N M
■ ❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This section identifies and evaluates the Project's potential to have adverse hydrology and water quality effects. Information presented in this section is primarily based on the following technical reports, which are included in their entirety in Technical Appendix 11, 12, Fl, Ll, and L2, respectively, of this EIR.
• Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. (PECW). 2022a. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Study for Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, City of Beaumont, California. April 2022. • Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. (PECW). 2022b. Project Specific Water Quality Management Plan for Beaumont Pointe. April 11, 2022.
• Kling Consulting Group, Inc (KCG). 2021. Revised Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility Investigation, Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan, 539.9 Acre Industrial/Commercial Development, Jack Rabbit Trail, Beaumont Area, Riverside County, California. March 19, 2021. This technical report is referred to herein as "Geotechnical Report." • Charles Marr Consulting and Pacific Advanced Civil Engineering (CMC & PACE). 2021.
Project Specific Water Supply Assessment. April 13, 2021. • Pacific Advanced Civil Engineering (PACE). 2022. Amendment #1 Water Supply Assessment.
April 8, 2022.
4.10.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Regional Setting
The northern portion of the Project site is within the Santa Ana River Watershed and the southern portion of the Project site is within the San Jacinto Valley Watershed, both of which are under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) (RCIT, 2021).
According to the SARWQCB, the Santa Ana River Watershed covers a land area of 2,840 square miles between Los Angeles and San Diego. The Santa Ana River headwaters originate in the southern San Bernardino Mountains and runs southwesterly across San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange Counties, where it discharges into the Pacific Ocean at the City of Huntington Beach. The total length of the Santa Ana River and its major tributaries is approximately 700 miles. (SAWPA, 2018) Water from the Project site flows through the San Timoteo Creek and then into the Santa Ana River, and ultimately discharges into the Pacific Ocean.
8. Existing Setting
The Project site has a varying topography consisting of hillsides, ridges, canyons, and valleys.
Stormwater originating from the site drains to the northeast towards SR -60 to 16 existing Caltrans maintained culverts (1-16) via their respective tributary areas (drainage areas 100 thru 1600).
Tributaries for these culverts extend to the ridgelines of the Badlands foothills along the southern and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ 1 I Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality northern borders; the development on the eastern border provides a ridgeline for the eastern edge of the Project site. The northwestern most culvert is an existing 54 -inch corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and the southeastern most culvert is a double 48 -inch CMP adjacent to the SR -60 off -ramp for Jack Rabbit Trail. The tributaries feature steep, eroded hillside grades and natural depressed grasslands at the entrances of the culverts. These depressed areas provide natural detention areas for the culverts before the runoff confluences with San Timoteo Creek on the northern side of SR -60.
As shown in Figure 4.10-1, Existing Hydrology Map, the Project site is divided into 16 drainage management areas (DMAs). Table 4.10-1, Existing 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates, identifies the peak flow rates discharging from each DMA under existing conditions for the 100 -year storm event.
Table 4.10-1 Existing 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates
Area ID
Acreage
Peak Runoff (cfs)
Culvert Size (in)
Culvert Capacity
(cfs)
100
140.0
376.7
54 CMP*
483.44**
200
2.6 9.0
30 CMP*
300
9.3 28.4
30CMP
96.0 400
16.9 54.5
36 CMP
154.1
450
0.4 1.8
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
500
5.4 16.4
30 CMP
71.8 600
53.9 160.5
42 CMP
132.0
700
4.4 14.3
24 CMP
59.5 800
7.0 22.6
24 CMP
51.5 900
14.1 49.7
24 CMP
38.7 1000
0.5 2.2
24 CMP
77.8 1100
79.1 212.6
48 CMP
79.2 1200
3.0 10.5
24 CMP
54.1 1300
65.7 191.2
36 CMP
138.8
1400
4.7 8.7
36 CMP
118.6
1500
25.8 88.4
36 CMP
119.6
1600
90.5 234.7
2 - 48 CMP
476.9
Total
523.4
1,482.4
Source: (PECW, 2022a)
* Existing culverts with no available data to use to calculate the estimated capacity. Existing culverts to be replaced by a 20'x20' RCB per Caltrans 60 Freeway widening project. Culvert capacity calculations based on Caltrans drainage plans (slope & pipe size). See selected Caltrans Drainage plan sheets in Appendix E of Technical Appendix 12 of this EIR).
** Proposed 20'x20' RCB culvert capacity calculated with a conservative assumed depth of 2 ft which is 10% of the total inside height of the culvert. The actual physical capacity of the culvert far exceeds the assumption and is a function of the depth of flow. However, it is unlikely that the depth of flow will exceed 25% of the total inside height.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
Source(s): Proactive Engineering Consultants (07-29-2021) Figure 4.10-1
immEnmEm
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Existing Hydrology Map
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality It should be noted that, at the time this EIR was drafted, Caltrans was conducting a project to widen the SR -60. The Caltrans project included the replacement of two culverts (Area ID 100 and 200) and the extension of several other culverts. The widening project will only affect the first five western culverts. Where runoff exceeds the calculated culvert capacity, the excess runoff ponds within the natural detention areas adjacent to the culvert invert. For Area 1100 and culvert 11, the approximate natural detention area is 18.4 ac -ft. For Area 1300 and culvert 13, the approximate natural detention area is 15.8 ac -ft. Areas 600 and 900 have an estimated natural detention capacity of 10.18 ac -ft and
12.06 ac -ft, respectively.
According to Figure 9.8, Flood Hazards Map, of the City's General Plan, the Project site is not within a flood hazard area (City of Beaumont, 2020a). Additionally, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Map No. 06065C0795H, the Project site is within Flood Zone X, which is an area of minimal flood hazard (FEMA, 2014).
As described in more detail below, each high and medium priority basin, as identified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is required to have a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) that will be responsible for groundwater management and development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) (DWR, 2020a). The Project site is within the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin. The Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin is a very low priority basin and management action is voluntary based on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act regulations (DWR, 2021). According to the Project -specific Geotechnical Report, groundwater was encountered on site at approximately 40 feet below the ground surface (bgs) in Boring KB -5 and 49 feet bgs in Boring KB -7. It should be noted that variations in groundwater may result from fluctuations in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors (KCG, 2021).
4.10.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to hydrology and water quality
4.10.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The following is a brief description of the federal, State, and local environmental laws and related regulations related to hydrology and water quality.
A. Federal
1. Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. "Clean Water Act" became the Act's common name Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality with amendments in 1972. Under the CWA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry, and also has set water quality standards for all contaminants in surface waters. The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. EPA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program controls discharges. Point sources are discrete conveyances such as pipes or man-made ditches. Individual homes that are connected to a municipal system, use a septic system, or do not have a surface discharge do not need an NPDES permit; however, industrial, municipal, and other facilities must obtain permits if their discharges go directly to surface waters.
8. State
1. Porter -Cologne Water Control Act
The Porter -Cologne Act is the principal law governing water quality regulation in California. It establishes a comprehensive program to protect water quality and the beneficial uses of water. The Porter -Cologne Act applies to surface waters, wetlands, and groundwater and to both point and nonpoint sources of pollution. Pursuant to the Porter -Cologne Act (California Water Code Section 13000 et seq.), the policy of the State is as follows:
• That the quality of all the waters of the State shall be protected; • That all activities and factors affecting the quality of water shall be regulated to attain the highest water quality within reason; and
• That the State must be prepared to exercise its full power and jurisdiction to protect the quality of water in the State from degradation. (SWRCB, 2014)
The Porter -Cologne Act established nine Regional Water Boards (based on hydrogeologic barriers) and the State Water Board, which are charged with implementing its provisions and which have primary responsibility for protecting water quality in California. The State Water Board provides program guidance and oversight, allocates funds, and reviews Regional Water Boards decisions. In addition, the State Water Board allocates rights to the use of surface water. The Regional Water Boards have primary responsibility for individual permitting, inspection, and enforcement actions within each of the nine hydrologic regions. The State Water Board and Regional Water Boards have numerous non -point source (NPS) related responsibilities, including monitoring and assessment, planning, financial assistance, and management. (SWRCB, 2014)
The Porter -Cologne Act establishes waste discharge requirements, water quality control planning and monitoring, enforcement of discharge requirements, and ground and surface water quality objectives.
It also prevents waste and unreasonable use of water, and it adjudicates water rights. It directs each RWQCB to develop a Water Quality Control Plan (basin plan) for all areas within its region. The basin plan serves as the basis for each RWQCB's regulatory programs. These plans identify the existing and potential beneficial uses of waters of the State and establish water quality objectives to protect these Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality uses. The basin plans also contain implementation, surveillance, and monitoring plans. The Project site is located within the purview of the SARWQCB (Region 8), and must comply with applicable elements of the region's Santa Ana River Basin Plan (discussed below), the Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the CWA.
The Regional Water Boards regulate discharges under the Porter -Cologne Act primarily through issuance of NPDES permits for point source discharges and waste discharge requirements (WDRs) for NPS discharges. Anyone discharging or proposing to discharge materials that could affect water quality (other than to a community sanitary sewer system regulated by an NPDES permit) must file a report of waste discharge. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs) can make their own investigations or may require dischargers to carry out water quality investigations and report on water quality issues. The Porter -Cologne Act provides several options for enforcing WDRs and other orders, including cease and desist orders, cleanup and abatement orders, administrative civil liability orders, civil court actions, and criminal prosecutions (SWRCB, 2014).
2. California Water Code
The California Water Code is the principal State law regulating water quality in California. Water quality provisions must be complied with as contained in numerous code sections including: 1) the Health and Safety Code for the protection of ground and surface waters from hazardous waste and other toxic substances; 2) the Fish and Game Code for the prevention of unauthorized diversions of any surface water and discharge of any substance that may be deleterious to fish, plant, animal, or bird life; 3) the Harbors and Navigation Code for the prevention of the unauthorized discharge of waste from vessels into surface waters; and 4) the Food and Agriculture Code for the protection of groundwater which may be used for drinking water supplies. The California Depai tment of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), through provisions of the Fish and Game Code (Sections 1601 - 1603) is empowered to issue agreements for any alteration of a river, stream, or lake where fish or wildlife resources may be adversely affected. CDFW regulates wetland areas only to the extent that those wetlands are part of a river, stream, or lake as defined by CDFW.
3. Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
The 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) requires governments and water agencies of high and medium priority basins to halt overdraft and bring groundwater basins into balanced levels of pumping and recharge. Under SGMA, these basins should reach sustainability within 20 years of implementing their sustainability plans. The DWR categorizes the priority of groundwater basins. For critically over -drafted basins, must comply by 2040. For the remaining high and medium priority basins, 2042 is the deadline. The SGMA also requires local public agencies and Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) in high- and medium -priority basins to develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) or Alternatives to GSPs. GSPs are detailed road maps for how groundwater basins will reach long term sustainability. (DWR, 2019). As noted above, the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin in which the Project site is located is Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality a very low priority basin and management action is voluntary based on the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act regulations. (DWR, 2021)
4. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit Pursuant to Section 402(p) of the CWA, which requires regulations for permitting of certain stormwater discharges, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has issued a statewide general NPDES Permit for stormwater discharges from construction sites ([NPDES No. CAS000002] Water Quality Order 2009-0009-DWQ'. Under this Construction General Permit, stormwater discharges from construction sites with a disturbed area of one acre or more are required to either obtain individual NPDES permits for stormwater discharges or to be covered by the Construction General Permit. Coverage under the Construction General Permit is accomplished by determining the risk level of the construction site and by preparing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that includes a site evaluation and assessment, BMPs to be implemented at the construction site, and an inspection program. The SWPPP should also outline the monitoring and sampling program to verify compliance with discharge Numeric Action Levels (NALs) according to the Risk Level for the site, as set by the Construction General Permit. The primary objective of the SWPPP is to ensure that the responsible party properly construct, implement, and maintain BMPs to reduce or eliminate pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges from the construction site. Permit Registration Documents (SWPPP, Notice of Intent, and other documents), as well as annual reports, Notice of Terminations, and NAL exceedance reports, must be electronically submitted to the SWRCB and the permit fee mailed to the SWRCB for Construction General Permit coverage.
C. Regional
1. Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin The SARWQCB Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin Plan (Basin Plan) was originally adopted in 1995 and has been subsequently amended through June 2019 (SARWQCB, 2019). The Basin Plan is designed to preserve and enhance water quality and to protect the beneficial uses of all regional waters. Specifically, the Basin Plan: 1) designates beneficial uses for surface and subsurface waters (groundwater); 2) sets narrative and numerical objectives that must be attained or maintained to protect the designated beneficial uses and to conform to the State's anti -degradation policy; 3) describes the implementation plan to achieve water quality objectives and to protect the beneficial uses of all waters in the region; 4) describes the comprehensive monitoring and assessment program used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Basin Plan; and 5) provides an overview of water resource management studies and projects which are in progress in the region. Additionally, the Basin Plan incorporates by reference all applicable State and Regional Board plans and policies. 1 NPDES No. CAS000002, Water Quality Order 2009 0009 DWQ, SWRCB NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction Activity (adopted by the SWRCB on September 2, 2009, and effective on July 1, 2010). This order was amended by 2010-0014-DWQ, which became effective on February 14, 2011, and 2012- 0006-DWQ, which became effective on July 17, 2012. In accordance with the language set forth in Order No. 2009- 0009-DWQ, this permit has been administratively extended indefinitely.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality The Basin Plan establishes or designates beneficial uses and water quality objectives for all the ground and surface waters in the region. Beneficial uses are the uses of water necessary for the survival and well-being of humans, plants, and wildlife. These uses serve to promote the tangible and intangible economic, social, and environmental goals. Water quality objectives are the levels of water quality constituents or characteristics that must be met to protect beneficial uses. The Basin Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin also establishes an implementation program that describes the actions that the SARWQCB and others must achieve and maintain for the designated beneficial uses and water quality objectives of the region's waters.
Water bodies that do not meet water quality standards are deemed "impaired" and, under Section 303(d) of the CWA, are placed on a list of impaired waters for which a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) must be developed for the impairing pollutant(s). A TMDL is an estimate of the total load of pollutants from point, non -point, and natural sources that a water body may receive without exceeding applicable water quality standards (with a "factor of safety" included). Once established, the TMDL is allocated among current and future pollutant sources to the water body. TMDLs must consider and include allocations to both point sources and non -point sources of listed pollutants. Table 4.10-2, Receiving Waters Tributary to the Project Site, indicates that the Basin Plan's beneficial use designations for the receiving waters that the Project is tributary to (in order of upstream to downstream) as well as the 303(d) listed impairment (if any). The definitions of the beneficial uses of receiving waters identified for the Project site are as follows:
• Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN): Uses of water for community, military, municipal, or individual water supply systems including, but not limited to, drinking water supply. • Agricultural Supply (AGR): Uses of water for farming, horticulture, or ranching including, but not limited to, irrigation, stock watering, or support of vegetation for range grazing. • Groundwater Recharge (GWR): Uses of water for natural or artificial recharge of groundwater for purposes including, but not limited to, future extraction, maintaining water quality, or halting of saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. • Water Contact Recreation (REC1): Uses of water for recreational activities involving bodily contact with water where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, swimming, wading, water-skiing, skin and scuba diving, surfing, white water activities, fishing, or use of natural hot springs.
• Non -Contact Water Recreation (REC2): Uses of water for recreational activities involving proximity to water, but not normally involving bodily contact with water, where ingestion of water is reasonably possible. These uses include, but are not limited to, picnicking, sunbathing, hiking, beachcombing, camping, boating, tidepool and marine life study, hunting, sightseeing, or aesthetic enjoyment in conjunction with the above activities. • Spawning, Reproduction and Development (SPWN): Uses of water that support high quality aquatic habitats necessary for reproduction and early development of fish and wildlife.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality • Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species (RARE): Uses of water that support the habitats necessary for the survival and successful maintenance of plant or animal species designated under state or federal law as rare, threatened or endangered. • Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM): Uses of water that support warm water ecosystems including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of aquatic habitats, vegetation habitats, and fish and wildlife habitats (including invertebrates). • Wildlife Habitat (WILD): Uses of water that support wildlife habitat including, but not limited to, preservation and enhancement of vegetation and prey species used by waterfowl and other wildlife water.
(SARWQCB, 2019)
Table 4.10-2 Receiving Waters Tributary to the Project Site Receiving Waters
EPA Approved 303(d)
List of Impairments
Designated Beneficial
Uses
Proximity to RARE
Beneficial Uses (miles)
On -site Storm Drain
System
N/A
N/A
9 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 3
None
N/A
9 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 2
None
AGR, GWR, WARM,
WILD, MUN, RARE,
REC1, REC2
2 San Timoteo Creek —
Reach 1
None
N/A
2 Santa Ana River —
Reach 5
None
SPWN, AGR
6 Santa Ana River —
Reach 4
Pathogens
N/A
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 3
Copper, Lead, Pathogens,
Nitrates
WILD, WARM, REC2,
REC1, MUN, GWR
1 Prado Basin
Nutrients
AGR, GWR, REC1,
REC2, WARM, WILD,
RARE, SPWN
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 2
Metals, Indicator Bacteria
AGR, GWR, WARM,
WILD, MUN, RARE,
REC1, REC2
1 Santa Ana River —
Reach 1
None
WARM, WILD, MUN,
RARE, REC1, REC2
1 Source: (PECW, 2022b, Table A.1)
AGR = Agricultural Supply; GWR = Groundwater Recharge; REC 1 = Primary Contact Recreation; REC2 = Secondary Contact Recreation; WARM = Warm Freshwater Habitat; WILD = Wildlife Habitat; MUN = Municipal and Domestic Supply; RARE = Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species; SPWN = Spawning, Reproduction and Development.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
2. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System Permit
On January 29, 2010, the SARWQCB issued the NPDES Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements for the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD), the County of Riverside, and the Incorporated Cities of Riverside County Within the Santa Ana Region (Order No.
R8-2010-0033 and NPDES No. CAS 618033). Order No. R8-2010-0033, which remains in effect until the effective date of a new permit, regulates the way the Permittees manage urban runoff in the Santa Ana Region. This order renews Order No. R8-2002-001 and regulates discharges of urban runoff from the MS4s in the Riverside County portion of the Santa Ana Region. As part of the permit application, the Permittees submitted a revised Drainage Area Management Plan that contained programs, policies, and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to achieve the water quality standards in receiving waters.
The City of Beaumont, as a co-permittee is responsible for implementing MS4 permits in Region 8.
3. Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plan — Santa Ana Region In compliance with the requirements of the Santa Ana Region MS4 Permit, the Riverside County Drainage Area Management Plan — Santa Ana Region (DAMP) (last updated in June 2017) was developed by the RCFC&WCD to provide guidance to Permittees (RCFC&WCD, County of Riverside, and incorporated cities) on the development and implementation of Local Implementation Plans (LIPs) (RCFCWCD, 2017) The Riverside County DAMP, which is applicable to the Santa Ana Watershed region of Riverside County, describes the program elements needed to comply with the MS4 Permit. It addresses the development of local stormwater ordinances, grading/erosion ordinances, and litter/trash control ordinances, including illicit connections and illegal discharges. The requirements for post -construction urban runoff from new development and significant redevelopment projects through a WQMP, operation and maintenance of the MS4, and commercial and industrial facility inspection programs are also addressed. In June 2017, the DAMP was updated to include the approval of the Watershed Action Plan and its supporting documents.
4. Riverside County Water Quality Management Plan
The MS4 Permit and DAMP require new development and significant redevelopment projects to prepare WQMPs for managing the quality of stormwater or urban runoff that flows from a project site after construction is completed and after the facilities or structures are occupied and/or operational. A WQMP is required to reduce or eliminate water pollution in urban runoff that flows from stormwater drainage systems into receiving waters. A WQMP must describe the site design, source -control, and treatment -control BMPs that will be implemented and maintained throughout the life of a project. The WQMP must include a statement that the project would implement appropriately sized treatment - control BMPs targeted to address the pollutants of concern and to achieve the required level of treatment either singly or in combination. On October 22, 2012, the Executive Officer of the SARWQCB approved the Water Quality Management Plan Guidance and Template for the Santa Ana Region of Riverside County; the guidance was updated in June 2016. The Riverside County WQMP addresses post construction urban runoff from new development and redevelopment projects in the Santa Ana River Watershed. It requires that Low Impact Development (LID) retention BMPs (e.g., Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ l Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality infiltration, harvest and use, evapotranspiration, and/or bio-treatment) to be used unless it can be shown that these BMPs are infeasible.
D. Local
1. City of Beaumont General Plan
The General Plan identifies goals related to water quality throughout its elements. These goals and policies and a discussion of the Project's consistency are discussed in Table 4.11-1, General Plan Applicability Analysis, in EIR Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning.
2. City of Beaumont Municipal Code
The City of Beaumont Municipal Code identifies policies related to stormwater runoff management.
The specific Municipal Code policy that is relevant to the Project is as follows:
Chapter 13.24 — Stormwater/Urban Runoff Management and Discharge Controls. The purpose of this chapter is to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public by: 1) reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable; 2) regulating illicit connections and discharges to the storm drain system; and 3) regulating non-stormwater discharges to the storm drain system. The intent of this chapter is to protect and enhance the water quality of watercourses, water bodies, groundwater, and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the federal CWA, the State Porter -Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and the conditions of any NPDES permit applicable to the City.
4.10.4 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Section IX of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines addresses typical adverse effects to hydrology and water quality, and includes the following threshold questions to evaluate the Project's impacts on hydrology and water quality:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality;
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site; Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site;
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff, or
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows.
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
4.10.5 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 further ensure the implementation of the mandated RRs.
RR 10-1
RR 10-2
Prior to grading plan approval and the issuance of a grading permit for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan developments, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that a Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the Regional Water Quality Control Board for coverage under the State National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit for discharge of stormwater associated with construction activities.
Prior to grading plan approval and the first issuance of a grading permit by the City for the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan development, the Project proponent shall submit to the City of Beaumont a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP shall include a surface water control plan and erosion -control plan citing specific measures to control erosion during the entire grading and construction period.
Additionally, the SWPPP shall identify structural and non-structural Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control sediment and nonvisible discharges from the site. BMPs to be implemented in the SWPPP may include (but shall not be limited to) the following:
• Sediment discharges from the site may be controlled by the following:
■ Perimeter protection to prevent sediment discharges through silt fences, fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag barriers, and compost socks; ■ Sediment capture and drainage control through sediment traps, storm drain inlet protection, and sediment basins;
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality • Velocity reduction through check dams, sediment basins, and outlet protection/velocity dissipation devices;
• Reduction in off -site sediment tracking through stabilized construction entrance/exit, construction road stabilization, and entrance/exit tire wash; • Slope interruption at permit -prescribed intervals (fiber rolls, gravel bag berms, sand bag berms, compost socks, biofilter bags).
• The construction and condition of the BMPs will be periodically inspected during construction, and repairs will be made when necessary as required by the SWPPP. • No materials of any kind shall be placed in drainage ways. • Materials that could contribute nonvisible pollutants to stormwater must be contained, elevated, and placed in temporary storage containment areas. • All loose piles of soil, silt, clay, sand, debris, and other earthen material shall be protected per RWQCB standards to eliminate any discharge from the site.
Stockpiles will be surrounding by silt fences.
• The SWPPP will include inspection forms for routine monitoring of the site during the construction phase to ensure NPDES compliance.
• Additional BMPs and erosion -control measures will be documented in the SWPPP and utilized if necessary.
• The SWPPP will be kept on site for the entire duration of project construction and will also be available to the local RWQCB for inspection at any time.
In the event that it is not feasible to implement the above BMPs, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs will provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site.
RR 10-3
Prior to the issuance of each grading permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that the following provisions have been added to the construction contracts for the proposed work:
• The Construction Contractor shall be responsible for performing and documenting the application of BMPs identified in the SWPPP. Weekly inspections shall be performed on sediment -control measures called for in the SWPPP. Monthly reports shall be maintained by the Contractor and submitted to the City for inspection. In addition, the Contractor will also be required to maintain an inspection log and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality have the log on site to be reviewed by the City of Beaumont and the representatives of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
RR 10-4
RR 10-5
Prior to issuance of each grading permit by the City of Beaumont for each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall receive approval from the City of Beaumont of a Final Water Quality Management Plan (Final WQMP). The Final WQMP shall specifically identify pollution -prevention, site -design, source -control, and treatment - control BMPs that shall be used on site to control predictable pollutant runoff to reduce impacts to water quality to the maximum extent practicable after construction is completed and after the facilities or structures are occupied and/or operational. Source control BMPs to be implemented in the Final WQMP may include (but shall not be limited to) those listed in Table 4.10-3. Treatment -control BMPs shall include on -site detention/sand filtration basins to treat the site's runoff; these facilities shall be maintained and inspected at least twice per year and prior to October 1. Additional BMPs will be documented in the WQMP and utilized if necessary. In the event that it is not feasible to implement the BMPs identified in the Final WQMP, the City of Beaumont can make a determination that other BMPs shall provide equivalent or superior treatment either on or off site.
Prior to the issuance of each building permit for the Project, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that the Project complies with the requirements of the RWQCB Municipal Permit General MS4 Permit. The MS4 Permit requirements for new development calls for compliance with water quality regulatory requirements applicable to stormwater runoff and waste discharge. Specifically, the MS4 permit would require Project proponent to develop and implement a comprehensive Stormwater Management Program (SWMP) that must include pollution prevention measures, treatment or removal techniques, monitoring, use of legal authority, and other appropriate measures to control the quality of stormwater discharged to the storm drains.
4.10.6 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? A. Construction -Related Water Quality Impacts
The Project would result in the development of a maximum of 246,000 sf of general commercial uses, a 125 -room hotel (90,000 sf), 4,995,000 sf of industrial uses, 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.
Construction -related activities have the potential to result in impacts to water quality. The grading and construction phases would require the disturbance of surface soils and removal of the existing, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality vegetation cover. During the construction period, grading activities would result in exposure of soil to storm runoff, potentially causing erosion and sedimentation in runoff. Sediments also transport substances such as nutrients, hydrocarbons, and trace metals, which would be conveyed to the storm drain facilities and receiving waters. Substances such as fuels, oil and grease, solvents, paints and other building construction materials, wash water, and dust control water could also enter storm runoff and be transported to nearby waterways. This could potentially degrade the quality of the receiving waters and potentially result in the impairment of downstream water sources.
Construction activities for the Project would occur over an area more than one acre. Therefore, the Project is required to obtain coverage under an NPDES permit. Construction impacts due to Project development would be minimized through compliance with the NPDES Construction General Permit.
As part of compliance with the NPDES requirements, a Notice of Intent (NOI) would be prepared and submitted to the SWRCB, and a Water Discharge Identification Number would be obtained prior to grading. This will provide notification and intent to comply with the State Construction General Permit.
This permit requires the discharger to perform a risk assessment for the proposed development (with differing requirements based upon the determined risk level). As stated in Regulatory Requirement RR -2, the discharger must prepare and implement a SWPPP, which must include erosion -control and sediment -control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the determined risk level of the construction site, in addition to tracking control, waste management, and site design BMPs that control construction -related pollutants. These measures may include the use of gravel bags, silt fences, straw wattles, hay bales, check dams, hydroseed, or soil binders (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10- 2). The construction contractor would be required to operate and maintain these BMPs throughout the duration of on -site construction activities. A Construction Site Monitoring Program that identifies monitoring and sampling requirements during construction is a required component of the SWPPP. In addition, the construction contractor would be required to maintain an inspection log and have the log on site to be reviewed by the City and representatives of the RWQCB.
The NPDES permit program was established under Section 402 of the CWA, which prohibits the unauthorized discharge of pollutants, including municipal, commercial, and industrial wastewater discharges. An NPDES permit would generally specify an acceptable level of pollutants or pollutant parameters in a discharge. The permittee may choose which technologies to use to achieve that level.
Table 4.10-3, Construction Activity Best Management Practices, lists BMPs for runoff control, sediment control, erosion control, and good housekeeping that may be used during the construction phase of the Project.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Table 4.10-3 Construction Activity Best Management Practices Runoff Control
Sediment Control
Erosion Control
Good Housekeeping
Temporary diversion
dikes
Install perimeter controls (e.g.,
silt fences)
Chemical stabilization
Create waste
collection area
Preserve natural
vegetation
Install sediment -trapping
devices (e.g., straw wattles,
hay bales, gravel bags)
Dust control
Put lids on containers
Stabilize drainage ways
Inlet protection (e.g., check
dams)
Construction sequencing
Clean up spills
immediately
Source: (EPA, 2018)
The construction -phase BMPs would ensure effective control of not only sediment discharge, but also of pollutants associated with sediments (e.g., nutrients, hydrocarbons, and trace metals). Mandatory compliance with regulatory requirements for the protection of water quality during construction (see Regulatory Requirements RR 10-1 through RR 10-3), including implementation of a SWPPP, would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities. Therefore, impacts related to water quality and waste discharge associated with construction activities would be less than significant.
8. Post -Development Water Quality Impacts
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, except for the portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The development of the Project and associated improvements would result in the conversion of existing on -site permeable surfaces to impermeable surfaces within PAs 1 through 8. The water runoff from impervious surfaces, including the proposed buildings, roadways, landscaped areas, and parking lots, have the potential to carry a variety of pollutants. A "pollutant of concern" is water pollutant that is also an impairment to the receiving water body. Based on the Project -specific WQMP, potential water pollutants that could be generated from the Project site in its post -development condition include the following:
• Bacterial Indicators
• Metals (parking lots and loading docks)
• Nutrients (landscaping)
• Pesticides (landscaping)
• Toxic Organic Compounds (TOCs)
• Sediments (landscaping)
• Trash & Debris (waste container and parking lots)
• Oil & Grease (parking lots and loading docks)
These pollutants may lead to the degradation of stormwater quality in downstream water bodies. It should be noted that there would be a reduction in sediments with implementation of the Project as landscaped areas, impervious surfaces, and BMPs would reduce suspended sediment in runoff compared to the undeveloped existing condition.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality Pollutant concentrations in urban runoff are extremely variable and are dependent on storm intensity, land use, elapsed time since previous storms, and the volume of runoff generated in a specific area that reaches a receiving water. As such, potential water quality impacts are related to the increase in the peak runoff, new urban uses, and the sensitivity of the receiving water. The primary receiving waters for runoff from the Project site are identified in Table 4.10-2. As shown, Santa Ana River — Reach 4 is impaired by pathogens; Santa Ana River — Reach 3 is impaired by copper, lead, pathogens, and nitrates; Prado Basin is impaired by nutrients; and Santa Ana River — Reach 2 is impaired by metals and indicator bacteria.
The MS4 Permit requirements for new development calls for compliance with water quality regulatory requirements applicable to stormwater runoff. The effectiveness of stormwater quality controls is primarily based on two factors: (1) the amount of runoff that is captured by the controls; and (2) the selection of BMPs to address identified pollutants of concern. Selection and numerical sizing criteria for new development treatment controls are included in the MS4 Permit. As part of the MS4 Permit, a SWMP will be prepared to include pollution prevention measures, treatment or removal techniques, monitoring, use of legal authority, and other appropriate measures to control the quality of stormwater discharged to the storm drains (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10-5).
As previously noted, a WQMP is required to reduce or eliminate water pollution caused by runoff that flows from stormwater drainage systems into receiving waters. A Project -specific Preliminary WQMP was prepared for the Project (included in Technical Appendix 12 of this EIR) to identify appropriate BMPs for the Project. A Final Project -specific WQMP that is in substantial conformance with the approved Preliminary Project -specific WQMP shall be approved by the City prior to the issuance of grading permits (see Regulatory Requirement RR 10-4). As identified in the Project's Preliminary WQMP, low -impact development (LID) BMPs (e.g., bioretention and biotreatment) are proposed to detain stormwater on site. Additionally, the Project' s Preliminary WQMP identifies site -design and structural and non-structural source -control BMPs that would be implemented for the Project.
Furthermore, as described under Section 3.8, Phasing, of this EIR, Phase 1 of the Project includes mass grading of PAs 1 and 2, which will remain graded and undeveloped until construction of the commercial uses in Phase 3. Under this interim condition, temporary bioretention basins would be required to capture debris flows and ensure SWPPP compliance.
The Project would maintain the 16 existing culverts as the ultimate discharge locations for the property; however, runoff from the impervious surfaces (i.e., proposed buildings, parking lots, and road improvements) would be collected by the Project's proposed drainage system. As shown on Figure
4.10-2, Proposed Hydrology Map and Water Quality Plan, the Project site would be divided into 17 drainage management areas (DMAs). The proposed drainage system would consist of catch basins, parking inlets, storm drain pipes with sizes varying from 18 inches to 48 inches, outlet structures, and four detention basins (Basins 1 — 4), one for each tributary area. The drainage system would route the runoff from the proposed impervious surfaces to the four detention basins. Where possible, runoff from impervious areas drain towards landscaped areas and bioretention basins through curb cutouts. All runoff from PAs 1 through 8 will enter the basins (Basins 1, 2, 3 & 4) for treatment and mitigation before discharging into their respective culverts. Runoff from streets and sidewalks from PAs 1 and 2 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality will enter Basin 5 located at the northeast corner of the property, adjacent to Jackrabbit Trail. Each culvert has natural depressed areas upstream which also acts as a natural detention area. Each basin would provide stormwater treatment for each of their respective tributaries. The proposed stormwater treatment basins will provide peak runoff mitigation before discharging to the culverts with the exception of Basin 1. Basin 1 within PA 1 discharges into a detention located at the southwest corner of the property that is tucked in the existing foothills. This detention area was the result of the required grading for the proposed improvements which will serve as a detention basin for off -site flows originating from the southern hills and runoff discharged from Basin 1. The detention basins would remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water to meet the water quality standards of the SARWQCB pursuant to the design requirements of the LID BMP Design Manual. The LID BMP Design Manual requires that basins are designed to capture runoff from the 0.75 inch, 24 -hour rainfall event or the 85th percentile, 24 -hour rainfall event, whichever is greater; thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it is discharged from the Project site.
Source -control BMPs would also be incorporated into the Project to reduce the pollutants released into the environment. Source -control BMPs are permanent, structural features that would be included in Project plans and operational BMPs that would be implemented by the site's occupant or user. Table
4.10-4, Permanent and Operational Source Control BMPs, lists source -control BMPs that are incorporated into the Project.
Table 4.10-4 Permanent and Operational Source Control BMPs Potential Sources of Runoff
Pollutants
Permanent Structural Source
Control BMPs
Operational Source Control
BMPs
Illegal Dumping into On -site Storm
Drain Inlets
Mark with "Only Rain in the
Drain"
Maintain/inspect regularly, owner
shall provide educational material
to occupants (good practices and
discharge prohibitions)
Landscape Fertilizers/Outdoor
Pesticide Use and Irrigation System
Maintenance
Landscaping plans to include:
design for minimal irrigation,
fertilizers, & pesticides
Maintenance staff education of
prohibitions/BMPs and weekly
inspection/weekly maintenance
Parking Lot (Vehicular Fluid and
Brake Dust Deposition) and Litter
Indirect connection of runoff to
downstream storm drain
Vacuum and Sweep weekly and
prevent litter from accumulating
(no cleaning agents or degreasers
discharging to storm drain system)
Food Waste in Dumpsters & Trash
Enclosures
Solid roof over trash enclosure and
work lids maintained on dumpsters
Daily check to close lids on
dumpsters and weekly
sweeping/cleaning of enclosure
(PECW, 2022b, Table G.1)
In addition, with implementation of Regulatory Requirements RR 10-1 through RR 10-5, surface water that may percolate in to the soil would not adversely affect groundwater on or off site.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Source(s): Proactive Engineering Consultants (07-29-2021) Figure 4.10-2
Proposed Hydrology Map and Water Quality Plan
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality By complying with the NPDES permit and WQMP requirements, the Project would ensure effective control of and would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to receiving waters.
Mandatory compliance with regulatory requirements for the protection of water quality (see Regulatory Requirements RR 10-4 and RR 10-5), would ensure that the Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during operation. Therefore, water quality and waste discharge impacts associated with operation of the project would be less than significant.
Threshold b: Would the Project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The Project's potable water would be provided by the Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District (BCVWD). The BCVWD is the potable water supplier for the City of Beaumont, the City's SOI, and the unincorporated community of Cherry Valley, which is outside the City's SOI. According to the BCVWD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), BCVWD provides potable water from two local groundwater sources: Beaumont Basin and Edgar Canyon. The Beaumont Basin provides between 80 and 85% of the potable water available to the City annually and Edgar Canyon provides between 15 and 20% of the potable water available to the City annually (BCVWD, 2021).
According to the Water Supply Assessment (WSA) and Amendment #1 WSA (Technical Appendix LI and L2 of this EIR), the Project's projected water demand is 196.7 acre-feet per year (AFY), of which
85.2 AFY is outdoor, non -potable water use. It should be noted that the Project site was included in the list of planned development projects within BCVWD's 2020 UWMP, which demonstrated that BCVWD has adequate water supplies under normal year, single -dry year, and multiple -dry year conditions through the year 2045. The 2020 UWMP estimates water demand for the Project site to be 360.26 equivalent dwelling units (EDUs), which is the same as the Project's total projected water demand. Additionally, the 2020 UMWP further defines BCVWD's and City of Beaumont's commitment to using non -potable water, available from the City's upgraded Title 22 recycled water treatment plant and shallow aquifer wells, which are not suitable for direct potable water supply. This is consistent with the approved WSA, which indicated 43.31% of the total demand could be supplied by BCVWD's non -potable water system. This further reduces Project's imported and local groundwater (potable) demand, from 360.26 EDUs to 204.21 EDUs. Therefore, groundwater supplies needed for Project development have been planned for and the Project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies and impacts would be less than significant.
The BCVWD augments its groundwater supplies at the Beaumont Basin with imported water from the State Water Project provided by the San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency, which is recharged at BCVWD's approximately 80 -acre recharge facility located on the east side Beaumont Avenue between Brookside Avenue and Cherry Valley Boulevard. This site has long-term percolation rates around 7 to 10 acre-feet per acre per day, with proper maintenance. Additionally, BCVWD has two active stream diversion locations with Edgar Canyon (Little San Gorgonio Creek). Currently, the BCVWD diverts streamflow in Edgar Canyon to a series of percolation ponds which recharge the shallow wells in Edgar Canyon (BCVWD, 2021).The Project site is located approximately 3.9 miles southwest of the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
N M
■ u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
groundwater recharge facility for the Beaumont Basin and is located approximately 0.60 mile southwest of Little San Gorgonia Creek. Therefore, the Project site is not within the recharge areas for the Beaumont Basin or Edgar Canyon and would not substantially affect groundwater recharge. As such, based on the foregoing analysis, the Project is not anticipated to substantially interfere with groundwater recharge and impacts would be less than significant.
Threshold c:
Would the Project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site; ii substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site;
iii create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff;
iv or impede or redirect flood flows?
A. Erosion and Siltation (Threshold c.i)
The Project would include the installation of an integrated, on -site storm drain system consisting of catch basins, grated inlets, storm drain pipes with varying sizes, and four detention basins. The on -site storm drain system is designed to capture the on -site stormwater runoff flows, convey the runoff to the proposed detention basins, and treat the runoff to minimize water -borne pollutants transported from the Project site. As discussed previously, Basin 1 in PA 1 will also serve as a detention basin for off - site flows originating from the southern hills.
Although soils in the Project site could experience erosion during construction, implementation of the Project would not cause substantial soil erosion. A SWPPP specifying BMPs for minimizing pollution of stormwater with soil and sediment during Project construction would be prepared and implemented.
Adherence to the BMPs in the SWPPP would reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from Project - related grading and construction activities.
The Project would introduce impervious surfaces to the Project site, thereby reducing the amount of exposed soils on site as compared to existing conditions. As such, the implementation of the Project would reduce the erosion potential on site as compared to existing conditions and impacts would be less than significant. Additionally, as further discussed under Threshold c.B, below, the Project would result in a 100 cubic feet per second (cfs) reduction in peak stormwater runoff rates. Furthermore, the Project Applicant would be required to implement the requirements of the Project -specific WQMP, which includes the installation and maintenance of BMPs that would ensure no substantial erosion impacts would occur off -site during operational activities. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality As summarized in the Project's Preliminary WQMP, the water quality treatment controls proposed (i.e., detention basin and catch basin filters) for the Project are effective at removing sediment from stormwater runoff during long-term operation. The City would require compliance with the WQMP and long-term maintenance of on -site stormwater conveyance and retention infrastructure by the property owner or operator to ensure their long-term effectiveness (Municipal Code Chapter 13.24).
Therefore, stormwater runoff flows leaving the Project site would not create substantial erosion or result in a substantial amount of sediment, and impacts would be less than significant.
8. Stormwater Runoff (Threshold c.ii and c.iii)
As described above, the Project's proposed grading, earthwork activities, and the addition of impervious surfaces on the Project site would alter the site's existing interior drainage characteristics.
Although the Project would introduce impervious surfaces to the Project site, the Project would maintain a similar drainage pattern as compared to existing conditions. Under post -development conditions, the Project site would be divided into 17 DMAs, similar to pre -development conditions.
The pre -development (existing) and post -development (proposed) DMAs represent different tributary areas but were created to maintain similar or less peak flows for each area which ultimately flow to its corresponding culvert, as shown on Figure 4.10-2.
The 16 existing culverts would remain as the ultimate discharge locations for the Project site except for culverts 1 and 2, which will be replaced with a 20' x 20' reinforced concreate box (RCB) to be installed west of culvert 1 as part of the Caltrans SR -60 improvements. Additionally, runoff from the Project site would be captured by the proposed storm drainage system prior discharging to the existing culverts.
Prior to flows reaching the existing culverts and draining to San Timeteo Creek Reach 3, the Project would utilize on -site storm drainage systems consisting of parking inlets, catch basins, storm drain pipes (varying from 18 to 48 inches in diameter), outlet structures, a flow diversion structure, and four water quality basins. The Project's drainage system would route runoff from each DMA to the proposed stormwater treatment basins, which would reduce peak flows for each of their respective tributaries. The basins are designed in accordance with Riverside County LID BMP Design Handbook for the Santa Ana River Watershed and would provide the capacity to mitigate the peak runoff for the developed 100 -year, 1 -hour storm event. Specifically, the LID BMP Design Manual requires that basins are designed to capture runoff from the 0.75 inch, 24 -hour rainfall event or the 85th percentile, 24 -hour rainfall event, whichever is greater.
As shown in previous Table 4.10-1, under existing conditions, the Project site has a peak runoff volume of 1,482.4 cfs. Table 4.10-5, Developed 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates, identifies the peak flow rates discharges from each DMA under Project conditions, which results in a total peak runoff volume of 1,379.5 cfs. Therefore, the implementation of the Project would result in an overall 100.9 cfs reduction in peak runoff.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality By designing for the peak flow event, the capacity of the culverts would not be exceeded, and the natural detention areas would not flood. Therefore, the proposed storm drainage system would ensure that the Project would result in a reduction in and therefore would not result in a substantial increase in rate or amount of runoff that would result in on- or off -site flooding or exceed existing or planned stormwater systems.
Table 4.10-5 Developed 100 -Year Peak Flow Rates
Area ID
Acreage
Existing Peak
Runoff
Proposed
Peak Runoff
(cfs)
Basin ID
Culvert Size (in)
Culvert
Capacity (cfs)
1 178.1
376.7
389.7
Basin 4
54 CMP*
483.4**
2 2.6
9.0 9.0
30 CMP*
3 6.7
28.4 20.0
30CMP
96.0 4
6.7 54.5
21.6 36 CMP
154.1
45 0.4
1.8 1.8
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
5 5.1
16.4 15.6
30 CMP
71.8 6
43.7 160.5
113.9
Basin 3
42CMP
132.0
7 4.2
14.3 15.2
24 CMP
59.5 8
5.2 22.6
16.9 24 CMP
51.5 9
9.6 49.7
31.3 24 CMP
38.7 10
0.5 2.2
2.1 24 CMP
77.8 11
12.1 212.6
36.7 48 CMP
79.2 12
2.9 10.5
10.2 24 CMP
54.1 13***
117.9
191.2
313.1
Basin 2
36 CMP
138.8
14 4.2
8.7 13.7
36 CMP
118.6
15 7.7
88.4 22.2
36 CMP
119.6
16 136.3
234.7
311.7
Basin 1
(2) 48 CMP
476.9
Total
543.5
1,482.4
1,379.5
Note: Area ID numbers for existing conditions are labeled in the 100s (e.g., 100, 200, 300, etc.), while the Area ID numbers under proposed conditions are labeled 1 through 16. * Existing culverts with no available data to use to calculate the estimated capacity. Existing culverts to be replaced by a 20'x20' RCB per Caltrans 60 Freeway widening project. Culvert capacity calculations based on Caltrans drainage plans (slope & pipe size). See selected Caltrans Drainage plan sheets in Appendix E of Technical Appendix 11 of this EIR.
** Proposed 20' x 20' RCB culvert capacity calculated with a conservative assumed depth of 2 ft which is 10% of the total inside height of the culvert. The actual physical capacity of the culvert far exceeds the assumption and is a function of the depth of flow. However, it is unlikely that the depth of flow will exceed 25% of the total inside height.
***Area 13's peak flow rate will be split between Area 11 and 13's culverts via a proposed junction structure with flow restriction storm gates.
Each culvert has an existing natural drainage detention area located before the upstream inlets, which will provide detention storage for the increased flow rates that exceed the calculated culvert capacity.
Additionally, the diversion structure would restrict flows to culvert 13 to be no more than 138.8 cfs and divert overflows to culvert 11. Table 4.10-6, Detention Basin 100 -Year Peak Flow Capacity, shows Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality the Project's peak runoff and basin design capacity. As shown, the basins are designed with adequate capacity to accept 100 -year, 1 -hour storm events consistent with the Riverside County LID BMP Design Handbook for the Santa Ana River Watershed.
Table 4.10-6 Detention Basin 100 -Year Peak Flow Capacity Area
ID
Acreage
100-Yr
1 -Hr Volume
(ac -ft)
100-Yr
24-HrVolume
(ac -ft)
100-Yr
1 -Hr Peak Flow
(Q, cfs)
100-Yr
24 -Hr Peak Flow
(Q, cfs)
Basin
ID
Basin
Capacity
(ac -ft)
1 70.8
8.4 23.5
268.0
51.3 4
9.4 6
33.8 4.0
12.5 120.0
24.0 3
9.5 13
88.7 10.6
32.7 333.7
65.0 2
11.1 16
85.6 10.2
32.8 320.3
63.3 1
10.3 Source: (PECW, 2022a)
As discussed above, compliance with the NPDES permit and WQMP requirements would ensure the Project would provide effective control and would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff to receiving waters. Accordingly, the Project would not create or contribute runoff that would result in flooding on or off site or exceed the capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage system. Impacts would be less than significant. Furthermore, with implementation of the Project's LID and during construction activities, SWPPPs, the Project would not contribute substantial amounts of polluted runoff that could adversely affect the downstream bodies of water.
C. Flood Flows (Threshold c.iv)
The Project site is not within a 100 -year floodplain, as mapped on the FEMA FIRM (FEMA, 2014).
As such, the implementation of the Project has no potential to impede or redirect flood flows following the construction of the Project. No impacts would occur.
Threshold d: Would the Project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release ofpollutants due to project inundation?
As previously identified, the Project site is within Flood Zone X, which is an area of minimal flooding (FEMA, 2014). As such, the Project site is not anticipated to result in the release of pollutants due to 100 -year flooding. No impacts would occur.
The Project site is approximately 50 miles east of the Pacific Ocean (Google Earth, 2021). Due to this distance the Project site would not be exposed to the threat of inundation due to a tsunami. As such, no impacts would occur.
A seiche is the formation of large waves in landlocked bodies of water due to seismic activity. The Project site is not within proximity to an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water. As such, the Project site would not be exposed to the threat of inundation due to a seiche. As such, no impacts would occur.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
. . J
Environmental Impact Report
4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Based on the foregoing analysis, the Project is not anticipated to release pollutants due to Project inundation within a flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche and no impacts would occur.
Threshold e: Would the Project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
As discussed above, the Project site is within the purview of the SARWQCB; therefore, Project -related construction and operational activities would be required to comply with the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan by preparing and adhering to a Project -specific SWPPP and WQMP and by installing and maintaining BMPs. As stated, implementation of the Project would not conflict with or obstruct the Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Plan and no impacts would occur.
Under the SGMA passed in 2014 (California Water Code Section 10729[d]), each high and medium priority basin, as identified by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is required to have a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) that will be responsible for groundwater management and development of a Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) (DWR, 2020a). As previously discussed, the Project site is within the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin, which is categorized as a "very -low priority" basin; therefore, the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin is not subject to the requirements of SGMA (DWR, 2021). Accordingly, the Project is not anticipated to conflict with or obstruct implementation of a sustainable groundwater management plan. No impacts would occur Furthermore, with implementation of the Project's LID and, during construction activities, SWPPPs, the Project would not contribute substantial amounts of polluted runoff that could adversely affect the underlying groundwater basin. Additionally, as previously discussed in the response to Threshold b, the Project would not interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. As such, the Project would not conflict with any water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans, and no impacts would occur.
4.10.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
The cumulative impact analysis considers potential hydrology and water quality effects of the Project in conjunction with other development projects in the vicinity of the Project site as well as other projects located within the Santa Ana River Basin and the Upper Santa Ana Valley — San Timoteo Groundwater Basin.
Project construction and the construction of other development projects in the cumulative study area would have the potential to contribute waterborne pollution, including erosion and sedimentation, to the Santa Ana River Watershed. As discussed under Thresholds a and e, pursuant to the requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board and the SARWQCB, all construction projects that disturb one (1) or more acre of land are required to obtain a NPDES permit and obtain coverage for construction activities. To obtain coverage, an effective site -specific, an effective site -specific SWPPP is required to be developed and implemented. The SWPPP must identify potential on -site pollutants Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MO Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality and identify an effective combination of erosion control and sediment control measures to reduce or eliminate discharge of pollutants to surface waters. In addition, the Project Applicant and all cumulative developments in the Santa Ana River Basin would be required to comply with the SARWQCB's Santa Ana River Basin Water Quality Control Program, which establishes water quality standards for ground and surface waters of the region. Compliance with these mandatory regulatory requirements would ensure that development project within the Santa Ana River Watershed, including the Project, would not contribute substantially to water quality impairments during construction; therefore, the Project would not contribute to a cumulatively considerable impact.
Operational activities on the Project site would be required to comply with the Project's WQMP to minimize the amount of waterborne pollution discharged from the site. Other development projects within the watershed would similarly be required by law to prepare and implement site -specific WQMPs to ensure that runoff does not substantially contribute to water quality violations for surface water or groundwater. Accordingly, operation of the Project would not contribute to cumulatively - considerable water quality effects.
As discussed under Threshold b, the Project site is under the purview of the BCVWD, which provides potable water services to the City, the City's SOI, and the community of Cherry Valley. BCVWD's water supply comes from two groundwater basins, Edgar Canyon and Beaumont Basin. The Project is consistent with BCVWD's UWMP and there are no components of the Project that would conflict, on a direct or cumulative basis, with BCVWD's Groundwater Management Plan policies. Additionally, although the development of the Project would add impervious surfaces to the Project site, the Project would not directly interfere with groundwater recharge for the BCVWD because the Project site is not within the recharge area for Edgar Canyon and Beaumont Basin. The Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge.
Construction of development projects within the Santa Ana River Watershed would alter existing ground contours throughout the basin, which would result in changes to the basin's existing drainage patterns. As discussed above in Threshold (c), development projects, including the proposed Project, would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations to minimize stormwater pollution during construction (including erosion and siltation). Accordingly, grading plans would be required to be designed to preclude undue soil erosion and development projects would be required to prepare and implement SWPPPs and WQMPs to ensure that substantial soil erosion and/or sedimentation would not occur during temporary construction conditions or long-term operating conditions. Because the Project and all other developments throughout the Santa Ana River Watershed would need to comply with applicable federal, State, and local regulations, substantial cumulative erosion and/or siltation would not occur.
There are no conditions associated with the Project that would affect on- or off -site flooding and mandatory compliance with BCVWD or Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District for site drainage by other projects within the cumulative study area would preclude the potential for other projects to increase the flood potential in the cumulative study area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact associated with flood hazards.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality The implementation of the Project would result in a decrease in peak flows discharging from the site under a 100 -year storm event. The Project would not contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of an existing or planned stormwater system. Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact.
The Project site is not within a 100 -year flood plain and there are no large bodies of enclosed water in proximity to the Project site or cumulative study area. Additionally, there are no dams within the vicinity of the Project that could expose the Project to flooding due to inundation. Moreover, the City of Beaumont and its SOI are not located in proximity to a coastal body of water; therefore, the City would not be subject to tsunami hazards. Other project in the area would be required to comply with BCVWD or RCFC&WCD requirements to reduce flooding hazards. Therefore, the Project would not result in a cumulative considerable impact related to inundation and the release of pollutants.
Furthermore, as discussed in the response to Threshold e, the Project has no potential to conflict with any water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans on a direct basis. As such, the Project would also have no potential to conflict with such plans on a cumulative basis.
4.10.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS BEFORE MITIGATION
Threshold a: Less -than -Significant Impact. Through compliance with the NPDES permits and the implementation of the required SWPPP during construction activities and the implementation of BMPs from the Project -specific WQMP during long-term operation, the Project would result in less than significant surface water and groundwater quality impacts and would not violate any water quality standards.
Threshold b: Less -than -Significant Impact. According to the WSA prepared by CMC, BCVWD has sufficient water supplies to serve the Project site and existing and future commitments under normal year, single -dry year, and multiple -dry years conditions. The Project would introduce impervious surfaces on site; however, the Project site is not within the recharge facility for the Beaumont Basin or Edgar Canyon. Accordingly, impacts to groundwater supplies and groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
Threshold c: Less -than -Significant Impact. The Project would not alter the drainage pattern of a stream or river. The Project would result in the introduction of impervious surfaces on site; however, the drainage pattern of the Project site under developed conditions would be similar as compared to existing conditions. Overall, the Project would result in a 100 cfs reduction in peak flow rates. The Project's drainage system, which include detention basins, is designed to ensure that all runoff is conveyed by facilities to bypass off -site tributary flows from the south, intercept and treat runoff from the development, and provide peak flow mitigation for the 100 -year storm events, as required by RCFC&WCD. Accordingly, the Project would not contribute runoff that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems and would not result in flooding on- or off -site, and a less -than -significant impact would occur. Implementation of the Project's proposed BMPs (include on -site water quality detention basins) also would ensure the Project does not contribute substantial Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality additional sources of runoff to existing or planned drainage systems. Accordingly, a less -than - significant impact would occur.
The Project site is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area. Accordingly, the Project would not impede or redirect flood flows, and no impact would occur.
Threshold d: No Impact. The Project site has no potential to be exposed to hazards associated with flood hazards, seiches, or tsunamis due to its location outside of mapped flood zones, proximity to water bodies, and the existing and proposed topography of the Project site.
Threshold e: No Impact. The Project has no potential to conflict with any water quality control plans or sustainable groundwater management plans. No impact would occur.
4.10.9 MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
4.10.10 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
The analysis presented in this section is based, in part, on a review of the City of Beaumont General Plan (dated August 21, 2020). This section of the EIR evaluates the potential impacts to land use in the City of Beaumont from implementation of the proposed Project. The analysis in this section is based on the proposed land use designations described in EIR Section 3, Project Description. The General Plan document is available for review on the City of Beaumont's website referenced in EIR Section
7.0, References.
4.11.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Project Site
The 539.9 -acre Project site is generally located west of Jack Rabbit Trail and south of SR -60. As detailed in Table 3-1 and shown on Figure 3-5, City of Beaumont Existing Land Uses Designation, in Section 3.0 of this EIR, the Project site is currently vacant and undeveloped, except for the eastern portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project site contains several unmarked trails that are located throughout the site. The Project site contains varying topography which includes hillsides, canyons, valleys, and ridges, ranging in elevation between the 2,300 and 2,450 -foot contours mean sea level (MSL). The site drains toward the SR -60 Freeway via several drainage courses that extend to the ridgelines of the Badlands foothills. The tributaries feature steep, eroded hillside grades and natural depressed grasslands where drainage flows to 16 existing Caltrans maintained culverts at the SR -60 Freeway.
B. Surrounding Land Uses
Based on field reconnaissance and review of aerial images, existing land uses in the area surrounding the Project site are described below.
• North. The SR -60 Freeway lies immediately north of the Project site. North of the SR -60 freeway lies San Timoteo Creek, and the mainline of the Union Pacific/BNSF Railroad.
Beyond the railroad right of way are the Oak Valley Parkway, the Oak Valley Golf Course and the residential neighborhoods of the Oak Valley community. Additionally, a master -planned residential community, currently under construction, is located north of the SR -60 Freeway, northeast of the Project site.
• East. The property located immediately east of the Project site, on the west side of Jack Rabbit Trail, is developed with a ranch and a single-family residence. The property east of Jack Rabbit Trail is disturbed by construction activities. This property is part of the Hidden Canyon Industrial Park project, currently under construction, which proposes industrial development on both sides of 4th Street. The properties east of the Hidden Canyon Industrial Park project site, include vacant, disturbed, and undeveloped land; and developed land with commercial and industrial uses.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning • South. Publicly owned rural mountainous lands are located directly to the south/southeast/southwest and include natural drainage courses, unmarked trails, and Jack Rabbit Trail. The mountainous area to the south/southwest of the Project site is designated for existing and proposed conserved lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP. • West. The publicly owned mountainous area to the west is also designated for existing and proposed conserved lands within the MSHCP and contains rural mountainous terrain, unmarked trails, natural drainage courses, and a portion of the SR -60 Freeway.
C. General Plan Land Use Designation
1. County of Riverside
The Project site is within the Pass Area Plan of unincorporated Riverside County (RCIT, 2020). The prevailing planning documents for the Pass Area is the Riverside County General Plan and Pass Area Plan. The Pass Area Plan is an extension of the Riverside County General Plan and Vision Statement and focuses on preserving the unique features found only in the Pass while accommodating future growth. The County of Riverside Vision Statement details the physical, environmental, and economic characteristics that the County of Riverside aspire to achieve by the year 2020. Using the Vision Statement as the primary foundation, the County of Riverside General Plan establishes policies for development and conservation within the entire unincorporated Riverside County territory. The Pass Area Plan contains a Land Use Plan, statistical summaries, policies, and accompanying exhibits describe the physical, environmental, and regulatory characteristics of the area and future growth.
According to the Pass Area Land Use Plan, the Project site is designated as Rural Mountainous (RM).
The RM designation allows single-family residential uses with a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The designation allows for limited animal keeping, agriculture, recreational uses, compatible resource development (which may include the commercial extraction of mineral resources with approval of a Surface Mining Permit) and associated uses and governmental use (Riverside County, 2017).
2. City of Beaumont
The City's prevailing planning document is the Beaumont General Plan, which provides a comprehensive plan to serve as the blueprint for future planning and development in the City of Beaumont. The City recently prepared a comprehensive update to its 2007 General Plan and adopted the Beaumont General Plan (General Plan) on December 1, 2020. The General Plan offers the City a roadmap to identify strategies for enhancing community character and quality of life, expanding economic development opportunities, managing growth, addressing impacts of climate change, and improving outcomes for public health and sustainability (City of Beaumont, 2020a). According to the City's General Plan Figures 3.2, Existing City Structure, and 3.3, General Plan Subareas, the Project site is in the Sphere of Influence (SOI) for the City of Beaumont within unincorporated Riverside County and in the Jack Rabbit Subarea (City of Beaumont, 2020a).
The entire Jack Rabbit Subarea, which includes the Project site, contains the mountainous range known as the San Timoteo Badlands. The City's General Plan notes that this Subarea is entirely in the Sphere Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning of Influence, and thus, is governed by the County of Riverside General Plan and that access is limited to the eastern end of the subarea from Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project site is designated in the City's General Plan as Rural Residential 1, allowing one -acre residential lots. This subarea is intended to preserve natural features, such as Timoteo Creek, and develop plans consistent with the MSHCP.
Allowed land uses in the Jack Rabbit Subarea include single-family dwellings. Uses such as churches, schools, day care centers, public facilities, and agricultural uses, which are determined to be compatible with and oriented toward serving the needs of low -density neighborhoods, may also be allowed. The General Plan notes that a Specific Plan in encouraged for development within the Subarea (City of Beaumont, 2020a).
D. Zoning Designations
1. County of Riverside
Based on Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, the Project site is zoned Controlled Development Areas with a minimum 20 -acre lot (W-2-20) (RCIT, 2020). The W-2 zone allows one -family dwellings, light agriculture, aviaries, apiaries, grazing of farm animals, and animal husbandry.
Additionally, the W-2-20 zone allows the following with a Plot Plan approval: guest ranches, educational institutions, country clubs, churches, and meat cutting/packing plants without slaughtering.
Further, the W-2-20 allows the following uses with a Conditional Use Permit approval: airport, cemetery, hunting clubs, lumber mill, trail bike park, rodeo arena, commercial stable, menagerie, and animal hospital (Riverside County, 2020).
2. City of Beaumont
Because the Project site is within the City's SOI within unincorporated Riverside County, the City has not adopted any zoning designations for the site. Although a City may pre -zone property in its SOI, that zoning is not effective until such time as an annexation becomes effective (see Government Code Section 65859).
4.11.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to land use and planning.
4.11.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
A. Regional
1. Southern California Association of Governments
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) under California State law, established as an association of local government and agencies that voluntarily convene as a forum to address regional issues. Under federal law, SCAG is designated as a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and under State law as a Regional Transportation Planning Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning Agency and a Council of Governments. The SCAG region encompasses six counties: Riverside, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Imperial; and 191 cities in an area covering more than 38,000 square miles. SCAG develops long-range regional transportation plans including sustainable communities strategy and growth forecast components, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations and other plans for the region.
As an MPO and public agency, SCAG develops transportation and housing strategies that transcend jurisdictional boundaries that affect the quality of life for southern California as a whole. On September 3, 2020, SCAG's Regional Council adopted the 2020-2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, known as "Connect SoCal." Connect SoCal includes long-range regional transportation plans, regional transportation improvement programs, regional housing needs allocations, and other plans for the region. Connect SoCal is a long-range visioning plan that builds upon and expands land use and transportation strategies to increase mobility options and achieve a more sustainable growth pattern. Connect SoCal identifies a path toward a more mobile, sustainable, and prosperous region by making connections between transportation networks, between planning strategies and between the people whose collaboration can improve the quality of life for Southern Californians (SCAG, 2020). Connect SoCal also provides objectives for meeting emissions reduction targets set forth by CARB; these objectives were provided in a direct response to Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) which was enacted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks through integrated transportation, land use, housing, and environmental planning. (SCAG, 2020) Additionally, SCAG reviews environmental impact reports for projects having regional significance to ensure they are in line with approved regional plans. As identified in Section 15206 of the CEQA Guidelines, regionally significant industrial projects include "A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or encompassing more than 650,000 square feet of floor area." Therefore, this Project is considered regionally significant and subject to review by SCAG.
Connect SoCal includes a Technical Appendix titled "Goods Movement" that is applicable to the Project because the Project entails development within the SCAG region that would support a variety of industrial and commercial users, and relies directly on the goods movement system (e.g., manufacturing, construction, retail trade, wholesale trade and transportation, and warehousing). The "Goods Movement" appendix offers a broad overview of goods movement in Southern California by defining what the goods movement system is, including its most critical components; highlighting its importance and connections to the economy and local industry sectors; summarizing international and domestic trade flows and their relations to the region; addressing environmental and air quality issues; articulating a regional vision and how it can be achieved; and illustrating the path to 2045 by promoting an effective set of regional strategies. (SCAG, 2020)
In April 2018 SCAG published Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region. According to the document, the SCAG region is a vibrant hub for international and domestic trade because of its large transportation base and extensive multimodal transportation system. The SCAG region's freight transportation system includes warehouses and distribution centers; the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
N M
■ u
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning
Beach, and Hueneme; airports; rail intermodal terminals; rail lines, and local streets, State highways and interstates. Together the system enables the movement of goods from source to market, facilitating uninterrupted global commerce. The region is home to approximately 34,000 warehouses with 1.17 billion square feet (sf) of warehouse building space, and undeveloped land that could accommodate an additional 338 million sf of new warehouse building space. These regions attract robust logistics activities, and are a major reason the region is a critical mode in the global supply chain. (SCAG, 2018, p. ES -1)
2. Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is a comprehensive habitat conservation/planning program for Western Riverside County. The intent of the MSHCP is to preserve native vegetation and meet the habitat needs of multiple species, rather than focusing preservation efforts on one species at a time. The MSHCP provides coverage (including take authorization for listed species) for special -status plant and animal species, as well as mitigation for impacts to special -status species and associated native habitats.
Through agreements with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and CDFW, the MSHCP designates 146 special -status animal and plant species as Covered Species, of which the majority have no project -specific survey/conservation requirements. The MSHCP provides mitigation for project - specific impacts to these species for projects that are compliant/consistent with MSHCP requirements, such that the impacts are reduced to below a level of significance pursuant to CEQA.
The Covered Species that are not yet adequately conserved have additional requirements in order for these species to ultimately be considered `adequately conserved'. A number of these species have survey requirements based on a project's occurrence within a designated MSHCP survey area and/or based on the presence of suitable habitat. These include Narrow Endemic Plant Species (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.3), as identified by the Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas (NEPSSA); Criteria Area Plant Species (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.3.2) identified by the Criteria Area Plant Species Survey Areas (CAPSSA); animal species (burrowing owl, mammals, amphibians) identified by survey areas (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.3.2); and species associated with riparian/riverine areas and vernal pool habitats, including least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, western yellow - billed cuckoo, and three species of listed fairy shrimp (MSHCP Volume I, Section 6.1.2). An additional 28 species (MSHCP Volume I, Table 9.3) not yet adequately conserved have species -specific objectives in order for the species to become adequately conserved. However, these species do not have project -specific survey requirements.
The goal of the MSHCP is to have a total Conservation Area in excess of 500,000 acres, including approximately 347,000 acres on existing Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) Lands, and approximately 153,000 acres of Additional Reserve Lands targeted within the MSHCP Criteria Area. The MSHCP is divided into 16 separate Area Plans, each with its own conservation goals and objectives. Within each Area Plan, the Criteria Area is divided into Subunits, and further divided into Criteria Cells and Cell Groups (a group of criteria cells). Each Cell Group and ungrouped independent Cell has designated Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning "criteria" for the purpose of targeting additional conservation lands for acquisition. Projects located within the Criteria Area are subject to the Habitat Evaluation and Acquisition Negotiation Strategy (HANS) process to determine if lands are targeted for inclusion in the MSHCP Reserve. In addition, all projects located within the Criteria Area are subject to the Joint Project Review (JPR) process, where the project is reviewed by the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA) to determine overall compliance/consistency with the biological requirements of the MSHCP.
The Project site is located in the MSHCP Criteria Area, including the Pass Area Plan (Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125) and the Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan (Cell Group A'). The Project requires a Criteria Cell Refinement to approve the Specific Plan, as designed, to be consistent with the MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements.
On behalf of the City of Beaumont and the Project Applicant, Glenn Lukos Associates, Inc. (GLA) has prepared a Criteria Refinement analysis (Technical Appendix C2) demonstrating that the proposed Criteria Refinement would be at least equivalent to the existing Criteria as it applies to Effects on Habitats, Effects on Covered Species, Effects on Core Areas, Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages, Effects on Non -Contiguous Habitat Blocks, Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area Configuration and Management, Effects on Ecotones, and Acreage Contributed to the MSHCP Conservation Area. The Criteria Refinement Analysis was submitted to the RCA on March 7, 2021 to initiate the Criteria Refinement review process. The Criteria Refinement Analysis was approved and determined to be in concurrence with the MSHCP by the RCA, US Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 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. 6. Local
1. City of Beaumont General Plan Policies
The Project site is within the SOI for the City of Beaumont and the Project site is proposed to be annexed by and incorporated into the City. Thus, the Project's impacts related to land use and planning will be analyzed against the City of Beaumont's requirements.
State law requires that general plans address seven topics (referred to as "Elements") of land use, circulation (mobility), housing, open space, safety, and noise (California Government Code Section 65302). A General Plan may also include other topics of local interest, as chosen by the local jurisdiction (California government Code Section 65303). The City adopted the Beaumont General Plan and certified the associated Final EIR on December 1, 2020. The Beaumont General Plan is organized into 12 chapters that include the following:
• Introduction
• Vision and Guiding Principles
• Land use and Community Design
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning
• Mobility
• Economic Development and Fiscal
• Health and Environmental Justice
• Community Facilities and Infrastructure
• Conservation and Open Space
• Safety
• Noise
• Downtown Area Plan
• Implementation
Information presented in the Beaumont General Plan chapters relevant to the Project are discussed in the representative sections of this EIR.
The Beaumont General Plan also identifies 12 subareas, which each have unique identifying features and demonstrate what makes Beaumont special. The subareas contain residential subdivisions, commercial, and industrial areas, which can evolve into true walkable neighborhoods. The Beaumont General Plan provides a vision and key strategies for specific subareas in the City of Beaumont. As previously discussed, the Project site is within the Jack Rabbit Subarea for the City of Beaumont, which encompasses the northwest portion of the City's SOI. This subarea includes the mountainous range known as the San Timoteo Badlands and contains the western extent of SR -60. The area north of SR - 60 is protected open space and part of the Western Riverside County MSHCP. San Timoteo Creek runs through the area north of SR -60. The Jack Rabbit Subarea intends to preserve the Timoteo Creek and its 100 -year flood plain as open space resource and work with property owner(s) of the southern portion of the subarea to develop plans compliant with the Western Riverside County MSHCP (City of Beaumont, 2020a).
2. City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance (Title 17)
The City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance is contained within Title 17 of the City of Beaumont's Municipal Code. The Zoning Ordinance is a regulatory document that establishes zoning districts that govern the use of land, indicates standards for structures and improvements that are permitted within the various zones, and establishes procedures for the granting of permits and entitlements. The primary purpose of the City's Zoning Ordinance is to serve the public's health, safety, and general welfare through the promotion of compatible land uses. The Zoning Ordinance includes the establishment of development standards related to health and safety, the protection and enhancement of the environment, the maintenance of property values, and the enhancement of the City's appearance.
Additionally, the Zoning Ordinance establishes standards and procedures for development in each zoning district in addition to setting forth the procedures for amendments to the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, Specific Plans are plans adopted by the City Council that is based upon the City's General Plan, as provided in Section 65450 et seq. of the Government Code, and authorized under State law and the City's Municipal Code (City of Beaumont, 2020c).
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning As stated above, although the Project site is within the SOI for the City of Beaumont and is currently governed by Riverside County, the Project site is proposed to be annexed by and incorporated into the City. Thus, the Project's impacts related to land use and planning will be analyzed against the City of Beaumont's requirements.
4.11.4 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Section XI of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines addresses typical adverse effects related to land use and planning and includes the following threshold questions:
a. Physically divide an established community;
b. Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
4.11.5 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project physically divide an established community? Currently the 539.9 -acre Project site is vacant and undeveloped, except for the eastern portion of the site that contains the paved portion of Jack Rabbit Trail. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with an Industrial/Commercial Park. There are no existing established communities surrounding the Project site. The area east of the Project site is designated for and developed with similar industrial/commercial uses. The nearest established residential community to the Project site is located approximately 0.84 -mile northeast on the opposite side of SR -60. It should be noted that there is one existing single-family residence located approximately 483 feet south of the Project site's southernmost boundary. However, the Project would not restrict access to or from the existing residence, and the Project would provide private residential access to the existing residence via the relocated Jack Rabbit Trail. Access to this residence will be maintained throughout construction and operation of the Project. Therefore, the implementation of the Project on the Project site is not anticipated to physically divide an established community and impacts would be less than significant.
Threshold b: Would the Project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
This EIR analyzes the physical environmental effects associated with all components of the Project, including Project construction and operation. Governmental approvals requested from the City of Beaumont include a General Plan Amendment (GPA; PLAN2019-0284), Pre -zoning (PLAN2019- 0284) to "Specific Plan," Adoption of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan (SP2019-0003), Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) No. 82551, and a Pre -Annexation and Development Agreement (DA; No. 01-2017).
The Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan is referred to herein as Specific Plan.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning The Project's consistency with land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect is discussed below. This section includes an analysis of consistency with the Beaumont General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, SCAG's Connect SoCal, and the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
1. City of Beaumont General Plan
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)." With the approval of the proposed Project, 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. 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, as demonstrated in the analysis below. Accordingly, a less -than - significant environmental impact would result from the Project's proposed governmental approvals.
Table 4.11-1, General Plan Applicability Analysis, provides an analysis of the Project's consistency with all applicable General Plan goals and policies that were adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. As shown in Table 4.11-1, the Project would not result in any inconsistency with any of the applicable General Plan goals and policies. Accordingly, the Project would have a less -than -significant impact with respect to a conflict with the Beaumont General Plan.
Table 4.11-1 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 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
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.
Policy 3.4.8: Where industrial uses are near
existing and planned residential
development, require that industrial
projects be designed to limit the impact of
truck traffic, air and noise pollution on
sensitive receptors, especially in El Barrio.
No Conflict. Existing residential land uses near the Project site are those that abut the Project site on the south and to the north beyond the SR -60 Freeway. As concluded in Section 4.3, Air Quality, Section 4.13, Noise, and Section 4.17, Transportation, the Project would result in unavoidable impacts to air quality, noise, and transportation, but these effects are significant due to their effect on the region. However, all mitigation measures have been implemented to reduce impacts to the extent feasible.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.4.8.
Policy 3.5.2: Continue to work towards the
implementation of streetscape and sign
standards.
No Conflict. The Project would develop the Project site in accordance with the Development Standards from Chapter 3 and Design Guidelines from Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan, which establish comprehensive streetscape design standards for interior streets. The Development Standards and the Design Guidelines that define the Project's design theme are intended to create a welcoming visual environment.
Additionally, a Sign Program for the Project is being processed concurrently with the Specific Plan. The Sign Program
provides adequate and appropriate project, street, building, tenant identification, pedestrian path, and wayfinding signage for the anticipated variety of building sizes, designs, and uses.
As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.5.2.
Policy 3.5.3: Promote quality design in the
review of commercial and residential
projects.
No Conflict. The Project would include "Activities Park" within the General Commercial land uses that would consist of landscaping, seating, video screen walls, and programming for wellness activities such as yoga, movies on the lawn,
"biergarten" games, and a large climbing wall. In addition, to encourage social interaction, the Industrial and General Commercial building sites within Project site may include outdoor employee break areas with tables affixed to the ground to provide employees with a location to eat, gather, and enjoy being outside. The Project Applicant would develop the site in accordance with the Development Standards established in Chapter 3 and the Design Guidelines established in Chapter 4 of the Specific Plan, which includes comprehensive
architectural and landscape standards and development criteria that provide for an attractive, contemporary industrial/business Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
park. Additionally, the development standards provide
regulations for building placement and orientation, floor area ratio, height, setbacks, open space, landscaping, signage, walls and fencing, roadways, and utilities and service areas. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.5.3.
Policy 3.9.1: Use Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design strategies (CPTED)
in new and existing development to
improve public safety, including the
following:
• Active public space
• Building design to promote "eyes
on the street"
• Clean delineation between private
and public space
• Natural access control between
public and private space
• Maintenance of public places
• Removal or repair of vandalism or
broken property.
No Conflict. The Project site is within the northwestern SOI for the City of Beaumont, which is characterized as
undeveloped and vacant. Under exiting conditions, there are no sidewalks or pedestrian facilities along the perimeter of the Project site.
The implementation of the Project would result in the
development of the Project site with Industrial and General Commercial uses. The implementation of the Project would provide a clean delineation between public and private space through signage, walls, and fencing. The Project's proposed buildings would feature security lighting to enhance security on site. Additionally, building facades would face public
roadways including SR -60 Freeway, Jack Rabbit Trail,
Entertainment Way, and 4th Street.
The implementation of the Project would not interfere with the City's ability to maintain public places or remove or repair vandalism or broken property. As such, the Project As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.9.1.
Goal 3.10: A City designed to improve the quality of the built and natural environments to reduce disparate health and environmental impacts
Policy 3.10.2: 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 as required by South Coast AQMD Rule 403.
Additionally, Mitigation Measure MM 4.3-2 shall ensure that all 75 -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. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.10.2.
Policy 3.10.4: Designate truck routes to
avoid sensitive land uses, where feasible.
No Conflict. This is not a Project specific policy; however, the Project does not propose truck routes in proximity to sensitive land uses. Located along the south side of the SR -60 Freeway, access to the regional transportation system from the Project site is provided via 4th Street at the Potrero interchange, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
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. In addition, Jack Rabbit Trail will only provide gated, emergency access to the SR -60 Freeway. No access to the SR -60 Freeway is proposed, except during an emergency in order to restrict truck traffic along Jack Rabbit Trail, which would be one of the main roadways that connects to the proposed commercial
development. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.10.4.
Policy 3.10.7: Support practices that
promote low impact development,
including water resilient communities,
prevention of urban runoff, and mitigation
of industrial pollution.
No Conflict. In accordance with the Project's WQMP, the Project would install LID BMPs (e.g., bioretention and
biotreatment) to detain stormwater on site for runoff mitigation.
The Project proposes to install four detention basins within drainage management areas. The detention basins would
remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water, thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it is discharged from the Project site.
Additionally, the Project proposes structural and non-structural source control BMPs (see Table 4.10-4 of this EIR) to mitigate industrial pollution. Furthermore, the Project would slightly reduce peak stormwater flows by approximately 100 cfs and would not cause adverse hydrologic or biologic impacts to downstream receiving waters, including groundwater. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.10.7.
Policy 3.11.5: Preserve watercourses and
washes necessary for regional flood
control, ground water recharge areas and
drainage for open space and recreational
purposes. These include San Timoteo
Creek, Little San Gorgonio Creek and
Noble Creek, among others.
No Conflict. As further discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this EIR, the Project site is not within the recharge area for Little San Gorgonio Creek. The Project Applicant proposes to preserve 124.7 acres on site as Open Space and 152.4 acres as Open Space — Conservation. The Project would result in a 100 cfs reduction in peak stormwater runoff rates, and drainage from the development areas would continue to flow to San Timoteo Creek.
The implementation of the Project would not interfere with the City's ability to preserve watercourses and washes necessary for regional flood control, groundwater recharge areas and drainage for open space and recreational purposes. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.11.5.
Policy 3.11.7: Preserve permanent open
space edges or greenbelts that provide a
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.1.12. The Project Applicant proposes to preserve 124.7 acres on site as Open Space and 152.4 acres as Open Space — Conservation. The Project's on -site Open Space Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
buffer for separation between adjoining
developments.
designated areas would provide a buffer between the proposed Industrial and Commercial uses from the existing open space to the west and south. Additionally, the SR -60 Freeway would provide a buffer from the proposed development and existing single-family residences to the north and northeast.
Furthermore, the proposed Industrial and Commercial uses would be compatible with the proposed Hidden Canyon
industrial development to the east. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.11.7.
Policy 3.11.8: Work with Riverside County
and adjacent cities, landowners, and
conservation organizations to preserve,
protect, and enhance open space and natural
resources consistent with the MSHCP.
No Conflict. 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 dedicated to the RCA as required by the MSHCP. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.11.8.
Policy 3.11.9: Continue to maintain the
Badlands and Potrero area as primarily a
functioning wildlife habitat.
No Conflict. As described in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources, of this EIR, the Project site is located within Criteria Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125 of Subunit 1
(Potrero/Badlands) of The Pass Area Plan, and with "offsite" proposed conservation located within Cell Group A' of Subunit 3 (Badlands North) of the Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan.
The MSHCP defines a "Core" as a "block of Habitat of
appropriate size, configuration, and vegetation characteristics to generally support the life history requirements of one or more Covered Species." The Project proposes a Criteria
Refinement that will support the assembly of Proposed Core 3 in a manner consistent with the existing Cell Criteria. The intent of conserved lands at the Project site is to expand the edge of Core 3.
The Project will impact 112.45 acres of lands described for conservation by the MSHCP Cell Criteria. The Project will offset those impacts with 122.81 acres of replacement lands that are not described by the Cell Criteria, including 41.21 acres on site and 78.40 acres off -site. In addition, the Project will conserve the remaining 93.42 acres of on -site lands described by the Cell Criteria, for a combined conservation area of 213.03 acres, compared with a total of 205.87 acres described by the MSHCP.
The Project's on -site conservation includes 133.27 acres within the Criteria Area (Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125) and Policy 3.11.10: Require the provision of
open space linkages and conservation
between development projects, consistent
with the conservation efforts targeted in the
MSHCP.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
1.36 acres on site that are not part of a Criteria Cell (but adjacent to Cells). Of the offsite lands, approximately 37.89 acres are in Cell 1125 of Cell Group A', and 40.51 acres are not a part of a Criteria Cell but are adjacent to Cell Group A'.
Although the Project does not achieve minimum described acreage for some of the individual Cells, the Project proposes an overall greater amount of conservation than is described, including the expansion of conservation to the northwest and the southeast into undescribed lands that will extend the conserved edge. The conservation of undescribed lands in the northwestern portion of Cell 933 will extend conservation to SR -60 to link up with the undercrossing constructed as part of the freeway improvements.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policies 3.11.9 and 3.11.10.
Goal 3.12: A City that minimizes the extent of urban development in the hillsides, and mitigates any significant adverse consequences associated with urbanization.
Policy 3.12.2: Limit the extent and intensity
of uses and development in areas of
unstable terrain, steep terrain, scenic vistas,
and other critical environmental areas.
No Conflict. The Project site is adjacent to and in part within the San Timoteo Badlands, which is characterized with
mountainous terrain. The Project site contains hillsides, ridges, canyons, and valleys in the northwestern and southeastern portions of the site. These areas include PAs 9 and 10 which are designated as Open Space and Open Space -Conservation, respectively. Areas designated as Open Space -Conservation would serve to protect the natural resources on site and no development would occur in this area. As previously discussed, grading would occur on PAs 1 through 9.
Landform modifications would occur under the Project in PAs 1-8 and remedial grading would occur in PA 9, along with 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 PA 10.
Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, no grading would occur within PA 10 or between the north-northeast property line and SR -60 Freeway, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. The boundary between PA 9 and PA 10 is designated as the "Limits of Disturbance" on the Land Use Plan. This designation means that all
development activity will take place inside of the limits of disturbance (i.e., within PA 9 or within PAs 1-8) and not on PA
10. PA 9 would include natural slopes which form a buffer Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
between the developed areas and PA 10, which would be
dedicated to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), pursuant to the MSHCP. Therefore, this area would preserve deeply incised hillsides and watercourse along with the habitats associated with these landforms.
As discussed in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, a Geotechnical Report was prepared to evaluate geological conditions on the Project site and feasibility of development. As discussed, the Project's proposed 2:1 cut and fill slopes are considered grossly stable and surficially stable; and, impacts relating to unstable soils and geologic units, including landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, and liquefaction would be less than significant.
Furthermore, mandatory adherence to the recommendations contained in the site -specific geotechnical report during Project construction would ensure impacts associated with geological hazards are less than significant.
Moreover, as discussed in Threshold b above, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. As such, the Project would be consistent with General Plan Policy 3.12.2.
Policy 3.12.3: Control the grading of land,
pursuant to the City's Municipal Code, to
No Conflict. The Project would require extensive grading in order to develop the site with the proposed Industrial and minimize the potential for erosion,
landslides, and other forms of land failure,
as well as to limit the potential negative
aesthetic impact of excessive modification
General Commercial land uses. However, the Project's grading plan would be in accordance with the standards identified in the City's Municipal Code, to minimize the potential for erosion, landslides, and other forms of land failure. The Project's of natural landforms.
grading would occur within the central portion of the Project site where the proposed buildings would be located. Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project Applicant does not propose to grade the northwestern or southern portions of the Project site within PA 10 or between the north-northeast property line and SR -60 Freeway, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. Future
development would be subjected to the recommendations
contained in the Geotechnical Report (see Section 5 of
Technical Appendix F1, of this EIR), in accordance with the CBC and Beaumont Municipal Code Section 17.1.040. The
Geotechnical Report includes requirements for: supplemental subsurface exploration, general earthwork and grading, fill placement and compaction, remedial grading, manufactured slopes, surface drainage, subdrainage, oversized rock
materials, deep fill areas/settlement monitoring, preliminary foundation recommendations, retaining walls, sulfate potential, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
corrosion potential, preliminary pavement design, and
temporary excavations. Mandatory compliance with the
recommendations contained within the Project site's
Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC, Beaumont
Building Code, and conditions of approval) would ensure that the Project is engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on -site and abutting off -site areas. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.12.3; see also discussion under Policy 3.12.2.
Policy 3.12.4: Recognize the value of
ridgelines and hillsides as significant
natural and visual resources and strengthen
their role as features which define the
character of the City and its individual
neighborhood.
No Conflict. The Project designates 152.4 acres (PA 10) as Open Space — Conservation, which is intended to be dedicated to the Regional Conservation Authority (RCA), pursuant to the Western Riverside County MSHCP, for preservation to
augment existing, adjacent conserved lands in this part of Riverside County. This area consists of deeply incised hillsides and watercourses along with the habitats associated with these landforms. As discussed in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, of the EIR, although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project would not allow grading within PA 10, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. No development would occur in this area. The Specific Plan would implement measures to ensure that Project design elements visually enhance and do not degrade the surrounding area. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 3.12.4.
Mobility (Chapter 4)
Goal 4.1: Promote smooth trafficflows 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.
Policy 4.1.6: Review and coordinate
circulation requirements with Caltrans, as it
pertains to freeways and state highways.
No Conflict. The TIA has been prepared in accordance with the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. The TIA analyzed freeway mainline and ramp junction impacts to the State Highway System, including the I-10 and Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
SR -60. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.1.6.
Goal 4.2: Support the development of a comprehensive network of complete streets throughout the City that provides safe, efficient, and accessible connectivity for users of all ages and abilities.
Policy 4.2.2: Maintain standards that align
with SB 743 and multi -modal level of
service (MMLOS) methodologies.
Incorporate these into impact assessments
when appropriate.
No conflict. Consistent with SB 743, the City of Beaumont adopted thresholds based on VMT. The VMT assessment
(Technical Appendix K2) prepared for the Project included analysis of VMT impacts resulting from implementation of the Project. The VMT assessment for the Project has been
reviewed and approved by the City.
The City has not adopted MMLOS methodologies, however,
the TIA (Technical Appendix KI) analyzes LOS and multi - modal transportation. Accordingly, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.2.2.
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.
Goal 4.6: An efficient goods movement system that ensures timely deliveries without compromising quality of life, safety, or smooth traffic flow for Beaumont residents.
Policy 4.6.1: Prioritize goods movement
along specific routes in the City, consistent
with the adopted layered network, to foster
efficient freight logistics.
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, the Inland Empire and the Western United States. Located along the south side of the SR -60 and I- 10 Freeway, access to the regional transportation system from the site is provided via 4th Street, and access to the SR -60 and I-10 Freeway from 4th Street is provided at the Potrero Boulevard interchange, approximately 1.25 miles to the east.
Truck trips would be routed through an industrial area to Potrero Boulevard, also identified as a potential City Truck Priority roadway [City to confirm]. 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 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
movement of goods throughout the region. In addition, the Project would be consistent with SCAG's Connect SoCal
goals, which are described in detail in EIR Section 4.11, Land Use and Planning. Based on the foregoing, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.6.1.
Policy 4.6.2: Minimize or restrict heavy
vehicle traffic near sensitive areas such as
schools, parks, and neighborhoods.
No Conflict. The closest sensitive area to the Project site is an existing single-family residence located approximately 483 feet south of the Project site's southernmost boundary. Other residential uses are located north across Frontage Road (1,253 feet) and beyond SR -60. However, the Project would not restrict access to or from the existing residence; the Project would provide private residential access on site to the existing residence; cars and trucks will not pass by this residence under the proposed roadway plan. truck trips would be routed through an industrial area to Potrero Boulevard and would not pass by sensitive areas. Based on these restrictions, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 4.6.2.
Health and Environmental Justice (Chapter 6)
Goal 6.7: A City that safely and systemically addresses toxics, legacy pollutants, and hazardous materials.
Policy 6.7.1: Prohibit new non-residential
uses that are known to release or emit toxic
waste at levels that are harmful to human
health while continuing to allow R&D uses,
medical uses, and other necessary services
such as dry cleaners.
No Conflict. The Project Applicant proposes to develop the Project site with industrial and commercial uses. However, the building occupants within the industrial land use will include warehousing, manufacturing, fulfillment, parcel hub and/or similar uses. Manufacturing uses may include manufacturing on -site and shipment of goods and/or shipment/transport of goods to the Project site for manufacturing on -site. Building occupants within the commercial land uses will include
restaurants, recreation, and entertainment (e.g., athletic fields, batting cages, miniature golf courses, health clubs, etc.). The full list of permitted, conditionally permitted, and ancillary uses allowed within the Project site are listed on Table 3-1 of the Specific Plan. Based on the facilities and uses that would be allowed at the Project site, hazardous materials (e.g., diesel fuel, lubricants, solvents, corrosives, hazardous materials, etc.) could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site, subject to mandatory regulatory compliance to insure safe use and disposal. It is possible that other hazardous materials also could be used during the course of daily operations at the Project site. In the event that hazardous materials, other than those common materials described above, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
are associated with future operations, the hazardous materials would only be stored and transported to and from the Project site subject to applicable safety regulations. General cleaning activities on site that contain toxic substances are usually low in concentration and small in amount; therefore, there is no significant risk to humans or the environment from the use of such cleaning products.
As concluded in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, of this EIR, 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 6.7.1.
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 75 -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.
Policy 6.7.6: Designate truck routes to
avoid sensitive land uses, where feasible.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.10.4. The Project does not propose any truck routes in proximity to sensitive land uses. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 6.7.6.
Community Facilities and Infrastructure (Chapter 7)
Goal 7.3: Buildings and landscapes promote water conservation, efficiency, and the increased use of recycled water.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
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 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 7.4: Incorporate sustainable and improved stormwater management practices.
Policy 7.4.1: Incorporate low -impact
development (LID) techniques to improve
stormwater quality and reduce run-off
quantity.
No Conflict. In accordance with the Project's WQMP, the Project would install LID BMPs (e.g., bioretention and
biotreatment) to detain stormwater on site for runoff mitigation.
The Project proposes to install four detention basins within drainage management areas. The detention basins would
remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water, thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it is discharged from the Project site.
Additionally, the Project proposes non-structural BMPs to mitigate industrial pollution. Furthermore, the Project would slightly reduce peak stormwater flows by approximately 100 cfs and would not cause adverse hydrologic or biologic impacts to downstream receiving waters, including groundwater. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy
7.4.1. Policy 7.4.3: Require new development and
redevelopment projects to reuse stormwater
on site to the maximum extent practical and
provide adequate stormwater infrastructure
for flood control.
No Conflict. The Project's proposed stormwater drainage system is designed to capture and convey the Project's
stormwater flows into the Project's proposed on -site
stormwater detention basins that would gradually release stormwater into the downstream public storm drain system.
Additionally, flood protection facilities will be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFCWCD) and with adequate access easements and facilities provided. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy
7.4.3. Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Goal 7.5: Manage and effectively treat stormwater to minimize risk to downstream resources.
Policy 7.5.1: Ensure compliance with the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) MS4 permit
requirements.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the implementation of the Project would
involve grading of more than one acre. Therefore, the Project developer would be required to obtain a NPDES General
Construction Permit and comply with permit requirements effective at the time of construction. Additionally, as stated in Regulatory Requirement RR 10-5, prior to the issuance of building permits for each phase of the Project, the Project proponent shall provide evidence to the City that the Project comply with the requirements of the RWQCB Municipal
Permit General MS4 Permit. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.5.1.
Policy 7.5.3: Minimize pollutant discharges
into storm drainage system, natural
drainages, and groundwater. Design the
necessary stormwater detention basins,
recharge basins, water quality basins, or
similar water capture facilities to protect
water quality by capturing and/or treating
water before it enters a watercourse.
No Conflict. In accordance with the Project's WQMP, the Project would install LID BMPs (e.g., bioretention and
biotreatment) to detain stormwater on site for runoff mitigation.
The Project proposes to install four detention basins within four DMAs. Additionally, the Project proposes non-structural BMPs to mitigate industrial pollution. Additionally, as further discussed in EIR Section 4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project's proposed storm drain system is designed to capture 100 -year storm event peak flows. The Project's proposed storm drain system has sufficient capacity to hold and treat peak stormwater flows. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.5.3.
Policy 7.5.5: Require hydrological/
hydraulic studies and WQMPs to ensure
that new developments and redevelopment
projects will not cause adverse hydrologic
or biologic impacts to downstream
receiving waters, including groundwater.
No Conflict. As further discussed in EIR Section 4.10,
Hydrology and Water Quality, a Project -specific WQMP and a Project -specific Hydrology Study was prepared by Proactive Engineering Consultants West, Inc. (PECW). The WMQP
identified BMPs that would be installed to mitigate water quality impacts and the Hydrology Study identified that the implementation of the Project would not result in substantial flooding on or off site. The detention basins to be installed on site would remove pollutants from runoff and filter the water, thereby providing first -flush capture, detention, and filtration of stormwater runoff before it is discharged from the Project site. Furthermore, the Project would slightly reduce peak stormwater flows by approximately 100 cfs and would not cause adverse hydrologic or biologic impacts to downstream receiving waters, including groundwater. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.5.5.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Goal 7.6: A zero -waste program that increases recycling and reduces waste sent to the landfill.
Policy 7.6.1: Encourage new construction
and additions to avoid "Red List" materials
and chemicals.'
No Conflict. Refer to General Plan Policy 6.7.1. As concluded in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, 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 Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, 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.
Goal 7.8: City-wide access to high -quality energy utility and telecommunication services. 1 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/
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 7.8.1: Ensure that adequate utility
and telecommunication infrastructure
support future development.
No Conflict. As disused in Section 4.19, Utilities and Service Systems, the Project's proposed connections to existing utility infrastructure including electricity, natural gas, and
telecommunications, as well as installation of on- and off -site stormwater management, water, and wastewater infrastructure would be adequate to support future development of the
Project. Therefore, the Project not conflict with General Plan Policy 7.8.1.
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
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
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR, the Project shall implement the County of
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 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
provides additional energy efficiencies that exceed Title 24.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.1.7.
Goal 8.4: A City that improves awareness and mitigation of negative air quality impacts.
Policy 8.4.3: Avoid the siting of new
project and land uses that would produce
localized air pollution (e.g., Interstate 10,
SR -60, high traffic roads, certain industrial
facilities) in a way that would adversely
impact existing air quality -sensitive
receptors including schools, childcare
center, senior housing, and subsidized
affordable housing. The recommended
minimum distance separating these uses
should be 500 feet.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.3, Air Quality, the closest sensitive area to the Project site is an existing single - family residence located approximately 483 feet south of the Project site's southernmost boundary. Other residential uses are located north across Frontage Road (1,253 feet) and beyond SR -60. The Project would not result in localized exceedances of federal or state ambient air quality standard under
construction or operation of the Project. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.4.3.
Goal 8.5: A City that preserves and enhances its natural resources.
Policy 8.5.1: Minimize the loss of sensitive
species and critical habitat in areas planned
for future development.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources, the Project would result in permanent impacts to vegetation communities described for conservation by the MSHCP associated with Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125 totaling 109.69 acres and would impact the following
communities: chaparral (0.21 acre), Riversidean sage scrub (24.40 acres), non-native grassland (82.13 acres), and southern riparian scrub (0.03 acre). To offset these impacts, the Project would conserve 133.62 acres of replacement lands, including
0.32 acre of chaparral, 45.85 acres of Riversidean sage scrub,
86.03 acres of non-native grassland, and 0.22 acre of southern riparian scrub consistent with the MSHCP (PDF 4-1).
Additionally, no special -status plants were detected at the Study Area during focused plant surveys; therefore, no impact to special -status plants would occur. The Project would result in potential impacts to crotch bumble bee, coastal California gnatcatcher and burrowing owl during construction activities.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.4-1 through MM
4.4-3 would reduce impacts to special -status animals to a less than significant level. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.5.1.
Policy 8.5.2: Require new developments
adjacent to identified plant and wildlife
habitat areas to maintain a protective buffer,
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources, the Project would erect wildlife fencing along the southern and western limits of the development footprint, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ U Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
minimize impervious surface, minimize
light pollution, and emphasize native
landscaping.
connecting with SR -60 wildlife fencing, to provide a barrier between the edge of the development footprint and the adjacent MSHCP Conservation Area. 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 dedicated to the RCA as required by the MSHCP. The Project through its design would also address edge effects relative to adjacent conserved lands. The Project's night lighting would be designed to prevent spillage into the MSHCP conserved lands along the western and southern development boundary. See Project
Consistency response to General Plan Policy 8.5.3 for a discussion on native landscaping. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.5.2.
Policy 8.5.3: Encourage new development
to support a diversity of native species and
manage invasive species.
No Conflict. As shown on 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 and habitats. Prohibited plant species are also identified to protect native habitats within and surrounding the Project due to their flammability or invasive nature. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy
8.5.3. Policy 8.5.7: Discourage the use of plant
species on the California Invasive Plant
Inventory.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 8.5.3. The Project Applicant would incorporate plants identified within the Project's landscape plan and plant species list identified in the Specific Plan. Prohibited plant species are also identified to protect native habitats within and surrounding the Project due to their flammability or invasive nature. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy
8.5.7. Goal 8.6: A City that protects and enhances its scenic vistas and views.
Policy 8.6.1: Protect and preserve existing,
signature view of the hills and mountains
from the City.
No Conflict. The Project site is within the Timoteo Badlands, which is characterized with mountainous terrain. The Project site's northwestern and southern portions contain ridges, canyons, and hillsides that are visible from Frontage Road and SR -60. The Project's proposed buildings would be built to a maximum height of 60 feet and therefore would be mainly Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
visible from the SR -60. Landform modifications would occur under the Project in PAs 1-8 and remedial grading would occur in PA 9, along with 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 PA 10. Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project Applicant does not propose to develop the northwestern or southern portions of the Project site, which would preserve distant ridgeline views. As such, public views to the site's natural features would continue to be provided from the immediate surrounding area. Additionally, due to the location and orientation of the Project's proposed buildings and signage, views to San Bernardino Mountains, San Gorgonio Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains would not be obstructed. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.6.1.
Policy 8.6.3: Require the preparation of a
grading analysis on hillside development to
pre -determine where development should
occur to minimize the impact of new
development on views of the City's
hillsides.
Policy 8.6.4: When grading is necessary,
encourage grading for new development
that complements the surrounding natural
features.
No Conflict. The Project's grading plan would be in
accordance with the standards identified in the City's
Municipal Code, to minimize the potential for erosion,
landslides, and other forms of land failure and preserve views of ridges, canyons, and hillsides. Future development
accommodated by the Specific Plan would be subjected to the recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Report (see Section 5 of Technical Appendix F 1 , of this EIR), in accordance with the CBC and Beaumont Municipal Code Section 17.1.040.
Mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project site's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC, Beaumont Building Code, and conditions of
approval) would ensure that the Project is engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on -site and abutting off -site areas. Moreover, although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline view. The boundary between PA 9 and PA 10 is designated as the "Limits of Disturbance" on the Land Use Plan, meaning that no
grading, fuel management or development activities will occur beyond the location of that line. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policies 8.6.3 and 8.6.4.
Policy 8.6.6: Limit light pollution from
outdoor sources, especially in rural hillside
and mountain areas, and open spaces, to
maintain darkness for night sky viewing.
No Conflict. The Project's proposed outdoor lighting would be in accordance with the standards established in City of Beaumont Municipal Code Chapter 8.50 (Outdoor Lighting
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Ordinance) to limit light pollution. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.6.6.
Goal 8.7: A City where open space is preserved and used for resource conservation and/or recreation.
Policy 8.7.6: Preserve permanent open
space edges or greenbelts that provide a
buffer for separation between adjoining
developments.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.1.12. The Project Applicant proposes to preserve 124.7 acres on site as Open Space and 152.4 acres as Open Space - Conservation. The location of the Open Space and Open Space - Conservation areas provide permanent preserve open space edges and provide a buffer from the proposed development to the MSHCP conserved lands to the south and west of the Project site and to the adjacent 60 Freeway.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.7.6.
Goal 8.8: A City where the natural and visual character of the community is preserved.
Policy 8.8.1: Promote the maintenance of
open space through the implementation of
the General Plan.
Policy 8.8.2: Protect and preserve open
space and natural habitat wherever
possible.
No Conflict. Under existing conditions, the Project site is within the jurisdiction of the County of Riverside but is designated for Rural Residential. The Project Applicant proposes to modify the Project site's designation from Rural Residential uses to Industrial, General Commercial, Open Space, and Open Space - Conservation. The Project Applicant proposes to designate the central portion of the Project site as Industrial and General Commercial. The remaining portions of the Project site would be designated as Open Space and Open Space - Conservation. The Project Applicant does not propose to develop the areas designated as Open Space and Open Space - Conservation. These areas would be retained as open space.
See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 8.8.3.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policies 8.8.1 and 8.8.2.
Policy 8.8.3: Work with Riverside County
and adjacent cities, landowners, and
conservation organizations to preserve,
protect, and enhance open space, and
natural resources consistent with the
MSHCP.
No Conflict. The Project requires a Criteria Refinement to approve the Specific Plan, as designed, to be consistent with the MSHCP Reserve Assembly requirements. The Project
designates approximately 152.4 acres as Open Space -
Conservation within the southern portion of the Project site which is intended to be dedicated to the RCA, pursuant to the Western Riverside County MSHCP, for preservation to
augment existing, adjacent conserved lands in this part of Riverside County. The Project Applicant does not propose to disturb the areas designated as Open Space - Conservation. The Project Applicant would preserve this area and retain the Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
natural resources. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.8.3.
Policy 8.8.6: Establish buffers between
open space areas and urban development by
encouraging less intensive rural
development within proximity to the open
space areas.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.12.12. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.8.6.
Goal 8.9: A City where the extent of urban development in the hillsides is minimized and mitigated.
Policy 8.9.2: Limit the extent and intensity
of uses and development in areas of
unstable terrain, steep terrain, scenic vistas,
and other critical environmental areas.
No Conflict. The Project site is within the San Timoteo Badlands, which is characterized with mountainous terrain.
The Project site contains hillsides, ridges, canyons, and valleys in the northwestern and southeastern portions of the site which per below will be preserved. These areas include PAs 9 and 10 which are designated as Open Space and Open Space -
Conservation, respectively. Areas designated as Open Space - Conservation would serve to protect the natural resources on site and no development would occur in this area. As
previously discussed, grading would occur on PAs 1 through 9.
Landform modifications would occur under the Project in PAs 1-8 and remedial grading would occur in PA 9, along with 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 PA 10.
Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, no grading would occur within PA 10 or between the north-northeast property line and SR -60 Freeway, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. The boundary between PA 9 and PA 10 is designated as the "Limits of Disturbance" on the Land Use Plan. This designation means that all
development activity will take place inside of the limits of disturbance (i.e., within PA 9 or within PAs 1-8) and not on PA
10. As discussed in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, geotechnical observation and testing shall be conducted during various stages of grading to avoid geological hazards associated with unstable soils. Mandatory adherence to the recommendations contained in the site -specific geotechnical report during Project construction would ensure impacts associated with geological hazards reduce to a less than significant level. Moreover, as discussed in Threshold a in Section 4.1, Aesthetics, impacts to Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
scenic vistas would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.9.2.
Policy 8.9.3: Control land grading to
minimize the potential for erosion,
landsliding, and other forms of land failure,
as well as to limit the potential negative
aesthetic impact of excessive modification
of natural landforms.
No Conflict. The Project's grading plan would be in
accordance with the standards identified in the City's
Municipal Code, to minimize the potential for erosion,
landslides, and other forms of land failure. Mandatory
adherence to the recommendations contained in the site - specific geotechnical report (see Section 5 of Technical Appendix F1, of this EIR) during Project construction would ensure impacts associated with geological hazards reduce to a less than significant level.
Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project Applicant does not propose to grade the northwestern or southern portions of the Project site within PA 10 or between the north-northeast property line and SR -60 Freeway. The Project would preserve the natural on -site landforms in PA 10, which would preserve foreground
landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. The Project's on -site Open Space designated areas would provide a buffer between the proposed development and adjoining natural open space. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.9.3.
Policy 8.9.4: Recognize the value of
ridgelines and hillsides as significant
natural and visual resources and strengthen
their role as features which define the
character of the City and its individual
neighborhood.
No Conflict. The Project would implement measures related to the City of Beaumont to ensure that Project design elements visually enhance and do not degrade the surrounding area. As discussed under Threshold a, the Project's proposed structures, which would reach a maximum height of 60 are not anticipated to block views to the San Gorgonio Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains, and San Jacinto Mountains. Additionally, the Project's proposed Open Space and Open Space - Conservation land uses would ensure that the Project site's existing hillsides, ridges, canyons, and valleys are preserved and retain their rural character. Although landforms in mid -ground views would be altered for the development, the Project would not allow grading within PA 10 or between the north-northeast property line and SR -60 Freeway, which would preserve foreground landforms along the SR -60 Freeway and distant ridgeline views. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.9.4.
Goal 8.10: A City that promotes the protection of biological resources Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Policy 8.10.1: Work with landowners and
government agencies in promoting
development concepts that are sensitive to
the environment and consider the
preservation of natural habitats and further
the conservation goals of the MSHCP.
No Conflict. The Open Space — Conservation area would be preserved as natural habitat and dedicated to the RCA as required by the MSHCP. Additionally, the Project Applicant has prepared a Criteria Refinement analysis demonstrating that the proposed Criteria Refinement would be at least equivalent to the existing Criteria as it applies to Effects on Habitats, Effects on Covered Species, Effects on Core Areas, Effects on Linkages and Constrained Linkages, Effects on Non -
Contiguous Habitat Blocks, Effects on MSHCP Conservation Area Configuration and Management, Effects on Ecotones, and Acreage Contributed to the MSHCP Conservation Area.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.10.1.
Policy 8.10.2: Work with landowners and
government agencies in identifying areas
within the City of Beaumont and its SOI
that should be preserved as open space for
passive recreation, resource management,
or public safety and which meet the City's
preservation obligations per the MSHCP.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 8.10.1. Moreover, the Project would conserve 133.62 acres of replacement lands, including 0.32 acre of chaparral,
45.85 acres of Riversidean sage scrub, 86.03 acres of non - native grassland, and 0.22 acre of southern riparian scrub consistent with the MSHCP (PDF 4-1). Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.10.2.
Policy 8.10.4: Preserve significant habitat
and environmentally sensitive areas,
including hillsides, rock outcroppings, and
viewsheds through the application of the
Hillside Ordinance Policies.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 8.6.1. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources, through the Project's participation in the MSHCP, impacts to sensitive vegetation communities would be less than significant. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.4-1 through 4.4-5 would reduce the Project's impacts to significant habitat and environmentally sensitive areas to less than significant levels. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.10.4.
Policy 8.10.5: Require project proponents
to hire a CDFW-qualified biologist or
monitor for special status species or other
wildlife of low or limited mobility. If
present, prior to and during all ground- and
habitat -disturbing activities, move out of
harm's way special status species or other
wildlife of low or limited mobility that
would otherwise be injured or killed.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological
Resources, the Project would crotch bumble bee, coastal California gnatcatcher, burrowing owl, and nesting birds.
Implementation of Mitigation Measures MMs 4.4-1 through
4.4-3, and 4.4-5 would require pre -construction surveys conducted by a qualified biologist prior to initial ground - disturbing activities (including vegetation clearing, clearing and grubbing, tree removal, site watering, equipment staging, grading, etc.). If species are present during the survey, measures would be taken to avoid impacts to the sensitive species either through relocation or establishment of buffer areas. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.10.5.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ . I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Goal 8.11: A City where archaeological, cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and historical places are identified, recognized, and preserved.
Policy 8.11.1: Avoid or when avoidance is
not feasible, minimize impacts to sites with
significant archaeological, paleontological,
cultural, and tribal cultural resources, to the
extent feasible.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, there are no known prehistoric archeological resources are present on the Project site. However, Mitigation Measure MM
4.5-2 would ensure the proper identification and subsequent treatment of any significant archaeological resources that may be encountered during ground -disturbing activities.
Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, the Project site is identified as within an area of "High" Paleontological Sensitivity; however, 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.
Similarly, as discussed in Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, although there are no tribal cultural resources are known to occur within the Project site, Mitigation Measures MM 4.18-1 through MM 4.18-3 would ensure impacts to tribal cultural resources would be reduced to less than significant levels. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.11.1.
Policy 8.11.2: Comply with notification of
California Native American tribes and
organization of proposed projects that have
the potential to adversely impact cultural
resources, per the requirements of AB 52
and SB18.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.18, Tribal Cultural Resources, the City of Beaumont sent notification to the Native American tribes with possible traditional or cultural affiliation to the area that previously requested consultation pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18 requirements. Of the tribes that were sent notifications letters, three requested 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 conducted telephone consultations with Agua
Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, and Soboba Band of Mission Indians. Mitigation Measure MM 4.18-1 would reduce impacts associated with the unanticipated discovery of tribal cultural resources to less than Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
significant. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.11.2.
Policy 8.11.4: Require that any human
remains discovered during implementation
of public and private project within the City
be treated with respect and dignity and fully
comply with the California Native
American Graves Protection and
Reparation Act, California Public
Resources Code Amended Status 1982
Chapter 1492, California Public Resources
Code Statues 2006, Chapter 863, Section 1,
CA Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5,
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98,
Public Resources Code Section 5097.94,
SB 447 (Chapter 404, Statues of 1987) and
other appropriate laws.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.5, Cultural Resources, the Project would be required to comply with the applicable provisions of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097 et seq. Mandatory compliance with State law would ensure that human remains, if encountered, are appropriately treated, and would preclude the potential for significant impacts to human remains. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 8.11.4.
Safety (Chapter 9)
Goal 9.2: A City with improved community safety and reduced opportunities for criminal activity through appropriate physical design.
Policy 9.2.1: Implement Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
principles with:
• Site design techniques that
maximize natural surveillance and
reduce the potential for criminal
activity.
• Policies and regulations that
encourage a mixture of compatible
land uses to promote visibility and
higher levels of activity and
increased the safety of public use
areas and of pedestrian travel.
• Improve lighting and nighttime
security across all City
neighborhoods, especially in
existing or potential crime problem
areas.
• Involve the City's Police
Department in the development
review process for evaluation of
building and site plan
vulnerabilities to criminal
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.9.1. The Project would result in the development of the Project site with Industrial and General Commercial uses.
The implementation of the Project would provide a clean delineation between public and private space through signage, walls, and fencing. The Project's proposed buildings would feature security lighting to enhance security on site.
Additionally, building facades would face public roadways including SR -60 Freeway, Jack Rabbit Trail, Entertainment Way, and 4th Street. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.2.1.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
activities, especially for public
areas within developments.
Goal 9.4: A City that is protected from the effects of natural and man-made disasters.
Policy 9.4.5: Require new development to
provide access roads that allow both safe
and efficient access of emergency
equipment and community evacuation.
No Conflict. During the course of the City of Beaumont's review of the Project, the City evaluated the Project's design, including but not limited to proposed driveway locations and parking lot/drive aisle configuration, to ensure that adequate access would be provided for emergency vehicles at Project build out. The Conceptual Circulation Plan (Figure 3-8) identifies a looped perimeter road system (4th Street and Industrial Way) along with a phased series of 40 -foot wide Interim Fire Access Loop Connections, to ensure adequate fire- fighting and emergency access, during construction and
operation of the site. Under operational conditions, the Project would be required by Riverside County Ordinance No. 348, Section 21.32a, to maintain adequate emergency access for emergency vehicles on site. In addition, the Project site design provides for adequate egress in case of emergency evacuation.
As discussed in Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, and Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.4.5.
Goal 9.5: A City with enhanced fire and emergency response services.
Policy 9.5.5: Coordinate with the
Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District to
ensure that water pressure for existing and
future developed areas is adequate for
firefighting purposes.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would result in the installation of on -site fire hydrants, that are designed in accordance with the Riverside County Fire
Department standards in coordination with Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District. The internal waterlines are anticipated to supply sufficient fire flows and pressure to meet the demands required for on -site fire hydrants. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.5.5.
Goal 9.6: A City that protects human life, land, and property from the effects of wildland fire hazards.
Policy 9.6.3: Ensure that development in
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
minimizes the risks of wildfire through
planning and design of structures in
accordance with the California Building
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project site is designated within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone within an SRA by the Riverside County General Plan and CalFire. The Project would implement on -site defensible space (fuel Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Code Chapter 7A. Ensure adequate
provisions for vegetation management,
emergency access, and firefighting.
modification area [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. Building materials will comply with any state building code requirements for buildings located in a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Additionally, the Project would be required by the CBC and Beaumont Building Code to comply with the recommendations identified in the Project's Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.6.3.
Policy 9.6.4: Require new development in
the High and Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zones to develop a fire protection
and evacuation plan and ensure that the plan
includes adequate fire access to new
development.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project Fire Protection Plan was prepared that includes evacuation routes. The Project will provide a proactive educational component disclosing the potential wildfire risk and the requirements identified in the Project's Fire Protection Plan for Project businesses and occupants. This educational information must include maintaining the landscape and structural
component according to the appropriate standards and
embracing a "Ready, Set, Go!" stance on evacuation.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.6.4.
Policy 9.6.6: Require property owners to
clear brush and high fuel vegetation and
maintain fire -safe zones (a minimum
distance of 30 feet from the structure of to
the property line, whichever is closer) to
reduce the risk of fires. For structures
located within the Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zone, the required brush distance
is up to 200 feet from structures up to their
property line.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would provide a fuel maintenance zone with 20 feet of irrigated vegetation around the perimeter of the Project site and a 100 - foot FMA of paved surface and/or irrigated landscape.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.6.6.
Policy 9.6.7: Continue to enforce the weed
abatement ordinance to mitigate potential
fire hazard risks.
No Conflict. The Project would be required to comply with the weed abatement ordinance to reduce wildfire impacts.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.6.7.
Policy 9.6.8: Require that developments
located in wildland interface areas
incorporate and enforce standards for
construction, including a fuel modification
program (i.e., brush clearance, planting of
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.20, Wildfire, the Project would incorporate FMA and fuel maintenance zone, which
would consist of asphalt roadways, parking stalls, loading zones, irrigated landscaping, and irrigated slope protecting landscaping. Vegetation management would also be
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
fire -retardant vegetation) to reduce the
threat of wildfires.
implemented as interim fuel management area throughout the construction phases for each structure as there may be a period if one or more years where developing phases are exposed on multiple sides to wildland fuels. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.6.8.
Goal 9.7: A City that protects safety of human life, land, and property from the effects of earthquakes and geotechnical hazards.
Policy 9.7.1: As new versions of the
California Building Code (CCR Title 24,
published triennially) are released, adopt
and enforce the most recent codes that
contain the most recent seismic
requirements for structural design of new
development and redevelopment to
minimize damage from earthquakes and
other geologic activity.
No Conflict. As required in Regulatory Requirement RR 7-1, the Project shall comply with CBSC (Chapter 18) (adopted by the City of Beaumont as Municipal Code Section Chapter
15.04.010) and Municipal Code Section 17.11.040, which
requires development projects to evaluate and identify site - specific geologic and seismic conditions, and seismic
requirements for structural design. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.7.1.
Policy 9.7.5: Ensure that Building and
Safety agencies include thorough plan
checks and inspections of structures
vulnerable to seismic activity, fire risk, and
flood hazards. Additionally, recommend
the periodic observation of construction by
design professionals.
No Conflict. According to RCIT and FEMA, the Project site is within an area of minimal flooding (RCIT, 2021; FEMA,
2014). As further discussed under Threshold c of EIR Section
4.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, the Project would maintain a similar drainage pattern as compared to existing conditions.
It should be noted that the overall development pad would be elevated by the proposed design grading to be situated above local drainage courses. As such, the risk of flooding is low. As discussed in Section 4.7, Geology and Soils, grading plan review is required to verify that the geotechnical requirements are updated specific to the detailed rough grading plans. Future development accommodated by the Specific Plan would be
required to have site -specific geotechnical investigation reports prepared by the Project applicant's/developer's geotechnical consultant, in accordance with the CBC and Beaumont
Municipal Code Section 17.1.040. The geotechnical
investigations would determine seismic design parameters for the site and the proposed building type per CBC requirements. mandatory compliance with the recommendations contained within the Project site's Geotechnical Report (as required by the CBSC, Beaumont Building Code, and conditions of
approval) would ensure that the Project is engineered and constructed to minimize seismic activity, fire risk, and flood hazards. Moreover, all structures would be protected by an automatic, internal fire sprinkler system. Fire sprinkler systems shall be in accordance with RCFD and National Fire Protection Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ � I Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
Association (NFPA) Standard 13. Fire sprinkler plans for each structure would be submitted and reviewed by RCFD for
compliance with the applicable fire and life safety regulations, codes, and ordinances as well as the RCFD Fire Prevention Standards for fire protection systems. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.7.5.
Goal 9.9: A City that promotes preparedness related to the adverse effects of high winds common in the Pass area.
Policy 9.9.2: Require implementation of
best practices for dust control at all
excavation and grading projects.
No Conflict. The Project would be required to comply with South Coast AQMD Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust), which requires the implementation of best available dust control measures.
Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 9.9.2.
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.
• 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.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 3.0, Project Description, of this EIR, 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 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 9.10.2.
Policy 9.10.3: Require enhanced water
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
No Conflict. As disused in 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 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
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.
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.
Goal 9.11: A City with minimized risk associated with hazardous materials.
Policy 9.11.2: Require an assessment of
hazardous materials use as part of
environmental review and/or include
approval of the development of a hazardous
management and disposal as a condition of
a project, subject to review by the County
Environmental Health Department.
No Conflict. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was prepared for the Project by McAlister GeoScience
(GeoScience), which identified the Project site's potential to contain hazardous materials. The results of the Phase I ESA are provided in EIR Section 4.9, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials. Additionally, heavy equipment (e.g., dozers, excavators, tractors) would be operated on the Project site during construction. This heavy equipment likely would be fueled and maintained by petroleum -based substances such as diesel fuel, gasoline, oil, and hydraulic fluid, which are considered hazardous if improperly stored or handled. In addition, materials such as paints, adhesives, solvents, and other substances typically used in building construction would be located on the Project site during construction. These materials would not be in such quantities or stored in such a manner as to pose a significant safety hazard to on -site construction workers or the general public
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 Section 4.9, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, 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 9.11.2.
Policy 9.11.5: Prohibit placement of
proposed new facilities that will be
involved in the production, use, storage,
transport, or disposal of hazardous
No Conflict. As concluded in Section 4.9, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, with mandatory regulatory compliance, the Project would not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
materials near existing sensitive land uses
(such as homes, schools, child-care centers,
nursing homes, senior housing, etc.), that
may be adversely affected by such
activities.
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 9.11.5.
Noise (Chapter 10)
Goal 10.1: A City where noise exposure is minimized for those living and working in the community.
Policy 10.1.4: Incorporate noise
considerations into land use planning
decisions. Require the inclusion of noise
mitigation measures, as may be necessary
to meet standards, in the design of new
development projects in the City.
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.13, Noise, Project traffic noise would exceed the City's applicable significance threshold. The Project would result in a significant impact from 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). Under Opening Year (2025) plus Project Conditions, the Project would result in a significant impact for one roadway segment (segment #6). Therefore, the Project -related off -site traffic noise level increases at adjacent noise -sensitive land uses are considered a significant impact.
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's construction and operational (stationary) noise impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 10.1.4.
Policy 10.1.5: Require project involving
new development or modifications to
existing development to implement
measures, where necessary, to reduce noise
levels to at least the normally compatible
range. Design measures should focus on
architectural features and building design
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.13, Noise, the Project's construction and operational (stationary) noise impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 10.1.5.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
EU Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
General Plan Policy
Applicability
and construction, rather than site design
features, such as excessive setbacks, berms,
and sound walls, to maintain compatibility
with adjacent and surrounding uses.
Policy 10.1.6: Encourage reduction of
stationary noise impacts from commercial
and industrial land uses, activities, events,
and businesses on noise -sensitive land uses,
No Conflict. As discussed in Section 4.13, Noise, the Project's operational (stationary) noise impacts would be less than significant. Project stationary noise would not expose nearby receivers to unacceptable daytime or nighttime noise levels during Project buildout. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 10.1.6.
Goal 10.2: A City with minimal mobile source -generated noise levels.
Policy 10.2.3: Prohibit truck routes through
neighborhoods with sensitive receptors,
where feasible.
No Conflict. See Project Consistency response to General Plan Policy 3.10.4. 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. The Project does not propose any truck routes in proximity to sensitive receptors. As such, the Project would not conflict with General Plan Policy 10.2.3.
2. City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance
As previously discussed, the City of Beaumont Zoning Ordinance is contained within Title 17 of the City of Beaumont's Municipal Code and establishes specific standards for the use and development of all properties within the City by regulating land uses, development intensity, including limits on building setbacks, landscaping standards, and building heights. Under existing conditions, the Project site is zoned as W-2-20 under Riverside County Ordinance No. 348. Since the Project site is within the City's SOI within unincorporated Riverside County, the City has not adopted any zoning designations for the site. The City may pre -zone property within its SOI, which would become effect at the time that an annexation becomes effective.
The Project Applicant 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 of Beaumont's Zoning Map to include the Project site and classify the Project site as "Specific Plan (Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan)". The application of the Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan Zone would allow for the Project to be developed in accordance with Section 3, Development Standards, of the Specific Plan, which would constitute the zoning regulations applicable to any future development within the Project site. The City's approval and implementation of PLAN2019-0283 would ensure that the Project would be consistent with the proposed zoning regulations identified in the Specific Plan. Based on the foregoing, the Project would have a less -than -significant impact with respect to a conflict with the City of Beaumont's Zoning Ordinance.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning
3. Connect SoCal
SCAG's Connect SoCal is the applicable SCAG planning document that applies to the Project. Connect SoCal identifies voluntary best practices to approach growth and infrastructure challenges in an integrated and comprehensive way. The Connect SoCal goals are meant to provide guidance for considering proposed project for municipalities throughout the SCAG jurisdictional area within the context of regional goals and policies. As shown in Table 4.11-2, SCAG Connect SoCal Consistency Analysis, implementation of the Project would not result in an inconsistency with the adopted Connect SoCal. Accordingly, the Project would have a less -than -significant impact with respect to a conflict with the SCAG's Connect SoCal.
Table 4.11-2 SCAG Connect SoCal Consistency Analysis
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Consistency
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 Section 4.14, Population and Housing, of this EIR).
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, 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 Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• 1 Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Consistency
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 1-215, 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 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.
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 CAP's requirement to Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• 1 Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Consistency
achieve at least 100 points and would have less than significant individual and cumulatively considerable impact on GHG
emissions.
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).
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
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
4.11 Land Use and Planning
Connect SoCa1
Goal Number
Goal Statement
Consistency
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.
0 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.
4. Western Riverside County MSHCP
The Project site is in the MSHCP Criteria Area, including the Pass Area Plan (Cells 933, 936, 1030, 1032, and 1125) and the Reche Canyon/Badlands Area Plan (Cell Group A'). The Biological Resources Assessment (Technical Appendix C1), evaluated the Project's consistency with MSHCP Reserve assembly requirements, Section 6.1.2 (Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools), Section 6.1.3 (Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species), Section 6.1.4 (Guidelines Pertaining to the Urban/Wildlands Interface), and Section 6.3.2 (Additional Survey Needs and Procedures). As discussed in Section 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR, the Project would be consistent with the West Riverside County MSHCP. Refer to Threshold f under Section 4.4, Biological Resources, of this EIR and Section 7.0 of the Project's Biological Resources Assessment (Technical Appendix CI) for a detailed discussion on the Project's consistency with the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■O Environmental Impact Report 4.11 Land Use and Planning
4.11.E CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
This cumulative impact analysis considers development of the Project in conjunction with other development projects and planned development in the vicinity of the Project site that are located in unincorporated Riverside County, and cities of Beaumont and Banning. As discussed under Threshold a, the Project would not physically divide an established community because the Project site is vacant and undeveloped and is within a developing portion of the City. Although there is one existing single- family residence located immediately south of the Project site, implementation of the Project would not obstruct access to and from the existing single-family residence. Therefore, the Project would have a less than cumulatively considerable impact with respect to a physical division of an established community.
As discussed under Threshold b, the Project would not conflict with any other aspects of the City's General Plan or any other applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating adverse environmental effects. Cumulative development would also be subject to site -specific environmental and planning reviews that would address consistency with adopted land use plan, policy, or regulation. Thus, it is expected that the land uses of cumulative projects would be consistent with policies that avoid an environmental effect; therefore, cumulatively considerable impacts from cumulative projects related to policy consistency would be less than significant.
4.11.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS BEFORE MITIGATION
Threshold a: Less -than -Significant Impact. Currently the Project site is vacant and undeveloped and is within a developing portion of the City. The Project site does not serve as a connection point to any existing established communities. There is one existing conforming single-family residence located immediately south of the Project site. The implementation of the Project would not obstruct access to and from the existing single-family residence. Additionally, the Project would include improvements to Jack Rabbit Trail that would improve access along Jack Rabbit Trail. The implementation of the Project is not anticipated to physically divide an established community and impacts would be less than significant.
Threshold b: Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the Project would not result in an inconsistency with the City of Beaumont General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Connect SoCal, or Western Riverside County MSHCP. The Project would not result in significant land use and planning conflicts in the context of compliance with applicable environmental plans, policies, and regulations beyond those identified in other Sections of this EIR and impacts would be less than significant.
4.11.8 MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
4.11.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
N M
■ ❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.12 Mineral Resources
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
This section assesses the Project's potential impacts associated with mineral resources. The sources of information used to support the analysis in this Subsection include the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by McAlister GeoScience (McAlister GeoScience, 2019), the City's General Plan 2040 (City of Beaumont, 2020a), and the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the General Plan 2040 (City of Beaumont, 2020b). Refer to Section 7.0, References, for a complete list of reference sources used in this analysis.
4.12.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
No significant amounts of mineral deposits have been found in the City of Beaumont. In addition, the City of Beaumont and its Sphere of Influence (SOI) do not contain any delineated sites or locations of mineral resources. However, because the majority of the area is flat and characterized by alluvial materials, which eroded and washed down from the mountains, there is potential for extracting aggregate resources from open spaces adjacent to drainage courses in the western portion of the City and its SOI. There are also likely accretions of aggregate along watercourses and drainage ways within the City or Sphere of Influence boundaries (City of Beaumont, 2020a, p. 211).
As detailed in the Project's Phase I Environmental Assessment conducted by McAlister GeoScience, the Project site is undeveloped and contains a water storage tank with associated valves and a concrete pad under existing conditions. Based on aerial photographs, between the 1900s and the present, the Project site has remained relatively unchanged in that it remains vacant and undeveloped (McAlister GeoScience, 2019, p. i). As such, there is no record that mineral extraction activities ever occurred on the Project site.
4.12.2 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made on the NOP or during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to mineral resources.
4.12.3 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
A. State
1. Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975
The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA, Public Resources Code, Sections 2710- 2796) provides a comprehensive surface mining and reclamation policy with the regulation of surface mining operations to assure that adverse environmental impacts are minimized and mined lands are reclaimed to a usable condition. SMARA also encourages the production, conservation, and protection of the state's mineral resources. Public Resources Code Section 2207 provides annual reporting requirements for all mines in the state, under which the State Mining and Geology Board is also granted authority and obligations (CDC, n.d.).
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ L Environmental Impact Report 4.12 Mineral Resources
SMARA, Chapter 9, Division 2 of the Public Resources Code, requires the State Mining and Geology Board to adopt State policy for the reclamation of mined lands and the conservation of mineral resources. These policies are prepared in accordance with the Administrative Procedures Act, (Government Code) and are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 2, Chapter 8, Subchapter 1 (CDC, n.d.).
2. Mineral Resources and Mineral Hazards Mapping Program California's Mineral Resources and Mineral Hazards Mapping Program (MRMHMP) provides data about nonfuel mineral resources, naturally occurring mineral hazards (such as asbestos, radon, and mercury), and historic mining activities throughout the state. The MRMHMP is divided into two projects; the Mineral Resources Project, which provides information about California's nonfuel mineral resources, and the Mineral Hazards Project, which maps and monitors minerals related to public health and safety concerns.
8. Regional
1. County of Riverside Ordinance No. 555
Ordinance No. 555 implements SMARA and addresses the importance of mineral extraction to the economic well-being of Riverside County. It regulates all surface mining operations in the unincorporated portions of Riverside County, as authorized by SMARA, to ensure that:
• The production and conservation of minerals is encouraged while considering and balancing values relating to recreation, watershed, wildlife, range and forage, and aesthetic enjoyment and, at the same time, eliminating or minimizing the residual hazards to public health and safety.
• The adverse effects of surface mining operations are prevented or minimized and that mined lands are reclaimed to a useable condition readily adaptable for alternative land use. • The reclamation of mined lands is carried out in a way that permits the continued mining of minerals.
• This ordinance is intended to ensure the conservation of mineral resources within the City's SOI which currently is under the jurisdiction of Riverside County.
C. Local
1. County of Riverside General Plan
The County of Riverside General Plan, Multipurpose Open Space Element, Figure OS -6 shows mineral resource zones in the County. As shown, the Project site is within Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 3 where the significance of mineral deposits is undetermined. (Riverside County, 2015) Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MOEnvironmental Impact Report 4.12 Mineral Resources
2. City of Beaumont General Plan
The General Plan discusses mineral resources in the Conservation and Open Space Element. The General Plan does not establish goals, policies, and implementation measures that directly address mineral resources, due to the absence of specific mineral resources in the City and its SOI. As depicted in the General Plan Figure 5.11-1, Mineral Resources Zones, the Project site is located in the City's SOI in mineral resource zone MRZ-3 where the significance of mineral deposits is undetermined. (City of Beaumont, 2020b)
3. Beaumont Municipal Code Section 17.03.160 — Mineral Resources Overlay Zone This section of the Beaumont Municipal Code is intended to facilitate mining and quarry activities within the properties subject to the land use regulations of the City. It currently permits mining, quarrying, excavating, beneficiating, concentrating, processing, and stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel, decomposed granite, clay gypsum, limestone, metallic ores, and similar materials, the reclamation of the resulting excavations and the manufacturing of cement, rock crushing plants, aggregate washing, screening and drying facilities and equipment, and concrete batching plants are permitted uses in conformance with certain development and performance standards provided the operator holds a valid surface mining permit issued pursuant to this section.
The City's Zoning Map does not include any land use designations regarding mineral resources. To be consistent with the lack of a mineral resources designation in the General Plan 2040 and the Zoning Map, General Plan 2040 indicated a revision to the City Zoning Ordinance to delete the Mineral Resources Overlay Zone that was previously set forth in Section 17.03.160. The City has since removed the Mineral Resources Overlay Zone.
4.12.4 METHODOLOGY
The Project site and surrounding areas were assessed to determine the presence of any past or present recoverable mineral resources. The County's General Plan, the City's General Plan and General Plan EIR, and the Project's Phase I Environmental Site Assessment were reviewed to determine whether there were any past or current mineral resources extraction activities on the Project site. This information was used to determine the Project's potential to affect any mineral resources.
4.12.5 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Section XII of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines, the proposed Project would result in a significant impact to aesthetics if the Project or any Project -related component would:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state;
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ O Environmental Impact Report
4.12 Mineral Resources
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recover site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan.
4.12.6 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State? According to the City of Beaumont General Plan, the City has no known identified mineral resources of regional or statewide importance. The Project site is located MRZ-3, which is defined as an area where the significance of the deposit is undetermined (City of Beaumont, 2020b, Figure 5.11-1).
Therefore, the Project site does not contain any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region or the residents of the State. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, no impacts to "known mineral resources" would occur with Project implementation. (City of Beaumont, 2020b, pp. 5.11-7) In addition, there are no delineated sites or locations of mineral resources within the City of Beaumont (City of Beaumont, 2020a, p. 211). Therefore, the potential for the implementation of the Project to result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the State is considered less than significant.
Threshold b: Would the Project result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
According to the County's General Plan, the Project site is within the MRZ-3 zone and not located within close proximity to the State designated Aggregate Mineral Resource areas (Riverside County, 2015). Additionally, according to the City's General Plan, the Project site is not located within an area known to be underlain by locally -important mineral resources (City of Beaumont, 2020b, Figure 5.11- 1). The Project site is not located within the City's Mineral Resource Overlay and the City's General Plan does not identify any locally -important mineral resource recovery sites on site or within proximity to the Project site (City of Beaumont, 2020b, p. 5.11-7). Additionally, as a future implementing action following adoption of the General Plan 2040, the City will delete the Mineral Resource Overlay from the City's Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan and impacts would be less than significant.
4.12.7 CUMULATIVE IMPACT ANALYSIS
As discussed under Threshold a, the Project site is classified as MRZ-3 in the County's and City's General Plan and contains no known mineral resource deposits. Furthermore, there are no delineated sites or locations of known mineral resources within the City of Beaumont. Therefore, the Project has no potential to result in a cumulatively -considerable contribution to impacts related to mineral resources that would be of value to the region and residents of the state.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MOEnvironmental Impact Report 4.12 Mineral Resources
As discussed under Threshold b, the County and City of Beaumont General Plan does not identify any locally important mineral resource recovery sites on the Project site or within proximity to the Project site. Therefore, the Project has no potential to result in a cumulatively -considerable contribution to impacts to a locally -important mineral resource recovery site. 4,12.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS BEFORE MITIGATION
Threshold a: Less than Significant Impact. The Project does not contain any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region or residents of the State. Accordingly, with implementation of the proposed Project there would be less that significant impacts to known mineral resources.
Threshold b: Less than Significant Impact. The Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
4.12.9 MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant and mitigation is not required.
4.12.10 SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACTS AFTER MITIGATION
Impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
•
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
4.13 NOISE
The analysis in this section is based, primarily, on a site -specific noise impact analysis titled "Beaumont Pointe Noise Impact Analysis" and dated November 16, 2022 (Urban Crossroads, 2022e).
The report (herein, "Noise Impact Analysis") was prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (hereafter, Urban Crossroads) and is included as Technical Appendix Jto this EIR. Additional references used for this section are listed in Section 7.0, References.
4.13.1 NOISE AND VIBRATION FUNDAMENTALS
A. Noise
Noise is simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as a decibel (dB). A -weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies which are audible to the human ear.
A variety of reactions can be expected from people exposed to any given environment. Despite variability in behavior on an individual level, the population as a whole can be expected to exhibit the following responses to changes in noise levels: an increase of 1 dBA cannot be perceived except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments; a change of 3 dBA is considered "barely perceptible;" and a change of 5 dBA is considered "readily perceptible."
8. Vibration
Vibration is the periodic oscillation of a medium or object. Sources of groundborne vibration include natural phenomena (e.g., earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides) or human -made causes (e.g., explosions, machinery, traffic, trains, construction equipment). Vibration sources may be continuous, such as factory machinery, or transient, such as explosions. As is the case with airborne sound, groundborne vibrations may be described by amplitude and frequency. There are several different methods that are used to quantify vibration. The peak particle velocity (PPV) is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal. Vibration is often described in units of velocity (inches per second) and decibels (dB) and is denoted as VdB.
The background vibration -velocity level in residential areas is generally 50 VdB. Groundborne vibration is normally perceptible to humans at approximately 65 VdB. For most people, a vibration - velocity level of 75 VdB is the approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible levels.
C. Blasting
Rock blasting is used when large boulders must be broken into smaller sizes for handling. Blasts typically occur for only a few seconds. Air overpressure, or "airblast," levels generated by blasting can Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report _ 4.13 Noise
travel up to 1,100 feet per second, depending on the size of the blast, distance from the blast, and amount of charge confinement. For safety purposes, during blasting, no other construction equipment is operated on a site. The intensity of the noise and vibration impacts associated with rock blasting depends on location, size, material, shape of the rock, and the methods used to crack it. While a blasting contractor can design the blasts to stay below a given vibration level that could cause damage to nearby structures, it is virtually impossible to design blasts that are not perceptible by people in the vicinity.
The noise produced by blasting activities is referred to as air overpressure, or an "airblast," which is generated when explosive energy in the form of gases escape from the detonating blast holes. Much like a point source, airblasts radiate outward in a spherical pattern and attenuate with each doubling of distance from the blast location, depending on the design of the blast and amount of containment.
4.13.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Existing Ambient Noise Environment
Urban Crossroads recorded 24 -hour noise readings at five noise sensitive receiver locations near the Project site on April 22, 2020. The noise measurement locations are identified in Figure 4.13-1, Noise Measurement Locations. The results of the existing noise level measurements are summarized below.
Refer to Appendix 5.2 of Technical Appendix J for the noise measurement worksheets used to calculate the noise levels, including a summary of the hourly noise levels and the minimum and maximum observed noise levels at each measurement location.
• Location L1 represents the noise levels north of the Project site on Roberts Place near existing single-family residential home at 34945 Roberts Place. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24 -hour exterior noise level of 51.8 dBA CNEL.
The hourly average energy daytime noise level was calculated at 45.0 dBA Leq with an hourly average energy nighttime noise level of 45.2 dBA Leq. • Location L2 represents the noise levels north of the Project site on Mickelson Drive near existing single-family residential homes. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24 -hour exterior noise level of 62.3 dBA CNEL. The hourly average energy daytime noise level was calculated at 62.7 dBA Leq with an hourly average energy nighttime noise level of 51.4 dBA Leq.
• Location L3 represents the noise levels northeast of the Project site by Oak Valley Parkway near the Tukwet Canyon Golf Course. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24 -hour exterior noise level of 68.8 dBA CNEL. The hourly average energy daytime noise level was calculated at 64.3 dBA Leq with an hourly average energy nighttime noise level of 60.8 dBA Leq.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Source(s): Urban Crossroads (10-12-2021)
Figure 4,13-1
Source: Esri, Maxor, GeoEye, Eorthstor
Geographies, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,
AeroGRID, ION, and the Gl5 User Community
.I'ra' j
Noise Measurement Locations
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
• Location L4 represents the noise levels northeast of the Project site on Olivewood near the Olivewood housing community. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24 -hour exterior noise level of 55.1 dBA CNEL. The hourly average energy daytime noise level was calculated at 52.9 dBA Leq with an hourly average energy nighttime noise level of 46.9 dBA Leq.
• Location L5 represents the noise levels southeast of the Project site on Jack Rabbit Trail just outside the Hoy Ranch Property. The noise level measurements collected show an overall 24 -hour exterior noise level of 48.1 dBA CNEL. The hourly average energy daytime noise level was calculated at 44.9 dBA Leq with an hourly average energy nighttime noise level of 39.4 dBA Leq.
4.13.3 NOTICE OF PREPARATION/SCOPING COMMENTS
A Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Project was released for public review on September 7, 2020 and an EIR Scoping Meeting was held September 17, 2020. No comments were made during the EIR Scoping Meeting that pertain to noise.
4.13.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
The following is a brief description of the federal, state, and local environmental laws and related regulations related to noise. Federal, state, and local agencies regulate different aspects of environmental noise. Federal and state agencies generally set noise standards for mobile sources such as aircraft and motor vehicles, while regulation of stationary sources is left to local agencies.
A. Federal
1. Noise Control Act of 1972
The Noise Control Act of 1972 establishes a national policy to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health and welfare. The Act also serves to (1) establish a means for effective coordination of Federal research and activities in noise control; (2) authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce; and (3) provide information to the public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction characteristics of such products.
While primary responsibility for control of noise rests with State and local governments, Federal action is essential to deal with major noise sources in commerce, control of which require national uniformity of treatment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is directed by Congress to coordinate the programs of all Federal agencies relating to noise research and noise control. (EPA, 2020)
2. Federal Transit Administration
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published a Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (NVIA), which provides guidance for preparing and reviewing the noise and vibration sections of Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
environmental documents. In the interest of promoting quality and uniformity in assessments, the manual is used by project sponsors and consultants in performing noise and vibration analyses for inclusion in environmental documents. The manual sets forth the methods and procedures for determining the level of noise and vibration impact resulting from most federally -funded transit projects and for determining what can be done to mitigate such impact. (FTA, 2018) The City of Beaumont does not identify specific vibration level limits and instead relies on the Federal Transit FTA methodology.
3. Federal Highway Administration
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the agency responsible for administering the Federal - aid highway program in accordance with Federal statutes and regulations. The FHWA developed the noise regulations as required by the Federal -Aid Highway Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-605, 84 Stat. 1713). The regulation, 23 CFR 772 Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise, applies to highway construction projects where a State department of transportation has requested Federal funding for participation in the project. The regulation requires the highway agency to investigate traffic noise impacts in areas adjacent to federally -aided highways for proposed construction of a highway on a new location or the reconstruction of an existing highway to either significantly change the horizontal or vertical alignment or increase the number of through - traffic lanes. If the highway agency identifies impacts, it must consider abatement. The highway agency must incorporate all feasible and reasonable noise abatement into the project design.
Highway projects receiving federal aid and requiring a traffic noise analysis must use the latest version of the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) according to Title 23 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations Part 772.9(a). The FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 1.0 was initially released in March of 1998. Since then, there have been five additional releases which have contained fixes to software bugs. The FHWA TNM provides for the accurate prediction of traffic noise levels along the wayside of a highway. The Project's Noise Impact Analysis utilizes FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108 for roadway noise level increases from vehicular traffic.
8. State
1. Noise Requirements
The State of California regulates freeway noise, sets standards for sound transmission, provides occupational noise control criteria, identifies noise standards, and provides guidance for local land use compatibility. State law requires that each county and city adopt a General Plan that includes a Noise Element which is to be prepared according to guidelines adopted by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research. The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels. In addition, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all known environmental effects of a project be analyzed, including environmental noise impacts.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MOEnvironmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
2. OPR General Plan Guidelines
Though not adopted by law, the 2017 California General Plan Guidelines, published by the California Governor's OPR, provides guidance for local agencies in preparing or updating General Plans. The Guidelines provide direction on the required Noise Element portion of the General Plans. The purpose of the Noise Element is to limit the exposure of the community to excessive noise levels. Local governments must "analyze and quantify" noise levels and the extent of noise exposure through actual measurement or the use of noise modeling. Technical data relating to mobile and point sources must be collected and synthesized into a set of noise control policies and programs that "minimizes the exposure of community residents to excessive noise." Noise level contours must be mapped and the conclusions of the element used as a basis for land use decisions. The element must include implementation measures and possible solutions to existing and foreseeable noise problems.
Furthermore, the policies and standards must be sufficient to serve as a guideline for compliance with sound transmission control requirements. The Noise Element directly correlates to the Land Use, Circulation, and Housing Elements. The Noise Element must be used to guide decisions concerning land use and the location of new roads and transit facilities since these are common sources of excessive noise levels. The noise levels from existing land uses, including mining, agricultural, and industrial activities, must be closely analyzed to ensure compatibility, especially where residential and other sensitive receptors have encroached into areas previously occupied by these uses. (OPR, 2017, pp. 131-132)
3. Building Standards Code
The State of California's noise insulation standards are codified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Building Standards Administrative Code, Part 2, and the California Building Standards Code.
These noise standards are applied to new construction in California for the purpose of controlling interior noise levels resulting from exterior noise sources. The regulations specify that acoustical studies must be prepared when non-residential structures are developed in areas where the exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL, such as within a noise contour of an airport, freeway, railroad, and other areas where noise contours are not readily available. If the development falls within an airport or freeway 65 dBA CNEL noise contour, the combined sound transmission class (STC) rating of the wall and roof -ceiling assemblies must be at least 50. For those developments in areas where noise contours are not readily available and the noise level exceeds 65 dBA Leq for any hour of operation, a wall and roof -ceiling combined STC rating of 45, and exterior windows with a minimum STC rating of 40 are required.
C. Local
1. City of Beaumont General Plan Noise Element
The City of Beaumont (City) Noise Element addresses the control and abatement of environmental noise to protect the citizens from excessive exposure to noise. The Noise Element specifies the maximum allowable exterior noise levels for new developments impacted by transportation noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports, and railroads. In addition, the Noise Element identifies several policies to minimize the impacts of excessive noise levels throughout the community Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ u Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
and establishes noise level requirements for all land uses. The Noise Element also contains noise programs to protect City residents from excessive noise (see Table 10.3, Noise Programs of the City's General Plan).
2. City of Beaumont Municipal Code
Noise impacts originating from a designated fixed location or private property noise from construction activities and stationary -source (operational) noise levels such as the expected loading dock activity, delivery van activity, truck movements, roof -top air conditioning units, parking lot vehicle movements and trash enclosure activity are evaluated against standards established under the City of Beaumont's Municipal Code (BMC).
❑ Construction -Related Noise Standards
The City has set restrictions to control noise impacts associated with the construction of the Project.
These restrictions are generally limited to the nearby noise sensitive receiver locations that may be impacted by the short-term construction noise activities. BMC Section 9.02.110(F) establishes limits to the hours of operation of construction activities. Specifically, . . . it shall be unlawful for any person to engage in or permit the generation of noise related to landscape maintenance, construction including erection, excavation, demolition, alteration or repair of any structure or improvement, at such sound levels, as measured at the property line of the nearest adjacent occupied property, as to be in excess of the sound levels permitted under this Chapter, at other times than between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. The person engaged in such activity is hereby permitted to exceed sound levels otherwise set forth in this Chapter for the duration of the activity during the above -described hours for purposes of construction. However, nothing contained herein shall permit any person to cause sound levels to at any time exceed 55 dB(A) for intervals of more than 15 minutes per hour as measured in the interior of the nearest occupied residence or school.
Section 9.02.110.F.3 indicates that:
Construction related noise...may take place outside the time period set forth therein and above the relative sound levels in case of urgent necessity in the interest of public health and safety, and then only with the prior permission of the building inspector.
Such permit may be granted for a period not to exceed three days or until the emergency ends, whichever is less. The permit may be renewed for periods of three days while the emergency continues.
❑ Operational Noise Standards
BMC Section 9.02.050 contains exterior noise level standards for residential, industrial, and commercial land uses as shown in Table 4.13-1, Operational Noise Standards.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Table 4.13-1 Operational Noise Standards
Receiving
Land Use
Time
Period
Base
Ambient
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)'
Exterior Noise Standards (dBA)2
L25
(15 mins)
L8
(5 mins)
L2
(1 min)
Lmax
(0 min)
Residential
Daytime
55 60
65 70
75 Nighttime
45 50
55 60
65 Industrial and
Commercial
Daytime
75 3
3 3
_3
Nighttime
50 3
3 3
3 Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e,Table 3-1)
1 BMC Section 9.02.050 Noise (Appendix 3.1).
2 Noise levels shall not exceed for the duration periods specified in Section 9.02.070 BMC. 3 No exterior noise level shall exceed the base ambient noise levels for nonresidential land uses. Section 9.02.090 BMC. The % noise level is the level exceeded "n" % of the time during the measurement period. L25 is the noise level exceeded 25% of the time.
"Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m..; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
The City's percentile noise descriptors are provided to ensure that the duration of the noise source is fully considered. However, due to the relatively constant intensity of the Project stationary operational activities, the (base exterior noise level limit) or the average Leq noise level metric best describes the loading dock activity, delivery van activity, truck movements, roof -top air conditioning units, parking lot vehicle movements and trash enclosure activity. The equivalent Leq noise level metric accounts for noise fluctuations over time by averaging the louder and quieter events and giving more weight to the louder events. In addition, a review of the existing ambient noise level measurements shows that the Leq is generally greater than the L25. Therefore, this noise study conservatively relies on the average Leq sound level limits to describe the Project stationary operational noise levels (Urban Crossroads, 2022e).
In addition, the BMC, Section 9.02.110.G states that:
it shall be unlawful for any person to operate, cause to operate or permit the operation of any machinery, equipment, device, pump, fan, compressor, air conditioning apparatus or similar mechanical device, including but not limited to the use of any steam shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, steam or electric hoist, blower or power fan, or any internal combustion engine, the operation of which causes noise due to the explosion of operating gases or fluids, or other appliance, in any manner so as to create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line of the property upon which the equipment or machinery is operated to exceed the base ambient noise level by five dB(A).
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
4.13.5 METHODOLOGY
A. Construction Noise Analysis
For the construction noise analysis, Urban Crossroads relies on reference noise level measurements published in the Update of Noise Database for Prediction of Noise on Construction and Open Sites by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). The DEFRA database provides the most recent and comprehensive source of reference construction noise levels. The reference noise level measurements included the types of construction equipment that would be used on the Project site performing similar types of construction activities at a similar level of activity/intensity as is expected to occur on the Project site. Table 4.13-2, Construction Reference Noise Levels, provides a summary of the reference noise level measurements. All construction noise level measurements presented in Table 4.13-2 were normalized by Urban Crossroads to describe a common reference distance of 50 feet.
Table 4.13-2 Construction Reference Noise Levels
Construction
Stage
Reference Construction Activity
Reference Noise
Level @ 50 Feet
(dBA Leq)
Highest Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Grading
Graders
79 79
Excavators
64 Compactors
67 Building
Construction
Cranes
67 72
Tractors
72 Welders
65 Paving
Pavers
70 70
Paving Equipment
69 Rollers
69 Architectural
Coating
Cranes
67 67
i
Air Compressors
67 Generator Sets
67 Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e, Table 10-1)
The construction noise analysis evaluates Project construction -related noise levels at the closest nearby receiver locations in the Project study area. A total of five receiver locations were considered in the construction noise analysis. In addition, receiver locations BIO-1, BIO-2 and BIO-3 represent the existing open space areas and potential sensitive receiver locations for further consideration in the biology report for the Project (see Technical Appendix Cl, of this EIR). The nearest noise sensitive residential receiver is located approximately 417 feet south of the Project site at the Hoy Ranch property.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
The modeled noise -sensitive receiver locations are representative of existing receptors nearest the Project site. It is not necessary to study every single receiver location surrounding the Project's construction area because receivers located at a similar distance from Project -related construction activities with similar ground elevations, orientation, and intervening physical conditions as the five modeled receptor locations would experience the same or very similar noise effects as those disclosed herein, and those at a greater distance would experience lesser noise effects. The receiver locations used in the construction noise analysis are shown on Figure 4.13-2, Noise Receiver Locations, and described below. Noise measurements were taken near these locations to describe the existing ambient noise environment. All distances are measured from the Project site boundary to the outdoor living areas (e.g., private backyards) or at the building facade, whichever is closer to the Project site.
R1: Location R1 represents the existing noise sensitive residence at 34945 Roberts Place, approximately 4,402 feet north of the Project site. Receiver RI is placed at the backyard property line facing the Project site. A 24 -hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L1.
R2: Location R2 represents the existing noise sensitive residence at 35339 Stewart Street, approximately 4,347 feet north of the Project site. Receiver R2 is placed at the backyard property line facing the Project Site. A 24 -hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L2.
R3: Location R3 represents the existing Tukwet Canyon Golf Course, approximately 3,123 feet north of the Project site. Since there are no private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site, receiver R3 is placed at the building facade. A 24 -hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L3.
R4: Location R4 represents the existing noise sensitive residence at 14157 Bosana Lane, approximately 1,159 feet north of the Project site. Receiver R4 is placed at the backyard property line facing the Project Site. A 24 -hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L4.
R5: Location R5 represents the existing noise sensitive residence at 13270 Jack Rabbit Trail (Hoy Ranch), approximately 92 feet south of the Project site. R2 is placed at the private outdoor living areas (backyards) facing the Project site. A 24 -hour noise measurement was taken near this location, L5.
BIO-1: Location BIO-1 represents the existing open space area near the wildlife underpass of the State Route 60, approximately 175 feet north of the Project site.
BIO-2: Location BIO-2 represents the existing open space area near the State Route 60, approximately 184 feet northeast of the Project site.
BIO-3: Location BIO-3 represents the existing open space area approximately 164 feet southwest of the Project site opposite the planned loading dock area of Building 4.
Receiver locations BIO-1, BIO-2 and BIO-3 are presented for informational purposes only. See Section
4.4 Biological Resources, and Technical Appendix CJ, of this EIR for further discussion.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Source(s): Urban Crossroads (10-12-2021)
Figure 4.13-2
Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar
Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,
AeroGRID, IGN, and the G/5 User Community
Noise Receiver Locations
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MOEnvironmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
8. Nighttime Concrete Pour Noise Analysis
It is our understanding that nighttime concrete pouring activities will occur as a part of Project building construction activities. Nighttime concrete pouring activities are often used to support reduced concrete mixer truck transit times and lower air temperatures than during the daytime hours and are generally limited to the actual building area. Since the nighttime concrete pours will take place outside the permitted City of Beaumont Municipal Code 9.02.110.F.1 hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., the Project Applicant will be required to obtain authorization for nighttime work from the City of Beaumont. Any nighttime construction noise activities are evaluated against the City of Beaumont exterior construction noise level threshold of 75 dBA Leq.
To estimate the noise levels due to nighttime concrete pour activities, sample reference noise level measurements were taken during a nighttime concrete pour at a construction site. Urban Crossroads, Inc. collected short-term nighttime concrete pour reference noise level measurements during the noise - sensitive nighttime hours between 1:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. at 27334 San Bernardino Avenue in the City of Redlands. The reference noise levels describe the expected concrete pour noise sources that may include concrete mixer truck movements and pouring activities, concrete paving equipment, rear mounted concrete mixer truck backup alarms, engine idling, air brakes, generators, and workers communicating/whistling.
To describe the nighttime concrete pour noise levels associated with the construction of the Beaumont Pointe, this analysis relies on reference sound pressure level of 67.7 dBA Leq at 50 feet representing a sound power level of 100.3 dBA L. While the Project noise levels will depend on the actual duration of activities and specific equipment fleet in use at the time of construction, the reference sound power level of 100.3 dBA LW is used to describe the expected Project nighttime concrete pour noise activities.
C. Stationary Noise Analysis
For the operational stationary noise analysis, the noise impact analysis relies on reference noise level measurements collected from similar types of activities to represent the noise levels expected with the development of the Project. Consistent with similar warehouse uses, the Project business operations would primarily be conducted within the enclosed buildings, except for traffic movements, parking lot activities, as well as loading and unloading of trucks and vans at designated loading bays. The on -site Project -related noise sources are expected to include loading dock activity, delivery van activity, truck movements, roof -top air conditioning units, parking lot vehicle movements, drive -through speakerphone activity, and trash enclosure activity. To estimate the Project operational noise impacts, reference noise level measurements for these anticipated uses were collected by Urban Crossroads, Inc. from similar types of activities to represent the noise levels expected with the development of the proposed Project. The projected noise levels assume the worst -case noise environment with the loading dock activity, delivery van activity, truck movements, roof -top air conditioning units, parking lot vehicle movements, drive -through speakerphone activity, and trash enclosure activity all operating continuously, 24 hours per day, seven days per week. These sources of noise activity will likely vary throughout the day.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Table 4.13-3, Operational Reference Noise Levels, provides a summary of the reference noise level measurements for the types of equipment and site operations that are expected on the Project site. All operational noise level measurements presented in Table 4.13-3 were normalized to describe a common reference distance of 50 feet.
Table 4.13-3 Operational Reference Noise Levels
Noise Source'
Noise
Source
Height
(Feet)
Min./Hour2
Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq) @
50 Feet
Sound Power
Level (dBA)3
Day
Night
Loading Dock Activity
8'
60 60
65.7 111.5
Truck Movements
8'
60 60
59.8 93.2
Roof -Top Air Conditioning Units
5'
39 28
57.2 88.9
Parking Lot Vehicle Movements
5'
60 60
56.1 87.8
Drive -Through Speakerphone Activity
3'
60 60
50.0 84.0
Trash Enclosure Activity
5'
10 10
57.3 89.0
As measured by Urban Crossroads, Inc.
2Anticipated duration (minutes within the hour) of noise activity during typical hourly conditions expected at the Project site. "Day" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Night" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. 3Sound power level represents the total amount of acoustical energy (noise level) produced by a sound source independent of distance or surroundings. Sound power levels calculated using the CadnaA noise model at the reference distance to the noise source.
Numbers may vary due to size differences between point and area noise sources. 4Truck Movements are calculate based on the number of events by time of day.
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e, Table 9-1)
The stationary noise analysis evaluates Project -related noise levels at the nearby receiver locations in the Project study area. The receiver locations used in the stationary noise analysis are the same that are used in the construction analysis (refer to Figure 4.13-2, Noise Receiver Locations). As discussed earlier in this section, it is not necessary to study every single receiver location surrounding Project site because receivers located at similar distances from the Project site with similar ground elevations, orientation, and intervening physical conditions (e.g., walls, landscaping) as the modeled receptor locations would experience noise levels the same or very similar to those disclosed herein.
D. Transportation -Related Noise Analysis
The expected roadway noise level increases from vehicular traffic were calculated by Urban Crossroads, Inc. using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model FHWA-RD-77-108 (the "FHWA Model"). This methodology is commonly used to describe the off -site traffic noise levels throughout southern California and is consistent with the County of Riverside Office of Industrial Hygiene Requirements for Determining and Mitigating Traffic Noise Impacts to Residential Structures, which specifically requires the FHWA RD -77-108 model to be used in analysis within the County's jurisdiction. The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL). In California, the national REMELs are substituted with the California Vehicle Noise (Calveno) Emission Levels. Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site conditions ("hard" or "soft" relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24 -hour period.
Research conducted by Caltrans has shown that the use of soft site conditions is appropriate for the application of the FHWA traffic noise prediction model used in this analysis.
Table 4.13-4, Roadway Parameters, presents the FHWA Model roadway parameters used for each of the six roadway segments in the Project's study area. The roadway segments were selected based on Urban Crossroads, Inc. review of the Project study area evaluated in the Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix KI) and the off -site truck trip distributions. To quantify transportation -related noise levels, the vehicular trips associated with the Project were assigned to the six roadway segments in the Project's study area, using the trip distribution and vehicle mix information contained in the Project's traffic impact analysis prepared by Urban Crossroads (refer to Technical Appendix K1 of this EIR).
Table 4.13-4 Roadway Parameters
ID
Roadway
Segment
Classifications
Distance from
Centerline to
Receiving Land
Use (Feet)2
Vehicle
Speed
(mph)3
1 Potrero Bl.
s/o Oak Valley Pkway.
Urban Arterial
67 40
2 California Av.
n/o 6th St.
Collector
33'
40 3
Oak Valley Pkway.
e/o Potrero Bl.
Urban Arterial Frontage
Road
60'
40 4
4th St.
e/o Potrero Bl.
Major
59'
40 5
4th St.
e/o Veile Av.
Secondary
44'
40 6
4th St.
w/o Potrero Bl.
Secondary
33'
40 'County of Riverside General Plan Circulation Element. 2Distance to receiving land use is based upon the right-of-way distances. 3Beaumont Pointe Traffic Analysis, Urban Crossroads, Inc.
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e, Table 6-1)
E. Vibration
Vibration levels were predicted using reference vibration levels and logarithmic equations contained in the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) 2018 publication: "Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment." The vibration source levels for Project construction equipment are summarized in Table
4.13-5, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Table 4.13-5 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment
Vibration Decibels (VdB) at 25 feet
Small bulldozer
58 Jackhammer
79 Loaded Trucks
86 Large bulldozer
87 Hoe Ram (Breaker)
87 Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e, Table 10-5)
F. Blasting
The blasting contractor is required to obtain blasting permit(s) from the State, and to notify Riverside County Sheriff's Department within 24 hours of planned blasting events. Air overpressure regulations are identified by the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the ISEE's Blasters' Handbook. To analyze blasting impacts originating from the construction of the Project, vibration -generating rock blasting activities are appropriately evaluated against standards established under a City's Municipal Code, if such standards exist. However, the City of Beaumont does not identify specific blasting noise or vibration level limits. Therefore, this analysis relies on the following criteria to assess potential temporary construction -related impacts at adjacent receiver locations.
Based on findings in the geotechnical report (Technical Appendix F1 of this EIR), blasting at the site is unlikely. However, if blasting is needed it is expected to be limited to the east ridgeline cut area as shown in Figure 4.13-3, Blasting Noise Source Locations. Recognizing that it is infeasible to foresee all the variables that may be encountered on various project sites, a site -specific blasting plan shall be developed for the Project. Blasting shall only be conducted by a licensed blaster. Further, the licensed blaster is required to design all blasts such that they remain below the significance thresholds identified by the USBM in addition to the permitting requirements of the State of California and Riverside County Sheriff's Department.
❑ Blasting Noise Limits
Based on Table 26.17 Typical Air Overpressure Damage Criteria of the Blasters' Handbook, an air overpressure of 133 dB is identified as a perception -based criteria level for blasting. The blasting airblast impacts described below represent the worst -case (closest) blast locations describing the potential impacts when measured from the edge of the nearest blast area to the nearest receiver location.
When measured at greater distances, the blasts will result in lower airblast noise levels.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
• Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Source(s): Urban Crossroads (10-05-2022)
Figure 4.13-3
Source: Esri, Maxus; Geofye, Earthstar
Geogrophics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS,
AeroGR)D, IGN, and the GIS User Community
LEGEND:
11 Site Boundary a) Receiver Locations
Blasting Activity —0 Distance from receiver to blasting activity (in feet) Blasting Noise Source Locations
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont
SCH No. 2020099007
N M
■ ❑
Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
❑ Blasting Vibration Limits
The Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Table 19, vibration criteria are used in this noise study to assess potential temporary construction -related impacts at adjacent receiver locations. The blasting vibration impacts represent the worst -case (closest) blast locations describing the potential impacts when measured from the edge of the nearest blast area to the nearest receiver location. When measured at greater distances, the blasts will result in lower vibration levels.
4.13.6 BASIS FOR DETERMINING SIGNIFICANCE
The City has not established local CEQA significance thresholds as described in Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Therefore, significance determinations utilized in this section are from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Section XII of Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines addresses typical adverse effects related to noise, and includes the following threshold questions to evaluate the Project's impacts on noise:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
b. Generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels; c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Off -site traffic noise level increases resulting from the Project are evaluated based on the Appendix G CEQA Guidelines described above at the closest sensitive receiver locations. Under CEQA, consideration must be given to the magnitude of the increase, the existing ambient noise levels, and the location of noise -sensitive receivers to determine if a noise increase represents a significant adverse environmental impact. This approach recognizes that there is no single noise increase that renders the noise impact significant. Table 5.12-G of in the City of Beaumont General Plan Noise Element EIR outlines the allowable operational roadway noise exposure increases that are derived from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. Operational stationary and construction noise is derived from Section 9.02.050 and 9.02.110 (F) of the City of Beaumont Municipal code, respectively. To describe the amount to which a given noise level increase is considered acceptable, the FTA criteria is used to evaluate the incremental noise level increase and establishes a method for comparing future project noise with existing ambient conditions. In effect, the amount to which a given noise level increase is considered acceptable is reduced based on existing ambient noise conditions.
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
ME Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
MOEnvironmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
A. Summary of Significance Criteria
Noise impacts will be considered significant if any of the following occur as a result of the Project.
Table 4.13-6, Summary of Noise Significance Criteria, provides a summary of the allowable criteria used to identify potentially significant incremental noise level increases.
1. Off -Site Traffic Noise
• When the existing ambient noise levels:
o are less than 50 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a 7 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or
o range from 50 to 55 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a 5 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or
o range from 55 to 60 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a 3 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or
o range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a 2 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or
o range from 65 to 75 dBA CNEL and the Project creates a 1 dBA CNEL or greater Project -related noise level increase; or
o exceed 75 dBA CNEL, and the Project creates a community noise level increase of greater than 0 dBA CNEL.
2. Operational Noise
Project operational activities would result in a significant impact if operational noise exceeds the levels allowed by the BMC Section 9.02.050 as follows:
• If Project -related operational (stationary -source) noise levels exceed an exterior noise level of 55 dBA Leq, during the daytime hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., and 45 dBA Leq during the nighttime hour of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Consistent with the City of Beaumont Municipal Code, Section 9.02.110[G], the stationary operational Project noise source activities shall not create any noise which would cause the noise level at the property line to exceed the base ambient noise level by 5 dBA.
3. Construction Noise
Project construction activities would result in a significant impact if construction noise conflicts with the BMC Section 9.02.110 (F) as follows:
• If Project -related construction activities take place outside the permitted hours of: 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (June through September) and 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (October through May).
Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report
4.13 Noise
Acceptable exterior construction noise level threshold is based on the City of Beaumont 55 dBA Leq interior noise level limit and the 20 dBA reduction in noise associated with typical sensitive receptor building construction.
• If Project -related construction activities create noise levels which exceed the 75 dBA Leq acceptable noise level threshold.
Table 4.13-6 Summary of Noise Significance Criteria
Analysis
Condition(s)
Significance Criteria
Daytime
Nighttime
Off -Site Traffic'
If ambient is 7 dBA CNEL Project increase
If ambient is 50 - 55 dBA CNEL
> 5 dBA CNEL Project increase
If ambient is 55 - 60 dBA CNEL
> 3 dBA CNEL Project increase
If ambient is 60 - 65 dBA CNEL
> 2 dBA CNEL Project increase
If ambient is 65 - 75 dBA CNEL
> 1 dBA CNEL Project increase
If ambient is > 75 dBA CNEL
0 dBA CNEL Project increase
Operational
Exterior Noise Level Standards2
55 dBA Leq
45 dBA Leq
Base Ambient Noise Level'
> 5 dBA Leq Project increase
Construction
Permitted between 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.3
Noise Level Threshold'
75 dBA Leq
n/a
Vibration Level Thresholds
78 VdB
n/a
Blasting
Airblast Threshold'
133 dBA Leq
n/a
Vibration Level Threshold'
0.5 PPV (in/sec)
n/a
1 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, consistent with the City of Beaumont General Plan EIR Update.
2BMC, Section 9.02.050
'City of Beaumont Municipal Code, Section 9.02.110(G)
'City of Beaumont Municipal Code, Section 9.02.110(F)
'Acceptable exterior construction noise level threshold based on the City of Beaumont 55 dBA Leq interior noise level limit and the 20 dBA noise reduction associated with typical building construction. 'Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. "Daytime" = 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; "Nighttime" = 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
7SEE's Blasters' Handbook, Table 26.17 Typical Air Overpressure Damage Criteria, and U.S. Bureau of Mines standards.
8Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Manual, April 2020 Table 19.
Source: (Urban Crossroads, 2022e, Table 4-1)
4. Vibration
To analyze vibration impacts originating from the construction of the Project, vibration -generating activities are appropriately evaluated against standards established under a City's Municipal Code, if such standards exist. However, the City of Beaumont does not identify specific vibration level limits and instead relies on the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) methodology. The FTA Transit Noise Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007
■ ■ Beaumont Pointe Specific Plan
■ D Environmental Impact Report 4.13 Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment methodology provides guidelines for the maximum -acceptable vibration criteria for different types of land uses. These guidelines, which are also the thresholds of significance outlined in the City of Beaumont General Plan EIR, allow 90 VdB for industrial (workshop) use, 84 VdB for office use and 78 VdB for daytime residential uses and 72 VdB for nighttime uses in buildings where people normally sleep.
5. Blasting
To analyze blasting impacts originating from the construction of the Project, vibration -generating rock blasting activities are appropriately evaluated against standards established under a city's Municipal Code, if such standards exist. However, the City does not identify specific blasting noise or vibration level limits. Therefore, this analysis relies on the following criteria to assess potential temporary construction -related impacts at adjacent receiver locations.
Based on Table 26.17, Typical Air Overpressure Damage Criteria of the Blasters' Handbook, an air overpressure of 133 dB is identified as a perception -based criteria level for blasting. As such, the Project blasting -related vibration and airblast levels are based on the 133 dB criteria for airblasts identified by the ISEE and U.S. Bureau of Mines.
The Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, Table 19, vibration criteria are used in this noise study to assess potential temporary construction -related impacts at adjacent receiver locations. Since most of the buildings near the Project site can be described as older residential buildings, Caltrans guidance identifies a maximum acceptable transient peak - particle -velocity (PPV) vibration threshold of 0.5 inches per second (in/sec). Therefore, the 0.5 PPV (in/sec) vibration threshold is used to evaluate the potential blasting -related vibration levels experienced at the nearby residential homes.
4.13.7 IMPACT ANALYSIS
Threshold a: Would the Project generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The analysis presented on the following pages summarizes the Project's potential construction noise levels and operational noise levels, including operational noise that would be generated on site as well as off -site noise that would be generated by Project -related traffic. The detailed noise calculations for the analysis presented here are provided in Appendices 7.1, 9.1, 10.1, and 10.2 of Technical Appendix J of this EIR.
A. Construction Noise Impact Analysis
Construction activities on the Project site would proceed in four stages: 1) grading; 2) building construction; 3) paving; and 4) architectural coating. These activities would create temporary periods of noise when heavy construction equipment (i.e., tractors, trucks, excavators, generators, pavers) is in Lead Agency: City of Beaumont SCH No. 2020099007