative basis for those emissions.

The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through 4.3-17, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible. Even with the Project's compliance with applicable rules, and the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures, the Project's construction NOx and operational VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would exceed South Coast AQMP regional thresholds of significance.

Several mitigation measures were recommended by commenters on the DEIR. These measures were evaluated in the FEIR and were: 1) already required through regulatory requirements, project design features, or mitigation; 2) added as mitigation and included, herein; or 3) determined to be infeasible.

For example, due to the reasons described under Section 5.1.1 "Substantial Evidence" above, the requirement that all heavy-duty vehicles must be zero emission was found to be economically and technologically infeasible because they are not commercially available for the foreseeable future.

Additionally, regulations that control heavy-duty truck emissions are the responsibility of the State and outside of the responsibility and control of the City. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, control of tailpipe emissions are within the responsibility and Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
jurisdiction of another public agency and have been adopted by that other agency. See FEIR, Response to Comments B-34 through B-63 and D-4 through D-29.

As such, Project impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce air quality impacts attributable to the proposed Project to the extent feasible. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.
❑ Substantial Evidence
Construction
Construction is expected to occur over a 56 -month period. The Project consists of grading (including blasting) of the Project site, construction of the proposed buildings, and eventual operation of the completed proposed buildings. South Coast AQMD Rules that are currently applicable during construction activity for this Project include but are not limited to Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) and Rule 1113 (Architectural Coatings).

DEIR Table 4.3-6, Maximum Daily Peak Construction Emission Summary, shows that estimated maximum daily construction emissions without mitigation resulting from Project construction will exceed criteria pollutant thresholds established by the South Coast AQMD for VOC and NOx during construction activity. Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant.

After application of regulatory controls such as Rule 403, the Project construction -source emissions would exceed South Coast AQMD regional thresholds for VOC and NOx emissions prior to mitigation.

With the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-1 (see above), however, Project construction - source emissions of VOCs would be reduced to less than significant levels. Even after implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2, NOx emissions would still exceed applicable South Coast AQMD thresholds.

With respect to NOx, based on discussions with contractors regarding availability of equipment in Riverside County, it is anticipated due to the size of the Project that there may be a lack of availability of sufficient Tier 4 equipment for construction of the Project. Accordingly, notwithstanding Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2 which requires use of Tier 4 equipment to the extent feasible, to evaluate the effect of mitigation on NOx impacts from construction, it is conservatively assumed that 50% all off -road diesel construction equipment used for project construction would be available to comply with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/California Air Resources Board (CARB) Tier 4 off -road emissions standards or equivalent and the remaining 50% with Tier 3 off -road emissions standards.

Applying these assumptions, after implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2, Project construction -source emissions with respect to NOx is considered significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pp. 4.3-38 to 4.3-39, 4.3-54)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Operation
Operational activities for summer and winter scenarios are presented in DEIR Table 4.3-7, Summary of Peak Operation Emissions. During Phase 1, the Project would exceed the numerical thresholds of significance established by the South Coast AQMD for emissions of NOx. During Phase 2, the Project will exceed the thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. During Phase 3, the Project would exceed the numerical thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant.

The Project would exceed regional thresholds of significance established by the South Coast AQMD for emissions of CO, VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. During Phase 1, the Project would exceed the numerical thresholds of significance established by the South Coast AQMD for emissions of NOx.

During Phase 2, the Project will exceed the thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. During Phase 3, the Project would exceed the numerical thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5. (DEIR pp. 4.3-39 to 4.3-41) Even with the Project's compliance with applicable rules, and the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures identified above (see MM 4.3-3 through MM 4.3-17), the Project's operational NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would exceed the applicable regional thresholds of significance. As such, Project operational -source NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions are considered significant and unavoidable.

It should be noted that, approximately 91% of the Project's NOx emissions, 93% of the Project's CO emissions, 99% of the Project's PM10 emissions, and 97% of the Project's PM2.5 emissions are derived from vehicle usage which cannot be directly regulated by the City. Neither the Project Applicant nor the Lead Agency can substantively or materially affect reductions in project -related vehicular source emissions beyond the regulatory requirements, and mitigation measures identified herein. While there are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce vehicular emissions, as discussed in the mitigation measures section above, the Project will install electric vehicle supply equipment in accordance with California Building Code which will allow charging stations to be supplied based on demand. Charging stations could lead to less use of gasoline -burning automobiles over time as more electric vehicles and trucks come into usage, and thus, would result in less air pollutant emissions.

Additionally, the Project would be required to implement on -site renewable energy to offset 20% of the expected energy demand for the commercial and industrial land uses as required by compliance with the County of Riverside's Climate Action Plan (CAP). Hence, overall, there are no additional feasible mitigations that would reduce emissions consistent with the 2015 Air Quality Attainment Plan, and this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

The majority of the Project's NOx and PM10, and PM2.5 emissions are derived from are from the transportation sector, and vast majority of the project's emissions are associated with emissions generated by trucks. In general, the state strategy for the transportation sector for medium and heavy- duty trucks is focused on making trucks more efficient and expediting truck turnover and eventually utilizing electric trucks as they become available rather than reducing VMT from trucks. This is in contrast to the passenger vehicle component of the transportation sector where both per -capita VMT Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
reductions and an increase in vehicle efficiency and electric vehicle usage are forecasted to be needed to achieve the overall state emissions reductions goals. Regulating tailpipe emissions is beyond the scope of the Project Applicant or the City and no feasible mitigation measures exist that would reduce these emissions to levels that are less -than -significant.

The Project would also be required to be consistent with the provisions of interior and exterior bicycle storage as a sustainable design strategy consistent with CALGreen. Furthermore, the Project would install 60 electric vehicles (EV) charging stations and clean air/vanpool parking stalls at the Project site, which would contribute to and support the use of more EVs and ridesharing and consequently reduce air quality emissions associated with passenger vehicle travel.

Emissions associated with heavy duty trucks involved in goods movements are generally controlled on the technology side and through fleet turnover of older trucks and engines to newer and cleaner trucks and engines. The first battery -electric heavy -heavy duty trucks are being tested this year and South Coast AQMD is looking to integrate this new technology into large-scale truck operations. The following state strategies would reduce air quality emissions and GHG emissions from the medium and heavy-duty trucks when implemented:
• CARB's Mobile Source Strategy focuses on reducing emissions through the transition to zero and low emission vehicles and from medium -duty and heavy-duty trucks. • CARB's Sustainable Freight Action Plan establishes a goal to improve freight efficiency by 25% by 2030, deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zero emission operation and maximize both zero and near -zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030.
• CARB's Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement (Goods Movement Plan) in California focuses on reducing heavy-duty truck -related emissions focus on establishment of emissions standards for trucks, fleet turnover, truck retrofits, and restriction on truck idling.

While the focus of Goods Movement Plan is to reduce criteria air pollutant and air toxic emissions, the strategies to reduce these pollutants would also generally have a beneficial effect in reducing GHG emissions.

In addition, the US EPA, CARB, and South Coast AQMD are currently in the rule development processes for the following strategies:
• US EPA Cleaner Truck Initiative: In response to a petition from SCQMD, the US EPA has committed to updating its truck engine standard to reduce NOx emissions. • CARB's Transport Refrigeration Unit Regulation. Measure to reduce residual risk from TRUs by transitioning to zero -emission technologies.
• CARB's Advanced Clean Truck Rule: Requires truck manufacturers to sell an increasing percentage of zero -emission trucks by 2030 (up to 15% or 50%, depending on truck type).

Also, this proposed rule would require one-time fleet reporting for large businesses.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
• CARB's Zero -Emission Fleet Rule: Would require some fleets to transition to zero -emissions. • CARB's Heavy -Duty Low NOx Program: Would set new statewide engine standards, test cycles, and warranty and durability requirements to reduce NOx from trucks. • CARB's Heavy -Duty Inspection/Maintenance Program: Would set new inspection and maintenance requirements to ensure emissions controls are functioning properly. • South Coast AQMD's Warehouse Indirect Source Review (ISR): South Coast AQMD adopted an ISR rule for warehouse distribution centers 100,000 square feet and larger. The Warehouse ISR requires warehouse projects to implement facility -based measures or pay a fee that would reduce local air quality emissions.

These strategies would contribute to reducing heavy duty truck emissions associated with the Project over time. The Project would not conflict with these strategies. Trucks on site are required to comply with CARB's Heavy -Duty (Tractor -Trailer) GHG Regulation, currently in effect, which requires SmartWay tractor trailers that include idle -reduction technologies, aerodynamic technologies, and low - rolling resistant tires that would reduce fuel consumption and associated emissions.

Additionally, the Project applicant proposes the Project Design Features (PDFs) 8-1 through PDF 8-5 and Mitigation Measure MM 4.8-1 that would be incorporated into the Project design and constructed or implemented as part of the Project. PDFs are specific design and/or operational characteristics proposed by the Project Applicant that are incorporated into the Project. These measures are all designed to reduce GHG emissions attributable to the Project. Although not quantifiable, some of these measures will have a co -benefit of reducing air quality emissions. Therefore, the emissions summary shown in DEIR Table 4.3-7 is a conservative forecast of air quality emissions and the Project is likely to be less than the total shown in DEIR Table 4.3-7 above.

Despite the design features and mitigation measures provided by the Project and the anticipated regulations implemented by the US EPA and CARB to improve truck efficiency, the estimated long- term emissions generated under full buildout of the Project would exceed the South Coast AQMD's regional operational significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations in the SCAB. In addition, regarding VOC, it is important to note that the majority of on - site operational VOC emissions are derived from consumer products. For analytical purposes, consumer products include cleaning supplies, aerosols, and other consumer products. As such, the Project Applicant cannot meaningfully control the use of consumer products by future building users via mitigation. On this basis, it is concluded that Project operational -source VOC emissions cannot be definitively reduced below applicable South Coast AQMD thresholds and are considered significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact. (DEIR pp. 4.3-51 to 4.3-58)

5.1 .3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would result in cumulatively considerable air quality impacts for construction (NOx) and operational regional emissions for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Finding
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to air quality are discussed in detail in Section 4.3.7 of the DEIR. The Project would result in and cause NAAQS or CAAQS violations due to exceedance of regional thresholds for which the regional is in nonattainment for ozone and particulate matter. The Project would require a General Plan Amendment. Furthermore, the Project would exceed applicable regional thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5, on a project- and cumulative level, see section 5.1.2, above. As such, the Project is considered to be inconsistent with the AQMP and a significant impact would occur. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3- 1 through 4.3-17, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible. The implementation of mitigation measures, the Project's emissions -reducing design features and operational programs are consistent with and support overarching AQMP air pollution reduction strategies. Project support of these strategies would globally promote timely attainment of AQMP air quality standards and would bring the Project into conformance with the AQMP to the extent feasible. However, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce air quality impacts attributable to the proposed Project.

Several mitigation measures were recommended by commenters on the DEIR. These measures were evaluated in the FEIR and were: 1) already required through regulatory requirements, project design features, or mitigation; 2) added as mitigation and included, herein; or 3) determined to be infeasible.

For example, due to the reasons described under Section 5.1.1 "Substantial Evidence" above, the requirement that all heavy-duty vehicles must be zero emission was found to be economically and technologically infeasible because they are not commercially available for the foreseeable future.

Additionally, regulations that control heavy-duty truck emissions are the responsibility of the State and outside of the responsibility and control of the City. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, control of tailpipe emissions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been adopted by that other agency. See FEIR, Response to Comments B-34 through B-63 and D-4 through D-29.

Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The cumulative study area for air quality includes the City and the SCAB. The SCAB is designated as a nonattainment area for State standards of 03, PM10, and PM2.5. The region is also designated as a nonattainment area for federal standards of 03 and PM2.5. Cumulative growth in population, vehicle use, and industrial activity could inhibit efforts to improve regional air quality and attain the ambient air quality standards. Thus, with exception of odors, the setting for this cumulative analysis consists of the SCAB and associated growth and development anticipated in the air basin. For the issue of odors, the cumulative study area includes the Project site and lands in close proximity to the Project site, as odors diminish rapidly with distance from the source.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
According to South Coast AQMD, projects that exceed the project -specific significance thresholds are considered by the South Coast AQMD to be cumulatively considerable. Conversely, projects that do not exceed the project -specific thresholds are generally not considered to be cumulatively significant.

The Project would exceed the Project -specific regional significance thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, impacts with regard to those thresholds would be cumulatively considerable.

As shown in DEIR Table 4.3-6, Maximum Daily Peak Construction Emission Summary, construction activities associated with the Project would exceed the significance results established by the South Coast AQMD for VOC and NOx. However, as discussed above, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-1, Project construction -source emissions of VOCs would be reduced to less than significant levels and NOx would remain significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, impacts associated with Project -related construction emissions for NOx would be significant and cumulatively considerable.

As shown in DEIR Table 4.3-7, Summary of Peak Operation Emissions, Project operation -source emissions would exceed the South Coast AQMD regional thresholds of significance for emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Therefore, impacts associated with Project -related operational emissions would be significant and cumulatively considerable. (DEIR pp. 4.3-49 to 4.3-50) As discussed in Sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.2, the Project would implement development -specific air quality mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1 through 4.3-17), to reduce the Project's construction -source and operational -source air pollutant emissions. Additionally, incorporation of contemporary energy -efficient technologies and operational programs, and compliance with South Coast AQMD emissions reductions and control requirements would reduce Project air pollutant emissions. However, with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, Project's emissions - reducing design features, and operational programs, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pp. 4.3-50 to 4.3-54)

5.2 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

5.2.1 PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES
The Project includes the following Project Design Features (PDFs) that serve to reduce the Project's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) impacts. The PDFs will be included in the Project's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program to ensure implementation of the PDFs.

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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
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.

5.2.2 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold a are discussed in detail in Section 4.8.7 of the DEIR. Project GHG emissions will result in a total of approximately 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year, which would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold. Therefore, impacts are significant. The Project applicant proposes the Project Design Features (PDFs) 8-1 through PDF 8-5 which are measures all designed to reduce GHG emissions attributable to the Project. Moreover, the Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through MM 4.3-17 and MM 4.8-1, which would reduce GHG impacts to the extent feasible. However, even with the implementation of mitigation measures, the Project's GHG emissions are estimated to be approximately 60,638.09 MT CO2e per year and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City finds that the above PDFs and mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce GHG impacts attributable to the proposed Project. There are no additional measures available that would further reduce emissions because the majority of the Project's emissions come from mobile sources which are regulated by the State and not the City of Beaumont.

Several mitigation measures were recommended by commenters on the DEIR. These measures were evaluated in the FEIR and were: 1) already be required through regulatory requirements, project design features, or mitigation; 2) added as mitigation and included, herein; or 3) determined to be infeasible.

For example, due to the reasons described under Section 5.1.1 "Substantial Evidence" above, the requirement that all heavy-duty vehicles must be zero emission was found to be economically and technologically infeasible because they are not commercially available for the foreseeable future.

Additionally, regulations that control heavy-duty truck emissions are the responsibility of the State and outside of the responsibility and control of the City. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, control of tailpipe emissions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been adopted by that other agency. See FEIR, Response to Comments B-34 through B-63 and D-4 through D-29.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
As shown in the DEIR, Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project requires compliance with a variety of GHG reduction measures. Mitigation Measure MM 4.8-1 requires that the Project provide documentation during the plan check process demonstrating that the Project will implement measures identified in DEIR Table 4.8-6, which were obtained from the Riverside County Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Table or that the Project achieves equivalent emission reductions from other measures approved by the City. Implementing these mitigation measures is required to be verified by the City prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy. The Project as described in the FEIR identified a minimum requirement of 581 points under the County of Riverside Climate Action Plan (CAP; DEIR p. 4.8-38). The FEIR and underlying technical GHG emissions quantification is conservative and did not take credit for emissions reductions that would occur associated with the Project Design Features (PDFs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs) specified in the FEIR, including, but not limited to:
• Installation of electric vehicle (EV) passenger vehicle charging stations (Table 4.8-6 & MM 4.8- 1)
• Installation of conduit in tractor trailer parking areas to accommodate installation of EV truck charging stations and to supply power to trailers with transport refrigeration units (TRUs) during the loading/unloading of refrigerated goods and a sufficiently sized electrical room for additional panels (MMs 4.3-7 and 4.3-8)
• On -site idling of no more than three minutes per idling event (MM 4.3-4 & PDF 8-3) • Electrification of truck bays serving refrigerated trucks (MM 4.3-9) • Funding for Zero Emission (ZE) and Near Zero Emission (NZE) vans or trucks by providing a $1 per square foot lease credit to industrial tenants who purchase ZE or NZE vehicles (MM 4.3-12) In addition, the Project Applicant added the following project design features and measures:
• The industrial portion of the Project will meet LEED-ready requirements. • Natural gas will be prohibited in the industrial buildings, • New recycling measures
• An increase in the number of EV charging stations for passenger cars from 60 to 175 as required by the updated CalGreen Building Code requirements.

At the time the DEIR was prepared, only four mitigation measures (MM 4.3-10, MM 4.8-1, MM 4.3- 6, and MM 4.8-1) were quantified to provide a conservative analysis of emissions reductions for Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas emissions. The Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Evaluation (see Attachment A of the Supplemental CEQA Memorandum) provides additional quantification of emissions reductions from project design features and mitigation measures described in the EIR but not quantified and from quantification of the new measures, which together would further reduce GHG emissions by 7,233.29 metric tons annually. In total, the Project would reduce GHG emissions by 10,506.27 metric tons annually. However, the Project would result in a total of approximately 53,404.80 MTCO2e per year and continue to result in a significant and unavoidable impact. The new measures further reduce impacts and do not result in a new significant environmental impact or substantial increase in severity of an environmental impact. Therefore, this does not represent significant new information as defined in Section 15088.5(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The new Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
measures do not change the finding in the Final EIR that there are no additional feasible mitigation measures available that would further reduce emissions because the majority of the Project's emissions come from mobile sources which are regulated by the State and not the City of Beaumont.

To reflect the additional measures added in response to Planning Commission requested modifications, Mitigation Measure MM 4.8-1 has been revised and MM 4.8-2 is proposed to increase the number of points that would be implemented from the Riverside County Greenhouse Gas Emissions Screening Tables and to prohibit natural gas in the industrial and warehouse components of the Project, respectively.

MM 4.8-1
MM 4.8-2
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 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.

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.

The revisions quantify reductions from existing measures, add recently adopted regulatory requirements, or make other minor modifications to the EIR that lessen GHG impacts without causing any new environmental impacts. Therefore, criteria for recirculation set forth in Section 15088.5(a) and (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines are not met.

Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR.
❑ Substantial Evidence
For construction phase Project emissions, GHGs are quantified and amortized over 30 years, the economic life of a development project. To amortize the emissions over the life of the Project, the South Coast AQMD recommends calculating the total GHG emissions for the construction activities, dividing it by a 30 -year project life then adding that number to the annual operational phase GHG emissions. As such, construction emissions were amortized over a 30 -year period and added to the annual operational phase GHG emissions (DEIR Table 4.8-3, Amortized Annual Construction Emissions).

The annual GHG emissions associated with the operations of the Project would result in direct and indirect emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 and would not generate other GHGs of sufficient quantity to affect the analysis, and the focus is on these three GHG emissions. Direct Project -related GHG Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
emissions include emissions from construction activities, area sources, and mobile sources, while indirect sources include emissions from electricity consumption, water demand, and solid waste generation. Project -related GHG emissions were quantified with Ca1EEMod, which relies upon vehicle trip rates and Project -specific land use data to calculate emissions.

Operational emissions generated by the proposed Project at full buildout (i.e., 2027) are used to indicate the total amount of GHG emissions for on -going operational emissions. Emissions will be generated when Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project become operational. Prior to mitigation, Phase 1 GHG emissions will commence when Phase 1 becomes operational and are estimated to be 17,296.43 MT CO2e per year. Phase 1 and Phase 2 combined emissions are estimated to be 58,708.70 MT CO2e per year beginning in 2025 when Phase 2 is completed and becomes operational. The emissions sources from Phase 1 and Phase 2 are the same as for full buildout at Phase 3. The same project design features and individual mitigation measures will be implemented for Phase 1 and Phase 2 operations as each is built and occupied as shown for Phase 3. Because total emissions are lower in Phase 1 and Phase 2 than in total buildout in Phase 3 which becomes operational in 2027, reporting emissions from the Project at full buildout is more conservative since the Project at full buildout would result in more total emissions than either Phase 1 or Phase 2 alone or combined. As such, the analysis conservatively reports emissions totals associated with the Project.

Annual GHG emissions were calculated for operation of the Project under Project Buildout scenario (Year 2027) as shown in DEIR Table 4.8-4, 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions. The Project will result in a total of approximately 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year, without mitigation. The Project operational phase emissions are from operation of the proposed land use, off -road equipment used for daily operations, and from Project -related vehicle trips. The primary source of Project -related emissions would be from mobile -source emissions generated from the Project- related mobile source (79%). The next largest sources of emissions would be from energy usage (12%) followed by waste (5%). Project Buildout GHG emissions would exceed the 3,000 MTCO2e per year threshold; therefore, the Project would generate greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment. Impacts related to GHG emissions are considered significant. (DEIR pp. 4.8-34 to 4.8- 36).

The Project would be required to implement Air Quality Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through MM

4.3-17, listed above which also serve to reduce GHG emissions, and MM 4.8-1 and MM 4.8-2, as follows:

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 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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
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.

Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through 4.3-17, MM 4.8-1 and MM 4.8-2 reduce emissions attributable to the proposed project for both air quality and GHG emissions. However, most of the measures cannot be quantified due to some uncertainty of the exact level of use or details needed to provide substantial evidence of reductions. As an example, the Ca1EEMod model does not provide reductions for the 60 EV charging systems and the TDM Program does not have enough detail to quantify at this time.

Therefore, the Project GHG emissions with mitigation is a conservative forecast of GHG emissions.

As shown in DEIR Table 4.8-10, 2027 Project Buildout GHG Emissions with Mitigation, the annual GHG emissions associated with the Project under Project Buildout scenario (Year 2027) with the implementation of mitigation measures are estimated to be approximately 60,638.09 MT CO2e per year, which exceeds the 3,000 MT CO2e per year threshold. At the time the DEIR was prepared, only four mitigation measures (MM 4.3-10, MM 4.8-1, MM 4.3-6, and MM 4.8-1) were quantified to provide a conservative analysis of emissions reductions. With the additional quantification of emissions reductions from project design features and mitigation measures described in the DEIR but not quantified and from quantification of the new measures (industrial portion of the Project will meet LEED-ready requirements, new recycling measures, an increase in number of EV charging stations for passenger cars from 60 to 175 as required by the updated CalGreen Building Code requirements, and MM 4.8-2), the Project would result in a total of approximately 53,404.80 MTCO2e per year and continue to result in a significant and unavoidable impact (Attachment A of the Supplemental CEQA Memorandum).

No additional feasible mitigation measures are available that can reduce impacts to less than significant. The Project incorporates all feasible mitigation measures that could be implemented to further reduce the Project's GHG emissions below the 3,000 MTCO2e threshold. There are no additional measures available that would further reduce emissions because the majority of the Project's emissions come from mobile sources which are regulated by the State and not the City.

The reliance on carbon offsets to reduce either the Project's mobile or non -mobile emissions is also not feasible; there is no local program available at this time that would meet CEQA's criteria for this to be a valid mitigation measure. To reduce emissions, purchased offset credits must be genuine, quantifiable, additional, and verifiable. Even offset credits purchased from CARB-approved offset project registries have been determined to not adequately assure that purchased offset credits accurately and reliably represent actual emissions reductions or cannot guarantee that such reductions are additional to any reduction that would occur under business -as -usual operations and reductions required by law. Such offsets have been determined to not comply with CEQA's definition of a valid mitigation measure. See Golden Door Properties, LLC v. County of San Diego (2020) 50 Ca1.App.5th 467.

The City, as Lead Agency and the entity responsible for enforcing any mitigation measures incorporated into the Project and relied upon to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, has no Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
enforcement authority over offset credits that fund carbon reduction projects outside of the City. Many offset credits "sell" reductions in emissions generated outside of California, which may not be verifiable. International offsets may also be difficult to verify and guarantee. Notably, CARB does not have enforcement authority over such reductions, let alone the City. Thus, the purchase of offset credits is not a feasible mitigation measure to reduce the emissions impact of the proposed Project and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pp. 4.8-60 to 4.8-61)

5.2.3 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. ❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.8.7 of the DEIR. The Project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions. However, despite plan consistency, the Project's long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the City's significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. As such, a significant GHG impact would occur as a result of the proposed Project.

The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through 4.3-17, MM 4.8-1 and MM 4.8-2, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible, however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
As previously stated, pursuant to 15064.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, a lead agency may rely on qualitative analysis or performance -based standards such as complying with an applicable plan to determine the significance of impacts from GHG emissions. Plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions are the City's CAP (Sustainable Beaumont), County of Riverside CAP, SCAG's Connect SoCal, and City and County General Plan policies related to GHG emissions. A consistency analysis with the City's and County of Riverside CAP along with the SCAG's Connect SoCal, City and County General Plan is shown in DEIR Tables 4.8-5 through 4.8-9. As shown in these tables, the Project would not conflict with the City approved Sustainable Beaumont: The City's Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions in 2015 (which has not been updated), the County of Riverside Climate Action Plan (CAP) (which does not apply to the Project after annexation into the City), SCAG's 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS (Connect SoCal), the Riverside County General Plan policies related to the reduction of GHG emissions (which do not apply to the Project after annexation into the City), and the City's General Plan goals and policies related to reducing GHG emissions. (DEIR pp. 4.8-37 to 4.8-59) A consistency analysis with the City's and County of Riverside CAP along with the SCAG's Connect SoCal, City and County General Plan is also presented below.

City of Beaumont CAP Consistency
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
The City approved Sustainable Beaumont: The City's Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions in 2015, which serves as a long-term plan to achieve sustainability in the City by reducing GHG emissions from existing and future development. Although it has expired, nevertheless, as shown in Table 4.8-5, Applicability of Sustainable Beaumont Goals, the Project would not conflict with the plan's goals.

Accordingly, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Table 4.8-5 Applicability of Sustainable Beaumont Goals Sustainable Beaumont Goal
Applicability
Goal 1: Increase energy
efficiency in existing residential
units.

Not Applicable. The Project does not include existing residential land uses therefore this goal does not apply.

Goal 2: Increase energy
efficiency in new residential
development.

Not Applicable. The Project does not propose new residential land uses therefore this goal does not apply.

Goal 3: Increase energy
efficiency in existing
commercial units.

Not Applicable. The Project does not include any existing commercial development; therefore, this goal does not apply.

Goal 4: Increase energy
efficiency in new commercial
development.

No Conflict. The Project would comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards and applicable mitigation measures that would improve energy efficiency.

Goal 5: Increase energy
efficiency through water
efficiency.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate low flow water fixtures and implement water reducing features (see DEIR Tables 3-2 and 4.8-6).

Goal 6: Decrease energy demand
through reducing urban heat
island effect.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate light-colored building materials that would reduce heat reflection in accordance with the Section 140.3(a) of the California Building Code.

Goal 7: Decrease GHG emissions
through reducing vehicle miles
traveled.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate a TDM program to reduce vehicle miles traveled, as required by Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-6.

Goal 8: Decrease GHG emissions
through reducing solid waste
generation.

No Conflict. The Project will comply with AB 939 which requires diversion of a minimum of 50% of solid waste from landfills.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Sustainable Beaumont Goal
Applicability
Goal 9: Decrease GHG emissions
through increasing clean energy
use.

No Conflict. The Project will incorporate solar photovoltaic solar panels (see DEIR Table 4.8-6).

Goal 10: Decrease GHG
emissions from new development
through performance standards.

No Conflict. Although the City has not implemented a GHG screening table, the Project is consistent with and implements GHG screening tables that have been adopted by the County of Riverside.

Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 4-3)
County of Riverside CAP Consistency
The Project includes annexation into the City of Beaumont from the County of Riverside. Under the County of Riverside Climate Action Plan (CAP), projects that generate more than 3,000 MT CO2e, can be determined to be consistent with the County's CAP if the projects implement a minimum of 100 points based on the County's CAP Screening Tables. The Screening Tables establishes a points system that assigns values for each GHG emissions mitigation design element or operational program feature incorporated into a given development project. For informational purposes, the Project is also shown to be consistent with the Riverside County CAP. As shown in Table 4.8-6, CAP Screening Table for GHG Implementation Measures, the Project originally would achieve a minimum of 581 points, which is significantly more than the required minimum of 100 points to determine consistency with the County's CAP. Mitigation Measure 4.8-1 was revised to require a minimum of 1,850 points. As such, the project would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the County's CAP which aims to reduce GHG emissions through design and operational controls.

Table 4.8-6 CAP Screening Table for GHG Implementation Measures Description
Points
EE10.A.1
Insulation
Enhanced Insulation
(rigid wall insulation R-13, roof/attic R-38)
11 EE10.A.2
Windows
Greatly Enhanced Window Insulation
(0.28 or less U -factor, 0.22 or less SHGC)
7 EE10-A.3
Cool Roofs
Modest Cool Roof
(CRRC Rated 0.15 aged solar reflectance, 0.75 thermal emittance) 7 EE10.B.1
Heating/Cooling
Distribution System
Distribution loss reduction with inspection (HERS Verified Duct Leakage or Equivalent)
8 EE10.B.2
Space Heating/Cooling
Equipment
Improved Efficiency HVAC (EER 14/78% AFUE or 8 HSPF)
4 EE10B.4
Water Heaters
Improved Efficiency Water Heater (0.675 Energy Factor)
8 EE10.B.6
Artificial Lighting
Efficient Lights (25% of in -unit fixtures considered high efficiency. High efficiency is defined as 40 lumens/watt for 15 watt or less fixtures, 50 lumens/watt for 15-40 watt fixtures, 60 lumens/watt for fixtures >40 watt) 5 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
EE10.B.7
Appliances
Description
Energy Star Commercial Refrigerator and Commercial Dishwasher Points
4 E 1 B.1
Photovoltaic
Solar Photovoltaic panels or wind installed on buildings or in collective arrangements such that the total power provided augments: 20% of the power needs of the Project.
e.g., 30%= 8 points, 40% = 12 points, 50% = 16 points, 60% = 19 points 19 W2.D.1
Water Efficient
Landscaping
Only low water using plants
3 W2.D.2
Water Efficient
Irrigation Systems
Weather based irrigation control systems combined with drip irrigation (demonstrate 20% reduced water)
3 W2.E.1
Toilets
Water Efficient Showerheads (2.0 gpm)
2 W2.E.2
Toilets
Water Efficient Toilets/Urinals (1.5 gpm)
3 W2.E.3
Faucets
Water Efficient faucets (1.28 gpm)
2 W2.E.4
Faucets
Water Efficient dishwasher (20% water savings)
2 W2.F.1
Recycled Water
Graywater (purple pipe) irrigation system on site
(p p p) g y
5 Car/vanpool program with preferred parking
2 T3.A.3
Employee
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Programs
Bike lockers and secure racks
Showers and changing facilities
3 T1 .F.1
Parking
Provide reserved preferential parking spaces for car -share, carpool, and ultra -low or zero emission vehicles.
1 T4.B.1
Electric Vehicle (EV)
Recharging
Install EV charging stations in garages/parking areas
480a
S1.B.1
Recycling
Provide separated recycling bins within each building/floor and provide large external recycling collection bins at central location for collection trash pick-up.
2 Total Points
581
Minimum Target
100
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022d, Table 4-1)
a The Project is anticipated to include 60 EV charging stations. Per the Screening Tables, each station is 8 points.

SCAG's 2020-2045 RTC/SCS (Connect SoCal)
The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS, developed with input from local governments, including the City of Beaumont, establishes GHG emissions goals for automobiles and light -duty trucks for 2035, 2045 and establishes an overall GHG target for the region that is consistent with the statewide GHG-reduction targets for the post -2020 statewide GHG reduction goals. The 2020-2045 RTP/SCS links appropriate land use planning with the goal of improving the efficiency of the region's network to serve the mobility needs of goods and people. The RTP/SCS is supported by a combination of transportation and land use strategies that help the region achieve state GHG emission reduction goals and federal Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Clean Air Act requirements, support the vital goods movement industry, and use resources more efficiently.

Table 4.8-7, SCAG Connect SoCal Applicability Analysis, provides an evaluation of the of the Project consistency with the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS goals. Additionally, while VMT associated with heavy duty trucks involved in goods movement is generally outside the realm of the RTP/SCS, which primarily focuses on VMT associated with passenger vehicles, the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS includes the following goods -movement strategies that could benefit the Project from a regional and macro -scale level:
• Clean Freight Corridor System/East-West Freight Corridor. Establishing a freight corridor system to connect the San Pedro Ports and industrial cluster areas in Los Angeles and the Inland Empire.
• Truck Bottleneck Relief Strategy. Working to relieve the top 57 truck bottlenecks. Examples of bottleneck relief strategies include ramp metering, extension of merging lanes, ramp and interchange improvements, capacity improvements and auxiliary lane additions. • Truck Climbing Lanes. Installing dedicated truck climbing lanes along key corridors, such as Interstate 10 (I-10), I-15, State Route 60 (SR -60), to enable other vehicles to move at a faster pace, thereby reducing congestion.

Table 4.8-7 SCAG Connect SoCal Applicability Analysis
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
1 Encourage regional
economic prosperity and
global competitiveness.

No Conflict. This policy would be implemented by cities and the counties within the SCAG region as part of comprehensive local and regional planning efforts. The City of Beaumont is identified as one of the priority growth areas for job centers in the region under the Connect SoCal Plan. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with industrial and commercial buildings that are designed to meet contemporary industry standards and operational characteristics, that can accommodate a wide variety of users and are economically competitive with similar industrial buildings in the local area and region. The Project would assist the City to meet its economic goal for fiscal strength and stability through business investment and employment generation. New job opportunities generated by the Project would improve the jobs to housing balance within the City (see DEIR Section 4.14, Population and Housing). Accordingly, the Project would not impede the economic development in the City of Beaumont or the region.
2 Improve mobility,
accessibility, reliability,
and travel safety for
people and goods.

No Conflict. The Project site is located approximately 12.4 miles east of March Air Reserve Base/Inland Port (MARB/IP). As such, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Connect SoCal
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
m
development of the site with the Project would efficiently facilitate the movement of goods.

Additionally, the Project is located at the western edge of the City of Beaumont and 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. The Project is along the south side of the SR -60 and access to the regional transportation system is provided from Potrero Boulevard and 4th Street.

SR -60 also provides access to Interstate 10 (I-10), which is located approximately 2.0 miles north of the Project site, and I-215, which is located approximately 14.6 miles west of the Project site. Due to the Project site's proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site would efficiently reach the State highway system to facilitate the movement of goods throughout the region. 3 Enhance the
preservation, security,
and resilience of the
regional transportation
system.

No Conflict. This policy would be implemented by cities and the counties within the SCAG region as part of the overall planning and maintenance of the regional transportation system.

Additionally, this policy provides guidance to City staff to monitor the transportation network and to continue to coordinate with other agencies as appropriate. The implementation of the Project would have no adverse effect on such planning or maintenance efforts.
4 Increase person and
goods movement and
travel choices within the
transportation system.

No Conflict. The Project involves the development of a
contemporary industrial park that abuts a developing industrial area along a regional transportation network (SR -60, I-10 and I- 79). The Project would generate approximately 5,456 permanent jobs. By providing job opportunities in a housing -rich area and industrial uses in close proximity to the regional transportation network; the Project increases person, goods movement, and travel choices within the transportation system.
5 Reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and improve
air quality.

No Conflict. An analysis of the Project's environmental impacts is provided throughout this EIR and mitigation measures are specified where warranted. Air quality impacts are addressed in DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality. Impacts would be reduced to the maximum extent feasible through the implementation of
Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features, which limit truck idling, provide incentives for using clean engines and equipment, require installation of conduit for EV truck charging stations, electric indoor material handling equipment and off -road equipment, preferential parking for fuel -efficient and carpool/van vehicles, EV charging stations.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
Additionally, as discussed herein, the Project would incorporate measures related to building design, landscaping, and energy systems to promote the efficient use of energy. The Project would be consistent with the County of Riverside CAP requirement by achieving a minimum of 1,850 points, which is significantly more than the required minimum of 100 points to determine
consistency. Furthermore, as demonstrated in Table 4.8-5 of the Draft EIR, the Project would not conflict with the City's Sustainable Beaumont: The City's Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions, which serves as a long-term plan to achieve sustainability in the City by reducing GHG emissions from existing and future development. Although the Project would exceed the City's GHG significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year, all feasible mitigation measures have been included to reduce GHG impacts. Specifically, Mitigation Measures 4.3-3 through 4.3-13 relating to air quality would also reduce GHG impacts and Mitigation Measure 4.8-1 requires verification that the Project would achieve a minimum of 1,850 points from the County CAP Screening Table for GHG Implementation
Measures.

Moreover, the City of Beaumont is identified as one of the priority growth areas for job centers in the region under the Connect SoCal Plan. When growth is concentrated in Job Centers, the length of vehicle trips for residents can be reduced, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving air quality.
7 Adapt to changing
climate and support an
integrated regional
development pattern and
transportation network.

No Conflict. Connect SoCal indicates that since the adoption of the 2016 RTP/SCS, there have been significant drivers of change in the goods movement industry including emerging and new technologies, more complex supply chain strategies, evolving consumer demands and shifts in trade policies. E -commerce continues to be one of the most influential factors shaping goods movement. As previously identified, the Project involves the development of a Project site, historically vacant and
undeveloped, with industrial and commercial buildings that would diversity the City's economy and bring employment opportunities closer to the local workforce. Co -locating jobs near housing improves the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces greenhouse gas emissions caused by long commutes and
contributes to integrated development patterns. Further, the Project site is located adjacent to an area surrounded by industrial development in the City, which is in close proximity to key freeway infrastructure (e.g., I-215, SR -60, I-10, etc.), thereby reducing travel distances. Development of the Project in western Riverside County, also would shorten the distance that goods need to travel between a logistics facility to their final destinations ("last mile" transit times).

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Applicability
8 Leverage new
transportation
technologies and data-
driven solutions that
result in more efficient
travel.

No Conflict. Connect SoCal indicates that the advancement of automation is expected to have considerable impacts throughout regional supply chains. Notably, warehouses, such as those proposed with the Project, are increasingly integrating automation to improve operational efficiencies in response to the surge in direct -to -consumer e -commerce. Additionally, continued developments and demonstrations of automated truck
technologies will alter the goods movement environment with far - reaching impacts ranging from employment to highway safety.

The Project would meet contemporary industry standards and operational characteristics relative to transportation technologies and data -driven solutions.
9 Encourage development
of diverse housing types
in areas that are
supported by multiple
transportation options.

No Conflict. The implementation of the Project would result in the development of the Project site with industrial, commercial, and open space/conservation uses. Implementation of the Project would not interfere with the City's ability to encourage the development of diverse housing types that are supported by multiple transportation options in other parts of the City, as appropriate.
10 Promote conservation of
natural and agricultural
lands and restoration of
habitats.

No Conflict. The Project site is in a rural yet developing area of the City of Beaumont. The Project site contains natural lands and contains suitable habitat for native wildlife or plant species. In general, the Project site's natural lands are in the northwestern and southeastern portions, while development would occur in the northeast portion of the site. The Project Applicant proposes to designate 263.5 acres as Open Space and Open Space -
Conservation (PAs 9 and 10), including the Project's
northwestern and southeastern portions. These areas would remain undeveloped. Additionally, the Project site does not support agricultural uses. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not interfere with the City's ability to promote the conservation of natural and agricultural lands and the restoration of habitats.

Implementing SCAG's RTP/SCS will help reduce the regional GHG emissions from transportation, thus helping to achieve statewide emission reduction targets. As shown, the Project would be consistent with and would not conflict with the stated goals of the RTP/SCS; therefore, the proposed Project would not interfere with SCAG's ability to achieve the region's year post -2020 mobile source GHG reduction targets outlined in the RTP/SCS.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
County of Riverside General Plan
The Riverside County General Plan has many policies that help reduce GHG emissions. Policies that indirectly contribute to reducing GHG emissions include Land Use strategies for improving air quality by emphasizing alternative transportation options for communities, energy conservation, reduce automobile use, and more. GHG reduction programs and measures listed in the CAP also support and help most of these General Plan policies. Table 4.8-8, County of Riverside General Plan Applicability Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project's consistency with County of Riverside General Plan goals and policies related to reducing GHG emissions. As shown in Table 4.8-8, the Project would not result in any inconsistency with the applicable County General Plan goals and policies, even though they would not be applicable after annexation. Accordingly, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

Table 4.8-8 County of Riverside General Plan Applicability Analysis General Plan Policy
Applicability
Land Use
LU 2.1 Accommodate land use development in
accordance with the patterns and distribution of use and density depicted on the General Plan Land Use Map
(Figure LU-1) and the Area Plan Land Use Maps, in
accordance with the following:
a. Provide a land use mix at the countywide and area
plan levels based on projected need and supported by
evaluation of impacts to the environment, economy,
infrastructure, and services.
b. Accommodate a range of community types and
character, from agricultural and rural enclaves to urban and suburban communities.
c. Provide for a broad range of land uses, intensities, and densities, including a range of residential, commercial, business, industry, open space, recreation, and public
facilities uses.
d. Concentrate growth near community centers that
provide a mixture of commercial, employment,
entertainment, recreation, civic, and cultural uses to the greatest extent possible.
e. Concentrate growth near or within existing urban and suburban areas to maintain the rural and open space
character of Riverside County to the greatest extent
possible.
f. Site development to capitalize upon multi -modal
transportation opportunities and promote compatible
land use arrangements that reduce reliance on the
automobile.

No Conflict. The Project would require a General Plan
Amendment and therefore the Project would not be
consistent with the County's General Plan Land Use
Plan and Area Plan Land Use Maps. However, the
Project would provide a broad range of land uses and
accommodate land use development in accordance with
policies (a —g).

Specifically, the Project would provide a broad range of land uses on the Project site. 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 concentrate employment growth near
entertainment in a housing -rich community adjacent to
SR -60 and the City of Beaumont's Interstate
Employment Subarea. This subarea will be developed
with industrial and commercial land uses. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

2.1. Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
g. Prevent inappropriate development in areas that are
environmentally sensitive or subject to severe natural
hazards.

LU 4.1 Require that new developments be located and
designed to visually enhance, not degrade the character of the surrounding area through consideration of the
following concepts:
e. Pursue energy efficiency through street configuration building orientation, and landscaping to capitalize on
shading and facilitate solar energy, as provided for in Title 24 Part 6 and/or Part 11, of the California Code of Regulations (CCR).
f. Incorporate water conservation techniques, such as
groundwater recharge basins, use of porous pavement,
drought tolerant landscaping, and water recycling, as
appropriate.
j. Provide safe and convenient vehicular access and
reciprocal access between adjacent commercial uses.
p. Require that new development be designed to provide
adequate space for pedestrian connectivity and access,
recreational trails, vehicular access and parking,
supporting functions, open space, and other pertinent
elements.
r. Site buildings access points along sidewalks,
pedestrian areas, and bicycle routes, and include
amenities that encourage pedestrian activity.

No Conflict. The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
provides an industrial/commercial business park that
capitalizes on the property's location south of SR -60.

The Project would complement the existing and planned
land uses in this portion the City of Beaumont. The
Project site is within the northwestern portion of the
City's SOI and is bordered to the east by land designated for industrial and commercial uses.

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.

As discussed in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 - inch recycled water line that would connect to the
existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

The Project also includes a detailed circulation plan,
which is organized to ensure efficient access to
individual tenant areas, as well as to public places.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy LU 4.1.

LU 8.12 Improve the relationship and ratio between jobs and housing so that residents have an opportunity to live and work within the county.

No Conflict. The Project would generate a substantial
number of jobs that would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The
Project would provide opportunities for positive
economic benefit to the City and County. The Project
would create 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.

Refer also to DEIR Section 4.14, Population and
Housing. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU 8.12.

LU 11.1 Provide sufficient commercial and industrial
development opportunities in order to increase local
No Conflict. As discussed previously, the Project would allow for the development on the Project site of a
maximum of 246,000 square feet (sf) of general
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
employment levels and thereby minimize long-distance
commuting.
commercial uses in addition to a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf) and a maximum of 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses,
which would create a substantial number of jobs that
would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The Project would
accommodate a wide variety of users, and would be
economically competitive with similar industrial
buildings in the local area and region. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

11.1. LU 11.3 Accommodate the development of community
centers and concentrations of development to reduce
reliance on the automobile and help improve air quality.

No Conflict. The Project site is in proximity to SR -60 and the City of Beaumont's Interstate Employment
Subarea, which will be developed with industrial and
commercial land uses. Due to the Project site's
proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site
would efficiently reach the State highway system to
facilitate the movement of goods throughout the region.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy LU 11.3.

LU 11.4 Provide options to the automobile in
communities, such as transit, bicycle and pedestrian
trails, to help improve air quality.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy LU

11.4. LU 11.5 Ensure that all new developments reduce
Greenhouse Gas emissions as prescribed in the Air
Quality Element and Climate Action Plan.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project would be consistent with the County's CAP
requirement to achieve at least 100 points and thus the Project is considered to have a less than significant
individual and cumulatively considerable impact on
GHG emissions. Therefore, the Project would not
conflict with General Plan Policy LU 11.5.

Circulation —
C 5.2 Encourage the use of drought -tolerant native
plants and the use of recycled water for roadway
landscaping.

No Conflict. As shown on DEIR Figure 3-14, Master
Landscape Plan, the Project provides a plant palette for three categories: Entrance Planting, Native California
Planting, and Industrial Screen Planting; and selected to complement and enhance the setting of the site, while
ensuring the conservation of the site's natural vegetation Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
and habitats. Alternative plant species may be used
provided that they are drought -tolerant and complement the Project's design theme. As disused in DEIR Section

4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would
construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line
that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled
water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon
development at 4th Street. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy C 5.2.

Multipurpose Open Space
OS 1.4 Promote the use of recycled water for landscape
irrigation.

No Conflict. As disused in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on - site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy OS 1.4.

OS 16.1 Continue to implement Title 24 of the
California Code of Regulations (the "California
Building Standards Code") particularly Part 6 (the
California Energy Code) and Part 11 (the California
Green Building Standards Code), as amended and
adopted pursuant to County ordinance. Establish
mechanisms and incentives to encourage architects and
builders to exceed the energy efficiency standards of
within CCR Title 24.

No Conflict. Energy efficiency/energy conservation
attributes of the Project would be complemented by
increasingly stringent State and federal regulatory
actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle
emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities
energy efficiencies mandated under California building
codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building
Standards Code). The Project would comply with Title
24 of the California Code of Regulations and 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. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS 16.1.

OS 16.2 Specify energy efficient materials and systems, including shade design technologies, for county
buildings
No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019
Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures
which include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and
energy efficient heating/cooling equipment.

Additionally, as shown on DEIR Figure 3-14, Master
Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping presents a
combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, low
shrubs, and masses of groundcovers. Therefore, the
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS

16.2. OS 16.8 Promote coordination of new public facilities with mass transit service and other alternative
transportation services, including bicycles, and design structures to enhance mass transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian use.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS

16.8. OS 16.9 Encourage increased use of passive, solar design and day -lighting in existing and new structures.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019
Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures
which include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and
energy efficient heating/cooling equipment.

Additionally, 20% of the Project's energy consumption
would be from solar consistent with the CAP
requirement. Furthermore, the Project's architecture
would include skylights and clerestory windows to
allow for increased use of passive solar design and day - lighted in new structures. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy OS 16.9.

Air Quality
AQ 4.1 Require the use of all feasible building
materials/methods which reduce emissions.

No Conflict. During the Project's construction phase,
water would be sprayed throughout the site to abate dust particulate emissions. Air quality impacts are address in DEIR Section 4.3, Air Quality. Impacts would be
reduced to the maximum extent feasible through the
implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.3-2 through

4.3-9, which limit truck idling, provide incentives for using clean engines and equipment, require installation of conduit for EV truck charging stations, electric indoor material handling equipment and off -road equipment,
preferential parking for fuel -efficient and carpool/van vehicles, EV charging stations. Additionally, the Project is consistent with the CAP requirement that 20% of the
Project's energy consumption would be from solar. As
such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan
Policy AQ 4.1.

AQ 4.2 Require the use of all feasible efficient heating equipment and other appliances, such as water heaters,
No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project would include the use of energy efficient
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
swimming pool heaters, cooking equipment,
refrigerators, furnaces and boiler units.
heating/cooling equipment, water heaters, and
appliances. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 4.2.

AQ 4.6 Require stationary air pollution sources to
comply with applicable air district rules and control
measures.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 4.3, Air
Quality, the Project would comply with applicable air
district rules and control measures to reduce operational air quality emissions. All feasible mitigation measure
has been incorporated to reduce air quality impacts to
the extent feasible. Therefore, the Project would not
conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 4.6.

AQ 5.1 Utilize source reduction, recycling and other
appropriate measures to reduce the amount of solid
waste disposed of in landfills.

No Conflict. The Project would be required to
coordinate with Waste Management, Inc. to develop a
collection program for recyclables, such as paper,
plastics, glass, and aluminum, in accordance with local and State programs, including AB 341, Mandatory
Commercial Recycling, and the California Solid Waste
Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 5.1.

AQ 5.4 Encourage the incorporation of energy -efficient design elements, including appropriate site orientation and the use of shade and windbreak trees to reduce fuel consumption for heating and cooling.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019
Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures
which include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and
energy efficient heating/cooling equipment.

Additionally, as shown on Figure 3-14, Master
Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping presents a
combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, low
shrubs, and masses of groundcovers. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

5.4. AQ 8.6 Encourage employment centers in close
proximity to residential uses.

No Conflict. The Project would generate a substantial
number of jobs that would be filled by residents of the City and surrounding communities in the County. The
land to the north of the Project site, on the opposite side of SR -60 is designated for residential uses. The Project would create 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.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 8.6.

AQ 8.8 Promote land use patterns which reduce the
number and length of motor vehicle trips.

No Conflict. The Project site is situated in close
proximity to the regional transportation network which
connects the site to the Ports of Long Beach and Los
Angeles, both major gateways for international trade,
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
the Inland Empire and the Western United States.

Located along the south side of the SR -60 Freeway,
access to the regional transportation system from the site is provided via 4th Street, and access to the SR -60
Freeway from 4th Street is provided at the Potrero
Boulevard interchange, approximately 1.25 miles to the
east. Due to the Project site's proximity to SR -60, trucks accessing the Project site would efficiently reach the
State highway system to facilitate the movement of
goods throughout the region. Therefore, the Project
would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 8.8.

AQ 8.9 Promote land use patterns that promote
alternative modes of travel.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of
sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack
Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant
proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths
to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

8.9. AQ 20.3 Reduce VMT and GHG emissions by
improving circulation network efficiency.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 4.17,
Transportation, Transportation demand management
(TDM) strategies have been evaluated for reducing
VMT impacts. The Project also includes a detailed
circulation plan, which is organized to ensure efficient access to individual tenant areas, as well as to public places. The Project would locate industrial uses adjacent to SR -60, a 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; thereby
improving goods movement circulation efficiency.

As demonstrated herein, impacts related to GHG
emissions are less than significant. Therefore, the
Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ

20.3. AQ 20.6 Reduce emissions from commercial vehicles, through VMT, by requiring all new commercial
buildings, in excess of 162,000 square feet, to install circuits and provide capacity for electric vehicle
charging stations.

No Conflict. As shown in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the Project
would provide a total of 15 electric vehicle charging
stations and electric conduit for truck charging.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 20.6.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
AQ 20.7 Reduce VMT through increased densities in
urban centers and encouraging emphasis on mixed use
to provide residential, commercial and employment
opportunities in closer proximity to each other. Such
measures will also support achieving the appropriate
jobs -housing balance within the communities.

No Conflict. The Project would provide employment
opportunities within close proximity to residential uses.

The Project would create 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. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.7.

AQ 20.10 Reduce energy consumption of the new
developments (residential, commercial and industrial)
through efficient site design that takes into
consideration solar orientation and shading, as well as passive solar design.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019
Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures
which include cool roofs to reduce energy consumption.

Additionally, 20% of the Project's energy consumption
would be from solar consistent with the CAP
requirement. Additionally, as shown on Figure 3-14,
Master Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping
presents a combination of evergreen and deciduous
trees, low shrubs, and masses of groundcovers to
provide adequate shading. Therefore, the Project would
not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.10.

AQ 20.11 Increase energy efficiency of the new
developments through efficient use of utilities (water, electricity, natural gas) and infrastructure design. Also, increase energy efficiency through use of energy
efficient mechanical systems and equipment.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the
Project shall implement the County of Riverside's 2019
Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures
which include energy efficient heating/cooling system,
water heaters, appliances, water efficient irrigation
systems, and recycle water. Therefore, the Project
would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.11.

AQ 20.13 Reduce water use and wastewater generation
in both new and existing housing, commercial and
industrial uses. Encourage increased efficiency of water use for agricultural activities.

No Conflict. As disused in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on - site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 20.13.

AQ 20.14 Reduce the amount of water used for
landscaping irrigation through implementation of
County Ordinance 859 and increase use of non -potable
water.

No Conflict. As shown in DEIR Table 4.8-6, the Project
would include water efficient landscaping.

Additionally, as disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy AQ 20.14.

AQ 20.17 Protect vegetation from increased fire risks
associated with drought conditions to ensure biological No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 4.20,
Wildfire, the Project would implement on -site
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability 1
carbon remains sequestered in vegetation and not
released to the atmosphere through wildfires.
defensible space (FMA and fuel maintenance zone),
which would consist of asphalt roadways, parking stalls, loading zones, irrigated landscaping, and irrigated slope protecting landscaping to preclude wildfire impacts.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General
Plan Policy AQ 20.17.

City of Beaumont General Plan
Table 4.8-9, City of Beaumont General Plan Applicability Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project's consistency with the City's General Plan goals and policies related to reducing GHG emissions. As shown in Table 4.8-9, the Project would not result in any inconsistency with the applicable General Plan goals and policies. Impacts regarding the Project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions and generation of GHG emissions were determined to be less than significant. However, despite plan consistency, the Project's long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the City's significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year, even after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures. As such, the Project's GHG emission impacts would be significant.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Table 4.8-9 City of Beaumont General Plan Applicability Analysis General Plan Policy
Applicability
Land Use and Community Design (Chapter 3)
Goal 3.1: A City structure that enhances the quality of life of residents, meets the community's vision for the future, and connects new growth areas together with established Beaumont neighborhoods.

Policy 3.1.12: Establish buffers between
open space areas and urban development by
encouraging less intensive rural
development within proximity to the open
space areas.

No Conflict. The Project site is bordered to the west and to the south by open space and conservation land uses. The Specific Plan designates PA 9 for Open Space, which accommodates landscaped, manufactured slopes, fuel modification areas, project signage, as well as the natural slopes which form a buffer between the Specific Plan's developed areas and the Open Space — Conservation in PA 10. These areas would not be developed with the Project's proposed structures. Some disturbance would occur within the areas designated as Open Space; however, the disturbance would be limited to grading and landscaping. Therefore, the Project would establish a buffer between open space areas and urban development and would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.1.12.

Goal 3.7: A City with a high -quality pedestrian environment for people, fostering interaction, activity, and safety
Policy 3.7.2: Create pedestrian -oriented
streetscapes by establishing unified street
tree planting, sidewalk dimensions and
maintenance, pedestrian amenities, and
high -quality building frontages in all new
development.

No Conflict. Passive recreational opportunities are provided to employees and visitors of Project site through curb -adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths. These amenities encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project. Provisions for sidewalks and pedestrian walkways, bicycle storage
facilities, and employee and visitor gathering areas interior to the planning areas are set forth in Chapter 4, Design Guidelines, of the Specific Plan.

The Project includes installation of sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way. The Project provides a plant palette for three categories: Entrance Planting, Native California Planting, and Industrial Screen Planting. Landscaping is selected to
complement and enhance the setting of the site, while ensuring the conservation of the site's natural vegetation and habitats.

Therefore, the Project would create pedestrian -oriented streetscapes by establishing unified street tree planting, sidewalks, and high -quality building frontages. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.7.2.

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

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 3.8.3 Ensure the design of context-
specific streetscaping that promotes safe
travel for all users, including signs, curbs,
trees and landscaping to provide a more
pleasant environment for drivers, cyclists,
and pedestrians.

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. In addition, all driveways and intersections to and from the Project site would be stop -controlled to ensure safety for all transportation users.

Based on the Project's roadway improvements, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.8.3.

Mobility (Chapter 4)
Goal 4.1: Promote smooth traffic flows and balance operational efficiency, technological, and economic feasibility.

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

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would provide pedestrian and bicycle network
improvements within the development connecting to existing off -site facilities to the east along 4th Street. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.1.5.

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

Policy 4.3.5: Integrate land use and
transportation infrastructure to support
higher -density development, a balanced
mix of residential and commercial uses, and
a connected system of sidewalks, bikeways,
greenways, and transit.

No Conflict. The Project involves a mixed development of 232.6 acres of light industrial use, 30.2 acres of commercial use (i.e., hotel, restaurants, recreation -based retail uses), 124.7 acres of open space, and 152.4 acres of open space -
conservation use. The Project also includes a detailed
circulation plan, which is organized to ensure efficient access to individual tenant areas, as well as to public places. Because the Project would integrate land use and transportation infrastructure to support a balanced mix of land uses, the Project would not conflict with Policy 4.3.5.

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

Policy 4.4.3: Improve safety for all active
transportation users.

No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. In addition, all driveways and intersections to and from the Project site would be stop -controlled to ensure safety for all transportation users.

Based on the Project's roadway improvements, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.4.3.

Health and Environmental Justice (Chapter 6)
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 6.7.2: Continue to work with State,
federal, regional, and local agencies to
eliminate and reduce concentrations of
regulated legacy pollutants.

No Conflict. There are no existing pollutants on site as the Project site is vacant and undeveloped. The Project would comply with State and federal Community -Right -to -Know laws, which allow the public to access information regarding the information about the amounts and types of chemicals that may be used by businesses on the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 6.7.2.

Policy 6.7.5: Reduce particulate emissions
from paved and unpaved roads,
construction activities, and agricultural
operations.

No Conflict. During the Project's construction phase, water would be sprayed throughout the site to abate dust particulate emissions. Additionally, Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2 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 Beaumont that Tier 4 Final equipment is not available.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 6.7.5.

Community Facilities and Infrastructure (Chapter 7)
Goal 7.3: Buildings and landscapes promote water conservation, efficiency, and the increased use of recycled water.

Policy 7.3.6: Encourage innovative water
recycling techniques, such as rainwater
capture, use of cisterns, and installation of
greywater systems.

No Conflict. As disused in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, and Section 4.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, the Project would commit to using graywater (purple pipe) irrigation Recycled water will be utilized and used for construction dewatering, irrigation of manufactured and replanted slopes within PA 9, as well as for irrigation of parkway landscaping and irrigation of landscaping within the General Commercial and Industrial land uses (PAs 1-8). The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street (350 feet east of the Project site in the existing right of way).

As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.3.6.

Goal 7.6: A zero -waste program that increases recycling and reduces waste sent to the landfill.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 7.6.1: Encourage new construction
and additions to avoid "Red List" materials
and chemicals.1°
No Conflict. Refer to General Plan Policy 6.7.1. As concluded in DEIR Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials,
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 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. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with industrial and commercial uses. Based on the facilities and uses that would be allowed at the Project site, hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, solvents, corrosives, toxic substances hazardous materials, etc.) could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. As concluded in DEIR Section 4.9, 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. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.6.1.

Goal 7.7: Provide for a clean and healthy community through an effective solid waste collection and disposal system.

Policy 7.7.3: Require businesses (including
public entities) that generate four cubic
yards or more of commercial solid waste
per week, or a multifamily residential
dwelling of five units or more, to arrange
for recycling services.

No Conflict. The Project would be required to coordinate with Waste Management, Inc. to develop a collection program for recyclables, such as paper, plastics, glass, and aluminum, in accordance with local and State programs, including AB 341, Mandatory Commercial Recycling, and the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.7.3.

Conservation and Open Space (Chapter 8)
Goal 8.1: A City with green buildings and developments that promote energy efficiency.

Policy 8.1.5: Encourage new development
to reduce building energy use by adopting
No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 3.0, Project
Description, the Project shall implement the County of
10 The "Red List" includes the worst types of materials and chemicals used in the building industry that are harmful to humans and the environment. For a list of material included on the "Red List," see: https://living- future.org/declare/declare-about/red-list/
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
passive solar techniques and heat island
reduction strategies:
• Maximizing interior daylighting
• Using cool exterior siding, cool
roofing, and paving materials with
relatively high solar reflectivity to
reduce solar heat gain
• Planting shade trees on south- and
west -facing sides of new buildings
to reduce energy load
• Installing water efficient
vegetative cover and planting,
substantial tree canopy coverage
Riverside's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which include 20% project energy generated from solar, cool roofs and water efficient landscaping. The Project would achieve a minimum of 201 Screening Table Points.

Additionally, the Project would include skylights and
clearstory windows to maximize day lighting. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.1.5.

Policy 8.1.7: Encourage new buildings and
buildings undergoing major retrofits to
exceed Title 24 energy efficiency
standards.

No Conflict. Energy efficiency/energy conservation attributes of the Project would be complemented by increasingly
stringent State and federal regulatory actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities energy efficiencies mandated under California building codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building Standards Code). The Project proposes conventional industrial and commercial 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 comply with current Title 24 energy efficiency standards and due to the continued upgrades to Title 24 standards new construction would be comparable to, or less than, other industrial projects of similar scale and configuration in terms of energy use. Compliance with the Riverside County CAP provides additional energy efficiencies that exceed Title 24.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.1.7.

Safety (Chapter 9)
Goal 9.10: A City that is prepared for the potential impacts of climate change.

Policy 9.10.2: Encourage new development
and redesign of existing buildings to take
steps to reduce the impacts of extreme heat
events, including:
• Design buildings to use less
mechanical heating and cooling
through use of passive solar
techniques.

No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 3.0, Project
Description, the Project shall implement the County of
Riverside's 2019 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Screening Table Measures which include cool roofs, enhanced insulation, and energy efficient heating/cooling equipment, and on -site solar to provide 20% of the Project's energy requirements.

Additionally, as shown on DEIR Figure 3-14, Master Landscape Plan, streetscape landscaping presents a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, low shrubs, and masses of Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
• Support and incentivize, as
feasible, energy efficiency and
weatherization programs.
• Protect and expand the City's
urban tree canopy to provide
shade, increase carbon
sequestration, and purify the air.
• Provide shade structures in public
parks, outdoor playgrounds, and
bus shelters.
groundcovers. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.10.2.

Policy 9.10.3: Require enhanced water
No Conflict. As discussed in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon development at 4th Street. The Project will comply with CAP points for increased efficient use of water both inside the building and for landscaping irrigation. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with Chapter 17.06 of the Municipal Code. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.10.3.
conservation measures in new development
and redesign of existing buildings to
address the possibility of constrained future
water supplies, including:
• Compliance with existing
landscape water conservation
ordinance (Chapter 17.06 of the
Municipal Code).
• Use of water conservation
measures in new development
beyond current requirements.
• Installation of recycled water use
and graywater systems.

Land Use (Chapter 11)
Goal 11.12: Encourage development to be efficient in the use of non-renewable resources, including water, energy, and air quality.

Policy 11.12.1: Promote the use of energy
and water conservation technologies and
practices.

Policy 11.12.3: Consider sustainable
development practices that reduce energy
and water demand.

No Conflict. The Project proposes conventional industrial uses reflecting contemporary energy efficient/energy conserving designs and operational programs. Energy efficiency/energy conservation attributes of the Project would be complemented by increasingly stringent State and federal regulatory actions addressing vehicle fuel economies and vehicle emissions standards; and enhanced building/utilities energy efficiencies mandated under California building codes (e.g., Title 24, California Green Building Standards Code). The Project would comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and 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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
General Plan Policy
Applicability
As discussed in DEIR Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project would construct an on -site recycled water system. The Project would connect a proposed 14 -inch
recycled water line that would connect to the existing 14 -inch recycled water line within the adjacent Hidden Canyon
development at 4th Street.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policies 1.12.1 and 11.12.3.

Policy 11.12.4: Ensure that new
development does not result in wind and
solar access impacts.

No Conflict. As shown in DEIR Table 4.8-6, 20% of the
Project's energy consumption would be from solar consistent with the CAP requirement. Furthermore, the Project's
architecture would include skylights and clerestory windows to allow for increased use of passive solar design and day -lighted in new structures. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 11.12.4.

Policy 11.12.6: Improve air quality through
improved walkability, reduced vehicular
use and enhanced non- vehicular travel.

No Conflict. The Project includes installation of sidewalks along the Project site's frontage with Jack Rabbit Trail and 4th Street and along Industrial Way, a proposed private road located along the north side of the proposed industrial buildings. The Project Applicant proposes curb adjacent sidewalks and pedestrian paths to encourage and enhance pedestrian activity throughout the Project site. Additionally, the Project would include the installation of bicycle racks and lockers at each of the proposed light industrial buildings.

Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 11.12.6.

The Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through MM 4.3-17 and MM 4.8-1, above. As discussed under Section 5.2.2, above, even with incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures, impacts would exceed the applicable 3,000 MT CO2e threshold of significance and remain significant and unavoidable.

5.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to GHG emissions.
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to GHG emissions are discussed in detail in Section

4.8.8 of the DEIR. CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(f), clarify that the effects of GHG emissions are cumulative and should be analyzed in the context of CEQA's requirements for cumulative impact analysis (see Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3, above). Because GHG impacts would exceed the applicable 3,000 MT CO2e threshold of significance, project impacts are cumulatively considerable under CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(0. The Project would not conflict with plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHG emissions. However, despite plan Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
consistency, the Project's long-term operational GHG emissions would exceed the City's significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. As such, a significant impact would occur as a result of the proposed Project. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-3 through 4.3- 17 and MM 4.8-1, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible, however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Several mitigation measures were recommended by commenters on the DEIR. These measures were evaluated in the FEIR and were: 1) already required through regulatory requirements, project design features, or mitigation; 2) added as mitigation and included, herein; or 3) determined to be infeasible.

For example, due to the reasons described under Section 5.1.1 "Substantial Evidence" above, the requirement that all heavy-duty vehicles must be zero emission was found to be economically and technologically infeasible because they are not commercially available for the foreseeable future.

Additionally, regulations that control heavy-duty truck emissions are the responsibility of the State and outside of the responsibility and control of the City. Therefore, pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, control of tailpipe emissions are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been adopted by that other agency. See FEIR, Response to Comments B-34 through B-63 and D-4 through D-29.

Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Implementation of a development project could contribute to global climate change through direct emissions of GHGs from on -site area sources and vehicle trips generated by the project, and indirectly through off -site energy production required for on -site activities, water use, and waste disposal.

Because no single project is large enough to result in a measurable increase in global concentrations of GHG emissions, climate change impacts of a project are considered on a cumulative basis consistent with the requirements outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3). As discussed, incorporation of mitigation would contribute to minimizing emissions. However, implementation of the Project would still result in net annual emissions that exceed the GHG emissions significance threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e/yr. Therefore, Project -related GHG emissions and their contribution to global climate change would be cumulatively considerable, and GHG emissions impacts would be significant. (DEIR p. 4.8-59)

5.3 NOISE

5.3.1 THRESHOLD A
Impact Statement: The Project would generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels from off -site traffic -related noise 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.

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 4.13.7 of the DEIR. The Project's incremental noise level represents the difference between the Existing (baseline) conditions and the Existing plus Project Buildout conditions. The Project would result in a significant impact from off -site traffic -related noise at four roadway segments (#1, #4, #5, and #6) due to the added Project traffic. Therefore, the Project -related off -site traffic noise level increases at adjacent noise -sensitive land uses are considered a significant impact. Both rubberized asphalt and off -site noise barriers are considered as potential noise mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant off - site traffic noise level increases. However, due the reasons outlined below neither form of mitigation is recommended for implementation since they would not eliminate or substantially lessen the off -site traffic noise level increases at the adjacent land uses to the impacted roadway segments. No feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce Project traffic noise impacts. Impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
Operational Noise Impact Analysis — Off -Site Traffic Noise To evaluate off -site noise increases that could result from Project -related traffic, noise levels were modeled for the following scenarios:
• Existing (2020) plus Project Conditions
o Existing plus Project (Phase 1)
o Existing plus Project (Phase 1 + 2)
o Existing plus Project (Project Buildout)
• Opening Year Conditions
o Opening Year (2023)
• Without Project
• With Project (Phase 1)
o Opening Year (2025)
• Without Project
• With Project (Phase 1 + 2)
o Opening Year (2027)
• Without Project
• With Project (Project Buildout)
• Horizon Year (2045) Conditions
o Without Project
o With Project
The Project would result in a significant impact from operational traffic noise during Existing (2020) plus Project conditions, Opening Year (2023 and 2027) plus Project Conditions, and Horizon Year (2045) Plus Project Conditions for three roadway segments (#4, #5, and #6, listed below). Additionally, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
during Existing (2020) plus Project conditions, the Project would result in a significant impact for roadway segment #1. Under Opening Year (2025) plus Project Conditions, the Project would result in a significant impact for one roadway segment (segment #6). Project off -site traffic noise level ranges for each of the scenarios is provided in DEIR Tables 4.13-15 to 4.13-21.

DEIR Table 4.13-22, Off -Site Traffic Incremental Noise Level Increase Summary, presents a summary of the cumulative and project incremental noise level increases presented in Table 4.13-15 to Table

4.13-21 for each of the six -study area roadway segments by traffic condition. As shown, four of the following study area roadway segments are shown to experience potentially significant off -site traffic noise level increases due to the added Project traffic. Therefore, the Project's contribution to off -site traffic noise would result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels and Project -related impacts on the following road segments would be significant:
• Potrero Boulevard south of Oak Valley Parkway (Segment #1). o Project Increment Increase of 1.6 dBA, which is over the threshold of 1.0 dBA. • 4th Street east of Potrero Boulevard. (Segment #4).
o Project Increment of 5.8 dBA, which is over the threshold of 1.0 dBA • 4th Street east of Veile Avenue (Segment #5).
o Project Increment of 6.5 dBA, which is over the threshold of 1.0 dBA • 4th Street west of Potrero Boulevard. (Segment #6).
o Project Increment of 21.2 dBA, which is over the threshold of 0.0 dBA (DEIR pp. 4.13- 29 to 4.13-34)
As analyzed in DEIR Sections 4.13.10 and 4.13.11 and further discussed below, no feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce Project traffic noise impacts during Existing (2020) plus Project conditions, Opening Year (2023 and 2027) plus Project Conditions, and Horizon Year (2045) Plus Project Conditions for three roadway segments (#4, #5, and #6); and under Opening Year (2025) plus Project Conditions, for one roadway segment (segment #6).

Significant off -site traffic noise level increases identified under Existing Conditions do not have the potential to occur, since the Project will not be fully developed and occupied under existing conditions, but rather under future conditions. Additionally, Segments #4, #5, and #6 are located in industrial areas and are not located immediately adjacent to any noise sensitive land uses. This is consistent with the City's General Plan EIR that determined that buildout of the City's General Plan could result in new vehicular traffic which could exceed the FHWA thresholds and could substantially increase the ambient noise levels in the City and its SOI. The City's General Plan recognizes that an increase in noise levels will occur in industrial areas due to truck traffic. The City's General Plan goals and policies, therefore, are focused on protecting noise sensitive receptors from road noise, while encouraging timely and efficient goods movement that does not significantly contribute to noise in the City. The Project is located adjacent to the SR -60, which is identified as a Truck Priority roadway in General Plan Figure 4.9, and truck trips would be routed through an industrial area to Potrero Boulevard.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
The City incorporated a number of General Plan policies and implementation programs to reduce traffic -related noise impacts, including the following polices: 10.1.2 (enforce noise standards), 10.1.3 (protect noise sensitive uses), 10.1.4 (require noise mitigation in the design of new development),

10.1.5 (require new development to implement measures to normally compatible range), 10.1.8 (promote effective enforcement of federal, State, and City noise standards), 10.2.1 (work with Caltrans and FHA), 10.2.2 (enforce speed limits to reduce noise and enforce truck and bus routes), 10.2.3 (prohibit truck routes through neighborhoods with sensitive receptors), 10.2.4 (reduce roadway noise),

10.2.5 (traffic calming measures), 10.2.6 (encourage noise -reducing paving materials), and 10.2.7 (reduce noise generated from City -owned vehicles). Applicable implementation actions include: N2 (requirement for acoustical studies) and N5 (traffic noise assessments). Compliance with the City's General Plan policies and implementation actions would reduce impacts to the extent feasible but would remain significant and unavoidable. (DEIR, pp. 4.13-39 to 4.13-40) Rubberized Asphalt
Due to the potential noise attenuation benefits, rubberized asphalt is considered as a mitigation measure for the off -site Project -related traffic noise level increases. To reduce traffic noise levels at the noise source, Caltrans research has shown that rubberized asphalt can provide noise attenuation of approximately 4 dBA for automobile traffic noise levels. Changing the pavement type of a roadway has been shown to reduce the amount of tire/pavement noise produced at the source under both near - term and long-term conditions. Traffic noise is generated primarily by the interaction of the tires and pavement, the engine, and exhaust systems. For automobiles noise, as much as 75 to 90% of traffic noise is generated by the interaction of the tires and pavement, especially when traveling at higher and constant speeds. According to research conducted by Caltrans and the Canadian Ministry of Transportation and Highways a 4 dBA reduction in tire/pavement noise is attainable using rubberized asphalt under typical operating conditions.

The effectiveness of reducing traffic noise levels is higher on roadways with low percentages of heavy trucks, since the heavy truck engine and exhaust noise is not affected by rubberized alternative pavement due to the truck engine and exhaust stack height above the pavement itself Per Caltrans guidance, a truck stack height is modeled using a height of 11.5 feet above the road. With the primary off -site traffic noise source consisting of heavy trucks with a stack height of 11.5 feet off the ground, the tire/pavement noise reduction benefits associated rubberized asphalt will be primarily limited to autos.

While the off -site Project -related traffic noise level increases would theoretically be reduced with the 4 dBA reduction provided by rubberized asphalt, the reduction would not provide reliable benefits for the noise levels generated by heavy truck traffic. This, as previously stated, is due to the noise source height difference between automobiles and trucks. While rubberized asphalt will provide some noise reduction, this noise study recognizes that this is only effective for tire -on -pavement noise at higher speeds and would not reduce truck -related off -site traffic noise levels associated with truck engine and exhaust stacks to less than significant levels. Since the use of rubberized asphalt would not substantially lessen off -site traffic noise levels, rubberized asphalt is not proposed as mitigation for the Project and Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
the off -site Project -related traffic noise level increases at adjacent land uses under Existing Conditions would remain significant. (DEIR, p. 4.13-40)
Off -Site Noise Barriers
Since existing and future noise -sensitive receiving land uses are located adjacent to the impacted roadway segments in the Project study area, off -site noise barriers were considered in this analysis as a potential traffic noise mitigation measure to reduce the impacts. Off -site noise barriers are estimated to provide a readily perceptible 5 dBA reduction which, according to the FHWA, is simple to attain when blocking the line -of -sight from the noise source to the receiver. As previously discussed, Caltrans guidance in the Highway Design Manual, Section 1102.3(3), indicates that for design purposes, the noise barrier should intercept the line of sight from the exhaust stack of a truck to the receptor, and an

11.5 -foot -high truck stack height is assumed to represent the truck engine and exhaust noise source.

Therefore, any exterior noise barriers at receiving noise sensitive land uses experiencing Project - related traffic noise level increases would need to be high enough and long enough to block the line - of -sight from the noise source (at 11.5 feet high per Caltrans) to the receiver (at 5 feet high per FHWA guidance) in order to provide a 5 dBA reduction per FHWA guidance. Installation of a wall would be infeasible because it would require: 1) installation of a minimum 11.5 -foot wall approximately 2.75 miles along 4th Street (from the eastern project boundary to Veile Avenue) and approximately 0.25 miles along Potrero (from SR -60 to 4th Street); 2) permission from multiple landowners would need to be obtained; 3) a wall is currently constructed along Potrero from Oak Valley Parkway to SR -60; 4) installation of a wall would block views; and 5) there are no sensitive receptors along 4th Street or Potrero south of SR -60. Furthermore, the wall would not block traffic -related noise where gaps would be required for curb cuts and vehicle access.

As such, off -site noise barriers would not be feasible and would not lower the off -site traffic noise levels below a level of significance, and therefore, noise barriers are not proposed as mitigation for the Project. (DEIR, p. 4.13-41)
Summary
Both rubberized asphalt and off -site noise barriers are considered as potential noise mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant off -site traffic noise level increases. However, due the reasons outlined above neither form of mitigation is recommended for implementation since they would not substantially lessen or eliminate the off -site traffic noise level increases at the adjacent land uses to the impacted roadway segments. Therefore, Project -related off -site traffic noise level increases are considered significant and unavoidable under Project -level and cumulative conditions. (DEIR, p.

4.13-41)

5.3.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would generate a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels from off -site traffic -related noise in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards under cumulative conditions, as detailed in Section 5.3.1, above.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to noise are discussed in detail in Section 4.13.8 of the DEIR. The Project would result in a significant impact from off -site traffic -related noise at four roadway segments (#1, #4, #5, and #6). Therefore, off -site traffic noise level increases at adjacent noise -sensitive land uses are considered a significant impact. No feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce or eliminate Project traffic noise impact and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The traffic -related noise analysis contained in the Noise Impact Analysis (DEIR Technical Appendix J) for Opening Year (2023, 2025, 2027) and Horizon Year (2045) was based upon the Project's Traffic Impact Analysis (DEIR Technical Appendix Kl) which considers impacts based on the addition of related projects as well as ambient growth. The percentage of ambient growth and cumulative development traffic applied to each cumulative scenario is detailed in Section 4.7 of the Traffic Analysis Report (DEIR Technical Appendix K1). As shown in DEIR Table 4.13-22, the Project's traffic -related noise impacts would be significant for four roadway segments: #1 (Potrero Boulevard south of Oak Valley Parkway); #4 (4th Street east of Potrero Boulevard); #5 (4th Street east of Veile Avenue); and #6 (4th Street west of Potrero Boulevard). Therefore, the Project's traffic -related noise impacts along study area roadway segments would be cumulatively considerable and result in a significant cumulative impact.

5.4 TRANSPORTATION

5.4.1 THRESHOLD B
Impact Statement: The Project would conflict with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
❑ Findings
Potential impacts of the Project related to Threshold b are discussed in detail in Section 4.17.7 of the DEIR. The Project would result in a significant VMT impact. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City finds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce some of the proposed Project transportation impacts attributable to trips generated by the proposed Project. However, since implementation and effectiveness of TDM measures will vary according to the tenants which are unknown at this time, the extent and effectiveness of mitigation cannot be determined. The significance determination is based on a conservative worst - case scenario whereby it is assumed that effectiveness of VMT mitigation and project design features cannot be guaranteed based on research to date and therefore, the impacts are significant and unavoidable.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures and alternatives identified in the EIR.
❑ Substantial Evidence
Since the Project does not meet any of the Project Type, Low VMT, or Transit Priority Area (TPA) screening criteria, a Project level VMT analysis was prepared to determine the Project impacts on VMT. Consistent with City VMT Guidelines, Project generated VMT includes all vehicle trips that are traced to the Project's transportation analysis zone. In addition, since the proposed Project also contains a significant amount of industrial land use, a calculation of Project VMT related to heavy -trucks has also been provided for informational purposes. The Project would result in a significant project generated VMT impact if the following condition is met:
• Baseline project generated VMT per service population (SP) exceeds 3% below the City of Beaumont current average VMT per service population. The City's current average VMT per service population is 27.87.

DEIR Table 4.17-2, Project VMT per SP Comparison, shows the Project Baseline VMT per SP compared to the City's adopted impact threshold. As shown, the Project's baseline VMT per SP is

39.19, which would exceed the City's current VMT per service population by 45%. As such, the Project's VMT impact is potentially significant. (DEIR, pp. 4.17-14 to 4.17-16) As described in DEIR Section 4.17.10, Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies have been evaluated for reducing VMT impacts that were determined to be potentially significant. The effectiveness of TDM strategies to reduce VMT has been determined based on the SB 743 Implementation TDM Strategy Assessment (Fehr & Peers, 2019) ("WRCOG Report") prepared for WRCOG and the Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (CAPCOA, 2010). In addition to specific tenancy considerations, which may affect the effectiveness of TDM measures, land use context is a major factor relevant to the potential application and effectiveness of TDM measures. More specifically, the land use context of the Project is characteristically suburban. The analysis provided by WRCOG shows that a rural to suburban community like Beaumont without a well -developed transportation system is unlikely to achieve anywhere near a 15% reduction in VMT regardless of project -specific mitigation. The Project's suburban context acts to reduce the range of feasible TDM measures and moderates their potential effectiveness. Relevant discussion in this regard is presented in the following excerpt from the WRCOG Report:

The Technical Advisory relies on the Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, (CAPCOA) 2010 resource document to help justify the 15 percent reduction in VMT threshold stating, " . . . fifteen percent reduction in VMT are achievable at the project level in a variety of place types . . . ". A more accurate reading of the CAPCOA document is that a fifteen percent is the maximum reduction when combining multiple mitigation strategies for the suburban center place type. For suburban place types 10 percent is the maximum and requires a project to contain a diverse land use mix, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
workforce housing, and project -specific transit. It is also important to note that the maximum percent reductions were not based on data or research comparing the actual performance of VMT reduction strategies in these place types. Instead, the percentages were derived from a limited comparison of aggregate citywide VMT performance for Sebastopol, San Rafael, and San Mateo where VMT performance ranged from 0 to 17 percent below the statewide VMT/capita average based on data collected prior to 2002. Little evidence exists about the long-term performance of similar TDM strategies in different land use contexts. As such, VMT reductions from TDM strategies cannot be guaranteed in most cases (Fehr & Peers, 2019, pp. 65-66).

Even under the most favorable circumstances, projects located within a suburban context, such as the proposed Project evaluated here, can realize a maximum 10% reduction in VMT through implementation of feasible TDM measures. This could result in reduction from 39.19 to 35.27 VMT per SP which would still exceed of the jurisdiction's current average VMT per SP threshold of 27.03 by 30.5%.

Given the City's rural/suburban land use context, the following TDM measures were identified as the most appropriate and incorporated into Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1, below. • Diversifying land use;
• Improving pedestrian networks;
• Implementing traffic calming infrastructure;
• Building low -street bicycle network improvements;
• Encouraging telecommuting and alternative work schedules; and • Providing ride -share programs.

Consistent with VMT reduction measures described within CAPCOA and further evaluated within the WRCOG Report and City's VMT Guidelines, reductions to VMT shall include the strategies identified in Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1. In addition to Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1, the Project would provide pedestrian and bicycle network improvements within the development connecting to existing off -site facilities to the east along 4th Street. Additionally, Section 3.6, Energy Efficiency Development Criteria, of the Specific Plan includes the following TDM measures: car/vanpool program with preferred parking; bike lockers and secure bike racks; preferential parking spaces for car -share, carpool; and installation of electric vehicle charging stations (see DEIR pp. 3-18 to 3-19).

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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
c. Commute trip reduction (CTR) programs offered to encourage the use of biking.
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.

Project components and mitigation measures available to reduce VMT include: developing pedestrian network improvements, providing design features that encourage people to walk or bike instead of drive, implementing TDM measures such as those listed in Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1, car/vanpool program with preferred parking; bike lockers and secure bike racks; preferential parking spaces for car -share, carpool, and ultra -low or zero emission vehicles; and installation of electric vehicle charging stations. Various design features are included in the Project to encourage pedestrian and bicycle activity (sidewalks and bicycle parking). Encouraging businesses to allow telecommuting and alternative work week hours and to use ridesharing programs also can reduce VMT, but the City has no jurisdictional authority to mandate the businesses practices of private enterprises. Additionally, while these measures would reduce VMT, there is no means to quantify any VMT reductions that could result, and even if VMT reductions could be quantified, it likely would not reduce impacts to less than significant.

It is also recognized that as the Project area and surrounding communities develop as envisioned under the City's General Plan (Beaumont 2040 Plan), new residential, retail, and industrial development would be implemented. These actions could collectively alter transportation patterns, improve the region's jobs/housing ratio, reduce VMT, and support implementation of new or alternative TDM measures. Additionally, the effectiveness of some of the TDM strategies that have potential to reduce the Project VMT are dependent on as yet unknown Project building tenant(s), which can change over time; and as noted above, "VMT reductions from TDM strategies cannot be guaranteed in most cases." Hence, relying on TDM programs tied to tenants would likely result in the need for on -going monitoring to verify performance Therefore, Project impacts related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable. (DEIR pp. 4.17-22 to 4.17-24)

5.4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
Impact Statement: The Project would result in a cumulative VMT impact since the Project was found to have a significant and unavoidable impact at the project level. The Project's baseline VMT per SP is 39.19, which would exceed the City's current VMT per service population by 45%. ❑ Findings
Potential cumulative impacts of the Project related to transportation are discussed in detail in Section

4.17.8 of the DEIR. The Project would result in a significant cumulative VMT impact. The Project is required to comply with Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1, which would reduce impacts to the extent feasible; however, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City fmds that the above mitigation measures are feasible, are adopted, and will reduce some of the proposed Project transportation impacts attributable to trips generated by the proposed Project. However, since implementation and effectiveness of TDM measures will vary according to the tenants which are unknown at this time, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
the extent and effectiveness of mitigation cannot be determined. The significance determination is based on a conservative worst -case scenario whereby it is assumed that effectiveness of VMT mitigation and project design features cannot be guaranteed based on research to date and therefore, the impacts are significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the California Public Resources Code, as described below, the City has determined that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the alternatives and mitigation measures identified in the EIR.
❑ Substantial Evidence
OPR's Technical Advisory states that "a project that falls below an efficiency -based threshold (e.g., VMT per service population) that is aligned with long-term goals and relevant plans has no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less than significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact and vice versa. This is similar to the analysis typically conducted for greenhouse gas emissions, air quality impacts, and impacts that utilize plan compliance as a threshold of significance." Since the Project was found to have a significant and unavoidable impact at the project level, it is also considered to be cumulatively considerable and therefore to have a significant cumulative impact. (DEIR p. 4.17-21) The Project would be required to implement Mitigation Measure MM 4.17-1 to reduce VMT, including car/vanpool program with preferred parking; bike lockers and secure bike racks; preferential parking spaces for car -share, carpool, and ultra -low or zero emission vehicles; and installation of electric vehicle charging stations. However, for the reasons set for in Section 5.4.1, even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, impacts would not be substantially lessened and would remain significant and unavoidable.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT I"

6.0 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS

6.1 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The State CEQA Guidelines require EIRs to address any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be involved with the proposed action should it be implemented (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2[d]). An environmental change would fall into this category if: a) the project would involve a large commitment of non-renewable resources; b) the primary and secondary impacts of the project would generally commit future generations to similar uses; c) the project involves uses in which irreversible damage could result from environmental accidents associated with the project; or d) the proposed consumption of resources is not justified (e.g., the project results in the wasteful use of energy).
❑ Finding
The Project's potential to result in significant irreversible environmental changes are discussed in detail in Subsection 5.2 of the DEIR. Significant irreversible environmental changes have been identified, as described below. The Project would permanently alter the site by converting vacant and undeveloped property to urban uses, which would commit future generations to similar uses. Construction and long- term operation of the Project would require the commitment and reduction of nonrenewable and/or slowly renewable resources; however, nonrenewable resources are not expected to negatively impact the availability of these resources. As demonstrated in the analysis presented throughout the DEIR, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in significant and unavoidable environmental effects that cannot be feasibly reduced to below levels of significance, with the exception of significant and unavoidable impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, off -site traffic noise, and VMT impacts.
❑ Substantial Evidence
Determining whether the Project may result in significant irreversible effects requires a determination of whether key resources would be degraded or destroyed in such a way that there would be little possibility of restoring them. The Project site is currently and has historically been vacant and undeveloped, except for the eastern portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project would permanently alter the site by converting vacant and undeveloped property to urban uses, which would commit future generations to similar uses. This is a significant irreversible environmental change that would occur because of Project implementation.

Construction and long-term operation of the Project would require the commitment and reduction of nonrenewable and/or slowly renewable resources, including petroleum fuels and natural gas (for vehicle emissions, construction, lighting, heating, and cooling of structures) as well as lumber, sand/gravel, steel, copper, lead, and other metals (for use in building construction, piping, and roadway infrastructure). Other resources that are slow to renew and/or recover from environmental stressors would also be impacted by Project implementation, such as air quality (through the combustion of fossil fuels and production of greenhouse gases) and water supply (through the increased demands for potable water for drinking, cleaning, landscaping, and general maintenance needs). However, use of Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
nonrenewable resources is not expected to negatively impact the availability of these resources because there is adequate supply (DEIR Section 4.6, Energy). Additionally, the Project is required by law to comply with the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), which will minimize the Project's demand for energy, including energy produced from non-renewable sources. Further, as indicated in DEIR Section 4.6, Energy, the Project would not result in the inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary consumption of energy.

An increased commitment of public and utility services (e.g., police, fire, sewer, and water services) would also be required, as it is for all projects, although to less than significant extent. Project development is an irreversible commitment of the land and energy resources and building materials.

After the 50- to 75 -year structural lifespan of the building is reached, it is improbable that the site would revert to its current use due to the large capital investment that will already have been committed. (DEIR, p. 5-4)

6.2 GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS
CEQA requires a discussion of the ways in which the proposed Project could be growth inducing. The CEQA Guidelines identify a project as growth inducing if it would foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment (CEQA Guidelines Section15126.2[e)]).
❑ Finding
The Project's potential to result in growth -inducing impacts is discussed in detail in Subsection 5.3 of the DEIR. For the reasons described in detail below, the Project will not 1) remove obstacles to growth because the infrastructure on site is designed and sized to only serve the Project and would not extend beyond the Project site; 2) result in the need to expand one or more public services (see Section 4.15, Public Services, of the DEIR); 3) encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment because it would provide jobs in a housing - rich area and will improve the jobs -housing ratio and it is anticipated that workers would come from the City and nearby in the region; and 4) involve a precedent setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment because the Project is limited to the Project site's boundaries and does not include any components that would indirectly affect existing or planned uses on neighboring properties . Additionally, Project development is occurring adjacent to an industrial corridor, as designated by the City. The development of the proposed commercial, industrial, and open uses on the Project site would not reasonably or foreseeably cause the redevelopment of other properties or cause development on other properties. Based on the entire record, the City finds that the Project would not directly or indirectly induce growth in the surrounding area which could result in a significant adverse effect to the environment.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
❑ Substantial Evidence
Would this project remove obstacles to growth (e.g., through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area or through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development)? No. While the Project would require the construction and extension of roadways and utility infrastructure to serve the development (DEIR Figure 3-8, Conceptual Circulation Plan, shows the Project's proposed circulation and roadway sizes and classifications), the Project is located at the end of a cul-de-sac, no further adjacent development is likely to occur near it, and roadway infrastructure on site is designed and sized to serve only the Project. The Project would construct four main roadways for on -site circulation -4th Street, Jack Rabbit Trail, Entertainment Avenue, and Industrial Way, with access to the Project site from 4th Street, which would be constructed from Jack Rabbit Trail at the easterly edge of the Project site to provide a looped road system around the entire site. Since all proposed roadways would be constructed on site and for the exclusive purpose of serving the proposed development, the Project would not create major new infrastructure that could result in substantial, unplanned growth or remove obstacles to population growth or facilitate additional development.

The same assessment applies to utilities which are being extended to serve the Project. Water, reclaimed water, and sewer infrastructure is currently under construction to the center line of 4th Street 350 feet east of the eastern boundary of the Project site. As shown in DEIR Figures 3-9, 3-10, and 3- 11, the proposed potable water, reclaimed water, and sewer system would connect to infrastructure lines from the Hidden Canyon Industrial Park project located immediately to the east to the Project to provide service to the Project site. The Project site is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is surrounded by existing development to the east, the SR -60 to the north, and MSHCP conservation land to the west and to the south/southwest of the site, with rural mountainous lands directly to the south/southeast.

Therefore, infrastructure would not extend beyond the Project site and would not induce population growth. Since all proposed utility infrastructure would connect to lines at the eastern edge of the Project site and would be sized to exclusively serve the proposed development, this Project infrastructure would not directly or indirectly remove obstacles to population growth or facilitate additional development.

Would this project result in the need to expand one or more public services to maintain desired levels of service?
No. The Project would not require the expansion of existing public service facilities either to serve the Project or maintain desired levels of service. Implementation of the Project would result in an increased requirement for fire and police protection services. However, considering the existing resources available, the Project is not expected to result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impact. Development of the Project would not result in an increase in the population of the Project area and therefore would not increase the demand for schools, parks or libraries, which would require the construction of new or expanded public facilities. As such, implementation of the Project would not adversely affect other public facilities or require the construction of new or modified public facilities and no impact would Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
occur. If these facilities or associated resources do need to be expanded in the future to accommodate planned growth within the City, funding mechanisms are in place through existing regulations and standard practices to obtain funds from each new project in the City to contribute to future expansion which would enable to City to accommodate growth. This Project would not, therefore, have significant growth inducing consequences with respect to public services.

Would this project encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment?
No. A project could indirectly induce growth at the local level by increasing the demand for additional goods and services associated with the increase in project population and thus reducing or removing the barriers to further growth. This occurs in suburban or rural areas where population growth results from a project and causes an increased demand for services and commodity markets responding to the new population. This type of growth is, however, a regional phenomenon resulting from introduction of a major employment center or regionally significant housing project. For example, additional commercial uses may be drawn to the area by the increased number of residents in the area because of a project.

While economic growth is expected to take place as a result of Project implementation from construction jobs, visitors to the commercial uses, and employees generated by the Project, it is anticipated that they will be drawn from the City and nearby and will not result in unplanned population growth within the City. The Project's employees (short-term construction and long-term operational) and visitors would likely be from the region and purchase goods and services from the Project.

As shown in DEIR Table 4.14-1, the City's population and employment has grown steadily over the past decades. As discussed in Section 4.14, Population and Housing, by 2045, the City is anticipated to have a population of 80,200 residents according to SCAG's Connect SoCal and 131,949 by 2040 based on City's estimates. Similarly, SCAG forecasted 15,900 jobs in the City by the year 2045 and the City's General Plan forecasted 21,497 jobs within the City limits (exceeding SCAG forecasts) and 16,727 jobs within the SOI, totaling 38,224 jobs within the City and its SOI by 2040 (City of Beaumont, 2020b). The Project's proposed 5,456 total jobs were anticipated by the City's General Plan and represent approximately 33% of the anticipated jobs within the City's SOI and approximately 14% of the City's total job pool. Therefore, the Project's employment is within both SCAG and City growth forecasts and would contribute to a more balanced job -housing ratio (see DEIR Table 4.14-4). The Project, therefore, is not growth inducing.

The extent to which the new jobs created by a project are filled by existing residents makes a project not growth -inducing. Project construction would require temporary design, engineering, and construction -related jobs. It is anticipated that workers would come from the City and nearby in the region and would not relocate to the City. This would last until Project construction is completed. At Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
full -Project build out, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 5,456 permanent jobs." Employees would come from within the City or the surrounding region because there is an imbalance of jobs and housing in Western Riverside County and the jobs that an industrial and commercial project in the region is likely to provide would be consistent with the job skills of residents in the area. For example, according to SCAG's Pre -Certified Local Housing Data, Beaumont has 19,385 workers living within its borders who work across 13 major industrial sectors. The most prevalent industry is Education & Social Services with 5,714 employees (29.5% of total) and the second most prevalent industry is Retail trade with 2,593 employees (13.4% of total). Additionally, the Construction industry has 1,071 employees (0.06% of total) and the Manufacturing industry has 1,483 employees (0.08% of total). (SCAG, 2021b) The Project's employment generation would not induce substantial growth in the area because the Project would result in service -oriented and industrial -oriented jobs, which are jobs that are anticipated to be filled by residents of the City and surrounding area.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), in August 2021, the Riverside -San Bernardino - Ontario region's civilian labor force has an unemployment rate of 7.6% (or 159,300 persons) (BLS, 2021), well above average for the state. Accordingly, the Riverside -San Bernardino -Ontario region contains an ample supply of potential employees and the Project's labor demand is not expected to draw a substantial number of new, unplanned residents to the area. Furthermore, approximately 91.1% of Beaumont residents commute outside of the City for work and more housing units are expected to be built within the City over the next 20 years. The Project would provide job opportunities close to home for Beaumont residents, which would subsequently help achieve a better job -to -housing balance within the City.

In summary, because it is anticipated that most of the Project's future employees would already be living in the City or the surrounding areas, the Project's introduction of employment opportunities on the Project site would not induce substantial unplanned growth in the area.

Would approval of this project involve some precedent setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment? No. The Beaumont General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element designates the Project site as Rural Residential The Project Applicant's proposed General Plan Amendment (GPA) PLAN2019- 0284 would amend the City's General Plan Land Use Map to modify the land use designations for the Project site from "Rural Residential" to "Industrial (I)," "General Commercial (GC)," "Open Space (OS)," and "Open Space -Conservation (OS -C)." The Project Applicant also proposes to annex and incorporate the Project site into the City. As such, the Project Applicant is proposing Pre -Zone PLAN2019-0283 to amend the City's Zoning Map to include the Project site and classify the Project site as "Specific Plan (Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan)". The Project is limited to the Project site's boundaries and does not include any components that would indirectly affect existing or planned uses on neighboring properties. Project development is occurring adjacent to an industrial corridor, as " Based on standard employment factors in the City's General Plan. Specifically, 1,000 s.f./employee for 4,500,000 s.f. Industrial Warehouse, 750 s.f./employee for 500,000 s.f. General Light Industrial, and 1,163 s.f./employee for 336,000 s.f. of Commercial.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
designated by the City. The development of the proposed commercial, industrial, and open uses on the Project site would not reasonably or foreseeably cause the redevelopment of other properties or cause development on other properties.

Furthermore, the Project's potential influence on other nearby properties to redevelop at greater intensities and/or different uses than the City's General Plan and Zoning Code allow is speculative; however, it should be noted that implementation of the Project would not result in the approval of proposed uses on any other property outside of the Project site. CEQA does not require the analysis of speculative effects (State CEQA Guidelines Section 151454). If any other property owner were to propose development of a property in the Project vicinity or in any part of the City, the development project would require evaluation under CEQA based on its own merits.

The operation and maintenance of the Project would generate jobs, but any potential growth -inducing impact of the employment of persons at the Project site was accounted for in the City's General Plan, as the Project's proposed 5,456 total jobs represent approximately 33% of the anticipated jobs within the City's SOI and approximately 14% of the City's total job pool. Accordingly, the Project would not directly or indirectly promote growth either at the Project site or at the adjacent and surrounding properties that were not accounted for in the City's General Plan. Upon the approval of the General Plan Amendment, Pre -Zone, Specific Plan, VTPM, and Development Agreement for the Project, the Project would be consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation and Zoning classification for the Project site. (DEIR, pp. 5-5 to 5-8).

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT I"

7.0 ALTERNATIVES

7.4.1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED
An EIR is required to identify any alternatives that were considered by the Lead Agency but were rejected. Factors described by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 in determining whether to exclude alternatives from detailed consideration in the EIR include: a) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, b) infeasibility, or c) inability to avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant environmental impacts. The Project's significant impacts that cannot be mitigated to less than significant are: air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and VMT.

With respect to the feasibility of potential alternatives to the proposed Project, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(1) provides:
"Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries ...and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site..." In determining a range of reasonable alternatives to be evaluated in the EIR, a number of possible alternatives were initially considered and, for a variety of reasons, rejected. Alternatives were rejected because either: 1) they could not accomplish the basic objectives of the Project, 2) they would not have avoided or substantially lessened significant adverse environmental impacts, or 3) they were considered infeasible to construct or operate. Alternatives that were considered but rejected are described below.

Alternative Sites
CEQA does not require that an analysis of alternate sites always be included in an EIR. The key question and first step in the analysis is whether any of the significant effects of the project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(f)(2)(A)). In addition, an alternative site need not be considered when implementation is "remote and speculative," such as when the alternative site is beyond the control of a project applicant.

The Project proposes to develop an approximately 539.9 -acre site with a maximum of 246,000 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 Applicant has ownership and control over the Project site, and the Project site's location in proximity to SR -60, which provides direct access to the regional transportation network, connecting the site to the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, adjacent to an existing industrial development (under construction) and away from residential uses is conducive to industrial and commercial development.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
There are no alternative sites within the City or its sphere of influence that are similarly sized that would be suitable for industrial and commercial uses proposed by the Project. Other developable land within the City would either require a general plan amendment and zone change or would place industrial and commercial uses closer to established residential communities. Additionally, the Project Applicant does not own or control another suitable site that would achieve the underlying purpose and objectives of the Project. Moreover, an alternative site would not result in reduction of significant impacts.

Given the size and type of the proposed development, a similarly sized project and land use elsewhere in the South Coast Air Basin would result in the same or greater project -level and cumulative air quality, GHG emission, and transportation impacts. Significant unavoidable regional air quality and GHG emission impacts of the Project relate primarily to mobile emissions during operation and are not site specific; therefore, relocation of the Project would not substantially reduce these impacts whether located elsewhere in the City or region. The Project's location is preferrable for industrial and commercial development to other areas of the City because of its proximity to 1) the regional transportation network and major infrastructure, reducing vehicle miles traveled; and 2) within an industrial corridor separated from sensitive receptors (e.g. residential uses, schools, etc.), reducing potential located air quality and associated health risk impacts to surrounding neighborhoods.

Therefore, analysis of an alternative site for the Project is neither meaningful nor necessary, because the significant impacts resulting from the Project would not be avoided or substantially lessened by its implementation in an alternate location.

As a result, this alternative was rejected from further consideration in the DEIR. (DEIR, pp. 6-5 to 6- 6)
All -Commercial Alternative
The All -Commercial Only Alternative would propose the Project site for regional commercial uses only. This was considered as an alternative land use that met or partially met some basic Project objectives. Namely, the All -Commercial Alternative would have the ability to minimize the demand for water resources in support of Objective I and partially meet the following Project Objectives:
• Objective C. 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. • Objective D. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont to improve and maximize the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduce the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.
• Objective G. 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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
However, while the commercial uses under the All -Commercial Alternative would construct regional shopping uses providing shopping and restaurants, it would not provide wellness -based retail, including recreation or hospitality, thereby only partially meeting Project Objective E: Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness -based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants. Furthermore, this alternative would not meet the following objectives:
• •Objective A. 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.
• Objective F. 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.
• Objective H. 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.

Additionally, the All -Commercial Alternative was rejected from further consideration because it would not reduce or eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts for air quality, GHG emissions, or VMT. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip rate for regional shopping centers (ITE 820), the All -Commercial Alternative would result in a substantial increase in vehicle trips in comparison to the Project. For example, a 750,000 square foot regional shopping center would generate 34,786 daily trips. Although this alternative would reduce truck trips, it would nearly double the Project's 16,266 daily trips resulting in a substantial increase in air quality emissions, GHG emissions, and transportation impacts. (see DEIR Technical Appendix P). (DEIR, pp. 6-5 to 6-8) Rural Residential Alternative
A Rural Residential Alternative was considered that assumed rural residential uses consistent with the County's existing General Plan and zoning designations. The Project site is designated as Rural Mountainous (RM) in the County of Riverside General Plan, which allows single-family residential uses with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. Based on Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, the Project site is zoned Controlled Development Areas with a minimum 20 -acre lot (W-2-20). Based on the County's existing general plan and zoning designations, the 539.9 -acre Project site would be allowed to develop up to 27 rural residential units. However, the Project site is not well suited to rural development in that it lacks potable groundwater and would require use of septic tanks, which is discouraged. Although water, sewer and roadway infrastructure is available at the easternmost portion of the site, the limited number of units that could be constructed would not be able to sustain the costs Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
needed to develop roadways or to take the infrastructure connections across the site for these homestead type developments rendering such development infeasible. In addition, development of homes in very high and high severity fire hazard zones in such a dispersed development pattern significantly increases wildfire risk and is highly discouraged, and the amount of fuel modification required could also be difficult to achieve given the limited number of units that would be permitted. Additionally, this alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives. Therefore, this alternative was rejected from further consideration in the DEIR. (DEIR, p. 6-8)

7.4.2 ALTERNATIVES UNDER CONSIDERATION
A. No Project/No Development Alternative
❑ Finding
The No Project/No Development Alternative assumes that no development or improvements would occur on the Project site and the entire site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Under this alternative, no impact would occur and all significant and unavoidable impacts would be eliminated.

However, none of the Project Objectives would be met and environmental benefits from the Project would not be constructed. Thus, The City finds that each of the reasons set forth below is an independent ground for rejecting the No Project/No Development Alternative, and by itself, independent of any other reason, justifies rejection of the No Project/No Development Alternative, and hereby rejects the No Project/No Development Alternative. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The No Project/No Development Alternative assumes that no development or improvements would occur on the Project site and the entire 539.9 -acre site would remain vacant and undeveloped. This alternative was selected by the City as required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) to compare the environmental effects of the Project with an alternative that would leave the Project site in its existing condition (as described in DEIR Section 3.0).

The No Project/No Development Alternative would result in no physical environmental impacts to the Project site. All significant and unavoidable impacts of the Project would be eliminated by the selection of the No Project/No Development Alternative. However, this alternative would not receive the environmental benefits from the permanent conservation of 152.42 acres of natural habitat consistent with the MSHCP; implementation of stormwater drainage and water quality filtration features; and ignition resistant structures and other wildfire prevention protocols, parking areas, and irrigated landscaping within a HFHSZ and VHFHSZ that would be constructed by the Project. Specifically, drainage improvements or water quality features would not be installed and runoff would continue to flow northeast across the site to the 16 existing Caltrans maintained culverts, as it does under existing conditions. The four detention basins proposed under the Project, which remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water to meet water quality standards, would not occur. The No Project/No Development Alternative would not result in the removal of existing fuel sources or development of ignition resistant structures, parking areas, and irrigated landscaping within a VHFHSZ and HFHSZ, which reduces potential wildfire risks The No Project/No Development Alternative would also fail to meet all the Project Objectives, as described in DEIR Section 6.1.1. (DEIR, pp. 6-9 to 6-15) Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
B. Ex/sting City General Plan Alternative
❑ Finding
The No Project - Existing General Plan Alternative considers development of the Project site with residential development of up to 383 single family units on the Project site. Under this alternative, impacts related to aesthetics, construction -related air quality, GHG emissions, energy, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation, utilities and service systems, and some impacts from wildfire would be reduced and significant and unavoidable impacts related to operational -related air quality, off -site traffic -related noise, and transportation impacts would be eliminated. However, none of the Project Objectives would be met. Thus, The City finds that each of the reasons set forth above is an independent ground for rejecting the Existing City General Plan Alternative, and by itself, independent of any other reason, justifies rejection of the Existing City General Plan Alternative, and hereby rejects the Existing City General Plan Alternative. ❑ Substantial Evidence
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A), the No Project - Existing General Plan Alternative considers development of the Project site with land uses that are consistent with the existing City's General Plan land use designation. The City's General Plan designates the Project site as Rural Residential 1 which permits one single-family dwelling per one acre lot. The General Plan further anticipates that buildout of the Rural Residential 1 land use in the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI) would consist of up to 383 dwelling units. Accordingly, the Existing City General Plan Alternative considers that the Project site would be annexed into the City for a residential development of up to 383 single family units on the Project site. Under this alternative, the Project site would be graded within approximately the same boundaries as the limit of grading for the Project in order to create residential one acre lots.

The Existing City General Plan Alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips by 78% and associated VMT, which is calculated based on square footage/dwelling units and the types of use.

Therefore, implementation of the Existing General Plan Alternative would result in fewer impacts from construction -related air quality and GHG emissions that would occur from implementation of the Project. Under the Existing City General Plan Alternative, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 operational -related emissions would be reduced to approximately 29.78, 21.88, 27.45, and 8.11 pounds per day during summer and 28.26, 22.66, 27.45, and 8.11 pounds per day during winter, respectively (see Technical Appendix P of the DEIR). The South Coast AQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, PM1o, and PM2.5 are 55, 55, 150, and 55, respectively. Therefore, this alternative would eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable operational air quality emissions, and impacts under this alternative would be less than significant. Moreover, the Project would result in a net increase of 60,638.09 MTCO2e per year after the implementation of mitigation measures, which would be reduced to 5,131.02 MTCO2e per year under the Existing City General Plan Alternative. This alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable GHG impacts, since it would exceed the threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, but reduced compared to the Project.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Operational noise impacts would be reduced under this alternative for both on -site stationary noise sources and off -site traffic -related noise, since residential uses do not generate significant stationary noise sources and truck trips would be eliminated. Therefore, the Existing City General Plan Alternative would eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable off -site traffic -related noise impacts that mainly occur due to truck trips, and impacts would be less than significant. As shown in DEIR Table 6-2, this alternative would also eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable VMT impact, and impacts would be less than significant (see Technical Appendix P of the DEIR).

The Existing City General Plan Alternative would reduce impacts related to aesthetics, construction - related air quality, GHG emissions, energy, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, transportation, utilities and service systems, and some impacts from wildfire. By constructing ignition resistant buildings in a focused area, creating defensible space, and implementing vegetation management protocols, the Project would reduce the overall risk of wildfire spread on and off site while the development of homes in very high and high severity fire hazard zones in such a dispersed development pattern significantly increases wildfire risk, and the amount of fuel modification required could also be difficult to achieve given the limited number of units.

Additionally, this alternative would eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts related to operational -related air quality, off -site traffic -related noise, and transportation impacts. The Existing City General Plan Alternative would result in greater impacts related to population and housing, public services, and recreation compared to the Project. Impacts related to agricultural and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, and tribal cultural resources would be similar to the Project. The Existing City General Plan Alternative would also fail to meet all the Project Objectives, as described in DEIR Section 6.1.1. (DEIR, pp. 6-15 to 6-22)
C. Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative
❑ Finding
The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in a development with overall 50% reduction of commercial portion within Planning Areas 1 and 2 and an overall reduction of 995,000 sf of industrial portion. Due to the reduction in square footage, development area, and vehicular trips, impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology, and soils, GHG emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation, and tribal cultural resources would be reduced. Impacts related to population and housing, therefore, would be greater under this alternative compared to the Project due to the decrease in the jobs -housing ratio. Moreover, all significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would remain. The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives A, B, and F -I. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet the Project Objectives C, D, and E to the same extent, due to a reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees and economic benefit. Thus, the City finds that each of the reasons set forth above is an independent ground for rejecting the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
and by itself, independent of any other reason, justifies rejection of the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative, and hereby rejects the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative. ❑ Substantial Evidence
The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in an overall 50% reduction of commercial development within Planning Areas 1 and 2 and an overall reduction of 995,000 sf of industrial development. The reduction in industrial development would occur by eliminating 995,000 sf in Planning Area 8 and expanding Planning Area 7 to allow an additional 305,000 sf (up to 905,000 sf) of industrial development. Overall, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would allow for up to 123,000 sf of commercial development, a 125 -room hotel, and 4,000,000 sf of industrial development.

The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative was selected to reduce impacts associated with air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation. Additionally, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in a considerable reduction in grading activities (eliminating approximately 3 million cubic yards of cut and fill) which would result in the less construction -related air quality impact compared to the Project.

The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips by approximately 15% and associated VMT, which is calculated based on square footage and the types of use. Under the Project, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.s emissions would be 44.52, 143.99, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 1; 160.65, 461.71, 195.00,

57.71 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 2; 188.63, 470.01, 236.44, 69.23 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 3; 43.22, 151.09, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 1; 155.69, 485.80, 195.00, 57.71 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 2; and 179.96, 494.43, 236.44, 69.23 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 3. Under the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced to approximately 156.97, 327.60, 188.64, 54.78 pounds per day respectively during summer and 149.44, 344.82, 188.64, and 54.78 pounds per day respectively during winter, respectively (see Technical Appendix P of the DEIR). The South Coast AQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 are 55, 55, 150, and 55, respectively. Under this alternative, PM2.s emissions for both summer and winter would be reduced to a less than significant level, but the Project's operational air quality emissions for VOC, NOx, PM10 emissions would remain significant and unavoidable. Moreover, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in 48,007.58 MTCO2e per year of GHG emissions (approximately 83% mobile source) compared to the Project's 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year (approximately 80% mobile source) prior to the implementation of mitigation measures. This alternative would result in a reduction of GHG emissions by approximately 24.88% but would not avoid the Project's significant and unavoidable GHG impacts, since it would significantly exceed the threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, but substantially lessened compared to the Project.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Operational noise would also be reduced under this alternative as traffic -generated and stationary noise sources would decrease in relation to the reduction in industrial and commercial square footage.

However, Project -related off -site traffic noise level increases are considered significant and unavoidable. Noise impacts from the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would remain significant and unavoidable but reduced compared to the Project.

Construction and operation -related vehicle truck trips would be reduced under the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative and Project trip generation would decrease vehicle trips by 15% from 16,266 trips -ends per day to 13,614 trips -ends per day. This would result in a corresponding decrease in overall VMT and proportional decrease in employees. As shown, in DEIR Table 6-4, Comparison of Project VMT to the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative, this alternative would also reduce VMT per service population by approximately 7% (from 39.19 to

36.45) compared to the Project (see DEIR Technical Appendix P). However, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would continue to exceed the City's baseline VMT threshold of 27.03 and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable but reduced when compared to the Project.

The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to aesthetics, energy, hydrology and water quality, and public services, , due to the reduction in overall square footage, development area, and associated vehicular trips. Impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, geology, and soils, and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation and reduced compared to the Project. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would not be avoided but would be reduced from implementation of this alternative. In addition, this alternative would not achieve the maximum improvement in jobs housing ratio. Impacts related to population and housing, therefore, would be greater under this alternative compared to the Project due to the decrease in the jobs -housing ratio. Impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources, hazardous and hazardous materials, land use and planning, mineral resources, recreation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire would be similar to the Project.

The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives A, B, and F -I, as described in Section 6.1.1 of the DEIR. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet Project Objectives C and D, and would not meet Project Objective E to the same extent, due to a reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees and economic benefit:
• Objective C. 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. • Objective D. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont to improve and maximize the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
• Objective E. Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants. (DEIR, pp. 6-22 — 6-30) D. Reduced intensityAiternative
❑ Finding
The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a development with 4,495,500 sf of industrial development, 221,400 sf of commercial development, and a 125 -room hotel. Under this alternative, impacts related to air quality, energy, GHG emissions, noise, public services, and utilities and service systems would be reduced due to the reduction in square footage and associated vehicular trips.

However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazardous and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire would be similar to the Project. The Reduced Intensity Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives A, B, and F —I, as described in DEIR Section 6.1.1. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet Project Objectives C, D, and E to the same extent, due to the reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees. Thus, The City finds that each of the reasons set forth above is an independent ground for rejecting the Reduced Intensity Alternative, and by itself, independent of any other reason, justifies rejection of the Reduced Intensity Alternative, and hereby rejects the Reduced Intensity Alternative.
❑ Substantial Evidence
The Reduced Intensity Alternative would consider development of the Project site with a 10% reduction in industrial and commercial development. Under this alternative, the Project would allow for 4,495,500 sf of industrial development, 221,400 sf of commercial development, and a 125 -room hotel. The development impact area would generally remain the same as the Project. Access to the site would be the same with a proportional reduction in the number of parking spaces. The Reduced Intensity Alternative was selected to reduce significant impacts associated with air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips and associated VMT by 10%, which is calculated based on square footage and the types of use. Under the Reduced Intensity Alternative, the volume of VOC, NOx, PMIo, and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced to approximately 188.63, 468.14, 236.20, 69.01 pounds per day during summer and 180.30, 491.49, 236.20, and 69.01 pounds per day during winter, respectively (see DEIR Technical Appendix P). Under the Project, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would be 44.52, 143.99, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 1; 160.65, 461.71, 195.00, 57.71 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 2; 188.63, 470.01, 236.44, 69.23 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 3; 43.22, 151.09, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 1; 155.69, 485.80, 195.00, 57.71 pounds per day during winter of Phase 2; and 179.96, 494.43, 236.44, 69.23 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
pounds per day during winter of Phase 3, respectively. The South Coast AQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 are 55, 55, 150, and 55, respectively. Therefore, this alternative would reduce the Project's operational air quality emissions, but all impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The Project would result in approximately 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year (approximately 80% mobile source) with the implementation of PDFs and prior to the implementation of mitigation measures, which would be reduced by approximately 19.33% to 51,556.08 MTCO2e per year (approximately 84% mobile source) under the Reduced Intensity Alternative (see Technical Appendix P of the DEIR). However, the Project's significant and unavoidable GHG impacts would remain, since the alternative's GHG emissions would exceed the threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, but substantially lessened compared to the Project.

As shown, in DEIR Table 6-6, Comparison of Project VMT to the Reduced Intensity Alternative, this alternative would slightly increase VMT per service population by approximately 1.61% (from 39.19 to 39.82) compared to the Project (see DEIR Technical Appendix P). Therefore, the Reduced Intensity Alternative would continue to exceed the City's baseline VMT threshold and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, but similar compared to the Project.

Operational noise would also be reduced under this alternative as traffic -generated and stationary noise sources would decrease in relation to the reduction in industrial and commercial square footage.

However, Project -related off -site traffic -related noise level increases would remain significant and unavoidable. Noise impacts from the Reduced Intensity Alternative would remain significant and unavoidable for off -site traffic -related noise but reduced compared to the Project.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to energy public services, and utilities and service systems due to the reduction in square footage and associated vehicular trips.

However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would not be avoided or substantially lessened from implementation of this alternative.

Impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, hazardous and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, recreation, and wildfire would be similar to the Project. Impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, geology, and soils, and tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with mitigation, and similar compared to the Project.

The Reduced Intensity Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives A, B, and F —I, as described in DEIR Section 6.1.1. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet Project Objectives C, D, and E to the same extent, due to the reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees and would not maximize opportunities to create jobs within the City, which are core components of Objectives C Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
and D The Reduced Intensity Alternative would result in a total of 4,700 jobs 12, a reduction in 756 jobs when compared to the Project -generated 5,456 jobs:
• Objective C. 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. • Objective D. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont to improve and maximize the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances.
• Objective E. Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants. (DEIR, pp. 6-30 — 6-37) E. Truck Storage YardAiternative
❑ Finding
The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would result in a development of up to 246,000 sf of commercial development, a 125 -room hotel, 4,000,000 sf of industrial development, and a truck storage yard for an approximately 20% decrease in total building square footage. Under this alternative, impacts related to air quality, energy, GHG emissions, noise, public services, and utilities and service systems would be reduced due to the reduction in square footage and associated vehicular trips. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazardous and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire would be similar to the Project; and impacts related to population and housing would be greater compared to the Project. The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives, A, B, and E —I, as described in DEIR Section 6.1.1. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet Project Objectives C and D to the same extent, due to the reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees. Thus, The City finds that each of the reasons set forth above is an independent ground for rejecting the Truck Storage Yard Alternative, and by itself, independent of any other reason, justifies rejection of the Truck Storage Yard Alternative, and hereby rejects the Truck Storage Yard Alternative.
❑ Substantial Evidence
The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would be the same as the Project except that it would replace the warehouse building in Planning Area 8 (approximately 1,000,000 sf) with a truck storage and lay down 12 Based on standard employment factors in the City's General Plan. Specifically, 1,000 s.f./employee for 4,450,500 s.f. Industrial Warehouse, 750 s.f./employee for 45,000 s.f. General Light Industrial, and 1,163 s.f./employee for 221,400 s.f. of Commercial
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
yard. Overall, the Project would allow for up to 246,000 sf of commercial development, a 125 -room hotel, 4,000,000 sf of industrial development, and a truck storage yard for an approximately 20% decrease in total building square footage. It is assumed that the truck storage yard would be an ancillary use to one of the adjacent industrial warehouse buildings. The Truck Storage Yard Alternative was selected to reduce impacts associated with air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation. The grading quantities and phases would be the same as the Project. The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips. Trip generation is calculated based on square footage and the types of use. The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would result in a total of 14,136 vehicle trips, compared to the Project's 16,266 trips (see DEIR Technical Appendix P).

The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips by 13% and associated VMT, which is calculated based on square footage and the types of use. Under the Project, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.s emissions would be 44.52, 143.99, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 1; 160.65, 461.71, 195.00, 57.71 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 2; 188.63, 470.01, 236.44, 69.23 pounds per day respectively during summer of Phase 3; 43.22, 151.09, 50.89, 15.25 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 1; 155.69, 485.80, 195.00, 57.71 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 2; and 179.96, 494.43, 236.44, 69.23 pounds per day respectively during winter of Phase 3, respectively. Under the Truck Storage Yard Alternative, the volume of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions would be reduced to approximately 162.47, 322.85, 196.97, 57.09 pounds per day respectively during summer and 154.16, 350.34, 196.98, and 57.10 pounds per day respectively during winter, respectively. The South Coast AQMD thresholds for VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.s are 55, 55, 150, and 55, respectively. Therefore, this alternative would not reduce the Project's operational air quality emissions to a less than significant level and a significant unavoidable air quality impact would remain. Moreover, the Project would result in approximately 63,911.07 MTCO2e per year (approximately 80% mobile source) with the implementation of PDFs prior to the implementation of mitigation measures, which would be reduced by approximately 23.87% to 48,655.28 MTCO2e per year (approximately 83% mobile source) under the Truck Storage Yard Alternative. This alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable GHG impacts, since it would exceed the threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Therefore, GHG emissions impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, but substantially lessened compared to the Project.

Operational noise would also be reduced under this alternative as traffic -generated and stationary noise sources would decrease in relation to the reduction in industrial square footage. However, Project - related off -site traffic noise level increases are considered significant and unavoidable. Noise impacts from the Truck Storage Yard Alternative would remain significant and unavoidable but reduced compared to the Project.

As shown, in DEIR Table 6-8, Comparison of Project VMT to the Truck Storage Yard Alternative, this alternative would result in a slight increase VMT per service population by 1.76% (from 39.19 to

39.88) compared to the Project (see DEIR Technical Appendix P). Therefore, the Truck Yard Alternative would continue to exceed the City's baseline VMT threshold and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable, and similar to the Project.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Under the Truck Storage Yard Alternative, buildout would result in a total of 4,345 jobs, 1,111 fewer jobs compared to the Project's generated 5,456 jobs. However, the jobs -housing ratio would decrease from the Project's 0.92 to 0.85 for the City under existing plus Alternative Project conditions and from

0.93 to 0.88 under buildout year plus project conditions, creating a greater jobs -housing imbalance as compared to the Project, and would impede the project objective of maximizing the opportunity of increasing the jobs housing balance. Overall, impacts to population and housing would remain less than significant with this alternative, but would be greater than the Project.

The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to air quality, energy, GHG emissions, noise, public services, and utilities and service systems due to the reduction in square footage and associated vehicular trips. However, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would not avoid or substantially lessened from implementation of this alternative. Impacts related to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazardous and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, recreation, transportation, tribal cultural resources, and wildfire would be similar to the Project; and impacts related to population and housing would be greater compared to the Project. The Truck Storage Yard Alternative would meet most of the basic objectives including Project Objectives, A, B, and E —I, as described in DEIR Section

6.1.1. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet the Project Objectives C and D to the same extent, due to the reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees and would not maximize opportunities to create jobs within the City, which are core components of Objectives C and D:
• Objective C. 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. • Objective D. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont to improve and maximize the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances. (DEIR, pp. 6-37 — 6-44)

7.4.3 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
The City finds as follows with respect to selection of an environmentally superior alternative and, in accordance with Section 15126.5 of the CEQA Guidelines selects the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative as the environmentally superior alternative. In addition to the discussion and comparison of impacts of a proposed project and the alternatives, Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an "environmentally superior" alternative be selected and the reasons for such a selection disclosed. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is the alternative that would be expected to generate the least amount of adverse impacts.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the CEQA Guidelines states if the No project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.

The No Project/No Development Alternative has the least impact to the environment because it would not involve any construction activities or commercial/industrial operations. There would be no impacts associated with a cumulatively considerable increase of VOC, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 during construction and operation, and no cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions, off -site traffic - related noise, and VMT. These impacts are considered significant and unavoidable for the Project.

While this alternative would avoid the significant effects of the Project, it would not receive the environmental benefits from conservation of 152.42 acres of natural habitat; implementation of stormwater drainage and water quality filtration features; and ignition resistant structures, parking areas, and irrigated landscaping within a VHFHSZ and HFHSZ that would be constructed by the Project. Additionally, none of the Project Objectives would be met.

The Existing City General Plan Alternative would eliminate the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts related to operational -related air quality, off -site traffic -related noise, and transportation impacts. However, the Existing City General Plan Alternative would result in greater impacts related to population and housing, public services, and recreation compared to the Project due to the increase in residents. Additionally, none of the Project Objectives would be met.

The Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative is environmentally superior to the Project because the alternative reduces the commercial and industrial square footage of the Project the most (non -hotel commercial square footage by 50% and the industrial square footage of the Project by approximately 20%) and also reduces the development footprint, with resulting reductions in grading, construction and off -site vehicular travel. As shown in DEIR Table 6-9, Comparison of Alternatives and Project -related Environmental Impacts, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, public services, transportation, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems, due to the reduction in overall square footage, development area, and associated vehicular trips. Despite the reductions to the Project scope under this alternative, significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, noise, and transportation would be reduced but would continue to occur from implementation of this alternative. Impacts related to population and housing would be greater under this alternative compared to the Project but would not be significant. Impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources, hazardous and hazardous materials, land use and planning, mineral resources, recreation, and wildfire would be similar to the Project.

As shown on DEIR Table 6-10, Alternatives Attainment of Project Objectives, the Reduced Development Area and Intensity Alternative would meet Project Objectives A, B, and F —I, as described in Section 6.1.1 of the DEIR. As compared with the Project, this alternative would not meet the following objectives to the same extent, due to the reduced industrial and commercial building square footage and proportional reduction in employees and economic benefit and would not maximize opportunities to create jobs within the City, which are core components of Objectives C and D:

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Objective C. 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.

Objective D. Creating new job opportunities within the City of Beaumont to improve and maximize the jobs to housing balance within the City and reduces the need for members of the existing local workforce to commute long distances. • Objective E. Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness -based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants. (DEIR, pp. 6-44 — 6.45) Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT I"

8.0 GENERAL CEQA FINDINGS

8.4.1 RECIRCULATION NOT REQUIRED
The City finds that the DEIR does not require recirculation under CEQA (CEQA Section 21092.1, CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5).
(a) CEQA requires that the lead agency recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice of its availability has previously been given but prior to its certification. "Significant new information" requiring recirculation includes, for example, a disclosure showing that:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation measure proposed to be implemented;
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance; (3)
A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt it; or
(4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. (b) Recirculation is not required where the new information added to the EIR merely clarifies or amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR. (c) If the revision is limited to a few chapters or portions of the EIR, the lead agency need only recirculate the chapters or portions that have been modified. (d) Recirculation of an EIR requires notice pursuant to Section 15087, and consultation pursuant to Section 15086.
(e) A decision not to recirculate an EIR must be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.

The DEIR documents changes to the DEIR. The DEIR provides additional analysis that was not included in the DEIR. Furthermore, Responses to Comments contained in the DEIR fully considered and responded to comments claiming that the Project would have significant impacts or more severe impacts not disclosed in the DEIR. Furthermore, the Responses to Comments include substantial evidence that none of these comments provided substantial evidence that project would result in changed circumstances, significant new information, considerably different mitigation measures, or new or more severe significant impacts than were discussed in the DEIR. In addition, CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(b) provides that "recirculation is not required where the new information Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
added to the EIR merely clarifies and amplifies or makes insignificant modifications in an adequate EIR." Recirculation also is not required simply because new information is added to the EIR indeed, new information is oftentimes added given CEQA's public/agency comment and response process and CEQA's post-DEIR circulation requirement of proposed responses to comments submitted by public agencies.

The City staff, Planning Commission, and City Council have thoroughly reviewed the public comments received regarding the Project and the DEIR to determine whether any of the public comments provide substantial evidence that would require recirculation of the EIR prior to its adoption.

8.4.2 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
To the extent that these Findings conclude that the proposed mitigation measures outlined in herein are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the City hereby commits to implementing these measures. These Findings, in other words, are not merely informational, but rather constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City approves the proposed project. The mitigation measures that are referenced herein and adopted concurrently with these Findings will be effectuated through the process of construction and implementation of the proposed Project. In accordance with the Requirements of Public Resources Code § 21081.6, the City must adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program, which is described in full in Section IV of the DEIR and is incorporated herein by this reference. The City reserves the right to make amendments and/or substitutions of mitigation measures if the City determines that the amended or substituted mitigation measure will mitigate the identified potential environmental impacts to at least the same degree as the original mitigation measure, and where the amendment or substitution would not result in a new significant impact on the environment which cannot be mitigated.

8.4.3 CONSIDERATION OF RECORD; INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT
In approving the proposed Project, the City decision -makers have reviewed and considered the DEIR and appendices, the DEIR and appendices, and all other pertinent evidence in the record of proceedings. The Applicant's consultants prepared the screen check versions of the DEIR, DEIR and technical studies. All such materials and all other materials related to the EIR were extensively reviewed and, where appropriate, modified by the Planning Department or other City representatives.

As such, the DEIR, DEIR, technical studies, and all other related materials reflect the independent judgment and analysis of the Lead Agency.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"

9.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
This Section specifically addresses CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, which requires the City, acting as the Lead Agency, to balance the benefits of the Project against its significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts and determine whether the benefits which will accrue from the development of the Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable impacts. If the City finds that the major benefits of the Project outweigh its significant and unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, the City may approve the Project. Each of the separate benefits listed below are hereby determined to be, in itself, and independent of the Project's other benefits, the basis for overriding all significant and unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the EIR.

As set forth in Section 3.0 above, the EIR identified all of the Project's adverse environmental impacts and mitigation measures that can reduce the Project's impacts to less -than -significant level where feasible, or to the lowest feasible levels. Mitigation imposed by the City must have a proportional nexus to the Project's impacts. As further set forth in Section 5.0, the EIR presents evidence that implementing the Project would cause or contribute to impacts that would remain significant and unavoidable even after the imposition of all feasible mitigation measures. Finally, as set forth in Section

7.0, herein, there are no feasible alternatives to the Project that would mitigate the Project's significant and avoidable impacts to less -than -significant level or avoid those environmental impacts while still attaining most of the Project's basic objectives. Based on the facts presented throughout this document, the City makes the following finding:

As the CEQA Lead Agency for the proposed Project, the City has reviewed the Project description and the alternatives to the Project, as presented in the EIR, and the City fully understands the Project and its alternatives. The City finds and determines that:
(i)
the majority of the significant impacts of the Project will be reduced to less -than significant and acceptable levels by the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR and approved and adopted by these Findings;
(ii) the City's approval of the Project will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the Project; and
(iii) all potential adverse environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impacts from the Project have been identified in the DEIR, Final EIR and public testimony and there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible Project alternatives that would further mitigate or avoid the remaining significant environmental effects. The significant effects that have not been mitigated to a less - than -significant level are therefore considered significant and unavoidable. Having considered the potential for the Project to cause or contribute to significant and unavoidable adverse impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation, the City hereby determines that all feasible mitigation measures have been adopted to reduce or avoid the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
the EIR, and that no additional feasible mitigation or alternatives are available to further reduce or avoid significant impacts.
(iv) economic, social, and other considerations of the Project outweigh the Project's significant and unavoidable impacts and that approval of the Project is appropriate.

Despite the potentially significant impacts, it is the City's considered judgment that the benefits offered by the proposed Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project (Project) outweigh the potentially adverse effects of the significant impacts. Each of the twelve overriding considerations set forth below constitutes a separate and independent ground for finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh its potential adverse effects and each such consideration, standing alone, warrants approval of the Project.

Each of the Project benefits separately and individually outweighs all of the unavoidable adverse environmental effects identified in the EIR, and the City therefore finds those impacts to be acceptable.

The Project would meet the following objectives:

A. 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.

B. 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.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. Fulfilling a need in the City and region for wellness -based retail, including entertainment, recreation, hospitality, and restaurants.

F. 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.

Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
G. 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.

H. 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.

I. 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. The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project is consistent with and will contribute to achieving the policies, goals and objectives established by the City of Beaumont General Plan. Implementing the City's General Plan as a policy is a legal and social prerogative of the City.

The Beaumont General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element designates the Project site as Rural Residential 1. The Project Applicant's proposed GPA PLAN2019-0284 would amend the City of Beaumont's General Plan Land Use Map to modify the land use designations for the Project site from "Rural Residential" to "Industrial (I)," "General Commercial (GC)," "Open Space (OS)," and "Open Space -Conservation (OS -C)." The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan policies, goals and objectives for these land use designations and other applicable General Plan policies, goals and objectives. With the approval of the proposed Project, including the Specific Plan, any future development plans and entitlement applications (tract maps, site plans, and other similar entitlements) would be required to comply with the Specific Plan and substantially conform to the standards and guidelines set forth in the other sections of the Specific Plan, as well as any other applicable City of Beaumont regulations and therefore would also be consistent with General Plan policies, goals and objectives. Although the Project would result in a change to the General Plan land use designations for the Project site to allow for implementation of the Specific Plan, these changes would not result in a conflict with applicable plans, polices, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or reducing an environmental effect (DEIR, Table 4.11- 1).

2. The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project is consistent with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) and will dedicate natural habitat to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) pursuant to the Western Riverside County MSHCP.

The Project site is located in the MSHCP Criteria Area, within portions of independent Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125, as well as a portion of Cell Group A', divided between two Area Plans. The Pass Area Plan (Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125) and the Reche Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations

"ATTACHMENT 1"
Canyon/Badlands Area Plan (Cell Group A'). The Project required a Criteria Refinement to approve the Specific Plan, as designed, to be consistent with the MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements.

The Criteria Refinement analysis was approved and determined to be in concurrence with the MSHCP by the RCA, USFWS and the CDFW on November 9, 2022. On November 9, 2022, the Wildlife Agencies issued a letter to the City of Beaumont concurring with the RCA's Findings that the proposed Revised Criteria Refinement is superior or equivalent to conservation described within Proposed Core 3. In furtherance of the findings, the Project will be constructed in compliance with the Criteria Refinement analysis and the City will condition the Project to require shielded, wildlife friendly lighting for all outdoor lighting consistent with the MSHCP Urban/Wildlife Interface Guidelines (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.4).

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 open space — conservation area would be preserved as natural habitat and would be dedicated to the RCA as required by the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Additionally, 78.40 acres of off -site lands would be conserved and conveyed to the RCA.

3. The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project will contribute towards implementing employment opportunities in the City to improve the jobs -housing balance and to reduce unemployment within the City. Jobs for residents at a variety of income levels will be provided. The Project furthers the regional goals of Connect SoCal which designates the Beaumont area as a Job Center within a designated Priority Growth Area13.

The Project would provide job opportunities close to home for Beaumont residents, which would subsequently help achieve a better job -to -housing balance within the City and the region (DEIR, Section 4.14). At full -Project buildout, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 5,456 permanent jobs. SCAG forecasted 15,900 jobs in the City by the year 2045; the Project's proposed jobs would represent approximately 34% of SCAG's forecast.

The Project would contribute new employment to a housing -rich area contributing to an improved jobs -housing ratio of 0.92 for the City under existing plus Project conditions and

0.93 at Project buildout (DEIR, Table 4.14-4). Therefore, the Project would have a beneficial impact on the City's jobs -housing ratio and contribute to the City goal of reaching the recommended jobs -housing ratio of approximately 1.0. The Project would be within the anticipated business growth projections of the City and would contribute to a more balanced job -housing ratio.
13 https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal-plan_0.pdf ? 1606001176 Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Project
Facts and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations