Chambers Group, Inc. 7
21492
Mitigation Measure Implementation Phase Monitoring
Phase
Enforcement
Agency
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Verification of Compliance
Initial Date Remarks
by the Qualified Archaeologist in consultation with the Tribe[s] and the Tribal Monitor[s] and be submitted to the Lead Agency for review and approval. Below are the possible treatments and dispositions of significant cultural resources in order of CEQA preference:
A. Full avoidance.
B. If avoidance is not feasible, Preservation in place.
C. If Preservation in place is not feasible, all items shall be reburied in an area away from any future impacts and reside in a permanent conservation easement or Deed Restriction.
D. If all other options are proven to be infeasible, data recovery through excavation and then curation in a Curation Facility that meets the Federal Curation Standards (CFR 79.1)
TCR-7: The following specific conditions to be imposed in order to protect Native American human remains and/or cremations. No photographs are to be taken except by the coroner, with written approval by the consulting Tribe.
A. Should human remains and/or cremations be encountered on the surface or during any and all ground-disturbing activities (i.e., clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post placement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all water supply, electrical, and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind), work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall immediately stop within a 100-foot perimeter of the discovery.
The area shall be protected; project personnel/observers will be restricted. The County Coroner is to be contacted within 24 hours of discovery. The County Coroner has 48 hours to make his/her determination pursuant to State and Safety Code §7050.5. and Public Resources Code (PRC) § 5097.98.
B. In the event that the human remains and/or cremations are identified as Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of determination pursuant to subdivision (c) of HSC §7050.5.
C. The Native American Heritage Commission shall immediately notify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD has 48 hours, upon being granted access to the Project site, to inspect the site of discovery and make his/her recommendation for final treatment and disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the remains and all associated grave goods pursuant to PRC §5097.98
D. If the Morongo Band of Mission Indians has been named the MLD, the Tribe may wish to rebury the human remains and/or cremation and sacred items in their place of discovery with no further disturbance where they will reside in perpetuity. The place(s) of reburial will not be disclosed by any party and is exempt from the California Public Records Act Construction Construction City of Beaumont LTS
Chambers Group, Inc. 8
21492
Mitigation Measure Implementation Phase Monitoring
Phase
Enforcement
Agency
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Verification of Compliance
Initial Date Remarks
(California Government Code § 6254[r]). Reburial location of human remains and/or cremations will be determined by the Tribe’s MLD, the landowner, and the City Planning Department.
were not]
was not]
2. _______________________________________
_________________________________________
_______________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________ Print Form
Notice of Determination Appendix D
To: From:
Office of Planning and Research Public Agency: ___________________________ Address: ________________________________U.S. Mail:
P.O. Box 3044
Sacramento, CA 95812-3044
Street Address:
1400 Tenth St., Rm 113
Sacramento, CA 95814
_______________________________________
Contact: _________________________________
Phone: __________________________________
County Clerk
Lead Agency (if different from above): County of: _________________________________ Address: __________________________________
Address: ________________________________
Contact: _________________________________
Phone: __________________________________
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code.
State Clearinghouse Number (if submitted to State Clearinghouse):______________________________ Project Title: _________________________________________________________________________ Project Applicant: _____________________________________________________________________ Project Location (include county):_________________________________________________________ Project Description:
This is to advise that the ____________________________________________ has approved the above ( Lead Agency or Responsible Agency)
described project on _______________ and has made the following determinations regarding the above (date)
described project.
1. The project [ will will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures [ were made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan [ was was not] adopted for this project.
5. A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was adopted for this project.
6. Findings [ were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval, or the negative Declaration, is available to the General Public at:
Signature (Public Agency): _____________________________ Title: ____________________________ Date: _______________________________ Date Received for filing at OPR: ____________________ Authority cited: Sections 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference Section 21000-21174, Public Resources Code. Revised 2011 n
n
4080 Lemon Street, Floor 1
Riverside, CA 92501
The Proposed Project would develop a City Yard utilized by multiple departments including Transit, Fleet Maintenance, Community Services, Public Works, and Wastewater. The approximately 6.15-acre parcel development would include the construction of an Administration Building, Fleet Garage, Welding Bay Canopy, Wash Bay Canopy, Warehouse, Hydrogen Fueling Station, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Station, Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure, and designated parking with both uncovered and solar-covered areas for up to 200 spaces. The Project site would accommodate up to 100 employees and will be operating Monday through Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM and Friday 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM.
8/14/2026
n
City of Beaumont
550 East Sixth Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Vincent Lopez
(951) 769-8520
Riverside
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
4th Street & Veile Avenue, Beaumont, CA (Riverside County) City of Beaumont
City of Beaumont
550 East Sixth Street, Beaumont, CA 92223
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
(Draft)
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
CITY OF BEAUMONT
Public Works Department
550 East Sixth Street
Beaumont, CA 92223
Prepared by:
CHAMBERS GROUP, INC.
3151 Airway Avenue Suite F208
Costa Mesa, California 92626
(949) 261-5414
June 2026
BEAUMONT
-C A L I F O R N I A -
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. ii
21500
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION 1.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................ 1
1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................ 1
1.2.1 Project Location, Setting, and Surrounding Uses ............................................................. 1
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................................. 1
1.4 CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION ................................................................................................ 2
1.4.1 Staging Areas .................................................................................................................... 2
1.4.2 Best Management Practices (BMPs) ................................................................................ 2
1.5 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS.......................................................................................... 3
1.5.1 Responsible Agencies ....................................................................................................... 3
1.5.2 Reviewing Agencies .......................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION .............................................................................. 8
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: ................................................................ 8
2.2 DETERMINATION .......................................................................................................................... 8 SECTION 3.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................ 8 SECTION 4.0 – CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ........................................................................ 9
4.1 AESTHETICS ................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 Environmental Setting ..................................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................ 9
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................................................................... 11
4.2.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 11
4.2.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 12
4.3 AIR QUALITY ................................................................................................................................ 13
4.3.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 13
4.3.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 14
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................ 17
4.4.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 17
4.4.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 17
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 19
4.5.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 20
4.5.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 20
4.6 ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 22
4.6.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 22 Construction Energy ................................................................................................................... 23
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 26
4.7.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 26
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. iii
21500
4.7.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 27
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 29
4.8.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 29
4.8.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 29
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ................................................................................... 30
4.9.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 31
4.9.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 31
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................ 33
4.10.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 33
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING ......................................................................................................... 37
4.11.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 37
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................................. 37
4.12.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 37
4.12.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 38
4.13 NOISE .......................................................................................................................................... 38
4.13.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 38
4.13.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 39
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ...................................................................................................... 41
4.14.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 41 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 41
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ......................................................................................................................... 42
4.15.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 42
4.15.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 42
4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................... 44
4.16.1 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................... 44
4.16.2 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 44
4.17 TRANSPORTATION ...................................................................................................................... 45
4.17.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 45
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................... 47
4.18.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 48
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................... 51
4.19.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 51
4.20 WILDFIRE .................................................................................................................................... 53
4.20.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 53
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................................. 54
4.21.1 Impact Analysis .............................................................................................................. 55 SECTION 5.0 – FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS EVALUATION ............................................. 58 SECTION 6.0 – ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED ......................................................................................... 62
6.1.1 Proposed Project ............................................................................................................ 62
6.1.2 No Project Alternative .................................................................................................... 62
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. iv
21500
6.1.3 Alternative 1: Off-Site / Third-Party Fueling .................................................................. 62 SECTION 7.0 – REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 63
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Screening Threshold for Criteria Pollutant .................................................................................... 14 Table 2: Expected Construction Emissions Summary (lb/day) ................................................................... 14 Table 3: Operational Unmitigated – Summer Daily Pollutant Generation ................................................. 15 Table 4: Operational Unmitigated – Winter Daily Pollutant Generation.................................................... 15
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1 – Project Location and Vicinity Map .............................................................................................. 5 Figure 2 – Site Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Figure 3 – General Plan Land Use and Zoning .............................................................................................. 6 Figure 4 – CNDDB Occurrences ..................................................................................................................... 7
Appendix A – Air Quality Assessment
Appendix B – Cultural Resources Study
Appendix C—Global Climate Change
Appendix D – Noise Assessment
Appendix E – Trip Generation
Appendix F – VMT Analysis
Appendix G – Sight Distance and Swept Path Analysis
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 1
21500
SECTION 1.0 – PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1.1 PROJECT PURPOSE
This Initial Study (IS) analyzes the proposed development of a city yard that would be utilized by the City of Beaumont (City) to manage various City services, including transit, vehicle maintenance, facilities, parks and recreation, engineering, street maintenance, and wastewater administration. The proposed city yard will also accommodate future staffing levels (Proposed Project). The IS has been prepared in a ccordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code [PRC] §21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR], §15000 et seq.) and has determined that preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration would be appropriate under CEQA.
1.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
1.2.1 Project Location, Setting, and Surrounding Uses
The City is located within the western area of Riverside County, bounded by Calimesa to the north/northwest, Banning to the east, and the San Jacinto wilderness to the south. The Project site is located at the southwest intersection of 4th Street and Veile Avenue within the City of Beaumont, California. It is surrounded by existing developments such as the City’s wastewater treatment plant to the west, an auto dismantling facility to the south, a distribution center to the north, and an electrical substation to the east. The Project site is zoned as Manufacturing, and its land use designation is Industrial.
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Proposed Project would develop a City Yard utilized by multiple departments, including Transit, Fleet Maintenance, Community Services, Public Works, and Wastewater. The approximately 6.15-acre parcel development would include the construction of the following facilities:
▪ Administration Building (9,982 square feet [sq. ft.]) ▪ Fleet Garage/Storage Building with Welding and Wash Bays (11,250 sq. ft.) ▪ Solar canopies (10,600 sq. ft.)
▪ 8 Hydrogen Fueling Stations
▪ 15 Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Stations, and Accessory Structures ▪ Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure
▪ Designated parking (uncovered and solar-covered) with up to 200 spaces.
The Project site would accommodate approximately 100 occupants under the current project design, although occupancy levels could vary in the future depending on operational needs and building use. The Project site would operate Monday through Thursday, 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM, and Friday, 8:00 AM to 12:00 PM.
The Administration Building and a 2,980 sq. ft. solar canopy would be developed on the northeastern corner of the Project site. The eastern side of the Project site would consist of 55 parking stalls designated for administration staff, bus drivers, future staff, and fleet garage personnel. This area would incorporate six EV charging stalls and three accessible stalls.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 2
21500
The northwest portion of the Project site would include public and fleet-serving infrastructure, including 15 CNG fueling stations, along with electric, and hydrogen fueling stations and equipment, and a driveway outlet. The fueling area would include both fast-fill and slow-fill fueling capabilities. Fast-fill CNG and hydrogen stations would primarily serve operational and convenience fueling needs during regular business hours, while slow-fill stations located within the fleet vehicle service area south of the public fueling area would primarily be utilized for overnight bus fueling after business hours. The southwest portion of the Project site would contain the 11,250 square -foot Fleet Garage with attached Welding Bay and Wash Bay canopies.
1.4 CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
The Proposed Project construction is expected to begin in early 2027 with a duration of approximately 18 months. Equipment to be used during construction may include the following items:
▪ Excavators
▪ Dump Trucks
▪ Backhoe(s)
▪ Cement Trucks
▪ Utility Pick-Up Trucks
▪ Concrete Finishing Equipment and Tools
▪ Graders and rollers
▪ Cranes
▪ Forklifts
1.4.1 Staging Areas
Construction trailers and staging areas will remain on-site during construction. The entire site would be fenced during this time.
1.4.2 Best Management Practices (BMPs)
The Proposed Project would implement several BMPs to comply with local, state, and federal regulations.
Construction BMPs would be implemented to reduce impacts to air, soil, and water quality. Such BMPs may include water or soil stabilizers, regular maintenance, equipment idling limits, temporary barriers, silt fencing, covering of stockpiles, etc. The Proposed Project would implement a Hydro Plan and Landscaping Plan, which outline design features that would reduce topsoil erosion, stormwater runoff, and water pollution.
For consistency with the MSHCP, the following shall be implemented for the Proposed Project.
1. If nesting season cannot be avoided, standard BMP for nesting season would be implemented, including a preconstruction nesting bird survey to be conducted within the Project area and the selected staging area(s) including a 500-foot buffer, within 7 days prior to the start of construction or staging (including any clearing, grubbing, tree removal, or grading) or according to the survey timing in Project permits. If an active nest is identified, a minimum avoidance buffer around the active nest would be determined and implemented by a qualified biologist to avoid impacts to the active nest. The buffer should be maintained during physical ground-disturbing activities. Once the qualified biologist has determined that nesting has ceased, and the nestlings have fledged and are no longer using the nest, the buffer may be removed.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 3
21500
2. A focused 30-day burrowing owl preconstruction survey would be conducted to ensure protection for this species and compliance with the conservation goals as outlined in the MSHCP and by the Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA). The surveys will be conducted in compliance with both MSHCP and CDFW guidelines. A report of the findings prepared by a qualified biologist will be submitted to the City of Beaumont for review and approval prior to any permit or ground disturbing activities.
3. Water pollution and erosion control plans shall be developed and implemented in accordance with RWQCB requirements.
4. The footprint of disturbance shall be minimized to the maximum extent feasible. Access to sites shall be via pre-existing access routes to the greatest extent possible.
5. Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located on upland sites with minimal risks of direct drainage into riparian areas or other sensitive habitats. These designated areas shall be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering sensitive habitat. Necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent the release of cement or other toxic substances into surface waters. Project related spills of hazardous materials shall be reported to appropriate entities including but not limited to applicable jurisdictional city, FWS, and CDFG, RWQCB and shall be cleaned up immediately and contaminated soils removed to approved disposal areas.
6. Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on its banks.
7. To avoid attracting predators of the species of concern, the project site shall be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site(s).
8. Construction employees shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the proposed project footprint and designated staging areas and routes of travel. The construction area(s) shall be the minimal area necessary to complete the project and shall be specified in the construction plans. Construction limits will be fenced with orange snow screen.
Exclusion fencing should be maintained until the completion of all construction activities.
Employees shall be instructed that their activities are restricted to the construction areas.
1.5 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS
Reviewing Agencies include those agencies that do not have discretionary powers but may review the MND for adequacy and accuracy. Responsible Agencies have discretionary approval authority for a project. Potential Reviewing Agencies and Responsible Agencies include the following:
1.5.1 Responsible Agencies
State of California Agencies
▪ Southern California Edison (SCE)
▪ State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
▪ California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
Regional Agencies
▪ South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
1.5.2 Reviewing Agencies
▪ Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and tribes requesting consultation
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 4
21500
1.5.3 Permits and Approvals
The following permits may be required prior to construction of the Project. ▪ SCAQMD - Rule 403 dust control
▪ Building Permit
▪ Encroachment Permit
▪ Grading Permit
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 5
21500
Figure 1 – Project Location and Vicinity Map
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 5
21500
Figure 2 – Site Plan
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 6
21500
Figure 3 – General Plan Land Use and Zoning
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 7
21500
Figure 4 – CNDDB Occurrences
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 8
21500
SECTION 2.0 – ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklists on the following pages.
For each of the potentially affected factors, mitigation measures are recommended that would reduce the impacts to less than significant levels.
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology /Water Quality Land Use / Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population / Housing Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities /Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
2.2 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
1. I find that the project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND) will be prepared.
2. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
3. I find the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
4. I find that the proposed project may have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated impact” on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
5. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Name Title
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 8
21500
SECTION 3.0 – EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A “No Impact” answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if substantial evidence exists that an effect may be significant. If one or more “Potentially Significant Impact” entries are marked when the determination is made, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required.
4. “Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a “Less Than Significant Impact.” The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier analyses may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated,” describe the mitigation measures that were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
*Note: Instructions may be omitted from final document.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 9
21500
SECTION 4.0 – CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
4.1 AESTHETICS
1. AESTHETICS.
Except as provided in Public Resources Code
Section 21099, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
(c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage point).
If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The aesthetic value of an area is a measure of its visual character and quality, combined with the viewer response to the area. Scenic quality can best be described as the overall impression that an individual viewer retains after driving through, walking through, or flying over an area. Aesthetic resources include scenic resources, which include water forms, trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings, and scenic highways. Impacts to aesthetic resources include obstruction and destruction of views to or f rom scenic resources, and/or the degradation of the visual character of the area.
The City is located in the western portion of Riverside County, California , and is bounded on the west by Calimesa and unincorporated areas, on the north by the unincorporated County areas (Cherry Valley), on the south by unincorporated County areas and the City of San Jacinto, and on the east by the City of Banning.
4.1.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is relatively flat and is within an area containing primarily industrial uses. The Proposed Project includes the construction of City facilities and fueling stations. The Proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or substantially damage scenic resources. Views from the Project site and the surrounding area do not include any potential scenic vistas. Although the Proposed Project would change the look of the existing site, no impact would occur to any designated scenic vistas. The Project would also implement a Landscaping Plan that includes planting vegetation along the northern, western, and eastern perimeter to enhance the visual character of the site and soften the appearance of paved industrial areas. The implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 10
21500
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The Proposed Project is not within or adjacent to a designated state scenic highway (Caltrans 2026). Therefore, no impact to scenic resources, including trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway would occur. c) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project site is surrounded by industrial uses. The Proposed Project is zoned as Manufacturing and is surrounded by areas zoned for Manufacturing (City 2020). The Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable land use. Although existing views of the Project site would change, the Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings. The Project would also implement a Landscaping Plan that includes planting vegetation along the northern, western, and eastern perimeter to enhance the visual character of the site and soften the appearance of paved industrial areas. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with applicable zoning, and impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site currently contains lighting sources from existing buildings nearby and from vehicles from commuters along the roadways. The Proposed Project would create new lighting sources from the office buildings, vehicles, and the fueling stations. However, lighting included in the Proposed Project would comply with the City’s Municipal Code under section
8.50.070 and would not adversely affect day or nighttime views. In addition, the Project area does not contain scenic resources that would be affected by the Proposed Project. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 11
21500
4.2 AGRICULTURE & FORESTRY RESOURCES
2. AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES.
(In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
farmland. In determining whether impacts to
forest resources, including timberland, are
significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest
land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project;
and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the
California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
(b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
(c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(g))?
(d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
(e) Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
4.2.1 Environmental Setting
Agricultural resources include prime farmland, farmland of statewide importance, unique farmland, farmland of local importance, and commercial grazing land as defined in the Guidelines for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, pursuant to Section 65570 of the Government Code, as well as land in a Williamson Act contract.
Prime farmland is land that has the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, fiber, forage, oilseed, and other agricultural crops with minimum inputs of fuel, fertilizer, pesticides, and labor and without intolerable soil erosion (7 U.S.C. 4201(c)(1)(A)).
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 12
21500
Unique farmland is land other than prime farmland that is used for the production of specific high-value food and fiber crops such as citrus, tree nuts, olives, cranberries, fruits, and vegetables (7 U.S.C. 4201(c)(1)(B)).
Additional farmland of statewide or local importance is land identified by state or local agencies for agricultural use but not of national significance (7 U.S.C. 4201(c)(1)(C)).
The California Legislature passed the Williamson Act in 1965 to preserve agricultural and open-space lands by discouraging premature and unnecessary conversion to urban uses. The Williamson Act creates an arrangement whereby private landowners’ contract with counties and cities to voluntarily restrict their land to agricultural and compatible open space uses.
The Williamson Act is a means to restrict the use of agricultural and open-space lands to farming and ranching uses during the length of the contract period. The Williamson Act Program was also envisioned as a way for local governments to integrate the protection of open space and agricultural resources into their overall strategies for planning urban growth patterns.
4.2.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? No Impact. The Project site is zoned Manufacturing and is surrounded by industrial/manufacturing uses. The Project site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (DOC 2026a). There are no existing agricultural operations occurring on-site, and none are proposed under the Project. The Proposed Project would not convert local farmland into nonagricultural use, and therefore, no impact would occur. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site is surrounded by areas zoned for institutional uses (City 2020). There are no areas adjacent to the Proposed Project site that are zoned for agricultural use, and it is not located on land under a Williamson Act contract (DOC 2025). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur.
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
No Impact. As mentioned above in Section 4.2.2 a, the Project site is zoned Manufacturing and is surrounded by industrial/manufacturing uses. The City does not have any designated forest lands or timberland. Although open space is present throughout the City, these portions of the City would not be significantly impacted by the Proposed Project. The Proposed Project would not take place within the forest lands. The Proposed Project would be compatible with the existing uses in the surrounding area. Therefore, the Project would not result in an impact associated with forest land or timberland.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 13
21500
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in any change to land use on the Project site. The Proposed Project does not contain forest lands or lands for forest uses. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in an impact associated with forest land or the conversion of forest land into non-forest use. Therefore, there would not be a loss of forest land or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use, and no impact would occur. e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or the conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No Impact. The Proposed Project is zoned for Manufacturing and there are no agricultural uses surrounding the site. The Project site is not within an area identified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (DOC 2026a). The Proposed Project involves the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. Therefore, the Proposed Project does not include activities involving conversion of agricultural or forest lands; no impact would occur.
4.3 AIR QUALITY
3. AIR QUALITY.
Where available, the significance criteria
established by the applicable air quality
management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
(b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(d) Result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
4.3.1 Environmental Setting
An Air Quality Assessment was prepared for the Proposed Project by Ldn Consulting in February 2025 (Appendix A).
The Project site is located in the City in the western portion of Riverside County, which is part of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) that includes all of Orange County as well as the non-desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The SCAB is located on a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills to the east. Regionally, the SCAB is bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the southwest and high mountains to the east forming the inland perimeter. The Project site is located toward the northeast portion of the SCAB near the foot of the San Bernardino Mountains, which define the eastern boundary of the SCAB.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 14
21500
4.3.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project has been developed to comply with the City’s General Plan guidelines. Since the Proposed Project is compatible with the General Plan, and emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, the Proposed Project would not conflict with any of the City’s applicable plans.
The City uses SCAQMD Air Quality Thresholds to determine whether a project would create potential air quality impacts, which are provided in Table 1 below. The thresholds were developed to align with attainment from both state and federal standards.
Table 1: Screening Threshold for Criteria Pollutant
Pollutant Total Emissions – Pounds per Day (lb/day)
Construction Emissions
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) 150 and 55 Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 100
Sulfur Oxide (SOx) 150
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) - Construction 75
Operational Emissions
Respirable Particulate Matter (PM10 and PM2.5) 150 and 55 Nitrogen Oxide (Nox) 55
Sulfur Oxide (Sox) 150
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550
Lead and Lead Compounds 3.2
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 55
Construction Findings
The emissions from construction activities and equipment are identified below which are presented in pounds per day. Based on the emission numbers, and comparing with the screening threshold, the Proposed Project would not result in a significant impact, as it does not exceed the screening threshold.
Table 2: Expected Construction Emissions Summary (lb/day) Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG
(reactive
organic
gases)
NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily Construction Emissions 12.3 10.5 14.0 0.02 6.89 3.63 City Screening Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Screening Threshold No No No No No No
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 15
21500
Operational Findings
Project buildout is expected in early 2027, with the first full year of operations in 2028. The expected daily pollutant generation is calculated in CalEEMod 2022.1 and shown for summer and winter scenarios below. Based on the results show, the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact during operations.
Table 3: Operational Unmitigated – Summer Daily Pollutant Generation Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG
(reactive
organic
gases)
NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Emission Estimates (Lb/Day) 4.73 5.82 56.6 0.15 14 3.62 Area Source Emission Estimates
(Lb/Day) 0.98 0.01 1.35 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
Energy Source Emission Estimates
(Lb/Day) 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 0.02
Total (Lb/Day) 5.72 6.06 58.1 0.16 14.02 3.64
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant? No No No No No No
Table 4: Operational Unmitigated – Winter Daily Pollutant Generation Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG
(reactive
organic
gases)
NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Source Emission Estimates
(Lb/Day) 4.47 6.25 46.3 0.15 14 3.62
Area Source Emission Estimates
(Lb/Day) 0.76 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
Energy Source Emission Estimates
(Lb/Day) 0.01 0.23 0.19 < 0.005 0.02 0.02
Total (Lb/Day) 5.24 6.48 46.5 0.15 14.02 3.64
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Significant? No No No No No No
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Quality Report found that the expected construction and emissions generated by the Proposed Project would be less than significant when compared to SCAQMD air quality thresholds. The cumulative impacts or impacts which would be additive between
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 16
21500
the Proposed Project and any nearby Project, would not likely increase emissions to a point where SCAQMD thresholds would be exceeded in the general vicinity of the Proposed Project. Since the Proposed Project is compatible with the City’s General Plan in addition to emissions not exceeding air quality thresholds, impacts would be less than significant in this regard. c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the Proposed Project, minimal fugitive dust emissions would be expected during grading, heavy equipment usage, and from construction workers commuting to and from the site. Results of the construction activities would not exceed the thresholds. Furthermore, the Proposed Project emissions were compared to both operational and construction LST, which includes background ambient air quality emissions; this resulted in no impacts expected. Because emissions would not exceed LST thresholds, a less than significant impact would occur at any sensitive receptors surrounding the site.
d) Would the project result in other emissions, such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less Than Significant Impact. Individual responses to odors are highly variable and can result in a variety of effects. Generally, the impact of an odor results from a variety of factors, such as frequency, duration, offensiveness, location, and sensory perception. The frequency is a measure of how often an individual is exposed to an odor in an ambient environment. The intensity refers to an individual’s or group’s perception of the odor strength or concentration. The duration of an odor refers to the elapsed time over which an odor is experienced. The offensiveness of the odor is the subjective rating of the pleasantness or unpleasantness of an odor. The location accounts for the type of area in which a potentially affected person lives, works, or visits; the type of activity in which he or she is engaged; and the sensitivity of the impacted receptor.
The Proposed Project has the potential to generate on-site odors during construction during short term activities. Impacts associated would be short term in nature, therefore, the impacts would be less than significant. The Proposed Project operations would generate odors from maintenance occurring at the site and at the fueling stations. However, these orders would be dispersed as the Project site would be an open area. Additionally, the Proposed Project would comply with AQMD rules to prevent nuisance odors. The Project site is located adjacent to an existing City wastewater treatment plant, which is a known source of intermittent odors. The Proposed Project is limited to an expansion of the existing City maintenance yard and would not introduce new, substanti al odor sources beyond those already present. Typical vehicle yard operations may generate minor odors (e.g. fuel, exhaust), but these are intermittent and would not be cumulatively considerable with intermittent odors from the wastewater treatment plant. Impacts would therefore be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 17
21500
4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
(d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
(e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
(f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
4.4.1 Environmental Setting
Biological resources include habitats and vegetative communities, migratory corridors, plants, wildlife, fisheries, special status species (regulated by a law, regulation, or policy, such as threatened and endangered species), and waters of the United States.
4.4.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species identified as candidate, sensitive or special status species in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project includes the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The Project site has been previously disturbed and graded and is not located as an area identified to contain critical habitat for threatened and endangered species (USFWS 202 6). While
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 18
21500
there may be animal species within a one-mile radius from the Project area (Figure 4), the site itself is disturbed with no suitable habitats. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in no impact in regard to candidate, sensitive, or special status species. b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The Proposed Project includes the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The Project site has been previously disturbed and graded and is not located as an area identified to contain riparian habitat or a wetland (USFWS 2026). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in no impact in regard to riparian habitat. c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact. Refer to section 4.4.2 b). The Proposed Project is not located as an area identified to contain a wetland (USFWS 2026). No impact would occur.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site does not contain native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. The Project site has been previously disturbed and graded, and no trees or vegetation exists at the Project site. The site has been previously and continually disturbed as a staging area and City parking and storage.
The Proposed Project would comply with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), which includes avoiding tree removal during bird nesting season, which is typically from February 1st to August 31st.
If nesting season cannot be avoided, standard BMP for nesting season would be implemented, including a preconstruction nesting bird survey to be conducted within the Project area and the selected staging area(s) including a 500-foot buffer, within 7 days prior to the start of construction or staging (including any clearing, grubbing, tree removal, or grading) or according to the survey timing in Project permits. If an active nest is identified, a minimum avoidance buffer around the active nest would be determined and implemented by a qualified biologist to avoid impacts to the active nest.
The buffer should be maintained during physical ground-disturbing activities. Once the qualified biologist has determined that nesting has ceased, and the nestlings have fledged and are no longer using the nest, the buffer may be removed. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s compliance with the MBTA would ensure a less than significant impact on native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The Project site has been previously disturbed and graded, and no trees are present. The Proposed Project may include ornamental landscaping which would be reviewed and approved by City staff. The selected plant species would be ones that are compatible to the area. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in an impact to trees and not conflict with any existing policy or ordinance related to trees and other vegetation. No impact would occur.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 19
21500
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservancy Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is not within the area of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, MSHCP Criteria Area, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan (WRCRCA 2025). However, Veile Avenue and West 4th Street are identified as secondary covered roads under the MSHCP. Per Section 7.1 Covered Activities of the MSHCP, public and private development that are outside of the criteria area are permitted under the plan subject to consistency with relevant policies.
The Proposed Project consists of development on a previously disturbed parcel with no vegetation or habitats, and the Project does not propose significant roadway alterations. Because the Project would not alter Veile Avenue and 4th Street, and the site conditions are significantly disturbed, the Project impacts within covered road right-of-way are considered consistent with and accounted for under the MSHCP. Additionally, as identified in Section 1.4.2 Best Management Practices, and section d above, Project BMPs will be implemented to ensure any potential impacts would be minimized during construction.
Additionally, the northern half of the Project site is designated within the Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA) Survey Area for two plant species, Marvin’s onion and many-stemmed dudleya, and one wildlife species, the burrowing owl (RCA 2026). Based on the general history of the site, the Project site has been used as a construction yard since 2024, and the soils are thus likely highly compacted and devoid of native topsoil (Google 2026). Additionally, according to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Web Soil Survey, the soils underlying the Project site are primarily sandy loam, devoid of specific habitat requirements and characteristics (e.g., clay soils, rocky outcrops) for both narrow endemic plant species requiring surveys. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the two plant species designated by the RCA would not be found on the Project site, and additional plant surveys are not required.
While the Project site has been heavily disturbed and does not contain any quality habitats for species, to comply with the RCA and MSHCP, a burrowing owl pre-construction survey shall be conducted no earlier than 30 days prior to construction. Additional detail of this survey is outlined as BMP 2 in Section 1.4.2.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would not conflict with any approved plans and a less than significant impact would occur.
4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5?
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 20
21500
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
4.5.1 Environmental Setting
A Cultural Resources Study Results letter report was prepared for the Proposed Project by Chambers Group in October 2024 and is located in Appendix B. The report includes a review of available cultural resources records data and literature review for the Project site and study area. The purpose of the review is to gather and analyze information needed to assess the potential for impacts to cultural resources within the Project site.
Due to the recent closure of the Eastern Information Center (EIC) at California State University, Riverside, the Office of Historic Preservation has not yet completed the transition of the EIC records to another information center. Therefore, new record searches for Riverside County were not available and may not be available for many months. In the effort to supplement this study with relevant records search data, Chambers Group utilized records search data, and cultural resources sensitivity mapping devel oped therein, from the supporting cultural resources assessment conducted in support of the City General Plan Update (Appendix B). The previous records searches in support of the General Plan Update were obtained from the EIC in April and July 2017 and encompassed all properties within the Beaumont city limits, including the current Project site.
4.5.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project involves the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The term historical resource includes any resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR); any resource included in a local register of historical resources; and any object, building structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (Appendix B). The Project site is not identified to be a historic resource, and there are no buildings in the area. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not create an adverse effect to a historic resource. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation. Results of the 2017 cultural resources records search indicate that 10 previous cultural resources studies have been conducted within one mile of the Project site (Appendix B). The studies were conducted between 1990 through 2014. None of these studies overlap or intersect with the Project site. This indicates that the Project site has not been previously studied for the presence of cultural resources and indicates that no cultural resources have been reported as present at the Project site. The previous 2017 CHRIS records search indicates that 26 cultural resources have been previously reported within one mile of the Project site, however, none of these resources overlap with the Project site.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 21
21500
According to the Cultural assessment for the City of Beaumont General Plan Update, there are a total of 293 previously recorded cultural resources within the City. The sensitivity mapping indicates that the current Project site is within an area of high sensitivity for cultural resources. Although no cultural resources have been identified at the Project site, background research supported the General Plan Update cultural resources sensitivity mapping that indicated a high level of sensitivity for buried resources in the Project site and surrounding vicinity. Because of the EIC closure and the reliance on previous records search data for this study, the Proposed Project could result in impacts during the initial ground disturbance on intact native soils, which may not have been previously disturbed. The soils shall be monitored for potential resources. Therefore, MM CUL-1 will be implemented to ensure a less than significant impact on such resources.
MM CUL-1: The Applicant shall retain the services of a Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior Standards, for the duration of ground -disturbing construction activity. All construction-related ground disturbing activity that includes cutting into native intact soils shall be monitored by a cultural resources specialist proficient in a construction monitoring setting. The Qualified Archaeologist or cultural resources specialist working under the direction of the Qualified Archaeologist shall provide training to inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the Project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources.
In the event of an inadvertent discovery of potential archaeological resources (artifacts or features) during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the discovery shall be halted while the Qualified Archaeologist assesses the find.
If the resource is determined to be significant or unique through significance evaluation, and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. These might include an archaeological mitigation and monitoring plan, treatment, or data recovery programs. All monitoring or associated plans would be prepared and implemented under the direction of a qualified archaeologist. All required close-out reporting would be completed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s Archaeological Resource Management Reports (ARMR).
c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project includes ground disturbing activities and therefore has the potential to discover human remains. In the event that human remains are discovered during ground-disturbing activities, then the Proposed Project would be subject to California Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and California PRC Section 5097.98.
Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact to human remains.
HUMAN REMAINS – LEGAL REQUIREMENTS If human remains are discovered during ground- disturbing activities, then the Project would be subject to California Health and Safety Code 7050.5, CEQA Section 15064.5, and California PRC Section 5097.98. If human remains are found during ground-disturbing activities, State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. In the event of an unanticipated discovery of human
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 22
21500
remains, the County Coroner shall be notified immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the County Coroner shall notify the NAHC, which shall notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with Native American burials.
4.6 ENERGY
6. ENERGY
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
(b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
4.6.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would impact energy resources during construction and operation. Energy resources that would be potentially impacted include electricity and natural gas, and petroleum-based fuel supplies and distribution systems.
Electricity, a consumptive utility, is a man-made resource. The production of electricity requires the consumption or conversion of energy resources, including water, wind, oil, gas, coal, solar, geothermal, and nuclear resources, into energy. The delivery of electricity involves a number of system components, including substations and transformers that lower transmission line power (voltage) to a level appropriate for on-site distribution and use. The electricity generated is distributed through a network of transmission and distribution lines commonly called a power grid.
Natural gas is a combustible mixture of simple hydrocarbon compounds (primarily methane) that is used as a fuel source. Natural gas consumed in California is obtained from naturally occurring reservoirs, mainly located outside the State, and delivered through high-pressure transmission pipelines. The natural gas transportation system is a nationwide network and, therefore, resource availability is typically not an issue. Natural gas satisfies almost one-third of the State’s total energy requirements and is used in electricity generation, space heating, cooking, water heating, industrial processes, and as a transportation fuel. Natural gas is measured in terms of cubic feet.
Petroleum-based fuels currently account for a majority of California’s transportation energy sources and primarily consist of diesel and gasoline types of fuels . However, the state has been working on developing strategies to reduce petroleum use. Over the last decade, California has implemented several policies, rules, and regulations to improve vehicle efficiency, increase the development and use of alternative fuels, reduce air pollutants and GHG emissions from the transportation sector, and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 23
21500
Construction Energy
The Proposed Project would consume energy resources during construction in three (3) general forms:
1. Petroleum-based fuels used to power off-road construction vehicles and equipment on the Project site, construction worker travel to and from the Project site, as well as delivery and haul truck trips (e.g. hauling of demolition material to off-site reuse and disposal facilities);
2. Electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during Project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during construction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power; and,
3. Energy used in the production of construction materials, such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes, and manufactured or processed materials such as lumber and glass.
During construction the Proposed Project would consume electricity to construct the Proposed Project. Electricity would be supplied to the Project site from the existing electrical lines in the vicinity of the Project site. The use of electricity from existing power lines rather than temporary diesel or gasoline-powered generators would minimize impacts on fuel consumption. Electricity consumed during project construction would vary throughout the construction period based on the construction activities being performed. Various construction activities include electricity associated with the conveyance of water that would be used during project construction for dust control (supply and conveyance) and electricity to power any necessary lighting during constru ction, electronic equipment, or other construction activities necessitating electrical power. Such electricity demand would be temporary, nominal, and would cease upon the completion of construction. Overall, construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would require limited electricity consumption that would not be expected to have an adverse impact on available electricity supplies and infrastructure. Therefore, the use of electricity during project construction would not be wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary.
Since there are currently power lines in the vicinity of the Project site, it is anticipated that only nominal improvements would be required to connect to the Project site. Compliance with City’s guidelines and requirements would ensure that the Proposed Project fulfills its responsibilities relative to infrastructure installation, coordinates any electrical infrastructure removals or relocations, and limits any impacts associated with the construction of the project. Construction of the Project’s electrical infrastructure is not anticipated to adversely affect the electrical infrastructure serving the surrounding uses or utility system capacity.
Petroleum-based fuel usage represents the highest amount of transportation energy potentially consumed during construction, which would be utilized by both off-road equipment operating on the Project site and on-road automobiles transporting workers to and from the Project site, and on-road trucks transporting equipment and supplies to the Project site. The construction-related petroleum use would be nominal when compared to current county-wide petroleum usage rates.
Construction activities associated with the Proposed Project would be required to adhere to all State and SCAQMD regulations for off-road equipment and on-road trucks, which provide minimum fuel efficiency standards. As such, construction activities for the Proposed Project would not result in the
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 24
21500
wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Impacts regarding transportation energy would be less than significant. Development of the project would not result in the need to manufacture construction materials or create new building material facilities specifically to supply the Proposed Project. It is difficult to measure the energy used in the production of construction materials such as asphalt, steel, and concrete, it is reasonable to assume that the production of building materials such as concrete, steel, etc., would employ all reasonable energy conservation practices in the interest of minimizing the cost of doing business.
Operational Energy
The ongoing operation of the Proposed Project would require the use of energy resources for multiple purposes, including but not limited to heating/ventilating/air conditioning (HVAC), refrigeration, lighting, appliances, and electronics. Energy would also be consumed during operations related to water usage, solid waste disposal, landscape equipment, and vehicle trips.
The operation of the Proposed Project would result in consumption of electricity at the Project site.
As detailed above in Section 8.3 the Proposed Project would consume 622,779 kilowatt-hours per year of electricity. This equates to .003 percent of the electricity consumed annually in the County of Riverside according to the California Energy Commission.
It should be noted that the Proposed Project would comply with all federal, State, and City requirements related to the consumption of electricity, including CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11 California Green Building Standards. The CCR Title 24, Part 6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency measures to be incorporated into the proposed structure, including enhanced insulation, use of energy efficient lighting and appliances, water and space heating systems, as well as requiring a variety of other energy-efficiency measures to be incorporated into the Proposed Project. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Proposed Project will be designed and built to minimize electricity use and that existing and planned electricity capacity and electricity supplies will be sufficient to support the Proposed Project’s electricity demand. Thus, the project would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of electricity, and no mitigation measures would be required.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 25
21500
Operations-Related Natural Gas
The operation of the Proposed Project would result in increased consumption of natural gas at the Project site. The Proposed Project would consume 855,186 kilo British Thermal Units (kBTU) per year of natural gas. This equates to 0.001 percent of the natural gas consumed annually in Riverside County. As such, the operations-related natural gas use would be nominal when compared to current natural gas usage rates in the County.
It should be noted that the Proposed Project would comply with all federal, State, and City requirements related to the consumption of natural gas, including CCR Title 24, Part 6 Building Energy Efficiency Standards and CCR Title 24, Part 11 California Green Building Standards. The CCR Title 24, Part 6 and Part 11 standards require numerous energy efficiency measures to be incorporated into the Proposed Project, including enhanced insulation as well as the use of efficient natural gas appliances and HVAC units. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Proposed Project will be designed and built to minimize natural gas use and that existing and planned natural gas capacity and natural gas supplies will be sufficient to support the Proposed Project’s natural gas demand. Thus, impacts with regard to natural gas supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
Operations-Related Vehicular Petroleum Fuel Usage
The Proposed Project would comply with all federal, State, and City requirements related to the consumption of transportation energy, which includes California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 10 California Green Building Standards. Therefore, it is anticipated that the Proposed Project will be designed and built to minimize transportation energy through the promotion of the use of alternative fueled vehicles, and it is anticipated that existing and planned capacity and supplies of transportation fuels would be sufficient to support the Proposed Project’s demand. Thus, impacts with regard to transportation energy supply and infrastructure capacity would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures would be required.
In conclusion, the Proposed Project would comply with regulatory compliance measures outlined by the State and City related to air quality, energy, and GHGs. Additionally, the Proposed Project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable City Building and Fire Codes. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Several plans and policies have been adopted to reduce GHG emissions that would also have the effect on reducing energy, such as the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, and the latest RTP for the region. The Proposed Project would comply with the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards. In addition, the project would receive electricity from existing utilities, which is required to reduce GHG emissions by increasing procurement from eligible renewable energy by set target years. Therefore, the project is consistent with plans that would have the effect of reducing energy us e. Impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 26
21500
4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
7. GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
(b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
(c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
(d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
(e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available for
the disposal of waste water?
(f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
4.7.1 Environmental Setting
The California Geological Survey (CGS) provides technical information and advice about landslides, erosion, sedimentation, and other geologic hazards to the agencies that administer land -use decisions in California. Surface rupture is the breakage of ground along the surface trace of a fault caused by the intersection of the fault surface area ruptured in an earthquake. Liquefaction is a process by which water- saturated granular soils transform from a solid to a liquid state during strong ground-shaking. A seismically induced landslide is a general term for falling, sliding, or flowing mass of soil, rocks, water, and debris caused by an earthquake. Erosion is the displacement of soil by moving water and wind.
The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting on structures for human occupancy. This state law was a direct result of the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, which was associated with extensive surface fault ruptures that damaged numerous homes,
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 27
21500
commercial buildings, and other structures. The main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults.
4.7.2 Impact Analysis
a) i) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in the seismically active region of Southern California and has the potential to be subjected to ground shaking hazards associated with earthquake events on active faults throughout the region. However, the Project site is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (DOC 2026b). The Proposed Project would not result in risk of loss, injury, or death involving the rupture of a known earthquake fault. No impacts would occur as a result of the Proposed Project.
ii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 4.7.2(a)(i) above, the Proposed Project is located in the seismically active region of Southern California and has the potential of ground shaking hazards associated with earthquake events on active faults throughout the region. The Proposed Project site is not located within the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (DOC 2026b).
The Proposed Project consists of constructing city facilities and fueling stations. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.
iii) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less Than Significant Impact. Liquefaction can occur when soils lose cohesion and their ability to support structures when subjected to strong ground motion. The Project site is not located in an area identified as a generalized liquefaction susceptibility zone on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map (DOC 2026b). The Proposed Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects regarding liquefaction, and no impact would occur.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 28
21500
iv) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides?
No Impact. The Proposed Project is not located within an area identified as a Landslide Hazard Zone on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map containing the Project site (DOC 2026b).
The Proposed Project would not result in the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides, and no impact would occur.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant impact. The Project site is undeveloped and graded, meaning the Proposed Project would require minimal grading. In addition, the flat nature of the Project site limits susceptibility to erosion. Due to the pre-grading of the Project site and the limited amount of ground disturbing activities associated with the Proposed Project, the potential for soil erosion or loss of topsoil would be minimal and not substantial; therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in less than significant impacts associated with soil erosion or loss of topsoil. c) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project is located within a seismically active region of Southern California; however, the Project site is not located within an area prone to liquefaction (DOC 2026b). Additionally, the Project has been previously graded and disturbed. Planning and construction activities would result in a less than significant impact associated with off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations in the geotechnical investigation, the latest version of the California Building Code, the Uniform Building Code, and all other applicable federal, State, and local codes. The Proposed Project would therefore not create a substantial risk to life or property and compliance with the recommendations in the reports and with existing regulations would ensure that impacts would be less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The Proposed Project relies on existing sewer infrastructure to accommodate wastewater disposal requirements. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in an impact associated with soils incapable of supporting septic systems. f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Proposed Project includes soil disturbance, therefore undocumented resources have the potential to be discovered in or near the Project site. Due to the demonstrated overall sensitivity of the area (Appendix B), mitigation measures
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 29
21500
MM PAL-1 are included to reduce potential impacts. These mitigation measures are intended to reduce impacts associated with the soil disturbance. Impacts would be less than significant.
MM PAL-1: The Applicant shall be required to obtain the services of a Qualified Paleontologist to remain on-call for the duration of the ground-disturbing construction activity. If requested by the City, a paleontological mitigation plan (PMP) outlining procedures for paleontological monitoring and/or data recovery shall be prepared for the Project and submitted to the City for review and approval. The development and implementation of the PMP shall include, but not be limited to, additional research and further assessment of paleontological sensitivity in the Project site, consultations with the Applicant's engineering geologist, as well as a requirement that the curation of all specimens recovered under any scenario shall be through an appropriate repository agreed upon by the City. The PMP shall also include developing a multilevel ranking system, or Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC), as a tool to demonstrate the potential yield of fossils within a given stratigraphic unit. The PMP shall outline the monitoring and salvage protocols to address paleontological resources encountered during Project-related ground-disturbing activities, as well as the appropriate recording, collection, processing, curation, and reporting protocols to appropriately address any monitoring conducted or resources discovered.
4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
8. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
the environment?
(b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
4.8.1 Environmental Setting
A Global Climate Change was prepared for the Proposed Project by Ldn Consulting in February 2025 to analyze the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the Project. The complete report is located in Appendix C. The City does not have specific GHG reduction strategies; it is reasonable to use the County of Riverside’s CEQA screening thresholds of 3,000 MT CO2e (metric tones of carbon dioxide equivalent) per year to establish impact significance.
4.8.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project is estimated to generate up to 281.3 MT CO2e during construction, assuming a worst-case scenario where all construction occurs within one year (assumed to be 2027). As such, proposed construction would remain well below the County's 3,000
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 30
21500
MT CO2e screening threshold. Operational emissions were calculated to be 2,017.23 MT CO2e annually, which would also be below the threshold.
As a result, the project would generate a less than significant direct and indirect impact under CEQA , and the Project would not require further analysis or mitigation. b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project will emit GHGs directly through the burning of carbon-based fuels such as gasoline and natural gas, as well as indirectly through the usage of electricity, water, and from the anaerobic bacterial breakdown of organic solid waste. The Project would produce 2,017.23 MT CO2e annually per year. The Project’s contributions to the cumulative environment are small and would be considered to have a less than significant impact on the cumulative greenhouse gas inventory. Therefore, the project would not require further analysis or mitigation to comply.
It should be noted that the Project will also install hydrogen gas fueling stations and CNG pumps , which would be utilized by City-owned vehicles. Since the analysis assumes all typical trucks and vehicles using gasoline or diesel, the analysis provided would be the worst case. Replacing standard vehicles with CNG, Hydrogen, or Electric would further reduce GHG emissions below 2,017.23 MT CO2e annually. The contributions to the cumulative environment are small and would be considered to have a less than significant impact on the cumulative greenhouse gas inventory. Therefore, the project would not require further analysis or mitigation to comply.
4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
(d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 31
21500
9. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within
2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or working in the project
area?
(f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
(g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
4.9.1 Environmental Setting
The Proposed Project and Project site were analyzed to determine the potential for hazards or hazardous materials to occur on-site. Background research included an evaluation of the Geotracker and Envirostor websites, operated by the SWRCB and the DTSC, respectively.
4.9.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project consists of the construction of City facilities and fueling stations. Construction and operation of the Proposed Project would require the routine transport, use, storage, and disposal of limited quantities of common hazardous materials such as gasoline, diesel fuels, oils, solvents, paint, fertilizers, pesticides, and other similar materials.
Operations would include standard maintenance such as landscape upkeep and exterior painting, which would involve the use of commercially available products such as pesticides, herbicides, gas, oil, and paint, which would not create a significant hazard to the public. All materials required during construction would be kept in compliance with State and local regulations and Best Management Practices (BMPs).
Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact in regard to creating a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Once operational, the Proposed Project would require the use and transport of fuels. Construction and operational activities would comply with all
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 32
21500
applicable regulations governing such activities. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact regarding creating a significant hazard to the public. c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The Proposed Project consists of the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The closest school to the Project site is Highland Academy Charter School and is located 0.6 miles northeast of the Proposed Project (Google 2026). The Proposed Project would not produce hazardous emissions or handle hazardous substances within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school.
No impact would occur.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. The following databases compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 were checked for known hazardous materials contamination at the Project site:
• GeoTracker (SWRCB): list of leaking underground storage tank sites • EnviroStor (California DTSC): list of hazardous waste and substances sites The Proposed Project is not located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65862.5 (DTSC 2026; SWRCB 2026). The Project site is currently vacant and zoned as Manufacturing. The Proposed Project includes the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. Once operational, no hazardous materials will be transported to and from the site or used for the Proposed Project. Because the Project site will not be located or adjacent to a hazardous materials site, its construction or operation would not result in a significant hazard to the public or environment. No impact would occur.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The Proposed Project is located more than 6 miles from the Banning Municipal Airport (Google 2026). The Project site is more than 2 miles from a public airport, airport land use plan, or a private airstrip, therefore there would be no impact associated with an airport. f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The Proposed Project would be designed to provide unobstructed access and would comply with the County of Riverside Emergency Operations Plan (County 20 24). Emergency access would be ensured, and the Proposed Project would not interfere with adopted emergency response or evacuation plans. Therefore, no impact would occur.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No Impact. The Project site is not located within a High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CalFire 2026). Additionally, the Proposed Project would comply with the latest Uniform Fire Code
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 33
21500
requirements and all applicable statutes, codes, ordinances, and standards of the Riverside County Fire Department. Therefore, no impact would occur in regard to exposing people or structure to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.
4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water 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;
ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flood 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?
4.10.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is located within the Potrero Creek sub watershed, within the Santa Ana River watershed, outside of the flood hazard area within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone (FEMA 2026). The Project site is located within the Santa Ana RWQCB. The RWQCB’s most recent update to the Santa Ana Basin Plan was adopted in April 2025.
Construction of the Proposed Project would involve demolition, grading, paving, utility installation, installation of the buildings and underground fuel tanks, and landscaping activities, which would result in the generation of potential water quality pollutants such as silt, debris, chemicals, paints, and other solvents with the potential to adversely affect water quality.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 34
21500
The Proposed Project would increase the amount of impervious surface in the area by approximately
5.19 acres. Pursuant to the requirements of the Santa Ana RWQCB, the Applicant would be required to obtain an NPDES Municipal Stormwater Permit for construction activities. The NPDES permit is required for all projects that include construction activities, such as clearing, grading, and/or excavation, that disturb at least one acre of total land area. In addition , the Proposed Project would be required to comply with the RWQCB’s Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin.
Compliance with the NPDES permit and the Santa Ana River Basin plan involves the preparation and implementation of a SWPPP. The SWPPP is required to specify the BMPs that the Proposed Project would implement during construction activities to ensure that all potential pollutants of concer n are prevented, minimized, and/or otherwise appropriately treated prior to being discharged from the subject property. Compliance with the SWPPP would ensure that the Proposed Project does not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements during construction activities.
Therefore, adherence to the SWPPP, construction impacts would be less than significant.
To ensure that water quality standards are upheld during operation of the Proposed Project, the Project incorporates site-specific hydrologic design features, including bioretention areas, catch basins, and storm drain infrastructure to manage and treat on-site runoff. Runoff would be collected in catch basins located along the western and northern portions of the site and conveyed into bioretention areas, where runoff would be filtered and allowed to percolate back into underground aquifers. The Proposed Project would also implement a Landscaping Plan, which includes approximately 39,000 square feet of vegetation (including within bioretention areas) to promote runoff retention and filtration. Through implementation of the hydrologic engineering designs and landscaping plan, impacts to water quality and water discharge would be minimized. Therefore, operational impacts would be less than significant.
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?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would construct City facilities and fueling stations.
Although a nominal amount of water may be used during construction, these activities would be minimal and temporary in nature and would not substantially impact groundwater supplies. The Project site would be served with water from the existing municipal water system. The proposed construction and operational activities do not include the installation and use of wells or other groundwater extraction activities. Therefore, the Project would not extract groundwater which would decrease groundwater supplies.
Construction of the Proposed Project would introduce additional impervious surfaces to the site, which could affect the amount of percolation into the aquifers. The Proposed Project would not obstruct or prevent the implementation of any groundwater management plans in the area as the Project site is not a designated recharge area. Additionally, any onsite runoff would be collected within two catch basins located along the western and northern perimeter. Water collected in the retention basins would disperse into the bioretention systems on the southwestern and northern perimeter of the Project site that would allow percolation back into the underground aquifers to minimize any depletion of groundwater supplies. Further, as mentioned above, the Proposed Project would implement a Landscaping Plan that includes approximately 39,000 square feet of vegetation to further promote runoff percolation back to underground aquifers. The Proposed Project’s increase
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 35
21500
impervious areas would not result in substantially reducing the amount of potential groundwater and therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) i) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would construct City facilities and fueling stations. Potential erosion or siltation may occur related to construction activities that include runoff of loose soils. The Proposed Project is designed to implement all facilities consistent with the City’s Master Plan of Drainage, thereby reducing potential impacts related to increased quantities of storm flows or surface runoff. As discussed above, the Proposed Project is not located within a 100-year floodplain (FEMA 2026), nor is it located near a stream or river. The site is not included within inundation areas identified for regional dams and levees. The Proposed Project is consistent with established building code regulation, standard design, and construction.
Additionally, it would not change the overall direction of runoff in the area; as mentioned above, the Proposed Project would include catch basins within two bioretention systems, which would allow for runoff water to collect and percolate back into underground aquifers rather than causing erosion on the surface. The Proposed Project would also implement a Landscaping Plan that would stabilize soils and reduce surface runoff velocity, thereby minimizing potential for erosion and sediment transport on- or off-site. Therefore, impacts therefore would be less than significant. ii) 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 substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site;
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would construct City facilities and fueling station on an undeveloped, disturbed parcel. The Proposed Project would alter the drainage pattern of the site by changing the land and constructing impervious surfaces to the area. As previously discussed, the Proposed Project does not contain any water bodies. The design of the Proposed Project will include stormwater conveyance features to manage runoff. Specifically, the Project would develop two bioretention systems that each feature one catch basin, allowing for runoff water to collect locally and percolate back into underground aquifers, thus reducing the risk of flooding on and off-site. As described above, the Proposed Project would also implement a Landscaping Plan that would help slow and disperse runoff, reducing localized runoff pooling. As required under the SWPPP and NPDES permit, and under the Beaumont Municipal Code, the Proposed Project would include erosion and siltation management to reduce erosion. Additional BMPs that would be implemented include but are not limited to site inspections, spill response, maintenance of drainage systems, and vehicle and equipment washing. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 36
21500
iii) 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 create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources or polluted runoff; or
Less Than Significant Impact. As previously discussed, the construction and operation of the Proposed Project would increase the impervious surfaces on the site and therefore increase runoff.
The construction and operation of the site would include implementation of erosion control systems and BMPs to address runoff. The Proposed Project will require review and approval by City staff and utilities to ensure the existing drainage has the capacity to accommodate the Proposed Project. Because the area is currently being served by City utilities, impacts would be less than significant.
iv) 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 impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. The Project site is located outside of any flood hazard areas within the FEMA Flood Map (FEMA 2026). Additionally, there are no streams or rivers within proximity to the Project site.
Although the Proposed Project would increase the overall area of impervious surface in the City of Beaumont, it would implement hydrologic engineering designs such as catch basins and bioretention systems to allow for on-site water catching and percolation, reducing flood risk.
Therefore, construction and operation of the Proposed Project would not redirect flood flows. d) Would the project in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No Impact. The Project is outside of any FEMA-indentified 100-year flood zones (FEMA 2026).
Additionally, the Proposed Project is located inland and away from any open water source or flood control dam that could result in a seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. The Proposed Project would not cause or expose people and structures to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact would occur.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not obstruct with the implementation of a water quality control plan or groundwater management plan. The Project site is located in the Upper Santa Ana Valley Groundwater Basin, which is designated by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) as “Very Low” priority (SGMA 2026). The Proposed Project would be required to comply with applicable regulations to address potential water impacts, ranging from construction and operational BMPs. The Project site is not a designated groundwater recharge area, and the proposed activities would not affect any groundwater management plan. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 37
21500
4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
11. LAND USE/PLANNING
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(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?
4.11.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project physically divide an established community? No Impact. The Proposed Project will be located on a site that is currently a vacant lot. The Project site is zoned as Manufacturing and its land use designation is Industrial. The new use of the site as city facilities and fuel stations would not result in a significant barrier in the community that would divide the established surrounding community; therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in no impact.
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? No Impact. As described above, the Proposed Project is located within an area designated by the General Plan as Industrial, which permits a range of industrial uses, including “stand-alone” industrial activities, general and light industrial, research parks, private trade schools, colleges, and business parks (City 2020). Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in an impact associated with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation.
4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
12. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(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?
(b) 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?
4.12.1 Environmental Setting
Mineral resources are commercially viable mineral or aggregate deposits, such as sand, gravel, and other construction aggregate. The CGS provides objective geologic expertise and information about California’s diverse nonfuel mineral resources. Maps, reports, and other data products developed by the staff assist governmental agencies, mining companies, consultants, and the public in recognizing, developing, and protecting important mineral resources. The DOC protects mineral resources to ensure adequate supplies
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 38
21500
for future production. The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) was developed to encourage production and conservation of mineral resources, prevent or minimize adverse effects to the environment, and protect public health and safety.
4.12.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project 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?
No Impact. The General Plan states that there have been no significant amounts of mineral deposits in the City and there are no delineated sites or locations of mineral resources within the City or sphere boundaries (City 2020). Implementation of the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of any known mineral resource that would be of value to the region . Thus, no impacts would occur.
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? No Impact. As noted above, The General Plan states that there have been no significant amounts of mineral deposits in the City, and there are no delineated sites or locations of mineral resources within the City or sphere boundaries (City 2020). Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource and no impact would occur.
4.13 NOISE
13. NOISE
Would the project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(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 groundborne vibration or
groundborne 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?
4.13.1 Environmental Setting
A Noise Assessment was prepared for the Proposed Project by Ldn Consulting in February 2025 and is located in Appendix D. The noise study has been completed to determine the noise impacts of the Proposed Project and includes construction noise, off-site transportation noise, and operational noise.
Noise levels were based on typical noise levels generated by construction equipment published by the Federal Transit Association (FTA) and Federal Highway Association (FHWA). Noise is assessed in dBA Leq; this unit is appropriate because Leq can be used to describe noise level from operation of each piece of
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 39
21500
equipment separately, and levels can be combined to represent the noise level from all equipment operating during a given period.
4.13.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project result in 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The unit of measurement used to describe a noise level is the decibel (dB).
The human ear is not equally sensitive to all frequencies within the sound spectrum. Therefore, the “A - weighted” noise scale, which weights the frequencies to which humans are sensitive, is used for measurements. Noise levels using A-weighted measurements are written dB(A) or dBA. Noise standards for land use compatibility are stated in terms of the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and the Day-Night Average Noise Level (DNL). CNEL is a 24-hour average weighted measure of community noise.
CNEL is obtained by adding five decibels to sound levels in the evening (7:00 PM to 10:00 PM) and by adding ten decibels to sound levels at night (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM). This weighting accounts for the increased human sensitivity to noise during the evening and nighttime hours. DNL is very similar to 24- hour average measure that weights only the nighttime hours. The equivalent continuous noise level, Leq, is a level of steady state sound that in a stated time period and a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound.
Construction Noise
Construction noise is regulated within Section 9.02.110(F) of the City Municipal Code. Accordingly, the Proposed Project would result in a significant impact if:
• Project construction occurs outside the hours of 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM during the months of June through September; or,
• Project construction occurs outside the hours of 7:00 AM and 6:00 PM during the months of October through May; or,
• Project construction noise exceeds 55 dBA at the interior of an occupied residence or school for any 15-minute period.
The FTA threshold for 80 dBA (8-hour Leq) for residential uses is used as a conservative standard for evaluating construction noise impacts. Based on the measurements, construction noise levels will comply with the FTA’s standard at the property lines and would not exceed the FTA threshold. Additionally, Project construction noise levels are considered exempt if activities do not occur within the hours specified in the City of Beaumont Municipal Code, Section 9.02.030 of 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. during the months of June through September and between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. during the months of October through May unless approval is obtained from the City Building Official or City Engineer.
Transportation Noise
A significant off-site traffic noise impact would occur if the project resulted in or created a significant increase in the existing ambient noise levels. Studies have shown that the average human ear can barely perceive a change in sound level of 3 dBA. A change of at least 5 dBA is considered a readily perceivable change in a normal environment. A 10 dBA increase is subjectively heard as a doubling in loudness and
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 40
21500
would cause a community response. Based on these concepts of noise level increase and perception, if noise levels were to result in greater than a 3 dBA increase, then the impact would be considered significant.
The project will not create a direct impact of more than 3 dBA CNEL on any roadway segment and no cumulative noise increases of 3 dBA CNEL or more were found. Therefore, the Proposed Project’s direct and cumulative contributions to off-site roadway noise increases will not cause any significant impacts to any existing or future noise-sensitive land uses.
Operational Noise
Based upon the property line noise levels determined above, none of the proposed noise sources directly or cumulatively exceeds the daytime property line standards at the nearest residential property line to the east. Although the Project site would not be operating during the nighttime hours, the project would also comply with the City’s nighttime threshold of 45 dBA at the nearest residential uses. Additionally, noise levels at the adjacent commercial and industrial uses are expected to be below 62 dBA and would easily meet the City’s 75 dBA daytime property line threshold. Therefore, the proposed development’s related operational noise levels will comply with the noise standards at the adjacent properties and the nearest residential uses. No impacts are anticipated, and no mitigation is required.
Additionally, the City of Beaumont Municipal Code also specifically exempts noise generated by the maintenance and repair of public properties by a governmental agency and other public/governmental services or operations including, but not limited to, trains and railway, or airplanes and helicopter machinery, equipment, or vehicles. Impacts during construction and operation would therefore be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed as either peak particle velocity (PPV) or the root mean square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous peak of the vibration signal in inches per second. The RMS of a signal is the average of the squared amplitude of the signal in vibration decibels (VdB), ref one micro-inch per second. The Federal Railroad Administration uses the abbreviation “VdB” for vibration decibels to reduce the potential for confusion with sound decibels.
The City has not established thresholds of significance concerning groundborne vibration. In the absence of City-established thresholds, groundborne vibration impacts are based on guidance from the Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans 2020). Accordingly, the Proposed Project would result in a significant impact if:
• Groundborne vibration levels generated by the Proposed Project have the potential to cause architectural damage at nearby buildings by exceeding the following PPV:
o 0.08 in/sec at extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient monuments o 0.10 in/sec at fragile buildings
o 0.25 in/sec at historic and some old buildings
o 0.30 in/sec at older residential structures
o 0.50 in/sec at new residential structures and modern industrial/commercial buildings.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 41
21500
• Groundborne vibration levels generated by the Proposed Project have the potential to cause severe annoyance to people living or working in nearby buildings by exceeding a PPV of 0.4 in/sec.
The Proposed Project involves the use of typical construction equipment such as excavators, dump trucks, backhoes, laser-graders, compactors, and concrete trucks. These types of equipment are common in construction projects and are not typically associated with excessive groundborne vibration. All construction equipment would be properly fitted with mufflers and staging and maintenance would be conducted away from residences (Appendix D). Therefore, the Proposed Project would comply with noise standards and is not expected to generate vibration or noise levels.
Impacts would be less than significant.
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 us airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The Proposed Project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or within two miles of a public airport. Therefore, it would not expose people residing or working at the Project site to excessive noise levels and no impact would occur.
4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
14. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in
an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
(b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
4.14.1 Environmental Setting
A project would have a significant adverse impact if it would induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly by proposing new homes and businesses, or indirectly through the extension of roads or other infrastructure; displace housing units, causing the construction of replacement housing somewhere else; or displace people, causing the construction of replacement housing somewhere else.
Impact Analysis
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
No Impact. The Proposed Project consists of the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The Proposed Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth in the area, as the city facilities and fueling stations would be used by existing city staff and residents. The Proposed Project
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 42
21500
does not include the addition of extended roads or other infrastructure. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in no impact with regard to unplanned population. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The Proposed Project consists of the construction of city facilities and fueling stations on a vacant parcel. The Proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing. No impact would occur in this regard.
4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
15. PUBLIC SERVICES.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire Protection?
ii) Police Protection?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks?
v) Other public facilities?
4.15.1 Environmental Setting
Public services include fire, police, schools, parks, and libraries. A project would impact a public service if it would result in an increased demand for that service or if the project would result in a hindrance to that service.
4.15.2 Impact Analysis
a) i) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for fire protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would be served by the Riverside County Fire Department. The closest fire station to the Project site is located approximately 1 mile northeast.
The Project site is undeveloped, and construction of the Proposed Project would increase demand for fire protection to the area. The Proposed Project is not located within a Very High Fire Severity Zone (FHSZ) and therefore would not be exposed to increased risk of wildfire (CAL FIRE 2026).
However, approximately 50 percent of the property is within a Moderate FHSZ, and approximately
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 43
21500
2.5 percent of the property is within a High FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2026) The Proposed Project shall comply with all fire code requirements and require review by existing utilities to ensure adequate service and access. Impacts, therefore, would be less than significant. ii) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for police protection?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site would be served by the Beaumont Police Department. The closest police station to the Project site is located approximately 1 mile northeast.
The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations and would not result in an increase in population in the area. However, the operations would incrementally increase the demand for police services. The increased service would not cause substantially delayed response times. The Project site would be accessible in the event that services are needed. Impacts would be less than significant.
iii) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for schools? No Impact. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations and would not result in new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new government facilities.
The closest school to the Project site is Highland Academy Charter School, which is located approximately 0.6 miles north. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not create significant impacts with regard to maintaining acceptable service rations, response times, or other performance objectives for schools.
iv) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for parks? No Impact. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations and would not result in new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new government facilities.
The closest park to the Project site is Rangel Park, located approximately 0.25 miles northeast of the Project site. Implementation of the Proposed Project would not create significant impacts with regard to maintaining acceptable service rations, response times, or other performance objectives for parks.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 44
21500
vi) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for other public facilities?
No Impact. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations and would not result in new or physically altered government facilities or the need for new government facilities. No impact would occur to other public facilities.
4.16 RECREATION
16. RECREATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
(b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
4.16.1 Environmental Setting
Recreational facilities include active and passive facilities. Active recreational facilities include parks, tennis and basketball courts, pools, golf courses, and various other facilities. Passive recreational facilities include plazas and other public places.
A project would result in a significant impact on recreational facilities if: it would increase the use of existing parks and facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated, or if the project included recreational facilities or required construction that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
4.16.2 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The Proposed Project includes the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The Proposed Project would not increase population that would increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks, or other recreational facilities. Rangel Park is the closest park to the Project site and is located approximately 0.25 miles northeast. Therefore, the Proposed Project would result in no impact with regard to increasing the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 45
21500
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The Proposed Project includes the construction of city facilities and fueling stations. The Proposed Project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. No impact would occur.
4.17 TRANSPORTATION
17. TRANSPORTATION.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
(b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
© Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
A Trip Generation Memorandum (Traffic Memo), Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Memorandum (VMT Memo), and Sight Distance Analysis and Swept Path Memo were prepared for the Proposed Project by General Technologies and Solutions (GTS) in February and March, 2026, using the Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for the City of Beaumont (Appendix E). The complete analysis for the Traffic Analysis Screening Memorandum, VMT Screening Memorandum, and Sight Distance Analysis and Swept Path Memo are provided in Appendices E, F, and G, respectively.
4.17.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would develop a City Yard that would be utilized by existing City departments and would not increase the number of staff or induce local population growth. As such, implementation of the Proposed Project would not generate a significant number of new trips. Although a minor increase in traffic would occur during construction, the Proposed Project is not expected to change the overall current traffic levels during operation.
The Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for the City of Beaumont states that a level of service (LOS) analysis must be conducted if a project would add 100 or more peak hour trips. As discussed in the Traffic Memo, the Project was evaluated for daily trips under Gross Floor Area (GFA) and number of employees. For the former, the Project is anticipated to generate approximately 266 daily trips with a total of 39 trips during the peak AM hour and 23 trips during the peak PM hour (Appendix E). For the latter, the Project is anticipated to generate approximately 660 daily trips with a total of 96 trips during the peak AM hour and 67 trips during the peak PM hour (Appendix E). Since the project is
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 46
21500
expected to generate less than 100 trips per each peak hour, a traffic analysis shall not be required based on the City of Beaumont Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines.
The Project site is served by existing public transit facilities along 4th St and Veile Ave. The Proposed Project would not involve construction or operational activities that would affect public transit. While the site would include fueling stations, these stations would not interrupt public transit along the roadways. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact associated with an applicable plan, ordnance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less Than Significant Impact. The VMT Screening Memorandum included a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis to evaluate the Project’s consistency (or inconsistency) with Senate Bill 743 (SB 743).
The OPR Technical Advisory provides project screening criteria and guidance for analysis o f VMT assessments under SB 743. With the adopted guidelines, transportation impacts are to be evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles traveled, which took effect July 1, 2020, as required in CEQA section 15064.3.
The City of Beaumont developed and adopted the City of Beaumont Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines for evaluating VMT include screening criteria, which enables a variety of projects that would result in a less than significant transportation impact to be screened out of more extensive VMT analyses. The conditions to be screened out may be based on proximity to transit, trip-generating potential, or project type.
Based on the latest version of the City’s Traffic Impact Analysis Screening Guidelines, certain land uses can be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary as their uses are local serving in nature. Because the Project would serve the City by providing fueling and charging facilities, among other administrative and storage uses, the Project would fall in this category. In addition, the Project site plan features a 9,982 sq. ft. Administrative Building, and an 11,250 sq. ft. Fleet Garage, both of which are within the development potentials that can be screened per the City’s guidelines (10,000 sq. ft. for office and 15,000 sq. ft. for light industrial). Therefore, based on the VMT screening analysis in Appendix F, the Proposed Project is determined to have a less than significant transportation impact concerning VMT. The Proposed Project would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project will not substantially increase hazards due to design features.
A Sight Distance Analysis and Swept Path Memo was prepared for the Project to ensure that the proposed development would be safe and functional for the vehicles that will utilize the site. Sight Distance Analysis was evaluated for all driveways with egress points by using sight stopping distance (SSD), which is the minimum distance required by a vehicle traveling at or near the design speed of a roadway to stop before reaching an object in its travel path. The results of the study indicated that the SSD is achieved within the designated driveways (Appendix G). Furthermore, implementation of
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 47
21500
red curbing along the west side of Viele Ave as a design feature would ensure that the Project meets the sight distance requirements.
The Swept Path Analysis utilized AutoTURN software to simulate the physical path a vehicle takes when turning, also known as a clearance check. The AutoTURN results generated six areas of concern regarding the internal site circulation and access driveways (Appendix G). The Proposed Project would coordinate with the fire department to ensure that the site would have adequate access. These design features could involve increased curb radii, truck aprons, expanded widths, recessed gates, or striping and pavement marking modifications.
The Proposed Project would include new driveways entering the fueling station and City office buildings. The designs of the driveways would be subject to review by City staff and engineers , including the County Fire Department, to ensure adequate turn lanes, circulation and driveways.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would not impede emergency access during temporary construction activities because work and equipment staging would not be adjacent to a roadway. During operations, the operation of the Proposed Project would not interfere with emergency access to and from the site, nor the surrounding neighborhoods. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
18. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource, defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred
place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in Public Resources
Code section 5020.1(k), or
(b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native
American tribe.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 48
21500
4.18.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
Less Than Significant Impact.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to crit eria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Assembly Bill 52 requires public agencies to consult with tribes that may have a traditional affiliation to a project area to gather information on a site’s sensitivity and identify if any mitigation measures would be required to preserve discovered or undiscovered tribal cultural resources. The City sent letters to their list of tribes to conduct consultation in December 2024. The City received responses from the Pala Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, (“Rincon Band” or “Band”), Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation (formerly San Manuel Band of Mission Indians), and Morongo Band of Mission Indians (MBMI). MBMI had requested consultation on the Proposed Project. Based on the provided information of the Proposed Project, the following mitigation measures have been requested to be included.
MM TCR-1: Native American Treatment Agreement. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall enter into a Tribal Monitoring Agreement with the Morongo Band of Mission Indians for the project. The Tribal Monitor(s) shall be on-site during all ground- disturbing activities (including, but not limited to, clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post placement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all utility and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind). The Tribal Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect, or halt the ground-disturbing activities to allow identification, evaluation, and potential recovery of cultural resources and/or tribal cultural resources.
MM TCR-2: Retention of Archaeologist. Prior to any ground-disturbing activities (including, but not limited to, clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post replacement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all utility and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind), and prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 49
21500
Interior Standards (SOI). The archaeologist shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities to identify any known or suspected archaeological and/or cultural resources.
The archaeologist will conduct a Cultural Resource Sensitivity Training, in conjunction with the Tribe Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), and/or designated Tribal Representative. The training session will focus on the archaeological and tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground-disturbing activities as well as the procedures to be followed in such an event.
MM TCR-3: Cultural Resource Management Plan. Prior to any ground-disturbing activities the project archaeologist shall develop a Cultural Resource Management Plan (CRMP) and/or Archaeological Monitoring and Treatment Plan (AMTP) to address the details, timing, and responsibilities of all archaeological and cultural resource activities that occur on the project site. This Plan shall be written in consultation with the consulting Tribe[s] and shall include the following: approved Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of Approval (COA), contact information for all pertinent parties, parties’ responsibilities, procedures for each MM or COA, and an overview of the project schedule.
MM TCR-4: Pre-Grade Meeting. The retained qualified archeologist and Consulting Tribe[s] representative shall attend the pre-grade meeting with the grading contractors to explain and coordinate the requirements of the monitoring plan.
MM TCR-5: On-site Monitoring. During all ground-disturbing activities the qualified archaeologist and the Tribal Monitor(s) shall be on-site full-time. The frequency of inspections shall depend on the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and any discoveries of Tribal Cultural Resources as defined in California Public Resources Code Section 21074. Archaeological and Native American monitoring will be discontinued when the depth of grading and the soil conditions no longer retain the potential to contain cultural deposits. The qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Tribal Monitor(s), shall be responsible for determining the duration and frequency of monitoring.
MM TCR-6: Inadvertent Discovery of Cultural Resources. In the event that previously unidentified cultural resources are unearthed during construction, the qualified archaeologist and the Tribal Monitor(s) shall have the authority to temporarily divert and/or temporarily halt ground-disturbance operations in the area of discovery to allow for the evaluation of potentially significant cultural resources. Isolates and clearly non-significant deposits shall be minimally documented in the field and collected so the monitored grading can proceed.
If a potentially significant cultural resource(s) is discovered, work shall stop within a 60- foot perimeter of the discovery and an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) physical demarcation/barrier constructed. All work shall be diverted away from the vicinity of the find, so that the find can be evaluated by the qualified archaeologist and Tribal Monitor[s].
The archaeologist shall notify the Lead Agency and consulting Tribe[s] of said discovery.
The qualified archaeologist, in consultation with the Lead Agency, the consulting Tribe[s], and the Native American monitor, shall determine the significance of the discovered resource. A recommendation for the treatment and disposition of the Tribal Cultural
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 50
21500
Resource shall be made by the qualified archaeologist in consultation with the Tribe[s] and the Native American monitor[s] and be submitted to the Lead Agency for review and approval. Below are the possible treatments and dispositions of significant cultural resources in order of CEQA preference:
A. Full avoidance.
B. If avoidance is not feasible, Preservation in place.
C. If Preservation in place is not feasible, all items shall be reburied in an area away from any future impacts and reside in a permanent conservation easement or Deed Restriction.
D. If all other options are proven to be infeasible, data recovery through excavation and then curation in a Curation Facility that meets the Federal Curation Standards (36 CFR 79)
MM TCR-7: Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains. The following specific conditions shall be imposed in order to protect Native American human remains and/or cremations. No photographs are to be taken except by the coroner, with written approval by the consulting Tribe[s].
a. Should human remains and/or cremations be encountered on the surface or during any and all ground-disturbing activities (i.e., clearing, grubbing, tree and bush removal, grading, trenching, fence post placement and removal, construction excavation, excavation for all water supply, electrical, and irrigation lines, and landscaping phases of any kind), work in the immediate vicinity of the discovery shall immediately stop within a 100-foot perimeter of the discovery.
The area shall be protected by the establishment of an ESA with a marked boundary. Project personnel/observers will be restricted from entry into the ESA. The County Coroner is to be contacted within 24 hours of discovery. The County Coroner has 48 hours to make his/her determination pursuant to State and Safety Code §7050.5. and Public Resources Code (PRC) § 5097.98. b. In the event that the human remains and/or cremations are identified as Native American, the Coroner shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of determination pursuant to subdivision (c) of HSC §7050.5. c. The Native American Heritage Commission shall immediately notify the person or persons it believes to be the Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD has 48 hours, upon being granted access to the Project site, to inspect the site of discovery and make his/her recommendation for final treatment and disposition, with appropriate dignity, of the remains and all associated grave goods pursuant to PRC §5097.98
d. If the Morongo Band of Mission Indians has been named the Most Likely Descendant (MLD), the Tribe may wish to rebury the human remains and/or cremation and sacred items in their place of discovery with no further
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 51
21500
disturbance where they will reside in perpetuity. The place(s) of reburial will not be disclosed by any party and is exempt from the California Public Records Act (California Government Code § 6254[r]). Reburial location of human remains and/or cremations will be determined by the Tribe’s Most Likely Descendant (MLD), the landowner, and the City Planning Department.
MM TCR-8: FINAL REPORT: The final report[s] created as a part of the project (AMTP, isolate records, site records, survey reports, testing reports, etc.) shall be submitted to the Lead Agency and Consulting Tribe[s] for review and comment. After approval of all parties, the final reports are to be submitted to the appropriate Information Center (IC), and the Consulting Tribe[s].
4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
19. UTILITIES/SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
(b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
(c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
(d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
(e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to
solid wastes?
4.19.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication s facilities, the construction or expansion of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations.
The Proposed Project does not propose any new land uses that would result in the construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, electric, telecom, or natural gas facilities. Water for the Proposed Project would be provided by the Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District. Water demand for the Proposed Project would consist of interior plumbing devices such as public restrooms
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 52
21500
with lavatory and sinks, as well as outdoor landscaping irrigation. The Proposed Project’s water, sewer, and storm drain lines would be connected to existing lines. There would be no significant impacts specifically related to the installation of water, wastewater, or storm drain infrastructure beyond the overall construction-related effects of the Project as whole. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and the Proposed Project would not cause significant environmental effects. b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal dry and multiple dry years? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would temporarily require the use of water for dust control; however, this water use would be temporary and cease at the end of construction. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations. Water use during operations would include public restrooms with lavatories and sinks, vehicle maintenance, and landscaping. The Proposed Project would not introduce new land uses or new construction that would significantly increase water demand to the area. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less Than Significant Impact. Utilities and service systems include potable water and wastewater treatment. The quantity of water consumed and wastewater generated by a project is determined by several factors including the size, type, and characteristics of the project. The need for construction of new or replacement water and wastewater treatment facilities (e.g., reservoirs, storage tanks, water mains, filtration plants, pumps, wells, and other connections or distribution facilities) would depend on the existing capacity and anticipated demand for the Project area. Wastewater generation from the Proposed Project would be limited to interior plumbing devices, including public restrooms with lavatories and sinks and vehicle maintenance. Wastewater would be treated by the Beaumont Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The Proposed Project’s contribution to wastewater would be minimal in comparison to residential and industrial uses and compared to the overall capacity of the treatment plan. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur. d) Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project may require the disposal of construction debris during the grading/excavation process including soil, asphalt, concrete, and other construction related materials. The generation of these materials would be short-term in nature and would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. The Proposed Project would construct city facilities and fueling stations. Therefore, implementation of the Proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact in regard to generation of significant solid waste. e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would comply with all federal, State, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste, including the California Integrated Waste Management Act, CalRecycle’s Mandatory Commercial Recycling Law, and County of Riverside requirements for
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 53
21500
solid waste generated during the construction process. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
4.20 WILDFIRE
20. WILDFIRE.
If located in or near state responsibility areas or
lands classified as very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
(b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors,
exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a
wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
(c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks,
emergency water sources, power lines or other
utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
(d) Expose people or structures to significant risks,
including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
4.20.1 Impact Analysis
a) Would the project impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The Project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (CAL FIRE 2026). However, approximately 50 percent of the property is within a Moderate FHSZ, and approximately 2.5 percent of the property is within a High FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2026). The Proposed Project will not impair an adopted emergency response plan or evacuation plan. The Proposed Project does not include any modifications of main roads that could be designated as emergency evacuation routes, nor does the Project include construction of facilities that would interfere with an emergency response or evacuation plan. As described in Section 4.17 Threshold (c), the Proposed Project would coordinate with the County fire department to ensure that the site would incorporate design features to ensure adequate emergency access. Impacts would be less than significant. b) Would the project, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone (CAL FIRE 2026). However, approximately 50 percent of the property is within a Moderate FHSZ, and approximately 2.5 percent of the property is within a High FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2026).
The Project site is located in a relatively flat, urbanized location with little vegetation and, therefore, will not exacerbate wildfire risks. Due to the absence of significant sloping features or notable prevailing winds, and the fact that the area is highly developed, the Proposed Project would not
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 54
21500
exacerbate wildfire risks and expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentration; impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact. The Proposed Project does not include installation or maintenance of associated infrastructures that would exacerbate a fire risk. In addition, the Proposed Project is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone. No impact would occur. d) Would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? Less Than Significant Impact. The Proposed Project would construct City facilities and fueling stations.
The Proposed Project does include structures that would be exposed to downstream flooding or landslides. The Project site is absent of significant sloping features. The Project site is relatively flat and does not include activities that would change the drainage or slope of the Project site. Impacts would be less than significant.
4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
(a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, substantially reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods of California history or prehistory?
(b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects?)
(c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 55
21500
4.21.1 Impact Analysis
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed in Section 4.4 Biological Resources, there are no significant impacts anticipated for special status wildlife and plant species due to the condition (lack of suitable habitats) of the Project site as it is disturbed. The Proposed Project would comply with the MBTA if construction activities cannot be scheduled outside of the nesting season.
Biological Resources
As mentioned in Section 4.4 Impact (d), the Project site cross-streets are identified as secondary covered roads under the MSHCP. The Proposed Project consists of development on a previously disturbed parcel with no vegetation or habitats, and the Project does not propose significant roadway alterations. Because the Project would not alter Veile Avenue and 4th Street, and the site conditions are significantly disturbed, the Project impacts within covered road right-of-way are considered consistent with and accounted for under the MSHCP. Additionally, as identified in Section 1.4.2, Project BMPs will be implemented to ensure any potential impacts would be minimized during construction.
Additionally, the northern half of the Project site is designated within the Riverside Conservation Authority (RCA) Survey Area for two plant species, Marvin’s onion and many-stemmed dudleya, and one wildlife species, the burrowing owl (RCA 2026). After aerial imagery review and USDA Soil Mapper analysis, it was determined that the two endemic plant species are unlikely to occur on the Project site as the soils underlying the Project site are devoid of native topsoil and of specific habi tat requirements and characteristics. Therefore, additional plant surveys are not required.
As a BMP, and in compliance with the RCA and MSHCP, a burrowing owl pre-construction survey shall be conducted no earlier than 30 days prior to construction. Additional detail of this survey is outlined as BMP 2 in Section 1.4.2.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would not substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal.
Cultural Resources
As discussed in Section 4.5 Cultural Resources, the Proposed Project would not result in impacts to historic resources. Additionally, the surrounding area and the Project site are previously disturbed.
Because of the EIC closure and the reliance on previous records search data for this study, the Proposed Project could result in impacts during the initial ground disturbance on intact native soils, which may not have been previously disturbed. Therefore, MM CUL-1 will be implemented to ensure a less than significant impact. Additionally, given that the proposed activities include soil disturbances,
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 56
21500
undocumented resources could be discovered (PAL-1). Due to the overall sensitivity of the area, mitigation measures for paleontological resources will be incorporated to address potential impacts to undiscovered resources. Implementation of these mitigation measures would result in a less than significant impact. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory.
MM CUL-1: The Applicant shall retain the services of a Qualified Archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior Standards, for the duration of ground -disturbing construction activity. All construction-related ground disturbing activity that includes cutting into native intact soils shall be monitored by a cultural resources specialist proficient in construction monitoring. The Qualified Archaeologist or cultural resources specialist working under the direction of the Qualified Archaeologist shall provide training to inform all construction personnel prior to construction activities about the proper procedures in the event of an archaeological discovery. The training shall be held in conjunction with the Project’s initial on-site safety meeting and shall explain the importance and legal basis for the protection of significant archaeological resources.
In the event of an inadvertent discovery of potential archaeological resources (artifacts or features) during ground-disturbing activities, construction activities within a 50-foot radius of the discovery shall be halted while the Qualified Archaeologist assesses the find.
If the resource is determined to be significant or unique through significance evaluation, and site avoidance is not possible, appropriate site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken. These might include an archaeological mitigation and monitoring plan, treatment, or data recovery programs. All monitoring or associated plans would be prepared and implemented under the direction of a qualified archaeologist. All required close-out reporting would be completed in accordance with the Office of Historic Preservation’s ARMR.
MM PAL-1: The Applicant shall be required to obtain the services of a Qualified Paleontologist to remain on-call for the duration of the ground-disturbing construction activity. If requested by the City, a paleontological mitigation plan (PMP) outlining procedures for paleontological monitoring and/or data recovery shall be prepared for the Project and submitted to the City for review and approval. The development and implementation of the PMP shall include, but not be limited to, additional research and further assessment of paleontological sensitivity in the Project site, consultations with the Applicant's engineering geologist, as well as a requirement that the curation of all specimens recovered under any scenario shall be through an appropriate repository agreed upon by the City. The PMP shall also include developing a multilevel ranking system, or Potential Fossil Yield Classification (PFYC), as a tool to demonstrate the potential yield of fossils within a given stratigraphic unit. The PMP shall outline the monitoring and salvage protocols to address paleontological resources encountered during Project-related ground-disturbing activities. As well as the appropriate recording, collection, processing, curation, and reporting protocols to appropriately address any monitoring conducted or resources discovered.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 57
21500
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?)
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project would not occur simultaneously with other projects in the area that would result in a cumulative impact. Various projects are scheduled to occur within the City; however, none are within the immediate area of the Project site. The closest in-design project is a City sidewalk improvement project, located approximately 0.5 miles east of the Project site (City 2026).
Therefore, no cumulative impact would occur. The Project consists of developing City offices and fueling facilities and is not introducing new land uses that would create cumulative effects to the area.
The Project would not result in any impacts that would be significant after mitigation. With the mitigation measures listed in this Initial Study, impacts from the Project would not be c umulatively considerable.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact. Environmental effects that may cause substantial adverse effects on humans typically result from impacts on air quality and GHGs; noise; hazardous materials; ground shaking; hazardous design features with respect to transportation and roadway designs; and wildfire.
The analysis of this document indicates that impacts would be less than significant to the environmental areas mentioned above and, therefore, would not cause substantial adverse impacts to human beings. Impacts would be less than significant.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 58
21500
SECTION 5.0 – FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS EVALUATION The Proposed Project may receive federal funding for public facility infrastructure, energy conservation strategies, and alternative fuels through the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, Economic Development Administration, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), or other grant programs overseen by a federal agency. Therefore, to assist in compliance with the federal environmental requirements, this document includes analysis that may be pertinent to several federal regulations as well as the resource areas identified in the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidelines.
The following section describes the status of compliance with federal laws, executive orders, and policies, and the consultation that may or may not be required in the future once a grant fund source has been identified.
Federal Endangered Species Act
Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act requires relevant federal agencies to ensure proposed actions would not jeopardize endangered or threatened species or would result in the destruction or significant modifications of the species’ critical habitats. Per Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act, a proposed action that could result in an incidental take of a listed threatened or endangered species must consult with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to prepare a Biological Opinion. If the Biological Opinion finds that a proposed action could jeopardize the existence of a listed species , the designated agency cannot authorize the proposed action until it is modified to no longer jeopardize the species.
The Proposed Project site is a vacant and undeveloped parcel. There is no high-quality vegetation present that could be categorized as sensitive or endangered, nor does it contain habitats that could be used for critical or sensitive species. Therefore, a Biological Opinion would not be required for the Proposed Project.
National Historic Preservation Act, Section 106
The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is to protect, preserve, rehabilitate, or restore significant historical, archaeological and cultural resources. Under Section 106, the review will involve a step-by-step process described in 36 CFR Part 800.
The Proposed Project is undeveloped with no existing structures. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not require compliance with NHPA and would not affect structures that may have historic significance.
Federal Clean Air Act
The Federal Air Quality Standards were developed per the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA), which is a federal law that was passed in 1970 and further amended in 1990. This law provides the basis for the national air pollution control effort. An important element of the act included the development of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for major air pollutants.
The CAA established two types of air quality standards, otherwise known as primary and secondary standards. The primary standards set limits to protect public health which includes sensitive populations
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 59
21500
(such as asthmatics, children, elderly). The secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare and include protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation and buildings. The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards) has set NAAQS for principal pollutants, which are named ‘criteria’ pollutants.
The results of the Air Quality study indicate that the Proposed Project would not require mitigation measures to minimize any potential air quality impacts (Appendix A). Additionally, the emission levels of the construction and operation of the Proposed Project would not be above the existing thresholds.
Coastal Zone Management Act
Passed by Congress in 1972, the Coastal Zone Management Act was designed to balance land and water issues in coastal zones. The purpose of the act aims to ‘preserve, protect, development and where possible, to restore or enhance the resources of the nation’s coastal zone’. Within the state of California, the Coastal Zone Management Act is managed by the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, California Coastal Conservancy, and the California Coastal Commission.
The Proposed Project is located inland within Riverside County. It is not located adjacent to any coastal zones. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not result in impacting any coastal zones.
Farmland Protection Policy Act
The Farmland Protection Policy Act requires a designated federal agency to consider the potential effects of a proposed action on the nation’s farmlands. The policy intends to minimize the impact of federal programs and actions with regards to the conversion from farmland to nonagricultural uses. The policy assures that, to the extent possible, federal programs and actions are administered to be compatible with policies to protect farmland.
While the Project site is undeveloped, it is not a designated farmland area, nor is it nearby any farmland areas. Additionally, the proposed uses do not involve any farmland operations, nor would it remove any existing farmlands. No effects or impacts are assumed. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not impede on this policy.
Executive Order 11988 – Floodplain Management
Executive Order 11988 requires the designated federal agencies to recognize the value of floodplains, and to consider the benefits to the public in restoring and preserving floodplains.
As described in the Hydrology and Water Quality Section 4.10, the Project site is located outside of a flood hazard area. While the Proposed Project would introduce impervious surfaces to the undeveloped area, it would not expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding. The Proposed Project would implement construction and operational BMPs to address any runoff and drainage changes. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not impede on this executive order.
Federal Migratory Bird Treat Act (Executive Order 13168)
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 60
21500
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act and Golden Eagle Protection Act prohibits the take of migratory birds, and the take and commerce of eagles (birds, or any part, nest or eggs of such bird species). The Executive Order 13168 requires a proposed action with federal involvement to address impacts on migratory birds.
The Project site does not contain any sensitive habitats or vegetation that could house sensitive species.
As described in the Biological Resources Section 4.3, the Proposed Project would have a less than significant impact on nesting birds with implementation of BIO-1 and compliance with the MBTA to minimize impacts to nesting birds. Therefore, the Proposed Project would comply under this order.
Executive Order 11990 Protection of Wetlands
Per Executive Order 11990, federal agencies must avoid affecting wetlands unless it has been determined that no other practicable alternative is available.
The Project site is undeveloped and disturbed. There are no wetlands or other riparian habitats present.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would comply with this order.
Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act was passed in 1968 to protect and preserve designated rivers as defined in the act for their natural, cultural and recreational value.
The Project site is undeveloped and disturbed. There are no rivers, streams, or other water bodies within or nearby the Project site. The Proposed Project, therefore, would not affect any wild or scenic rivers.
Safe Drinking Water Act
Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act established the EPA’s Sole Source Aquifer Program. This protects communities from groundwater contamination from federally funded projects.
Per the Sole Source Aquifer Maps from the U.S. EPA, the Proposed Project is not located within any of the identified aquifers. Therefore, this act does not apply to the Proposed Project.
Executive Order 13195 on Trails for America in the 21st Century
This Executive Order on Trails for America requires federal agencies to protect, connect, promote, and assist trails of all types through the U.S.
The Proposed Project is located within a developed area of the City surrounded primarily by industrial uses. The Project site and vicinity are not located nearby any recreational areas or designated trails.
Therefore, the Proposed Project would not affect trails within the City or County.
Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites
As defined in Executive Order 13007, sacred sites are defined as any “specific, discrete, narrowly delineated location on federal land that is identified by an Indian tribe, or Indian individual determined to be an appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion, as sacred by virtue of its
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 61
21500
established religious significance to, or ceremonial use by an Indian religion; provided that the tribe or appropriately authoritative representative of an Indian religion has informed the agency of the existence of such a site."
The results from the record searches described in the Cultural Resources Section 4.5 did not find any previous resources reports within the Project site. While the results do not show resources in the area, the General Plan identifies portions of the City having high sensitivity for cultural resources. Although no cultural resources were identified, mitigation measures outlined in Section 4.5.2 were included to address the discovery of undocumented or newly discovered resources. Additionally, as discussed i n the Tribal Cultural Resources Section 4.18.1, mitigation measures have been incorporated as requested by the Native American Tribes consulting during the AB 52 consultation. Implementation of these measures would ensure that the Proposed Project would not impact sacred sites.
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is the primary act that governs federal management of fisheries in federal waters. The Act also requires federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on proposed actions that could damage essential fish habitats as defined in the Sustainable Fisheries Act.
The Project site does not contain any bodies of water that could contain fish habitats. Therefore, the act does not apply to the Proposed Project.
Environmental Justice
The US EPA defines environmental justice as:
“The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or economic groups should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, State, local, and tribal programs, and policies.”
In February 2025, the environmental justice (EJ) categories from the NEPA reviews were removed. The guidance on analyzing effects related to EJ shifted to focus on reasonably foreseeable effects. While the NEPA regulations have omitted the EPA database to identify such communities, the State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) provides a CalEnviroScreen screening tool to identify communities that may be disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and with characteristics that make them more sensitive to pollution. The Project site is not identified to be within a disadvantaged community per the CalEnviroScreen screening. Additionally, the Project site is surrounded predominantly by industrial/public service facilities and would not affect residential or commercial communities.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 62
21500
SECTION 6.0 – ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED
6.1.1 Proposed Project
The Proposed Project is described in detail in Section 1.0.
6.1.2 No Project Alternative
Under the No Project alternative, no action would be taken. The City would maintain the status quo of the existing City fleet maintenance and would operate using their existing buildings. There would be no expansion of City facilities, and the proposed site would remain vacant.
Without the new maintenance building, existing shops will remain in use. However, the City currently lacks capacity for fleet growth. Additionally, this alternative would backlog preventative maintenance which could lead to fleet delays due to constrained maintenance.
The No Action alternative would not include the expansion of fuel alternatives (CNG or hydrogen fuels).
This would result in continued reliance on older diesel or CNG vehicles. This would delay transition to zero-emission or low-emission technologies.
There would be no new stormwater systems, energy-efficient buildings, or emissions-reducing infrastructure. Maintenance operations would continue within the current City buildings with existing limitations (e.g. insufficient bays, outdated equipment, non-compliance with modern safety standards).
The City still needs to expand its fleet and offices to accommodate staff growth and expanding fleet vehicles to service the City and its residents at another location. While the site would not be developed by the Proposed Project, future development could still occur. Therefore, the No Project/No Action alternative would not provide the City open space to allow for City expansion.
6.1.3 Alternative 1: Off-Site / Third-Party Fueling
Under Alternative 1, this consists of construction of the Proposed Project without the installation of the fueling stations. This alternative will require the City to identify a third-party fueling station or construct a fueling station at a separate location. Alternative 1 would result in the City continually fueling at commercial CNG stations and will require a contract with regional hydrogen supplies if available. The need for a third-party supplier would increase deadhead miles and operating costs due to off-site fueling. The City’s fleet would also experience reduced reliability if fueling infrastructure is limited or inconsistent.
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 63
21500
SECTION 7.0 – REFERENCES
The following is a list of references used in the preparation of this document.
Beaumont (City)
2020 City of Beaumont General Plan. Available online at:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/36788/Attachment-F---link-to- Final-EIR
2026 City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Projects Status. Available online at:
https://beaumontgis.com/arcgis/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=aa484d78e66 4465eb454b32a8d197464#data_s=id%3AdataSource_1-198be1aa33b-layer-2%3A34.
California Department of Conservation (DOC)
2025 Williamson Act Enrollment Finder. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/WilliamsonAct/App/ . 2026a Department of Conservation, California Important Farmland Finder. Available online at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
2026b California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application. Available online at:
https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geohazards/eq-zapp
California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CAL FIRE) 2026 CalFire, Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Available online at: https://calfire- forestry.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=988d431a42b242b29d89 597ab693d008
California Department of Water Resources
2026 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) Data Viewer. Available online at:
https://sgma.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=SGMADataViewer#boundaries .
California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) 2026 Envirostor Database. Available online at
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/profile_report?global_id=60001577 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
2020 Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Available online at:
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental- analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf
2026 Caltrans, Scenic Highways. Available online at: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap- landscape-architecture-and-community-livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways County of Riverside (County)
2024 County of Riverside Emergency Operations Plan. Available online at:
https://rivcoready.org/sites/g/files/aldnop181/files/users/user41/RivCo%20EOP%20202
4.pdf
Beaumont Corporate Yard Project
Beaumont, California
Chambers Group, Inc. 64
21500
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
2026 FEMA Flood Maps. Available online at: https://msc.fema.gov/portal/home Google
2026 Google Earth. Available online at: https://earth.google.com/web/ .
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)
2026 State Water Resources Control Board, GeoTracker Map. Available online at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=6500+Atlant ic+Avenue%2C+Long+Beach%2C+CA+90805+
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
2026 National Wetlands Inventory. Available online at:
https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/ .
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
2026 Web Soil Survey online at: https://earth.google.com/web/ .
Western Riverside County Regional Conservation Authority (WRCRCA) 2025 RCA MSHCP Information Map. Available online at:
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/379b037fb33b4cc0ad8849c5dca76db6 .
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
[email protected]
City of Beaumont
550 E. 6th Street
Beaumont, California 92223
Account Number:5209298
Ad Order Number:0011798320
Customer's Reference/PO Number:
Publication:The Press-Enterprise
Publication Dates:06/14/2026 and 06/20/2026
Total Amount:$547.44
Payment Amount:$0.00
Amount Due:$547.44
Notice ID:kIukOmijRVguGOHv38tM
Invoice Text:City of Beaumont Notice of Intent to adopt an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Beaumont Corporate Yard Project Notice is hereby given that the City of Beaumont (City) has released a Notice of Intent (NOI) to adopt an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Beaumont Corporate Yard Project (Proposed Project) located in Riverside County. The Proposed Project is located at the southwest intersection of 4th Street and Veile Avenue within the City of Beaumont, California. The Proposed Project would develop a Transit Yard and facility utilized by the City for operational purposes. The approximately 6.15-acre parcel development would include the construction of an Administration Building, Fleet Garage, Welding Bay Canopy, Wash Bay Canopy, Warehouse, Hydrogen Fueling Station, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Station, Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure, and designated parking with both uncovered and solar- covered areas for up to 200 spaces. The IS/MND evaluates potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of the construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project. The Final IS/MND will incorporate written input received during the public comment period, from June 15, 2026 to July 14, 2026 . The Draft IS/MND may be viewed online on the City’s website for the Project at:
https://www.beaumontca.gov/1504/Public-Notices . This website provides access to public documents and information pertaining to the environmental review process for the Project and will be updated during the review process to include current Project information, as it becomes available. A printed copy of the Draft IS/MND is also made available at the City Clerk’s Office located at 550 E. 6 th Street, Beaumont, CA 92223 Notice of Intent - Page 1 of 1Page 250 of 452
The Press-Enterprise
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
City of Beaumont
550 E. 6th Street
Beaumont, California 92223
Publication: The Press-Enterprise
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF
Ad Desc: 0011798320
FILE NO. 0011798320
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
I am a citizen of the United States. I
am over the age of eighteen years and
not party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am an authorized
representative of THE PRESS-
ENTERPRISE, a newspaper of
general circulation, printed and
published daily in the County of
Riverside, and which newspaper has
been adjudicated a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Riverside, State
of California, under date of April 25,
1952, Case Number 54446, under
date of March 29, 1957, Case Number
65673, under date of August 25, 1995,
Case Number 267864, and under date
of September 16, 2013, Case Number
RIC 1309013; that the notice, of which
the annexed is a printed copy, has
been published in said newspaper in
accordance with the instructions of the
person(s) requesting publication, and
not in any supplement thereof on the
following dates, to wit:
06/14/2026, 06/20/2026
I certify (or declare) under the penalty
of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Date: June 20, 2026.
At: Riverside, California
______________________________
Signature
Notice of Intent - Page 1 of 1Page 251 of 452
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
[email protected]
City of Beaumont
550 E. 6th Street
Beaumont, California 92223
Account Number:5209298
Ad Order Number:0011803982
Customer's Reference/PO Number:
Publication:The Press-Enterprise
Publication Dates:07/23/2026
Total Amount:$548.67
Payment Amount:$0.00
Amount Due:$548.67
Notice ID:XLHXsrCsEUO0ZFZnOsJC
Invoice Text:LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the City Council of the City of Beaumont will conduct a public hearing to consider the matter described below. The City Council's public hearing will be held at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, August 4, 2026, at 550 East Sixth Street, Beaumont, California. ADOPT A CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORT PROGRAM (MMRP) FOR THE BEAUMONT TRANSIT YARD (T25-01). Conduct a public hearing to consider a request for adoption of a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program for the Beaumont Transit Yard (Project). The proposed Project would develop a Transit Yard and facility utilized by the City for operational purposes. The approximately 6.15-acre parcel development would include the construction of an Administration Building, Fleet Garage, Welding Bay Canopy, Wash Bay Canopy, Warehouse, Hydrogen Fueling Station, Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Fueling Station, Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure, and designated parking with both uncovered and solar-covered areas for up to 200 spaces. The Project site is located at the southwest corner of 4 th Street and Veile Avenue on Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 417-110-018. Project Title: T25-01 Beaumont Transit Yard Public comments can be made in person, using the public comment phone line, or by written email. Phone-in comments will be accepted by calling the designated public comment phone line (951) 922-4845 prior to the corresponding item. Public comments shall not exceed three minutes unless otherwise authorized by the City Council. Written Beaumont Transit Yard - Page 1 of 1Page 252 of 452
The Press-Enterprise
3512 14 Street
Riverside, California 92501
(951) 368-9229
City of Beaumont
550 E. 6th Street
Beaumont, California 92223
Publication: The Press-Enterprise
PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF
Ad Desc: 0011803982
FILE NO. 0011803982
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
I am a citizen of the United States. I
am over the age of eighteen years and
not party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am an authorized
representative of THE PRESS-
ENTERPRISE, a newspaper of
general circulation, printed and
published daily in the County of
Riverside, and which newspaper has
been adjudicated a newspaper of
general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of Riverside, State
of California, under date of April 25,
1952, Case Number 54446, under
date of March 29, 1957, Case Number
65673, under date of August 25, 1995,
Case Number 267864, and under date
of September 16, 2013, Case Number
RIC 1309013; that the notice, of which
the annexed is a printed copy, has
been published in said newspaper in
accordance with the instructions of the
person(s) requesting publication, and
not in any supplement thereof on the
following dates, to wit:
07/23/2026
I certify (or declare) under the penalty
of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Date: July 23, 2026.
At: Riverside, California
______________________________
Signature
Beaumont Transit Yard - Page 1 of 1Page 253 of 452
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lisa Leach, CPA, Interim Finance Director
DATE: August 18, 2026
SUBJECT: Introduction to Chandler Asset Management, Inc.
Description: Introduction of Chandler Asset Management, Inc. as the City’s new investment advisor and an opportunity for the firm to provide a brief overview of its services and team.
Motion:
If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:
I move to receive and file the report.
Recommendation:
Receive and file.
Discussion:
The City conducted a competitive Request for Proposals process for investment advisory and portfolio management services in January. Ten proposals were received and evaluated, and two firms were invited to make formal presentations.
Following the evaluation process, Chandler Asset Management, Inc. was selected as the firm that best met the City's needs. City staff have been working with Chandler staff to transition its investment assets from the previous advisor, with the transfer completed in July 2026. Chandler representatives will provide a brief introduction to the firm, its public-sector experience, and the team that will support the City's investment program.
Fiscal Impact:
There is no fiscal impact at this time. The cost to prepare this report is $150.
Alternatives:
Receive and file the presentation from Chandler Asset Management, Inc. and provide direction to staff, as appropriate.
Attachments:
A. Chandler Asset Management, Inc. Powerpoint
1 City of Beaumont
Investment Management Services
Mia Corral Brown
Regional Director
July 27, 2026
Partnering with Chandler
3 Experienced Team
Karl Otto Meng, CFA
Portfolio Strategist
20 Yrs. Industry Experience
Portfolio Strategy and
Research
Mia Corral Brown
Regional Director
29 Yrs. Industry Experience
Relationship Management,
Client Engagement
Aaron Nail, CFA
Portfolio Manager
9 Yrs. Industry Experience
Portfolio Strategy and
Research
Isabelle Arguelles
Client Service Associate
2 Yrs. Industry Experience
Client Service and
Reporting
4 Public
88%
Healthcare
11%
Other
1%
Fast Facts
▪SEC-Registered Investment Adviser
▪Founded in 1988 by public finance professionals.
▪100% owned by current and former employees through
an Employee Stock Ownership Plan.
▪Headquartered in San Diego, CA with offices in Ventura, CA; Oakland, CA; Marin County, CA; Seattle, WA; Denver, CO; and Clearwater, FL.
Tailored Investment Solutions, Customized Guidance & Support ▪We listen first, then customize an investment strategy specific to your agency’s needs, goals and risk profile. We don’t have a one-size-fits-all approach. ▪You’ll have direct access to the investment management team members guiding your portfolio.
▪We will set you up for success with reporting and presentations catered to your stakeholders.
Assets Under Management: $45.6 B
As of March 31, 2026
Firm Snapshot
Total AUM ($B)Employees
2021 $25.8 33
2022 $28.6 41
2023 $35.8 47
2024 $41.6 52
2025 $45.3 54
Track Record of Growth
Data as of December 31 of each year
Markets are volatile, but your stakeholders crave certainty. We take a proactive approach to investment management that helps clients like you navigate the curve.
5 Partnerships with Neighboring Agencies
Los Angeles Area Clients
City of Bell
City of Beverly Hills
City of Camarillo
Crescenta Valley WD
City of El Monte
City of Gardena
City of La Mirada
LA County MTA
City of Monterey Park
City of Pico Rivera
City of Pomona
City of Port Hueneme
Three Valleys Muni WD
Upper San Gabriel Muni WD
Walnut Valley WD
Orange County Clients
City of Brea
City of Buena Park
City of Costa Mesa
East Orange County WD
City of Fountain Valley
City of La Habra
City of Mission Viejo
Moulton Niguel WD
City of Newport Beach
City of Orange
OC Transportation Authority
City of San Clemente
City of San Juan Capistrano
Santa Ana Watershed PA
South Coast WD
City of Stanton
Transportation Corridor Agencies
City of Tustin
City of Westminster
Inland Area Clients
City of Riverside
City of Chino Hills
Coachella Valley WD
City of Corona
Beaumont Cherry Valley WD
Elsinore Valley Muni WD
City of Indio
City of Jurupa Valley
City of Menifee
City of Moreno Valley
City of Murrieta
City of Palm Springs
City of Perris
Rancho California WD
San Bernardino Muni WD
City of San Jacinto
Temescal Valley WD
West Valley WD
San Diego Clients
City of Chula Vista
City of Imperial Beach
City of National City
City of Oceanside
County of San Diego
(Advisory)
San Diego County Regional
Airport
San Diego County WA
City of San Marcos
City of Solana Beach
San Diego Community Power
San Diego Unified School
District
$35 Billion in AUM for California-based agencies as of 3/31/2026 A listing of the Firm's clients in the State of California’s Inland area, Los Angeles, Orange County and San Diego County as of 3/31/2026. This list only includes clients that have given permission to be listed. It is not known whether the clients liste d approve or disapprove of Chandler Asset Management and the advisory services provided. Includes discretionary and non-discretionary relationships.Page 260 of 452
6 Collaborating on All Aspects of your
Investment Program
Chandler is committed to executing your scope of services so that you can meet the City’s investment goals
Assistance with determining risk tolerance
and selecting appropriate benchmark
Assistance with cashflow and
maturity analysis
Recommendations on the City’s investment policy based
on legislative changes and industry best practices
Quarterly performance reports against
City’s benchmark
Presentations to the City Council
Management of the City’s
portfolio
Monthly portfolio reporting and online access to
current account information
Credit analysis on investments held
in portfolio
Development of investment
strategies within government code
Technical analysis and
market research
7 Building an Investment Program
Initial Steps
•Credit analysis of security issuers and financial institutions •Asset-liability management
•Broker/dealer due diligence and relations
•Consistent application of a disciplined,conservative investment process •Safety of principal*
•Appropriate levels of
liquidity
•Diversification of risk
•Generating market yield
and return
•Compliance with legal
requirements, policies, and
objectives
*While Chandler focuses on safety of principal by investing in conservative investment-grade quality bonds,investors should be aware that bonds and other fixed income securities do carry some degree of risk and we cannot ensure a profit nor guarantee against loss.
Ongoing Management
Approach Focused On:
8 •Daily cash required for
payroll, operational and
other outgoing invoices
•Local Government
Investment Pools (LGIP)
•Government Money Market
Funds
•Matching maturities to
known expenditures
Total Portfolio
Liquidity Portfolio
Less than 1 year
Checking Account
Daily liquidity
Segmenting Account Structure
Custom Solutions
Dependent on need
Reserve Portfolio
Greater than 1 year
•Limited Maturity or Short-
Term Bond Strategy
•Longer-duration, high-
quality securities allowed by
Government Code and the
Investment Policy to
potentially increase
earnings
•Book or total return
objective
•Option for customized
investment solutions for
operating, project, and
restricted bond reserves
•OPEB, 115 Trusts
9 Short Term Bond (1-5 Year)
AUM $17.3B*, inception 09/30/1995
Limited Maturity (1-3 Year)
AUM $11.2B*, inception 10/31/1988
Average Final Maturity 2.11 years
Average Duration 1.84 years
Yield-to-Maturity 3.95%
Average Quality (S&P)AA+
Average Coupon 3.81%
*Based on Chandler’s Limited Maturity and Short Term Bond composite characteristics as of 3/31/2026.Credit quality equivalent of composite/average of S&P,Moody’s and Fitch ratings;“A”category includes “A-1”rated money market securities.The composite characteristic information presented above is supplemental information pursuant to GIPS®.There is no guarantee that investment in any of these styles will result in characteristics similar to those that appear in this presentation due to changes in economic conditions and other market factors.Past characteristics are not indicative of future results.
Average Final Maturity 2.94 years
Average Duration 2.51 years
Yield-to-Maturity 4.03%
Average Quality (S&P)AA+
Average Coupon 3.78%
Chandler’s Composites
Short Term Bond (1-5 Year)
9.0%
40.1%49.7%
1.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
0-1 Years 1-3 Years 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Maturity Distribution
*Other includes Municipal Bonds, Negotiable CDs and
Commercial Paper
Agency
5.8%Other*
2.7%
US Corporate
25.3%
US Treasury
45.5%
Cash
0.9%
ABS
8.1%
CMO
7.9%
Supranational
3.8%
SECTOR ALLOCATION
Limited Maturity (1-3 Year)
21.2%
55.5%
22.9%
0.4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
0-1 Years 1-3 Years 3-5 Years 5+ Years
Maturity Distribution
Agency
14.0%
Cash
0.7%
US Corporate
23.7%
US Treasury
46.0%
Supranational
2.1%
ABS
5.9%
CMO
6.7%
Other*
0.9%
SECTOR ALLOCATION
*Other includes Municipal Bonds, MBS, Negotiable CDs and Commercial Paper
10 Composite Performance
Based on Chandler’s Limited Maturity and Short Term Bond composites as of 3/31/2026.Please see the GIPS Composite Reports at the end of this presentation.Past performance is not indicative of future results.Performance is presented gross and net of investment management fees.*Net returns are for a sample fee of 8 basis points (0.08 of 1%).All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss.Market conditions or economic factors may alter the performance and results of a portfolio.Performance for periods greater than one year is annualized.For one-on-one presentation.
Composite Performance as of March 31, 2026 –Gross and Net of Fees* Our GIPS compliant results underscore the strength of Chandler’s investment process and approach to risk management
Total Rate of Return One
Year
Three
Years
Five
Years
Ten
Years
Since
Inception
Chandler Limited Maturity (Gross) 4.15%4.51%2.25%2.09%4.20% Chandler Limited Maturity (Net)4.07%4.43%2.17%2.01%4.12% ICE BofA 1-3 Year U.S. Treasury Index 3.75%4.04%1.86%1.78%3.89% Difference (Gross)0.40%0.47%0.39%0.31%0.31%
Chandler Short Term Bond (Gross) 4.30%4.47%1.90%2.02%3.67% Chandler Short Term Bond (Net)4.22%4.39%1.82%2.94%3.59% ICE BofA 1-5 Year U.S. Treasury & Agency Index 3.87%3.93%1.49%1.70%3.38% Difference (Gross)0.43%0.54%0.41%0.32%0.29%
11 Historical Index Performance
Source: Bloomberg. Graph demonstrating the performance of commonly used benchmarks among our clients.Historical benchmark performance data for the 3 Month Treasury Bill Index, 1-3 Year Treasury Index, and 1-5 Year Treasury & Agency indices sourced from Bloomberg AIM. Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions. Historical performance results for investment indexes do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment management fee, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Please see important hypothetical disclosures at the end of this presentation, page 16.
Hypothetical Example: Growth of $100 Million Over 20 Years
12 Compliance with Investment Policy
This sample report is being provided for illustrative purposes to demonstrate Chandler Asset Management’s reporting capabilities.Elements of the Compliance Report are representative of investment guidelines promulgated by State Law or the entity’s investment policy.
13 Commitment to Excellence in Service and
Communication
Daily/Weekly
•Direct access to investment team members via phone and email •24/7 online account access to reporting and trade tickets •Weekly economic recap
Monthly •Monthly portfolio statements and affirmation of compliance •Bond Market and Economic Review
Quarterly
•Meetings in-person/via web conferencing to review portfolio •Customized comprehensive quarterly reporting
•Quarterly investment reports, including cash flow review •In-depth economic discussion
Annually
•Initial and Annual Investment Policy review
•GASB 40/72 reports
•Fiscal year-end reports
Custom
•Presentations to Staff and stakeholders
•Projects, presentations and discussions on various topics •Training and education
14 •Portfolio summary
•Compliance statement
•Reconciliation summary
•Holdings report
•Transactions ledger
•Income earned
•Cash flow
•Detailed portfolio performance reports
•Market analysis
Robust Reporting
Monthly Reports Quarterly Reports and Market Analysis
Online Platform and Customizable Reports
Supported by CWAN, our clients also have access to
customizable reporting 24/7.
This sample report is being provided for illustrative purposes to demonstrate Chandler Asset Management’s reporting capabilities.References to specific securities and their characteristics are examples of securities potentially held in a sample portfolio and are not intended to be,and should not be interpreted as an offer,solicitation or recommendation to purchase or sell any financial instrument,an indication that the purchase of such securities was or will be profitable,or representative of the composition or performance of the portfolio.
15 THANK YOU!
QUESTIONS?
Disclosures
17 ©2026 Chandler Asset Management,Inc.,an SEC-Registered Investment Adviser.
This report is being provided for informational purposes only.No investment decision should be made based solely on the information provided herein.All investments involve risk,including loss of principal invested.The strategies referenced may not be suitable for all investors.The information contained herein is based on internal research derived from various sources and does not purport to be statements of all material facts relating to the strategies.While not guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness,some of the information has been obtained from sources we believe to be reliable.Opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice.There can be no assurance that an account or specific investment product will be able to achieve its investment objective.No guarantee of investment performance is being provided and no inference to the contrary should be made.
Any forecasts,forward-looking statements and assumptions are inherently limited and should not be relied upon as an indicator of future results.Any opinions and views constitute judgments made by the author at the date of this presentation and may become outdated or superseded at any time without notice.Any statements concerning financial market trends are based on current market conditions,which will fluctuate.
Economic factors,market conditions and investment strategies will affect the performance of any portfolio and there are no assurances that it will match or outperform any particular benchmark.The data contained in this presentation is the property of those providers,which were obtained from sources believed to be reliable,but are subject to change at any time at the provider’s discretion.Unless otherwise noted,Chandler is the source of data contained in this presentation.
Fixed Income investments are subject to interest,credit and market risk.Interest rate risk:the value of fixed income investments will decline as interest rates rise.Credit risk:the possibility that the borrower may not be able to repay interest and principal.Low rated bonds generally must pay higher interest rates to attract investors willing to take on greater risk.Market risk:the bond market in general could decline due to economic conditions,especially during periods of rising interest rates.
References to specific securities are examples of securities held in a portfolio and are not intended to be,and should not be interpreted as an offer,solicitation,or recommendation to purchase or sell any financial instrument,an indication that the purchase of such securities was or will be profitable,or representative of the composition or performance of the portfolio.The information contained in this sample presentation was obtained from sources we believe to be reliable,but we do not guarantee its accuracy.Past performance is not indicative of future success.
Performance results are presented gross-of-advisory fees and represent the client's Total Return.The deduction of advisory fees lowers performance results.These results include the reinvestment of dividends and other earnings.Past performance may not be indicative of future results.
Therefore,clients should not assume that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy will be profitable or equal to past performance levels.All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss.Economic factors,market conditions or changes in investment strategies,contributions or withdrawals may materially alter the performance and results of your portfolio.Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions.Historical performance results for investment indexes generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment management fee,the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results.It is not possible to invest directly in an index.
ICE BofA 0-3 Year US Treasury &Agency Index
ICE BofA 0-3 Year US Treasury &Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market.Qualifying securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s,S&P and Fitch).In addition,qualifying securities must have a remaining term to final maturity less than 3 years,at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance,a fixed coupon schedule and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for agencies."Global" securities (debt issued simultaneously in the eurobond and US domestic markets)and 144a securities qualify for inclusion in the Index.Subordinated US agency securities are excluded from the index.Callable perpetual securities qualify provided they are at least one year from the first call date.Fixed-to-floating rate securities also qualify provided they are callable within the fixed rate period and are at least one year from the last call prior to the date the bond transitions from a fixed to a floating rate security.Bills,inflation-linked debt and strips are also excluded from the Index;however,original issue zero coupon bonds are included in the Index and the amounts outstanding of qualifying coupon securities are not reduced by any portions that have been stripped.
ICE BofA US 3-Month Treasury Bill Index
The ICE BofA US 3-Month Treasury Bill Index is comprised of a single issue purchased at the beginning of the month and held for a full month.At the end of the month that issue is sold and rolled into a newly selected issue.The issue selected at each month-end rebalancing is the outstanding Treasury Bill that matures closest to,but not beyond,three months from the rebalancing date.
ICE BofA 1-5 Year US Treasury &Agency Index
The ICE BofA 1-5 Year US Treasury &Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market.Qualifying securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s,S&P and Fitch).
Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions.Historical performance results for investment indexes generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment management fee,the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results.It is not possible to invest directly in an index.
Source ICE Data Indices,LLC ("ICE"),used with permission.ICE permits the use of ICE Indices and related data on an “as is”basis;ICE,its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representation,express and/or implied,including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use,including the indices,index data and any data included in,related to,or derived therefrom.Neither ICE data,its affiliates or their respective third-party providers guarantee the quality,adequacy,accuracy,timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof,and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is”basis and licensee’s use is at licensee’s own risk.ICE data,its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor,endorse,or recommend Chandler,or any of its products or services.
Where listed,certain performance shown is hypothetical and does not represent actual trading in a client's account.HYPOTHETICAL OR SIMULATED PERFORMANCE RESULTS HAVE CERTAIN LIMITATIONS.UNLIKE AN ACTUAL PERFORMANCE RECORD,SIMULATED RESULTS DO NOT REPRESENT ACTUAL TRADING.NO REPRESENTATION IS BEING MADE THAT ANY ACCOUNT WILL OR IS LIKELY TO ACHIEVE PROFIT OR LOSSES SIMILAR TO THOSE SHOWN.THERE ARE FREQUENTLY SHARP DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS AND THE ACTUAL RESULTS SUBSEQUENTLY ACHIEVED BY ANY PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM.ONE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS IS THAT THEY ARE GENERALLY PREPARED WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT.IN ADDITION,HYPOTHETICAL TRADING DOES NOT INVOLVE FINANCIAL RISK AND DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT MATERIAL AND MARKET FACTORS MAY HAVE IMPACTED THE ADVISER'S DECISION-MAKING IF THE ADVISER WERE ACTUALLY MANAGING CLIENT'S MONEY.NO HYPOTHETICAL TRADING RECORD CAN COMPLETELY ACCOUNT FOR THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL RISK IN ACTUAL TRADING.FOR EXAMPLE,THE ABILITY TO WITHSTAND LOSSES OR ADHERE TO A PARTICULAR TRADING PROGRAM IN SPITE OF TRADING LOSSES ARE MATERIAL POINTS WHICH CAN ALSO ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS.THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER
FACTORS RELATED TO THE MARKETS IN GENERAL OR TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY SPECIFIC TRADING PROGRAM WHICH CANNOT BE FULLY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE PREPARATION OF HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE RESULTS,ALL OF WHICH CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT ACTUAL TRADING RESULTS.It should not be assumed that investors who invest in Chandler Asset Management's Portfolios will be profitable or achieve the hypothetical performance results reflected or any corresponding index presented.Actual performance of and holdings and investment implementation in Chandler Asset Management's client accounts can materially differ from that of the hypothetical models presented herein and performance can be higher or lower than the results shown.Investors may have experienced investment results during the corresponding time periods that were materially different from those portrayed.The opinions referenced are as of the date of publication and are subject to change.Chandler Asset Management has discretion in the timing of trade execution and selection of securities traded and utilized in any client account,which can and will materially differ from the hypothetical simulated performance based upon a variety of factors,including the adviser's discretion to not follow any trading signal generated and to determine the timing and implementation of a trade (which can include securities other than those listed).
Disclosures
18 GIPS® Compliant Verification Statement
19 1.Chandler Asset Management is an independent investment adviser registered as such with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Adviser’s Act of 1940.Registration with the SEC does not imply a certain level of skill or training.Since 1988,Chandler Asset Management has provided fixed income investment management services to the public sector,as well as to foundations,endowments,individuals and corporations.A complete list and description of all of the firm’s composites is available upon request.
2.The Ultra Short Bond Composite is a composite of individually managed accounts with an average modified duration approximately equal to the modified duration of the ICE BofA Blended 0-3 year Treasury index and a maximum final stated maturity of individual securities of three years.The minimum account size required to be included in this composite is $2 million.This composite was created in November 1988 and incepted December 1988.The name of this composite was changed from Principal Preservation effective June 30,2009.
3.The ICE BofA Blended 0-3 Year US Treasury Index is a static,internally maintained benchmark comprised of US dollar denominated sovereign debt publicly issued by the US government in its domestic market.Effective 1/1/2001,it consists of the following indices:(30%)ICE BofA US 3-Month Treasury Bill Index,(30%)ICE BofA US 6-Month Treasury Bill Index,(40%)ICE BofA 1-3 Year US Treasury Index.Qualifying securities will include 3 and 6-month Treasury Bills and US Treasury securities that must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than three years remaining term to final maturity,a fixed coupon schedule,and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion.Qualifying securities must have at least 18 months to final maturity at the time of issuance.*Prior to 1/1/2001 it consisted of (100%)ICE BofA US 1-Year Treasury Bill Index,G0O3.Indexes are referred to for comparative purposes only and are not intended to parallel the risk or investment style of the portfolios in the Composite.Indexes do not utilize leverage.Index calculations do not reflect fees, brokerage commissions or other expenses of investing.Investors may not make direct investments into any index.Index data contained herein (and all trademarks related thereto)are owned by the indicated index provider,and may not be redistributed.The information herein has not been approved by the index provider.
4.Valuations are computed and performance reported in U.S.Dollars.
5.Performance is calculated using a time-weighted total rate of return,which links performance monthly,and is reported gross of investment management fees and custodial fees,but after all trading expenses.Results reflect the reinvestment of income,dividends and other earnings,and include realized and unrealized gains and losses and interest accrued through the last day of each month.Results do not reflect the potential impact of taxes.Past performance is not indicative of future results.Fees charged by Chandler Asset Management will reduce performance.
6.Net-of-fees performance returns are calculated by reducing the monthly gross performance by one-twelfth (1/12)of the actual maximum applicable fee of 0.25%,which is representative of our current fee schedule for this composite.These monthly returns are then geometrically linked to produce annual returns which are presented before custodial fees but after management fees and all trading expenses.Fees are negotiable and additional information regarding Chandler's fees is included in our Part 2A of Form ADV.
7.Dispersion is calculated using the asset weighted standard deviation of annual gross returns of those portfolios that were included in the composite for the entire year.For years when less than six portfolios were included in the composite for the full year,no dispersion measure is presented.The three-year annualized standard deviation measures the variability of the composite gross returns and the benchmark returns over the preceding 36-month period.Policies for valuing investments,calculating performance,and preparing GIPS reports are available upon request.
8.Policies for valuing investments,calculating performance,and preparing GIPS reports are available upon request.
9.GIPS®is a registered trademark of CFA Institute.CFA Institute does not endorse or promote this organization,nor does it warrant the accuracy or quality of the content contained herein.
Annual Rates of Return 2014 through 2024
Returns 3 Year Annualized Dispersion Assets
Year Total Total Standard Deviation Asset Wtd Number of Composite % of Firm Firm End Gross Net Index Composite Index Std. Dev.Portfolios (MM)Assets (MM) 2015 0.46%0.21%0.30%0.23%0.23%≤5 ≤5 62 0.53%11,747
2016 0.97%0.71%0.65%0.30%0.32%≤5 ≤5 80 0.62%12,882
2017 0.99%0.74%0.71%0.29%0.32%0.09%≤5 86 0.63%13,698
2018 1.97%1.72%1.77%0.34%0.40%0.05%≤5 59 0.35%16,551
2019 3.29%3.04%2.88%0.44%0.47%≤5 ≤5 66 0.34%19,552
2020 2.08%1.83%1.76%0.52%0.63%0.04%≤5 66 0.29%22,227
2021 -0.16%-0.41%-0.17%0.62%0.67%0.00%≤5 64 0.25%25,785 2022 -0.17%-0.95%-0.65%0.82%0.82%0.05%≤5 64 0.22%28,641 2023 5.09%4.83%4.76%1.10%1.08%0.01%2 56 0.16%35,804
2024 4.98%4.72%4.82%1.23%1.19%0.00%1 28 0.06%41,585
Chandler Asset Management claims compliance with the
Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®) and has prepared and presented this report in compliance with the GIPS standards.
Chandler Asset Management has been independently
verified by ACA Performance Services for the period of July 1,1997 through December 31,2024.The verification
report is available upon request.A Firm that claims
compliance with the GIPS standards must establish policies and procedures for complying with all the applicable
requirements of the GIPS standards.Verification provides assurance on whether the firm's policies and procedures related to composite maintenance,as well as the
calculation,presentation,and distribution of performance, have been designed in compliance with the GIPS standards and have been implemented on a firm-wide basis.
Verification does not provide assurance on the accuracy of any specific performance report.
GIPS® Composite Report: Ultra Short Bond
Source ICE Data Indices,LLC ("ICE"),used with permission.ICE permits the use of ICE Indices and related data on an “as is”basis;ICE,its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representation, express and/or implied,including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use,including the indices,index data and any data included in,related to,or derived therefrom.Neither ICE data,its affiliates or their respective third-party providers guarantee the quality,adequacy,accuracy,timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof,and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is”basis and licensee’s use is at licensee’s own risk.ICE data,its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor,endorse,or recommend Chandler,or any of its products or services.
20 1.Chandler Asset Management is an independent investment adviser registered as such with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Adviser’s Act of 1940.Registration with the SEC does not imply a certain level of skill or training.Since 1988,Chandler Asset Management has provided fixed income investment management services to the public sector,as well as to foundations,endowments,individuals and corporations.A complete list and description of all of the firm’s composites is available upon request.
2.The Limited Maturity Composite is a composite of individually managed accounts with an average modified duration approximately equal to the modified duration of the ICE BofA 1-3 Year US Treasury Index and a final stated maturity of individual securities of five years.The minimum account size required to be included in this composite is $2 million.This composite was created September 1988 and incepted October 1988.The name of this composite was changed from Short- Term Fixed Income effective September 30,2009.
3.The ICE BofA 1-3 Year US Treasury Index tracks the performance of US dollar-denominated sovereign debt publicly issued by the US government in its domestic market.Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than three years remaining term to final maturity,a fixed coupon schedule,and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion.Qualifying securities must have at least 18 months to final maturity at the time of issuance.Indexes are referred to for comparative purposes only and are not intended to parallel the risk or investment style of the portfolios in the Composite.Indexes do not utilize leverage.Index calculations do not reflect fees,brokerage commissions or other expenses of investing.Investors may not make direct investments into any index.Index data contained herein (and all trademarks related thereto)are owned by the indicated index provider,and may not be redistributed.The information herein has not been approved by the index provider.
4.Valuations are computed and performance reported in U.S.Dollars.
5.Performance is calculated using a time-weighted total rate of return,which links performance monthly,and is reported gross of investment management fees and custodial fees,but after all trading expenses.Results reflect the reinvestment of income,dividends and other earnings,and include realized and unrealized gains and losses and interest accrued through the last day of each month.Results do not reflect the potential impact of taxes.Past performance is not indicative of future results.Fees charged by Chandler Asset Management will reduce performance.
6.Net-of-fees performance returns are calculated by reducing the monthly gross performance by one-twelfth (1/12)of the actual maximum applicable fee of 0.25%,which is representative of our current fee schedule for this composite.These monthly returns are then geometrically linked to produce annual returns which are presented before custodial fees but after management fees and all trading expenses.Fees are negotiable and additional information regarding Chandler's fees is included in our Part 2A of Form ADV.
7.Dispersion is calculated using the asset weighted standard deviation of annual gross returns of those portfolios that were included in the composite for the entire year.For years when less than six portfolios were included in the composite for the full year,no dispersion measure is presented.The three-year annualized standard deviation measures the variability of the composite gross returns and the benchmark returns over the preceding 36-month period.
8.Policies for valuing investments,calculating performance,and preparing GIPS reports are available upon request.
9.GIPS®is a registered trademark of CFA Institute.CFA Institute does not endorse or promote this organization,nor does it warrant the accuracy or quality of the content contained herein.
Chandler Asset Management claims compliance with the Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®)and has prepared and presented this report in compliance with the GIPS standards.
Chandler Asset Management has been independently verified by ACA Performance Services for the period of July 1,1997 through December 31,2024.The verification report is available upon request.A Firm that claims compliance with the GIPS standards must establish policies and procedures for complying with all the applicable requirements of the GIPS standards.Verification provides assurance on whether the firm's policies and procedures related to composite maintenance,as well as the calculation, presentation,and distribution of performance,have been designed in compliance with the GIPS standards and have been implemented on a firm-wide basis.Verification does not provide assurance on the accuracy of any specific performance report.
Annual Rates of Return 2015 through 2024
Returns 3 Year Annualized Dispersion Assets
Year Total Total Standard Deviation Asset Wtd Number of Composite % of Firm Firm End Gross Net Index Composite Index Std. Dev.Portfolios (MM)Assets (MM) 2015 0.74%0.49%0.54%0.63%0.56%0.07%27 1,328 11.31%11,747 2016 1.11%0.86%0.88%0.74%0.76%0.06%31 1,081 8.39%12,882 2017 0.85%0.60%0.43%0.71%0.74%0.08%32 1,178 8.60%13,698 2018 1.69%1.44%1.59%0.77%0.85%0.03%31 1,905 11.51%16,551 2019 3.87%3.61%3.55%0.84%0.94%0.08%39 2,653 13.57%19,552 2020 3.25%3.00%3.12%0.92%1.21%0.12%39 2,713 12.21%22,227 2021 -0.48%-0.73%-0.55%0.96%1.19%0.07%44 3,189 12.37%25,785 2022 -3.13%-3.37%-3.65%1.52%1.71%0.17%54 3,655 12.76%28,641 2023 4.79%4.53%4.26%1.92%2.04%0.08%59 4,576 12.78%35,804 2024 4.33%4.07%4.08%2.20%2.33%0.12%63 5,077 12.04%41,585 GIPS® Composite Report: Limited Maturity
Source ice Data Indices,LLC ("ICE"),used with permission.ICE permits the use of ICE Indices and related data on an “as is”basis;ICE,its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representation, express and/or implied,including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use,including the indices,index data and any data included in,related to,or derived therefrom.Neither ICE data,its affiliates or their respective third-party providers guarantee the quality,adequacy,accuracy,timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof,and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is”basis and licensee’s use is at licensee’s own risk.ICE data,its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor,endorse,or recommend Chandler,or any of its products or services.
21 1.Chandler Asset Management is an independent investment adviser registered as such with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Investment Adviser’s Act of 1940.Registration with the SEC does not imply a certain level of skill or training.Since 1988,Chandler Asset Management has provided fixed income investment management services to the public sector,as well as to foundations,endowments,individuals and corporations.A complete list and description of all of the firm’s composites is available upon request.
2.The Short Term Bond Composite is a composite of individually managed accounts with an average modified duration approximately equal to the modified duration of the ICE BofA 1-5 Year US Treasury &Agency Index and a maximum final stated maturity of individual securities of five years.The minimum account size required to be included in this composite is $2 million.This composite was created in September 1995 and incepted September 1995.The name of this composite was changed from 1-5 Year Government Fixed Income effective September 30,2009. 3 The ICE BofA 1-5 Year US Treasury &Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market.Qualifying securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s,S&P and Fitch).Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than five years remaining term to final maturity,at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance,a fixed coupon schedule,and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for agencies.Index calculations do not reflect fees,brokerage commissions or other expenses of investing.Investors may not make direct investments into any index.Index data contained herein (and all trademarks related thereto)are owned by the indicated index provider,and may not be redistributed.The information herein has not been approved by the index provider.
4.Valuations are computed and performance reported in U.S.Dollars.
5.Performance is calculated using a time-weighted total rate of return,which links performance monthly,and is reported gross of investment management fees and custodial fees,but after all trading expenses.Results reflect the reinvestment of income,dividends and other earnings,and include realized and unrealized gains and losses and interest accrued through the last day of each month.Results do not reflect the potential impact of taxes.Past performance is not indicative of future results.Fees charged by Chandler Asset Management will reduce performance.
6.Net-of-fees performance returns are calculated by reducing the monthly gross performance by one-twelfth (1/12)of the actual maximum applicable fee of 0.25%,which is reflective of our current fee schedule for this composite.These monthly returns are then geometrically linked to produce annual returns which are presented before custodial fees but after management fees and all trading expenses.Fees are negotiable and additional information regarding Chandler's fees is included in our Part 2A of Form ADV.
7.Dispersion is calculated using the asset weighted standard deviation of annual gross returns of those portfolios that were included in the composite for the entire year.For years when less than six portfolios were included in the composite for the full year,no dispersion measure is presented.The three-year annualized standard deviation measures the variability of the composite gross returns and the benchmark returns over the preceding 36-month period.
8.Policies for valuing investments,calculating performance,and preparing GIPS reports are available upon request.
9.GIPS®is a registered trademark of CFA Institute.CFA Institute does not endorse or promote this organization,nor does it warrant the accuracy or quality of the content contained herein.
Source ice Data Indices,LLC ("ICE"),used with permission.ICE permits the use of ICE Indices and related data on an “as is”basis;ICE,its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representation,express and/or implied,including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use,including the indices,index data and any data included in,related to,or derived therefrom.Neither ICE data,its affiliates or their respective third- party providers guarantee the quality,adequacy,accuracy,timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof,and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is”basis and licensee’s use is at licensee’s own risk.ICE data,its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor,endorse,or recommend Chandler,or any of its products or services.
Annual Rates of Return 2015 through 2024
Returns 3 Year Annualized Dispersion Assets
Year Total Total Standard Deviation Asset Wtd Number of Composite % of Firm Firm End Gross Net Index Composite Index Std. Dev.Portfolios (MM)Assets (MM) 2015 1.15%0.90%0.96%1.11%1.18%0.07%44 3,403 28.97%11,747 2016 1.30%1.04%1.08%1.24%1.39%0.05%49 4,131 32.07%12,882 2017 1.08%0.83%0.67%1.19%1.34%0.11%48 3,783 27.62%13,698 2018 1.53%1.27%1.55%1.22%1.40%0.05%48 3,485 21.06%16,551 2019 4.55%4.29%4.19%1.22%1.39%0.19%55 5,199 26.59%19,552 2020 4.43%4.17%4.22%1.32%1.70%0.11%59 6,234 28.05%22,227 2021 -0.93%-1.17%-1.09%1.33%1.65%0.04%72 7,294 28.29%25,785 2022 -4.82%-5.06%-5.25%2.22%2.42%0.15%75 8,221 28.70%28,641 2023 4.83%4.57%4.32%2.72%2.86%0.10%81 9,207 25.72%35,804 2024 3.86%3.61%3.42%3.10%3.25%0.10%92 10,538 25.34%41,585 Chandler Asset Management claims compliance with the Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®)and has prepared and presented this report in compliance with the GIPS standards.
Chandler Asset Management has been independently verified by ACA Performance Services for the period of July 1,1997 through December 31,2024.The verification report is available upon request.A Firm that claims compliance with the GIPS standards must establish policies and procedures for complying with all the applicable requirements of the GIPS standards.Verification provides assurance on whether the firm's policies and procedures related to composite maintenance,as well as the calculation, presentation,and distribution of performance,have been designed in compliance with the GIPS standards and have been implemented on a firm-wide basis.Verification does not provide assurance on the accuracy of any specific performance report.
GIPS® Composite Report: Short Term Bond
22
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM:
BY:
Christopher Ramos, Chief of Police
Don Craw, Assistant Director Community Services and Sarah Lower, Support Services Supervisor Police Department
DATE: August 18, 2026
SUBJECT: Interim Animal Sheltering Services Contract and an Agreement for Architectural Services for the Design of a City-Operated Animal Shelter
Description: Consider approval of a one-year interim animal sheltering services agreement with Haven Pet Center and an agreement with Higginson Architects, Inc. for architectural and engineering design of a municipal animal shelter within Building E.
Motion:
If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motions are provided:
I move to approve a one-year agreement with Haven Pet Center for interim animal sheltering services in an amount not to exceed $246,000, and authorize designated City staff to approve additional veterinary and medical expenses up to $3,000 per month; and,
Award a professional services agreement to Higginson Architects, Inc. for architectural and engineering services associated with the conversion of Building E into a municipal animal shelter in an amount not to exceed $71,800; and,
To authorize the City Manager to execute both agreements, establish a contingency equal to 10% of each agreement’s not-to-exceed amount, $24,600 and $7,180 respectively, and approve change orders and administrative amendments within the authorized contingencies.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the one-year interim sheltering agreement with Haven Pet Center and the architectural and engineering agreement with Higginson Architects,
Inc. These actions will restore needed shelter capacity while advancing the phased development of a locally operated, full-service Animal Services Division and Shelter that improves customer service, local control, and operational reliability. Staff will provide Council with an in-depth analysis and proposed budget for the expanded shelter prior to award of a construction contract.
Discussion:
For more than a decade, the City contracted with Ramona Animal Shelter for animal sheltering services. In 2024, the provider shifted its focus to rescue and adoption and stopped accepting City animals. Since then, Beaumont has operated with three standard kennels and two temporary emergency kennels, which provide only limited short-term capacity. Staff explored other providers throughout Southern California but was unable to secure a replacement. Haven Pet Center is agreeable to a one -year agreement, with any continuation available only month to month at this time. Staff recommends approval of this agreement as an interim solution while a city shelter facility is constructed.
The existing kennel facility was not designed or staffed as a full-service shelter and cannot adequately accommodate extended stays, quarantine, medical treatment, behavioral concerns, or specialized placements.
Animal housing requires care 365 days per year, including weekends and holidays.
Responsibilities include feeding, cleaning, exercise, health monitoring, medication, intake and identification, recordkeeping, veterinary coordination, owner reclaims, and placement services. The City must maintain adequate daily and backup coverage regardless of the number of animals housed.
The City has two Animal Control Officers working staggered 4/10 schedules, with both officers regularly on duty only one day each week. Transporting animals outside Beaumont or assigning officers to routine kennel care impacts coverage and may delay calls, investigations, and enforcement. A City-operated division would establish dedicated animal-care staffing and more reliable seven-day coverage.
Animal Intake and Facility Capacity
Before the City lost contracted sheltering services, animal impounds averaged approximately 500 annually in 2023 and prior years. Modified intake practices reduced impounds to approximately 365 in 2024, and annual intake averaged approximately 200 during 2025 and 2026 due to the City's limited capacity. This reduction reflects operating constraints and does not indicate a comparable decline in community need.
Staff anticipates approximately 365 annual animal intakes when full-service sheltering is restored. The preliminary Building E plan contains 24 kennels, including quarantine capacity, and appears capable of meeting projected demand if length of stay is actively
managed through owner reclaims, adoptions, foster placements, and rescue partnerships. The design phase will evaluate average and peak populations, quarantine and isolation needs, surge capacity, and potential expansion.
A Beaumont shelter would provide residents with a single location to deliver stray animals, search for lost pets, reclaim animals, adopt pets, obtain licensing information, and access other animal services. Local operations would also eliminate the need to transport animals out of town and improve coordination among field officers, shelter personnel, pet owners, veterinarians, fosters, and rescue organizations.
Direct operation would allow the City to establish its own service standards, operating hours, intake and care policies, staffing levels, fees, and performance expectations. It would also support volunteer and foster programs, adoption events, public education, and partnerships for vaccination, microchip, and spay-and-neuter services.
Development Plan
Staff recommends a one-year agreement with Haven Pet Center to provide interim shelter capacity while the City facility is developed. Haven would accept up to 50 animals per month, or 600 annually.
The agreement totals $210,000 for sheltering and administrative services and includes up to $36,000 for actual veterinary expenses, for a total amount not to exceed $246,000. Veterinary expenses exceeding $1,000 in a month would require prior staff approval and may not exceed $3,000 per month.
Haven would accept eligible stray animals delivered by City officers or Beaumont residents and provide adoption services following the required holding period. Owner surrenders and excluded animals would be handled according to the agreement and Haven's established policies.
The agreement provides interim capacity but does not eliminate the City's responsibilities for intake, temporary housing, transportation, excluded animals, field response, or daily animal care.
Facility Design and Operational Planning
Staff recommends awarding a professional services agreement to local firm Higginson Architects, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $71,800 to design the conversion of Building E at 550 East 6th Street into a 24-kennel municipal animal shelter. As part of the procurement process, the City requested design proposals from qualified local firms.
Four proposals were received and evaluated, with Higginson Architects, Inc. determined to be the top proposal based on the firm's qualifications, cost, and proposed services.
The design will address the improvements specific to the proposed animal shelter, including kennels, quarantine and examination areas, animal-care support spaces, staff
and public areas, an outdoor dog run, drainage, sanitation, and security. Although the shelter is anticipated to occupy only a portion of the building, the project will also identify and address necessary building-wide improvements, including a new roof and HVAC systems, as these improvements are not practical to implement only within the portion of the building occupied by the shelter. Where feasible, the remaining portions of the building will remain adaptable for another municipal use. The design period is anticipated to be approximately three months.
Staff will also develop an operating plan addressing staffing and seven-day coverage, veterinary and shelter services, customer service, volunteer and foster programs, equipment, vehicles, technology, and ongoing costs. The duties and classification of the existing project manager position will be evaluated for management of the City-operated division.
When design, cost estimates, operational planning, and bid documents are complete, staff will return to the City Council to consider the construction contract, project and operating budgets, staffing, funding, schedule, and transition plan. Following Council approval and completion of the facility, the City would transition to a locally operated, full-service Animal Services Division.
Fiscal Impact:
The Haven Pet Center agreement would not exceed $246,000, con sisting of $210,000 for sheltering and administrative services and up to $36,000 for actual veterinary expenses. The Higginson Architects, Inc. agreement would not exceed $71,800. A Midyear budget adjustment will be necessary to appropriate the funding nec essary to cover the sheltering agreement.
The combined agreement amount is $317,800, plus a 10% contingency of $31,780, for a total authorization not to exceed $349,580. Funding will be provided from the current ACO budget (2000-7068) and CIP Project F26-04, respectively.
Construction, equipment, staffing, and ongoing operating costs have not yet been determined and will be presented with the proposed construction contract.
Alternatives:
The City Council may decline either agreement or provide alternative direction. Without the interim agreement, the City would continue operating with limited shelter capacity.
Delaying the design agreement would extend the timeline for establishing local operations.
Attachments:
A. Haven Pet Center Agreement
B. Professional Services Agreement with Higginson Architects, Inc.
C26-124
1 GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SHELTERING
SERVICES BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF BEAUMONT AND RAMONA HUMANE SOCIETY, INC. dba HAVEN PET CENTER
THIS AGREEMENT FOR GENERAL SERVICES BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR (“Agreement”) is made and effective as of the _________________, 2026 by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT, a California municipal corporation (“City”) whose address is 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, California 92223, and RAMONA HUMANE SOCIETY, INC. dba HAVEN PET CENTER, a California Non-Profit Corporation, whose address is 690 Humane Way, San Jacinto, CA 92582 (“Contractor”). City and Contractor are sometimes hereinafter individually referred to as “party” and hereinafter collectively referred to as the “parties.”
RECITALS
This Agreement is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the parties to this Agreement:
A.City desires to engage Contractor to provide the following services: Animal control sheltering services ; and
B.Contractor has made a proposal (“Proposal”) to the City to provide such services, which Proposal is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference; and C.Contractor agrees to provide such services pursuant to, and in accordance with, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and represents and warrants to City that Contractor possesses the necessary skills, licenses, certifications, qualifications, personnel and equipment to provide such services.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and mutual covenants contained herein, City and Contractor agree as follows:
1.Term of Agreement. This Agreement is effective as of the date first above written and shall continue until terminated as provided for herein. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, this Agreement shall automatically terminate after August 31, 2027 unless extended by the parties with the approval of the City Council of the City.
C26-124
2 2. Services to be Performed. Contractor agrees to provide the services (“Services”) as follows: Animal control sheltering and placement services in accordance with Exhibit “A”. All Services shall be performed in the manner and according to the timeframe set forth in the Proposal.
Contractor designates Nicole Smith as Contractor’s Representative responsible for overseeing the Services provided by Contractor (“Contractor’s Representative”). City designates the City Manager, or his or her designee, to act as the Project Manager (“Project Manager”) in connection with the delivery of Services under this Agreement. Contractor shall supply, at its sole expense, all equipment, tools, materials, and supplies necessary to perform Services. In the event that the Proposal contains terms that are in addition to or in conflict with this Agreement, other than the price for Services, such terms shall not be valid and shall be of no force or effect.
3. Associates and Subcontractors. Contractor may, at Contractor’s sole cost and expense, employ such competent and qualified independent associates, subcontractors and consultants as Contractor deems necessary to perform the Services; provided, however, that Contractor shall not subcontract any of the Services without the prior written consent of City.
4. Compensation.
4.01 Contractor shall be paid at the rates set forth in the Proposal and shall not increase any rate without the prior written consent of the City. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, total fees and charges paid by City to Contractor under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of Two Hundred Twenty-two Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($222,000.00).
4.02 Contractor shall not be compensated for any Services rendered nor reimbursed for any expenses incurred in excess of those authorized unless approved in advance by the City, in writing.
4.03 Contractor shall submit to City, on or before the twenty-fifth (25th) of the prior month, an invoice for each subsequent monthly billing cycle. The City shall not be obligated to pay any invoice that is submitted more than sixty (60) days after the due date of such invoice.
City shall have the right to review and audit all invoices prior to or after payment to Contractor.
This review and audit may include, but not be limited to City’s:
a. RESERVED;
b. RESERVED;
c. Determination that each item charged is the usual, customary, and reasonable charge for the particular item. If City determines an item charged is greater than usual,
C26-124
3 customary, or reasonable, or is duplicative, ambiguous, excessive, or inappropriate, City shall either return the bill to Contractor with a request for explanation or adjust the payment accordingly and give notice to Contractor of the adjustment.
4.04 If the work is satisfactorily completed, City shall pay such invoice on or the before the tenth (10th) of each month. Should City dispute any portion of any invoice, City shall pay the undisputed portion within the time stated above, and at the same time advise Contractor in writing of the disputed portion.
5. Obligations of Contractor.
5.01 Contractor agrees to perform all Services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and the Proposal. In the event that the terms of the Proposal shall conflict with the terms of this Agreement or contain additional terms that purport to bind the City other than the Services to be rendered and the hourly rate for the Services, the terms of this Agreement shall govern and said additional or conflicting terms shall be of no force or effect.
5.02 Except as otherwise agreed by the parties, Contractor will supply all personnel, materials and equipment required to perform the Services. Contractor shall provide its own offices, telephones, vehicles and computers. Contractor will determine the method, details, and means of performing the Services under this Agreement.
5.03 Contractor shall keep City informed as to the progress of the Services by means of regular and frequent consultations. Additionally, when requested by City, Contractor shall prepare written status reports.
5.04 Contractor is responsible for paying, when due, all income and other taxes, fees, and withholding, including withholding state and federal taxes, social security, unemployment and worker’s compensation, incurred as a result of the compensation paid under this Agreement. Contractor agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for any claims, costs, losses, fees, penalties, interest, or damages suffered by City resulting from Contractor’s failure to comply with this provision.
5.05 In the event Contractor is required to prepare plans, drawings, specifications and/or estimates, the same shall be furnished in conformance with local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.
5.06 Contractor represents that it possesses all required licenses necessary or applicable to the performance of Services under this Agreement and the Proposal and shall obtain and keep in full force and effect all permits and approvals required to perform the Services herein.
C26-124
4 In the event City is required to obtain an approval or permit from another governmental entity, Contractor shall provide all necessary supporting documents to be filed with such entity.
5.07 Contractor shall be solely responsible for obtaining Employment Eligibility Verification information from Contractor’s employees, in compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99-603 (8 U.S.C. 1324a), and shall ensure that Contractor’s employees are eligible to work in the United States.
5.08 In the event that Contractor employs, contracts with, or otherwise utilizes any CalPERS retirees in completing any of the Services performed hereunder, such instances shall be disclosed in advance to the City and shall be subject to the City’s advance written approval.
5.09 Drug-free Workplace Certification. By signing this Agreement, the Contractor hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the Contractor will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code, Section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug-free workplace.
5.10 Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations, entitlements and/or permits applicable to, or governing the Services authorized hereunder including, but not limited to California Department of Industrial Relations (Cal/OSHA) regulations; and the U.S. Department of Transportation Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act, related to their scope of work and operations. In case of conflict, the most stringent shall apply.
5.11 Contractor shall keep itself informed concerning and shall render all Services hereunder in accordance with all ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules, and regulations of the City and any federal, state or local governmental entity having jurisdiction in effect at the time service is rendered.
5.12 Contractor warrants that it has investigated the scope, site, and conditions of the Services, understands the challenges involved, and will perform in accordance with this Agreement. Contractor shall promptly notify the City of any latent or unknown conditions and shall not proceed without written direction from the Project Manager.
All Services shall be of good quality and free from defects. For one year after final acceptance (or longer if required by other warranties), Contractor shall, at its sole expense and within ten (10) days of notice, correct any defective or non-conforming Services and repair related damage, including work of others affected thereby. Corrected Services shall carry a renewed one-year warranty from the date of acceptance.
C26-124
5 If Contractor fails to fulfill these obligations, the City may correct the work at Contractor’s expense, and Contractor shall reimburse the City upon demand. Payment by the City shall not be deemed acceptance of defective work.
5.13 Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.
6. Insurance. Contractor hereby agrees to be solely responsible for the health and safety of its employees and agents in performing the Services under this Agreement and shall comply with all laws applicable to worker safety including but not limited to Cal-OSHA.
Therefore, throughout the duration of this Agreement, Contractor hereby covenants and agrees to maintain insurance in conformance with the requirements set forth below. Attached hereto as Exhibit “B” are copies of Certificates of Insurance and endorsements as required by Section 7.02.
If existing coverage does not meet the requirements set forth herein, Contractor agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage to do so. Contractor shall provide the following types and amounts of insurance:
6.01 Commercial general liability insurance in an amount of not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence and $4,000,000 in the aggregate; Contractor agrees to have its insurer endorse the general liability coverage required herein to include as additional insured’s City, its officials, employees and agents. Contractor also agrees to require all contractors and subcontractors to provide the same coverage required under this Section 6.
6.02 Business Auto Coverage in an amount no less than $1 million per accident.
If Contractor or Contractor’s employees will use personal autos in performance of the Services hereunder, Contractor shall provide evidence of personal auto liability coverage for each such person.
6.03 Workers’ Compensation insurance for any of Contractor’s employees that will be providing any Services hereunder. Contractor will have a state-approved policy form providing statutory benefits as required by California law. The provisions of any Workers’ Compensation insurance will not limit the obligations of Contractor under this Agreement.
Contractor expressly agrees not to use any statutory immunity defenses under such laws with respect to City, its employees, officials and agents. Sole proprietors with no employees, LLCs, or partnerships using the services of members or partners who do not carry Workers’ Compensation insurance acknowledge that they are not subject to the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of California and agree to complete a signed workers compensation exemption form.
6.04 Optional Insurance Coverage. Choose and check one: Required __ /Not Required X; Errors and omissions insurance in a minimum amount of $2 million per occurrence
C26-124
6 to cover any negligent acts or omissions committed by Contractor, its employees and/or agents in the performance of any Services for City.
7. General Conditions pertaining to Insurance Coverage.
7.01 No liability insurance coverage provided shall prohibit Contractor from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. Contractor waives all rights of subrogation against City regardless of the applicability of insurance proceeds and shall require all contractors and subcontractors to do likewise.
7.02 Prior to beginning the Services under this Agreement, Contractor shall furnish City with certificates of insurance, endorsements, and upon request, complete copies of all policies, including complete copies of all endorsements. All copies of policies and endorsements shall show the signature of a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf.
7.03 All required policies shall be issued by a highly rated insurer with a minimum A.M. Best rating of “A:VII”. The insurer(s) shall be admitted and licensed to do business in California. The certificates of insurance hereunder shall state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, or reduced in coverage or in limits, except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice has been given to CITY.
7.04 Self-insurance does not comply with these insurance specifications.
Contractor acknowledges and agrees that that all insurance coverage required to be provided by Contractor or any subcontractor, shall apply first and on a primary, non-contributing basis in relation to any other insurance, indemnity or self-insurance available to City.
7.05 All coverage types and limits required are subject to approval, modification and additional requirements by City, as the need arises. Contractor shall not make any reductions in scope of coverage (e.g. elimination of contractual liability or reduction of discovery period) that may affect City’s protection without City’s prior written consent.
7.06 Contractor agrees to provide immediate notice to City of any claim or loss against Contractor or arising out of the Services performed under this Agreement. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.
7.07 The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope of protection afforded to City, its directors, officers, employees, or authorized volunteers. If the Contractor maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained by the
C26-124
7 Contractor. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.
8. Indemnification.
8.01 Contractor and City agree that City, its employees, agents and officials should, to the extent permitted by law, be fully protected from any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys’ fees, litigation costs, defense costs, court costs or any other costs arising out of or in any way related to the performance of this Agreement by Contractor or any subcontractor or agent of either as set forth herein. Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity are intended by the parties to be interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to City. Contractor acknowledges that City would not enter into this Agreement in the absence of the commitment of Contractor to defend, indemnify, and protect City as set forth herein.
a. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless City, its employees, agents and officials, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, injuries, expenses, damages or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys’ fees incurred by City, court costs, interest, defense costs, including expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever without restriction or limitation incurred in relation to, as a consequence of or arising out of, or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part to the performance of this Agreement.
Contractor’s obligation to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless shall include any and all claims, suits, and proceedings in which Contractor (and/or Contractor’s agents and/or employees) is alleged to be an employee of City. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by Contractor as they are incurred by City.
b. Without affecting the rights of City under any provision of this Agreement or this Section, Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless City as set forth above for liability attributable solely to the fault of City, provided such fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction.
9. Additional Services, Changes and Deletions.
9.01. In the event Contractor performs additional or different services than those described herein without the prior written approval of the City Manager and/or City Council of City, Contractor shall not be compensated for such services. Contractor expressly waives any right to be compensated for services and materials not covered by the scope of this Agreement or authorized by the City in writing.
C26-124
8 9.02 Contractor shall promptly advise the City Manager and Finance Director of City as soon as reasonably practicable upon gaining knowledge of a condition, event or accumulation of events which may affect the scope and/or cost of Services. All proposed changes, modifications, deletions and/or requests for additional services shall be reduced to writing for review and approval by the City and/or City Council.
10. Termination of Agreement.
10.01. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, City, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement with or without cause, or for no cause, at any time by giving twenty (20) days’ written notice to Contractor.
10.02 In the event of termination, the payment of monies due Contractor for undisputed Services performed prior to the effective date of such termination shall be paid within thirty (30) business days after receipt of an invoice as provided in this Agreement. Immediately upon termination, Contractor agrees to promptly provide and deliver to City all original documents, reports, studies, plans, specifications and the like which are in the possession or control of Contractor and pertain to City.
11. Status of Contractor.
11.01 Contractor shall perform the Services in Contractor’s own way as an independent contractor, and in pursuit of Contractor’s independent calling, and not as an employee of City. However, Contractor shall regularly confer with City’s City Manager or Project Manager as provided for in this Agreement.
11.02 Contractor agrees that it is not entitled to the rights and benefits afforded to City’s employees, including disability or unemployment insurance, Workers’ Compensation, retirement, CalPERS, medical insurance, sick leave, or any other employment benefit. Contractor is responsible for providing, at its own expense, disability, unemployment, Workers’ Compensation and other insurance, training, permits, and licenses for itself and its employees and subcontractors.
11.03 Contractor hereby specifically represents and warrants to City that it possesses the qualifications and skills necessary to perform the Services under this Agreement in a competent, professional manner, without the advice or direction of City and that the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the standards customarily applicable to an experienced and competent professional rendering the same or similar services in the same geographic area where the City is located. Further, Contractor represents and