Attachment 3- Draft Addendum to the General Plan EIR — Hesperia City Council, May 2, 2023

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM

2021 - 2029 Housing Element
Update

Lead Agency:

CITY OF HESPERIA

PLANNING DEPARTMENT
9700 Seventh Avenue
Hesperia, CA 92345
Contact: Ryan Leonard
(760) 947-1651

Prepared by:

MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
3536 Concours St #100
Ontario, CA 91764
Contact: Emily Elliott, AICP
909.974.4961

September 2022

JN 182308

This document is designed for double-sided printing to conserve natural resources. 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum |September 2022 i Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... I

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 2

1.1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM ................................................................................................ 2

1.2 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ................................................................ 3

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 4

1.4 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS .................................................................................................... 5

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ............................................................................................. 6

2.1 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................................... 6

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS ................................................................................................. 8

3.1 AESTHETICS ............................................................................................................................. 10

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES .................................................................. 13

3.3 AIR QUALITY ........................................................................................................................... 16

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................... 19

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ....................................................................................................... 22

3.6 ENERGY .................................................................................................................................... 24

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................................................ 25

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ........................................................................................... 31

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................................... 32

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................ 38

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING .............................................................................................. 42

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES....................................................................................................... 43

3.13 NOISE ..................................................................................................................................... 44

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING ........................................................................................... 47

3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES ............................................................................................................... 48

3.16 RECREATION ....................................................................................................................... 52

3.17 TRANSPORTATION ............................................................................................................. 53

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................... 55

3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ................................................................................ 57

3.20 WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................. 60

3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ................................................................. 62

4.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 64

APPENDICES:

Appendix A General Plan EIR

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 2 Introduction

1.0 INTRODUCTION
An addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Hesperia 2010 General Plan Update (General Plan EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2010011011) has been prepared in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.) and City of Hesperia CEQA Guidelines to address minor changes to the City of Hesperia General Plan for the City of Hesperia 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update (Housing Element or “project”).

State law (California Government Code Sections 65580–65589.8) requires that jurisdictions evaluate their housing elements every eight years. The current statutory update in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region covers the planning period 2021 through 2029 (6th cycle). The proposed 6th Cycle Housing Element represents a comprehensive update of the adopted 2013 -2021 Housing Element (5th Cycle), in order to comply with State housing law and reflect the current 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Final Allocation Plan.

In general, the 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies and establishes the City’s policies with respect to meeting the housing needs of existing and future residents in Hesperia. It establishes housing policies that will guide City decision-making and sets forth an action plan to implement the City’s housing goals over the next eight years. The commitments are in furtherance of the statewide housing goal of “early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every California family,” as well as a reflection of the concerns unique to the City of Hesperia.

1.1 PURPOSE OF AN ADDENDUM
CEQA, a Statewide environmental law contained in Public Resource Code (PRC) Sections 21000–21177, applies to most public agency decisions which carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. The CEQA Guidelines allow for updating and using a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are diffe rent from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with Section 21166 of CEQA and Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.” Pursuant to Section 15162(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, a Subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration is only required when:

1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;

2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revision of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following:
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 3 Introduction

(a) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;

(b) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;

(c) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasib le would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or

(d) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably d ifferent from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162[a])
The following describes the requirements of an Addendum, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164:

4. The lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

5. An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred.

6. An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration.

7. The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project.

8. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be inclu ded in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.

If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. The City of Hesperia certified its General Plan EIR in October 2010. This Addendum relies on the 2010 General Plan EIR and the related administrative record and is intended to be included or attached to the 2010 General Plan EIR. It is not to be considered an independent or separate document from the 2010 General Plan EIR.

1.2 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
The following documents were utilized during preparation of this Addendum and are incorporated into this document by reference. The documents are available for review at the City of Hesperia.

• City of Hesperia 2010 General Plan. The City of Hesperia 2010 General Plan (2010 General Plan) was adopted in 2010. The 2010 General Plan is organized around the following seven Elements:

Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Open Space, Noise, Conservation, and Safety.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 4 Introduction
• City of Hesperia 2010 General Plan Environmental Impact Report . Pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Hesperia prepared an EIR to analyze the impacts of 2010 General Plan buildout. According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, significant and unavoidable impacts were identified for air quality, noise, and transportation. The 2010 General Plan EIR was certified in October 2010.

• City Code of the City of Hesperia. The City’s Land Use Zoning Ordinance is found in the Hesperia Municipal Code (City Code) Title 16, Development Code, which carries out the City’s General Plan policies by regulating development and land uses within Hesperia.

1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The 6th Cycle Housing Element (referred to as the “project”) retains many of the goals, policies, and relevant implementation programs previously included as part of the 5th Cycle Housing Element. The project consists of updates to the Housing Element, particularly limited to the Housing Needs Assessment, which contains updated statistics and analyses based on data from the 2010 US Census and the 2019 American Community Survey and a revised sites inventory to meet the City’s RHNA. All other updates are limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law and internal consistency. A summary of the revisions proposed by the project is included below.

State law (California Government Code Sections 65580–65589.8) requires that jurisdictions evaluate their housing elements every eight years. The current statutory update in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region covers the planning period 2021 through 2029 (6th cycle). The proposed 6th Cycle Housing Ele ment represents a comprehensive update of the adopted 2013 -2021 Housing Element (5th Cycle), in order to comply with state housing law and reflect the current 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Final Allocation Plan.

The 6th Cycle Housing Element (referred to as the “proposed project” or “Housing Element”) retains many of the goals, policies, and relevant implementation programs previously included as part of the 5th Cycle Housing Element, which was adopted by the City in 2014. In general, the 6th Cycle Housing Element covers the planning period of October 15, 2021 through October 15, 2029, and identifies strategies and programs that focus on: 1) conserving and improving existing affordable housing; 2) providing adequate housing sites; 3) assisting in the development of affordable housing; 4) removing governmental and other constraints to housing development; 5) promoting equal housing opportunities; and 6) affirmatively furthering fair housing.

Overall, the Hesperia Housing Element consists of the following major components:

• Introduction: An overview of the purpose and contents of the Housing Element. • Housing Needs Assessment: An analysis of the demographic and housing characteristics and trends.
• Housing Constraints: A review of potenti al market, governmental, and environmental constraints to meeting the identified housing needs.
• Housing Resources: An evaluation of resources available to address housing goals. • Housing Plan: A statement of the Housing Plan to address the identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies, and programs.

In addition, a review of past accomplishments under the previous 5th Cycle Housing Element is included as Appendix C of the Housing Element.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 5 Introduction
The updates to the Housing Element are generally limited to the Housing Needs Assessment, which contains updated statistics and analyses based on data from the 2010 U.S. Census and the American Community Survey and a revised sites inventory to meet the Cit y’s RHNA. All other updates are limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with state law and internal consistency.

During this planning period, the City is expected to accommodate 8,125 dwelling units. The policies and programs identified in the Housing Element are focused on meeting this future housing need allocation.

PROJECT LOCATION

The City of Hesperia (City) is located in the southwestern portion of San Bernardino County, within an area known as the Victor Valley region. The City contains approximately 74.77 square miles of land area.

Nearby communities include the Cities of Victorville and Adelanto to the north; the Town of Apple Valley to the east; unincorporated San Bernardino County land to the south; and the unincorporated community of Oak Hills to the west.

The City lies within a transitional area between the foothills of the San Bernardino Mountains and National Forest to the south and the Mojave Desert to the north. Three highways provide direct access to t he City:

Interstate 15 (I-15) runs north–south on the west side of the City, U.S. Highway 395 connects to I -15 on the west side, and State Route 138 passes through the southeastern corner of the City.

The Housing Element would be implemented City -wide. Re fer to Exhibit 1, Regional Location. The jurisdictional boundary of the project includes the entirety of the jurisdictional limits of the City of Hesperia as shown in Exhibit 2, Jurisdictional Boundary.

1.4 DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS

The City of Hesperia is the Lead Agency under CEQA and has discretionary authority over the project. The project would be subject to various City permits and approvals, including, but not limited to:

o California Environmental Quality Act review;
o Adoption of the 2021-2029 Housing Element;

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | December 2021 6 Environmental Checklist

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST

2.1 BACKGROUND

1. Project Title: 2021-2029 Housing Element Update

2. Lead Agency Name and Address:

City of Hesperia
Planning Department
9700 Seventh Avenue
Hesperia, California 92345

3. Contact Person and Phone Number:

Ryan Leonard, Senior Planner
(760) 947-1651

4. Project Location: The Housing Element would apply City-wide; refer to Exhibit 1, Regional Vicinity and Exhibit 2, Jurisdictional Boundary.

5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address:

City of Hesperia
Planning Department
9700 Seventh Avenue
Hesperia, California 92345

6. General Plan Designation: Various

7. Zoning: Various

8. Description of the Project: Refer to Section 1.3, Project Description.

9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Various

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval or participation agreement).

None applicable.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | December 2021 7 Environmental Checklist
This page intentionally left blank.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 8 Environmental Analysis

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

This section describes the environmental impacts of the project as compared to those identified in the 2010 General Plan EIR and discusses any substantial changes to existing conditions or regulatory setting since the 2010 General Plan EIR was certified. The issue areas evaluated in this document include the following, pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, and have been modified to evaluate the project changes for which an EIR has been previously certified to assist in the determination of the need for a supplemental EIR or an Addendum.

In December 2018, the Natural Resources Agency amended the CEQA Guidelines, which included modifications to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist Form . As such, the following analysis identifies where modifications to the Appendix G topical areas and thresholds have been added and/or updated since the 2010 General Plan EIR was prepared.

• Aesthetics
• Agriculture and Forestry Resources
• Air Quality
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Energy
• Geology and Soils
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• Hydrology and Water Quality
• Land Use and Planning
• Mineral Resources
• Noise
• Population and Housing
• Public Services
• Recreation
• Transportation
• Tribal Cultural Resources
• Utilities and Service Systems
• Wildfire
• Mandatory Findings of Significance
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 10 Environmental Analysis

A summary of impacts of the adopted Specific Plan and the mitigation measures imposed is provided along with an analysis of the potential impacts resulting from the project and whether those impacts substantially exceed those discussed in the certified 2010 General Plan EIR.

3.1 AESTHETICS

This section corresponds with the General Plan EIR Section 3.1, Aesthetics.

Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:

a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?

Relative to scenic vistas, the General Plan identifies natural scenic open space as a valuable scenic resource that contributes to the visual landscape and should be preserved. Such resources include the Mojave River to the east, the San Bernardino and San Gabriel Mountain ranges to the south and the surrounding Victor Valley, along with neighboring hillsides and the natural desert environment. Implementation of the programs contained in the Housing Element document would accommodate future residential development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential aesthetic impacts of those projects under CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Specifically, future housing projects implemented under the Housing Element would be required to undergo development review per the provisions of the Hesperia Municipal Code Title 16, Development Code, Chapter 16.12, Permits and Procedures, Article I, Section 16.12.005, Development Review Procedures, in order to determine compliance with development regulations, including but not limited to, building setback lines, lot coverage, maximum height, bulk, number of stories, size and use of lots, yards, courts, and open space. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning scenic vistas as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?

Relative to state scenic highways, according to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) State Scenic Highway System Map, there are no officially designated state scenic highways within the City of Hesperia. State Route 38, the County’s only designated scenic highway, is located approximately 50 miles southeast of the City in the San Bernardino Mountains . State Highways 173 and 138 are designated as eligible scenic highways within the southern portion of the City of Hesperia. Thus, development could potentially impact the two eligible scenic highways. However, the policies detailed in the existing General Plan ensure that Hesperia maintains open space to preserve scenic resources. Individual development 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 11 Environmental Analysis projects will still be subject to development and planning review and must therefore conform to zoning and other ordinances in this regard. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential aesthetic impacts of those projects under CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Specifically, future housi ng projects implemented under the Housing Element would be required to undergo development review per the provisions of the Hesperia Municipal Code Title 16, Development Code, Chapter 16.12, Permits and Procedures, Article I, Section 16.12.005, Development Review Procedures, in order to determine compliance with development regulations, including but not limited to, building setback lines, lot coverage, maximum height, bulk, number of stories, size and use of lots, yards, courts, and open space. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning scenic resources or quality of public views as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, buildout of the proposed General Plan Update is not anticipated to generate a substantial increase in urban uses throughout the project area. However, the policies detailed in the existing General Plan ensure that Hesperia maintains open space to preserve scenic vista s, such as goal OS-2. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Implementation of the programs contained in the Housing Element document would accommodate future residential development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. However, the Housing Element is a policy document consisting of a housing program and its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts, including impacts relative to aesthetics. No actual development is proposed as part of the Housing Element. As such, the proposed Housing Element would not result in any physical changes to the environment that might have the potential to impact the existing visual character or quality or public views within the city or its surroundings. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential aesthetic impacts of those projects under CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Specifically, future housi ng projects implemented under the Housing Element would be required to undergo development review per the provisions of the Hesperia Municipal Code Title 16, Development Code, Chapter 16.12, Permits and Procedures, Article I, Section 16.12.005, Development Review Procedures, in order to determine compliance with development regulations, including but not limited to, building setback lines, lot coverage, maximum height, bulk, number of stories, size and use of lots, yards, courts, and open space. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 12 Environmental Analysis severe environmental impacts concerning visual character or quality of public views as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan Update w ould protect sensitive land uses from light glare through the buffering of residential land uses from business, which produce noise, odors, thigh -volume traffic, light and glare, and parking through the incorporation of setbacks, site planning, and other design techniques. Moreover, the General Plan Update directs future growth away from scenic areas that would be adversely impacted by light and glare from urban development; concentrating development along the Interstate 15 freeway corridor. Therefore, buildout of the proposed General Plan Update would not create any substantial light and glare impact s on nighttime views. Impacts related to light and glare were determined to be less than significant.

Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential aesthetic impacts of those projects under CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Specifically, future housing projects implemented under the Housing Element would be required to undergo development review per the provisions of the Hesperia Municipal Code Title 16, Development Code, Chapter 16.12, Permits and Procedures, Article I, Section 16.12.005, Development Review Procedures, in order to determine compliance with development regulations, including but not limited to, building setback lines, lot coverag e, maximum height, bulk, number of stories, size and use of lots, yards, courts, and open space. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning light and glare as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

The proposed Housing Element is a policy document and would not result in any physical changes to the environment. Although implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation, such development would not impact agricultural resources. As noted above, there is a minimal amount of existing agricultural land in the City that is being cultivated and residential development would not occur in these areas. In addition, future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential impacts of those projects under the CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required.

Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning conversion of important farmland as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 13 Environmental Analysis

3.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.2, Agricultural Resources.

In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the State’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.

Would the project:

a) Convert Pr ime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would not significantly contribute to the loss of farmlands. The implementation of goal CN-6 of the General Plan would reduce impacts to Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Significance. According to Goal CN-6, development shall preserve farmland considered important by the US Department of Agriculture. Hence, discretionary projects that contain land classified as Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide importance would need to be consistent with Goal CN -6. As all lands designated as Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance are zoned for agricultural purposes, the proposed General Plan was determined to have a less than significant impact to the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use.

According to the California Department of Conservation (DOC) Important Farmland Finder website, within the City of Hesperia, there is a minimal amount of land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency (DOC 2021). According to the General Plan, there is an area located at the intersection of the Mojave River and the Atchison, Topeka, and the rail spur line to Lucerne Valley (currently under cultivation with alfalfa), which area is designated Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance. Additionally, a portion of land near Arrowhead Lake Road south of Ranchero Road is designated Unique Farmland. Lands that were once used for agricultural and crop production have evolved towards large residential lots with animal keeping and equestrian activities, resulting in a very small portion of land being retained as agricultural in the City.

Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that no mitigation is available that would reduce impacts to a level that is less than significant. 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 14 Environmental Analysis

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the proposed General Plan would not reduce the total designated agricultural land uses within the project area. According to the City of Hesperia Zoning Map, the areas under Williamson Act Contract have a zoning of Special Development (SD) , which is consistent with the City’s zoning. In addition, the current lands under Williamson Act contract are located within the City’s sphere of influence, in unincorporated San Bernardino County. Therefore, implementation of the proposed General Plan would not conflict existing zoning and the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact

c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning, of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the City does not contain any forest land. Furthermore, no portion of the City zone d for forestland. Therefore, the project would not result in the loss of forestland or the conversion of forestland to non-forest use. Therefore, development of the project would not result in greater impacts than previously analyzed in the 2010 General Plan EIR. No impact was determined to occur.

Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 15 Environmental Analysis

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

Refer to Response 3.2(c).

Certified General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

As discussed in response 3.2(a), the proposed Housing Element is a policy document and would not result in any physical changes to the environment. Although implementation of the programs contained in the document would accommodate development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation, such development would not impact agricultural resources. As noted above, there is a minimal amount of existing agricultural land in the City that is being cultivated and residential development would not occur in these areas. In addition, future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the potential impacts of those projects under the CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 16 Environmental Analysis

3.3 AIR QUALITY

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.3, 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:

a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the City is located within the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB), which consists of the eastern portions of San Bernardino, Riverside counties as well as portions of Kern and Los Angeles Counties. The Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) has primary responsibility for monitoring and regulating stationary sources of air pollution within the MDAB, as well as for updating its air quality management planning documents which are developed for the primary purpose of controlling emissions to maintain all California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The MDAQMD’s air quality management plans include control measures and strategies to be implemented to attain state and federal ambient air quality standards in the MDAB. The MDAQMD then implements these control measures as regulations to control or reduce criteria pollutant emissions from stationary sources or equipment. The MDAQMD’s most recent air quality plan s are the PM10 (particulate matter up to 10 microns in size) attainment demonstration and maintenance plan (MDAQMD 1995) and the O3 (ozone) attainment plan.

The purpose of the Housing Element is to comply with state housing element law requiring the City to show it has adequate land designated to accommodate the existing and projected housing needs reflected in the City’s RHNA, which is based on the regional population forecasts. The RHNA does not encourage or promote growth, but rather requires communities to address the projected growth and provide its fair share of the regional housing needs to accommodate the forecasted growth. As discussed throughout this IS/ND, the proposed Housing Element would not result in any physical changes to the environment. Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case -by-case basis to evaluate the potential air quality impacts of those projects under CEQA, and mitigation measures would be adopted, as required. Therefore, the proposed Housing Element does not have the potential to result in air quality impacts including conflicting with air quality management plans, increasing existing air quality violations, resulting in cumulatively considerable net increases of criteria pollutants, ex posing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or resulting in odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact

b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable feder al or state ambient air quality standard?

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 17 Environmental Analysis Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR , the City is located within the Mojave Desert Air Basin (MDAB), which consists of the eastern portions of San Bernardino, Riverside counties as well as portions of Kern and Los Angeles Counties. The Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) has primary responsibility for monitoring and regulating stationary sources of air pollution within the MDAB, as well as for updating its air quality management planning documents which are developed for the primary purpose of controlling emissions to maintain all California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The MDAQMD’s air quality management plans include control measures and strategies to be implemented to attain state and federal ambient air quality standards in the MDAB. The MDAQMD then implements these control measures as regulations to control or reduce criteria pollutant emissions from stationary sources or equipment. The MDAQMD’s most recent air quality plans are the PM10 (particulate matter up to 10 microns in size) attainment demonstration and maintenance plan (MDAQMD 1995) and the O3 (ozone) attainment plan.

As the General Plan was determined not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. In addition, implementation of the goals and policies established within the General Plan Update would ensure that impacts generated by substantial population growth would be avoided or minimized.

Therefore, impacts in this regard were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CE QA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable.

c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, proposed developments under the General Plan may be planned near or adjacent to a major source of toxic air contaminants such as adjacent to a distribution center, major road, freeway, or rail line. Without taking a careful consideration of poten tial exposures of sensitive receptors to sources of toxic air contaminants, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined a potentially significant impact could occur.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 18 Environmental Analysis Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures AQ -4 and AQ -5 were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation

d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people)?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, Potential operational airborne odors could result from cooking activities associated with the new residential and restaurant uses within the City. These odors would be similar to existing housing and food service uses throughout the City and would be confined to the immediate vicinity of the new buildings. Restaurants are also typically required to have ventilation systems that avoid substantial adverse odor impacts. The other potential source of odors would be new trash receptacles within the community. The receptacles would be stored in areas and in containers as req uired by City and Health Department regulations, and be emptied on a regular basis, before potentially substantial odors have a chance to develop. Other sources of odor that are potentially significant include wastewater treatment and pumping facilities, transfer station, sanitary landfill, composting facility, asphalt batch plant, green waste and recycling operations, and painting/coating operations, among others. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction were considered to be potentially significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure AQ-6 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 19 Environmental Analysis

3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.4, Biological Resources.

Would the project:

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?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, there is a potential for impacts to riparian habitat along the West Fork of the Mojave River, Grass Valley Creek, Little Horsethief Creek, and Horsethief Creek. The southern sycamore alder riparian woodland and Mojave riparian forest found within these areas are considered sensitive by CDFG in the project area. However, the land uses for most of these areas are planned for either some type of open space or low density residential use. Therefore, development in these areas is only expected to occur in a limited number of instances. Therefore, policies within the General Plan and existing state regulations were determined to keep impacts to a less than significant level.

The proposed Housing Element is a policy document and would not result in any physical changes to the environment including biological resources. Nonetheless, implementation of the programs contained in the Housing Element document would accommodate residential development required to meet the City’s RHNA allocation. Future housing projects proposed under the Housing Element would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis including the preparation of site -specific biological resource assessments, to evaluate the potential impacts to biological resources of those projects in accordance with federal and state laws. In addition, future projects would be ana lyzed for compliance with local policies protecting biological resources, including General Plan Conservation Element policies and with Hesperia Municipal Code Chapter 16.24, Protected Plants, which specifically addresses the protection of desert plants within the City.

Therefore, the proposed Housing Element would not have a substantial adverse effect on special status species, riparian habitat or sensitive natural communities, wetlands, or migratory wildlife corridors, nor would the project conflict with local policies, ordinances, or adopted plans protecting biological resources.

The project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning biological resources as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure BR-1 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

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?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, there are several drainages that could contain riparian habitat such as the West Fork of the Mojave River, Grass Valley Creek, Little Horsethief Creek, and Horsethief Creek.

The southern sycamore alder riparian woodland and Mojave riparian forest found within these areas are considered sensitive by CDFG in the project area. The land uses for most of these areas are planned for 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 20 Environmental Analysis either some type of open space or low density residential use. In addition, Implementation Policies CN-3.1 and CN-3.2 call for the city to monitor the development impacts to surface water resources within the city and preserve areas within the Oro Grande wash and un -named wash #1 that exhibit ideal native habitat in a natural state Therefore, development in these areas is only expected to occur in a limited number of instances. Therefore, policies within the General Plan and existing state regulations were determined to keep impacts to a less than significant level.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candid ate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a re sult, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required for the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Have a substantial adverse effect on State or Federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, there are several drainages that could contain federally protected wetlands such as the West Fork of the Mojave River, Grass Valley Creek, Little Horsethief Creek, and Horsethief Creek. The southern sycamore alder riparian woodland and Mojave riparian forest found within these areas are considered sensitive by CDFG in the project area. However, the land uses for most of these areas are planned for either some type of open space or low density residential use. Therefore, development in these areas is only expected to occur in a limited number of instances. Therefore, policies within the General Plan and existing state regulations were determined to keep impacts to a less than significant level.

The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that General Plan Action 6-A.12 would reduce potential impacts by requiring the City to review all future private development and public works activities on sites that contain or adjacent to wet lands to determine an appropriate buffer from developed uses. Projects that involve impacts on drainages with wetland features would have to comply with established regulatory permitting through the appropriate Federal and/or State agency, consistent with current Federal and State laws. Implementation of the indicated General Plan policies, and the City’s development review process, and regulatory permitting required by existing Federal and State laws relative to jurisdictional features, were determined to reduce potential impacts of the General Plan on federally protected wetlands to less than significant levels.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 21 Environmental Analysis the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning State or Federally protected wetlands as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, the major wildlife corridors within the project area primarily exist within the washes and creeks. There are also potential for wildlife corridors along the existing utility easements, and railroad lines. None of the changes occurring from the General Plan U pdate would negatively affect these areas. Implementation policies found in the General Plan were determined to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. .

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to bac kground information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered unde r the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning wildlife movement as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, the General Plan Update would not conflict with or adversely affect existing policies protecting biological resources. The General Plan Update’s Goals and Policies were also consistent with existing state and federal regulations protecting biological resources . Impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it ident ifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA re quirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 22 Environmental Analysis General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning local polices or ordinances protecting biological resources as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: None required.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact.

f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, General Plan implementation would not conflict with an adopted HCP, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. The West Mojave Plan HCP currently applies to Federal land but may be expanded in the future. The West Mojave Plan covers over 9 million acres of land in the Mojave Desert, and strives to provide multiple use opportunities as well as protect over 100 listed and sensitive species. The Plan streamlines the incidental take permitting process to allow development, resource extraction, and recreation on disturbed lands within the planning area. The West Mojave Plan focuses on using an adaptive management approach to protect the Desert Tortoise and the MGS. The General Plan implementation will not conflict with any provisions of the West Mojave Plan. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan was determined to have a less than significant impact.

The project proposes updates to the C ity’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.5, Cultural Resources.

Would the project:

a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section15064.5?
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 23 Environmental Analysis

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, research has shown that certain areas of the City will be more sensitive than others for both recorded and unknown cultural resources, and unrecorded paleontological resources. Therefore, it is possible that any one portion of the project area may exhibit buried historic cultural resources that may become exposed once a development is undertaken, as well as historic cultural resources that are exposed on the modern ground surface. Impacts were determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR -1a through CR -1d were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, research has shown that certain areas of the City will be more sensitive than others for both recorded and unknown cultural resources, and unrecorded paleontological resources. Therefore, it is possible that any one portion of the project area may exhibit archaeological resources that may become exposed once a development is undertaken, as well as historic cultural resources that are exposed on the modern ground surface. Impacts were determined to be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR-2a and CR-2b were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 24 Environmental Analysis c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, human remains, particularly those interred outside formal cemeteries, could be disturbed during grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities associated with future development or redevelopment projects allowed under the General Plan. The treatment of Native American human remains is regulated by Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, as amended by Assembly Bill 2641, which addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects remains, and appoints the NAHC to resolve disputes. Future private development and public works activities are required to comply with existing State law.

Although the General Plan does not include any goals or policies that directly address the disturbance of human remains, future development and redevelopment projects allowed under the General Plan would be required to adhere to the laws and regulations discussed above . Therefore, impacts associated with the disturbance of human remains would be less than significant because existing laws and regulations would reduce the potential for encountering human remains and ensure the appropriate disposition of any human remains that are encountered.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.6 ENERGY

The previously certified 2010 General Plan EIR did not specifically evaluate wildfire as it was not required in the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 2010 General Plan EIR was prepared. Nonetheless, this section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.16, Utilities and Service Systems. The project’s impacts, as currently proposed, are discussed below.

Would the project:

a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?

While energy resources would be consumed during construction of future residential development consistent with the Housing Element , potential impacts regarding energy resources relative to future 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 25 Environmental Analysis residential projects that would be constructed u nder the programs associated with the Housing Element would be assessed at the time specific development projects are proposed. Project -specific energy usage would be quantified at the time of development and mitigation measures would then be adopted as required, in conformance with CEQA.

In addition, future housing projects implemented under the Housing Element would be subject to federal, state, and local regulatory requirements related to energy efficiency and compliance with goals, policies, and measu res contained in the City’s General Plan intended to mitigate potential impacts to energy resources. Future housing projects would also be required to undergo development review per the provisions of the Hesperia Municipal Code Section 16.12.005, Development Review Procedures, in order to determine compliance with development regulations relative to energy usage. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning cultural resources as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, all future development under the General Plan would be required to comply with the latest California Building Standards Code requirements, including Energy Efficiency Standards, as well as all Federal, State, and local rules and regulations pertaining to energy consumption and conservation. The General Plan includes policies that emphasize energy reduction strategies. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning conflicting with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.6, Geology and Soils.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 26 Environmental Analysis Would the project:

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.

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, there are currently no Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones mapped within Hesperia’s City limits. The closest Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones to Hesperia include that on the North Frontal fault less than 2 miles to the east, and the San Andreas fault to the south.

Other faults closer to the City that have not been zoned are associated with the Cleghorn fault zone. Of these, a few fault traces have been mapped just inside the city’s southern and eastern boundaries. Another fault trace has been mapped near the city’s western boundary, and within its Sphere of Influence.

Implementation of the proposed General Plan will implement Policy SF-1.7, which will require that critical facilities proposed across the trace of any secondary faults mapped within the City have a geological study conducted to assess the location and recency of activity of the fault. Based on implementation of Policy SF-

1.7 impacts from a rupture of a known earthquake fault will be avoided. Impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 20 10 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning earthquake fault rupture as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, earthquakes in and near the Planning Area have the potential to cause ground shaking of significant magnitude. The General Plan would allow for additional development within the city, which could expose people and property to strong seismic g round shaking. However, new buildings would be constructed in compliance with the CBC. Section 1613 of the CBC requires all structures be designed and constructed to resist the effects of earthquake motions in accordance with the Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures established by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Additionally, the General Plan policies would further reduce any potential impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking. Therefore, impacts to people and structures from strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 27 Environmental Analysis rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning seismic ground shaking compared to the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

According to the 20 10 General Plan EIR, there is potential for liquefaction to occur within the Mojave River floodplain, which can lead to lateral spreads and cause extensive damage to pipelines, utilities, bridges, roads and other structures. In addition, several areas in Hesperia are underlain by unconsolidated, young alluvial deposits and artificial fill that may be susceptible to settlement. Moreover, although most of Hesperia is on relatively level to gently sloping terrain, there are a few natural slopes in the City that could be vulnerable seismically induced slope failure.

Consequently, the proposed General Plan will implement Policy SF -1.1 through SF -1.10 to minimize earthquake-induced hazards and geologic hazards, including slope instability, compressible and collapsible soils and subsidence. Therefore, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that consistency with Policy SF-

1.1 through SF-1.10 will reduce impacts from seismic-related ground failure and landslides to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three year s of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project prese nt a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning seismic-related ground failure as compared to the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

iv) Landslides?

EIR Addendum | September 2022 28 Environmental Analysis Hesperia is on relatively level to gently sloping terrain, there are a few natural slopes in the City that could be vulnerable seismically induced slope failure.

1.1 through SF -1.10 will reduce impacts from seismic-related ground failure and l iquefication to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies f uture candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requireme nts. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning landslides as compared to the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?

According to 2010 General Plan EIR, development associated with the General Plan would likely include earthwork activities that could expose soils to the effects of erosion or loss of topsoil. Once disturbed, either through removal of vegetation, asphalt, or an entire structure, stockpiled soils can be exposed to the effects of wind and water if not managed properly. Generally, earthwork and ground -disturbing activities, unless below minimum requirements, require a grading permit, compliance with which minimizes erosion, and the City’s grading permit requirements ensure that construction pract ices include measures to protect exposed soils such as limiting work to dry seasons, covering stockpiled soils and use of straw bales and silt fences to minimize offsite sedimentation.

In addition, development that disturbs more than one acre would be subject to compliance with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, including the implementation of best management practices (BMPs), some of which are specifically implemented to reduce soil erosion or loss of topsoil, and the implementation of a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) through the local jurisdiction. BMPs that are required under a SWPPP include erosion prevention measures that have proven effective in limiting soil erosion and loss of topsoil. Generally, once construction is complete and exposed areas are revegetated or covered by buildings, asphalt, or concrete, the erosion hazard is substantially eliminated or reduced. Therefore, the potential for adverse soil erosion and topsoil loss impacts related to land use changes from implementation of the General Plan was determined to be less than significant with implementation of General Plan polices.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 29 Environmental Analysis review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 20 10 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning substantial soil erosion as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become uns table as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, some improvements associated with buildout of the General Plan could be located on geologic units or soils that are unstable, or that could become unstable and result in geologic hazards if not addressed appropriately. However, the potential hazards of unstable soil or geologic units would be addressed largely through the integration of geotechnical information in the planning and design process for projects to determine the local soil suitability for specific projects in accordance with standard industry practices and state-provided requirements, such as CBC requirements which are used to minimize the risk associated with these hazards. Geotechnical investigations would be required to thoroughly evaluate site -specific geotechnical charact eristics of subsurface soils and bedrock to assess potential hazards and recommend site preparation and design measures to address any hazards which may be present. These measures are enforced through compliance with the CBC to avoid or reduce hazards relating to unstable soils and slope failure. In addition, General Plan policies would help ensure that potential impacts related to unstable units are minimized and would reduce the potential impact to less than significant. The potential for landslide, later al spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse impacts related to changes from implementation of the General Plan were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primaril y limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 20 10 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning unstable geologic units or soils that have the potential to result in landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, and liquefication or collapse as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 30 Environmental Analysis

Refer to Response 3.7(c). The project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning expansive soil as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were require d in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) 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 wastewater?

According to the 2035 General Plan EIR, future development that may result from buildout of the General Plan in areas where sewers are not available could include septic systems or other alternative wastewater disposal systems. Consequently, implementation of the proposed General Plan will require all discretionary proposals, as well as Capital Improvement Projects in the City to conduct, as a condition of approval, geotechnical and engineering geological investigations, prepared by State-certified professionals (geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists, as appropriate) following the most recent guidelines by the California Geological Survey and similar organizations, that address, at a minimum, the site-specific seismic and geologic hazards. Based on implementation of Policy SF -1.2 and SF -1.4 impacts from wastewater disposal systems will be avoided. Impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are prima rily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning septic tanks and wastewater as compared to the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

f) Directly or indirectly destroy a u nique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the City has potential for paleontological finds. Finds are typically fossils and could be human and animal bones, shells, casts, and tracks. The area once potentially contained extinct animals such as the mammoth, a large camel, an extinct llama, and an extinct horse. Potential exists in areas containing older alluvial deposits. There are no known paleontological resources identified within the City. However, research has shown that certain areas of the City will be more sensitive than others for paleontological resources. Establishment of procedures that account for this possibility is crucial toward appropriate CEQA compliance. It is the policy of the City that, if there is potential for impacts to fossil 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 31 Environmental Analysis resources, paleontological monitoring shall be required if it is recommended. Impacts were determined to be less than significant with appropriate mitigation.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2035 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning paleontological resources as compared to the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2035 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure CR-3a through 3c were required in the 2035 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

3.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.17, Greenhouse Gases.

Would the project:

a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, the 2010 General Plan is responsible for an addition of approximately 13,000 MTCO2e per year after buildout, prior to accounting for reductions from Climate Action Plan (CAP) actions and statewide measures. The CAP contains a reduction target of reducing per capita emissions by 29 percent by the year 2020. The CAP contains strategies to reduce emissions. These strategies rely on CAP implementation actions, proposed General Plan policies, ordinances, and actions that the City has recently implemented. With implementation of the CAP strategies, the City is consistent with the Scoping Plan. The CAP is part of the General Plan and reduces emissions to a level consistent with AB 32. AB 32 is an achievable, mid-term target to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions.

The CAP strategies reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 50,000 MTCO2e per year and the statewide reduction measures reduce greenhouse gas emissions by approximatel y 227,000 MTCO2e per year. These reductions are greater than the increase in greenhouse gas emissions anticipated by the project.

Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 32 Environmental Analysis General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, the implementation of the General Plan policies aimed at reducing GHG emissions, and the CAP that would serve as the implementation tool for GHG monitoring and reporting, number of strategies and measures aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions would be implemented. Additionally, the SCAG R TP/SCS includes a set of policy objectives related to mobility, reliability, system preservation and safety, social equity, healthy environment, and economic growth. The RTP will assist in SCAG’s implementation of SB 375, the California Global Warming Solu tions Act of 2006, and regional GHG targets. With implementation of the General Plan’s goals and policies related to sustainability and multi-modal transportation objectives, the General Plan would complement the goals and policies of the RTP/SCS and would continue to carry out the goals of AB 32 and SB 375. Therefore, future development projects and land uses proposed under the General Plan and the City’s CAP would, by nature, result in reduced transportation GHG emissions. This achieves the overarching goals of local, regional, and State plans to reduce GHG emissions. Impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordan ce with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 33 Environmental Analysis As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would allow for the development of land uses, including residential, mixed-use, recreational, industrial, commercial, and office uses, that may require the routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous material and waste within the project area. Additionally, future construction activities associated with buildout of the General Plan may generate hazardous materials and waste, such as fuels and oils from construction equipment and vehicles.

Federal and State regulations require adherence to specific guidelines regarding the use, transportation, disposal, and accidental release of hazardous materials. In addition, implementation of the proposed General Plan will regulate the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials within the City of Hesperia by continuing to support the operation of programs and recycling centers that accept hazardous substances, such as paint, paint thinner, used waste oil, etc., such as the City’s Drop-Off facility. Any future disposal of hazardous waste by a hazardous waste generator, transporter, or treatment storage and disposal facility would require compliance with relevant federal and State law, including permitting through the DTSC and compliance with the SBFD’s CUPA requirements for hazardous waste generation and onsite treatment.

Policies in the General Plan seek to ensure that more intense land uses that may be more likely to utilize hazardous materials are sufficiently buffered from lower intensity uses such as residential. Proposed policies also seek to ensure that all projects, including those using hazardous materials, meet development standards t o ensure public safety, and that emergency responders have the appropriate facilities and agreements in place to act quickly in case of an upset.

Implementation of applicable federal, State, and local regulations and policies would serve to lessen the risk of death, injury, and/or property loss associated with the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials by promoting safe handling and storage, documentation and information sharing, and appropriate emergency planning and response. In addition, compliance with General Plan policies would further ensure safe practices regarding hazardous materials. Therefore, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that compliance with the General Plan policies and federal and State regulations will ensure the impact of routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with implementation of the General Plan would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning the transportation, use, or disposal of hazardous materials as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 34 Environmental Analysis 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?

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would result in future development of land uses that would involve the use, transportation, disposal, and storage of hazardous materials in the project area. Thus, personal injury, property damage, environmental degradation, or death could result from the release of hazardous materials caused by upset or accident conditions. Although the risk of upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment cannot be eliminated, it can be reduced to a manageable level. Existing regulations at the Federal, State, and local levels serve to minimize the potential for upset during routine transportation, use, and disposal. Additionally, regulations are in place to minimize the risk of upset or accident involving sites that have previously been contaminated by hazardous substances. Proper implementation of the SBFD’s CUPA programs would help to ensure documentation of releases and threatened releases as well as the developme nt of risk management and hazardous materials release response plans. Given existing regulations and programs and General Plan policies that reduce the potential for hazardous materials upsets and promote the ability of emergency services to respond to inc idents, impacts associated with the release of hazardous materials into the environment were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates a nd policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning the accidental release of hazardous materials into the environment as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, there are currently twelve reported Significant Hazardous Materials Sites in the Hesperia area. The General Plan would allow land uses that would be reasonably expected to handle hazardous materials or generate hazardous emissions. Under the land use designations of the General Plan, there would be a range of land uses potentially allowed within a quarter-mile of existing schools (there are no proposed schools). Compared to other cities in southern California, Hesperia at this time has a small number of facilities that use or store hazardous materials. Nevertheless, many of the existing significant hazardous sites are located within approximately one (1) mile of schools in the community. However, as the City continues to grow, an increasing number of small-quantity generators of hazardous materials are expected in the area. In addition, impacts to critical facilities can be from existing or future facilitates that use, store, generate or transport hazardous materials within one mile of a school.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 35 Environmental Analysis According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, future projects associated with buildout of the General Plan would be subject to regulations regarding the siting of uses handling hazardous materials. Furthermore, individual users of hazardous materials would continue to be regulated by local disclosure, permitting, and notification requirements of the “Disclosure of Hazardous Materials” program consistent with all Federal, State, and local laws. Public schools are also required to evaluate and potentially amend their school safety plan on an annual basis. In the case that new schools or alterations to existing schools would be required in the future, the siting of schools, including existing facilities and upgrading construction projects, would be regulated by the California Department of Education; and new facilities would not be constructed within a quarter mile of facilities emitting or handling materials consistent with California Department of Education requirements. In addition, General Plan policies encourage compatibility of adjacent land uses, require buffering between high- and low-intensity land uses, prohibit the creation of harmful emissions, allow for the availability of information regarding hazardous materials for school planning, and provide for emergency planning to address potential upsets. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and pol icy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning hazardous materials in relation to schools as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Be located on a site which is include d 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?

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, there are numerous sites in the project area that are included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Several of the sites have reported releases to the ground resulting in soil and groundwater contamination and which are subject to various State and Federal laws and regulators, including CERCLA, EPA, DTSC, and the RWQCB, and are in various stages of the cleanup process as stipulated by the relevant agencies. Redevelopment of sites with existing soil or groundwater contamination in acco rdance with the Project could potentially pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through releases of hazardous materials into the environment. However, these sites are regulated by existing Federal and State policies and have been or are being investigated and remediated.

The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that existing regulations and CUPA programs would also help by ensuring the reporting and documentation of any hazardous materials incidents in the project area such that property owners could be aware of potential hazards. For future projects, CEQA requires developers to reference the Cortese List and state if the project or any alternatives would be located on a listed site. Based on these policies, regulations, and programs, impacts were determined to be less than significant.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 36 Environmental Analysis The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning sites containing hazardous materials as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, the project area is located within the Hesperia Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed Hesperia General Plan will be consistent with provisions outlined within the Hesperia Airport Land Use Plan by implementing three airport overlays within the City of Hesperia, including the Airport Safety zone (AS); the Airport Approach and Transitional zone (AAT); and the Airport Notice area (AN). Impacts were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning airport safety and noise as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, The City of Hesperia, Victorville and Apple Valley are all part of the San Bernardino County Operational Area. The jurisdictions that form an Operational Area have mutual aid agreements that allow the response of additional emergency resources, as needed, from non -affected members in the group. Numerous other local, State and federal agencies are available to assist the San Bernardino County Fire Department as needed, depending on the type of incident. Emergency response in every jurisdiction in the State of California is handled in accordance with the Standardized Emergency 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 37 Environmental Analysis Management System (SEMS) and inter-jurisdictional cooperation throughout the project area. In addition, the San Bernardino County’s Office of Emergency Services (OE S) and the City of Hesperia’s Office of Emergency Services and County Fire Department are responsible for coordinating hazardous material and disaster preparedness planning and appropriate response efforts with City departments, as well as local and state agencies Impacts were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The proj ect does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning emergency response or evacuation plans as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, Hesperia is located within an area predominantly containing desert shrub, creosote bush shrub and succulent shrub occurring in undeveloped areas. Other important vegetation types include Joshua Tree woodland, shad-scale scrub, blackbrush scrub, and desert scrub -steppe. About one-third of the desert floor in the Mojave section is devoid of vegetation, limiting the amount of surface fuel loads available to burn. Variations in the annual precipitation for the Mojave region, and as a result, there is a significant variation in the frequency and extent of wildland fires in the area.

In addition to County and State fire reduction requir ements, the General Plan includes implementation policies to reduce impacts from wildfires, including cooperation with the San Bernardino County Fire Department and the evaluation of a citizen notification systems, which can be used to warn residents of an approaching wildfire and to provide evacuation instructions. Based on federal, State and local requirements and proposed General Plan policies, significant adverse impacts from wildland fires within the project area was determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and poli cy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning wildland fires as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in th e 2010 General Plan EIR.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 38 Environmental Analysis Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.8, Hydrology and Water Quality.

Would the project:

a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, all individual projects implemented under the General Plan will be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local water quality regulations. In collaboration with other surrounding cities in the Mojave Basin, the City of Hesperia has established a Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Program to reduce pollutants from construction activities that result in a land disturbance of greater than or equal to one acre. An inter city Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) has been implemented to effective ly control erosion, sedimentation, and other construction based pollutants during construction

Furthermore, the General Plan contains goals and poli cies pertaining to water quality that will promote protection to city’s natural water bodies, prevent wate r pollution, ensure preparation and implementation of applicable water quality plans, require incorporation of BMPs and ensure compliance with the city’s NPDES Permit and other related regulations. Overall, the General Plan’s policies would promote improved water quality in the project area and continued compliance with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project d oes not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning surface or groundwater quality as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere su bstantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 39 Environmental Analysis According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, most of the expected new development in the City will utilize city sewer services (95 percent) rather than septic systems (5 percent). Because septic systems indirectly facilitate recharge, implementation of increased reclamation and use of sewer water will be an integral part of coordinated City and regional groundwater recharge efforts. In addition, The Urban Water Management Planning Act (UWMPA) requires that the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) include an urban water shortage contingency analysis that provides for an action plan should water supply shortages arise. In compliance, the Hesperia Water District Board of Directors passed Ordinance No. 31 on April 26, 1990, which established an Urban Water Storage Contingency Plan for the City. This ordinance established a three stage plan for the conservation of water, establishing conservation practices for (1) Normal conditions, (2) Threatened Water Supply Shortage (Reduction Goal: 25 percent), and (3) Water Shortage Emergency (Reduction Goal: 50 percent). Based on the level of the situation the plan pr ogressively limits and/or prohibits specific/identified water uses and provides for enforcement mechanisms and penalties for non - compliance. Overall, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts on groundwater would be less than significant.

The proj ect proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning groundwater supplies or groundwater recharge as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the si te or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or rive or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that would:

i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would not involve the direct alteration of existing streams, rivers, or other drainage patterns. However, future development allowed under the General Plan could impact the existing drainage system. Increases to impervious surfaces, such as roofs, patios, driveways, and parking areas would lead to increased stormwater flow. The General Plan would allow for additional development that could increase the number of impervious surfaces within the city and could increase runoff from these sites into the local storm drains in the project area. An increase in runoff volumes could result in hydromodification effects, such as erosion, siltation, and flooding on the hydrological systems within the project area, which occur when rainfall runoff is increased from impervious areas above the natural rainfall rate that would otherwise occur. In addition, the General Plan’s goals and policies are intended to preserve natural watercourses or naturalized drainage channels, and to ensure future development incorporates BMPs to reduce runoff from a site. For these reasons, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts associated with the General Plan would be less than significant.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 40 Environmental Analysis The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it id entifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning erosion as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?

Refer to Response 10(c)(i) above.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the projected increase in City population identified in the General Plan Update may result in increased impermeable cover and may also contribute to increased stormwater runoff volume and velocities, which contribute to pollutant loading and impacts to sensitive and/or impaired downstream resources. As such, the Regional Water Quality Control Board requires post -construction BMPs to be implemented for new development and significant redevelopment, for both private and public agency projects. Stormwater BMPs for construction activities are also required, and construction activities are regulated by the statewide General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activity. The San Bernardino Stormwater Program has established guidelines for permittees to develop a WQMP consistent with these requirements. The regulations and guidelines provide for the minimization of the detrimental effects of urbanization on the benef icial uses of receiving waters, including effects caused by increased pollutant loads and changes in hydrology. These effects are minimized through the implementation of site designs that reduce runoff and pollutant transport by minimizing impervious surfaces and maximizing onsite infiltration, source control BMPs, on -site structural treatment controls, or participation in regional watershed-based structural treatment control BMPs. Overall, the proposed General Plan’s goals and policies would promote improved water quality in the city and continued compliance with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable. The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 41 Environmental Analysis The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not pro pose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts stormwater drainage or runoff as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the project area is subject to unpredictable seasonal rainfall. Every few years, the region is subjected to periods of intense and sustained precipitation. Most of the flooding occurs in the numerous washes, natural drainage courses, drainage easements and floodways. Construction of the Mojave Forks Dam in 1971 greatly reduced the impact of flooding along the Mojave River, although a few parcels adjacent to the river are still at risk. Most of Hesperia is located on alluvial fans, relatively flat to sloping areas covered with sediment deposited by shallow, intermittent streams that spread out away from their source in the mountains to the south . The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that c ompliance with the City’s existing regulations pertaining to flooding and l andslide hazards, along with the proposed General Plan policies would ensure the impacts associated with mudflow would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning floods, tsunamis, or seiches as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, the General Plan would allow for new development that could potentially degrade water quality. However, development would be subject to the RWQCB requirements and City of Hesperia8 Municipal Code. Furthermore, the General Plan contains go als and policies 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 42 Environmental Analysis pertaining to water quality, as described previously. Overall, the General Plan’s goals and policies would promote improved water quality in the project area and continued compliance with Federal, State, and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, the General Plan would not substantially degrade water quality and the 2010 General Plan EIR determined impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that w ould be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning a water quality control plan as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.9, Land Use and Planning.

Would the project:

a) Physically divide an established community?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, the General Plan would not result in uses or development that would physically divide any established community. Additionally, the General Plan does not propose new highways or infrastructure facilities that would physically divide the community. Rather, by improving connectivity and land use consistency within and between existing neighborhoods, the General Plan provides more linkages within the city and the region. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan would not cause an adverse impact in this regard.

The proje ct proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would b e rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning the physical division of established communities as compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 43 Environmental Analysis Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

The 2010 General Plan EIR concluded that, s ince the General Plan would update policies and land use designations for future development, it may naturally be inconsistent with existing planning regulations, such as density/intensity standards and allowed uses, that were designed to implement the current General Plan. These existing regulations must be updated to be consistent with and/or effectively implement the proposed project if it were adopted. Amendments to the General Plan may also be needed from time to time to conform to State or federal laws passed since adoption of the General Plan, and to eliminate or modify policies that may become obsolete or unrealistic due to changed conditions. Additionally, the City’s Zoning Ordinance would be revised to implement the proposed project, and it will translate the proposed General Plan policies into specific use regulations, development standards and performance criteria that will govern development on individual properties. The Development Code prescribes standards, rules, and procedures for development under the project. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning existing land use plans compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.12 MINERAL RESOURCES

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.10, Mineral Resources.

Would the project:

a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region and the residents of the State?

According to 2010 General Plan EIR, the City of Hesperia currently has not identified any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Further exploration of the Mojave River and Horsethief Canyon may identify significant mineral resources but there are currently no known resources. As a result, an upgrading of the existing mineral resou rce classification may occur.

Therefore, no impacts would occur to known mineral resources of statewide importance with the implementation of the proposed General Plan Update. Impacts were determined to be less than significant.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 44 Environmental Analysis The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning mineral resources compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were r equired in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

Therefore, no impacts would occur to known mineral resources of statewide importance with the implementation of the proposed General Plan Update. Impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the Ci ty’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts concerning mineral resources compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.13 NOISE

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.11, Noise.

Would the project result in?

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 45 Environmental Analysis 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?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan may result in both temporary and permanent increases in ambient noise levels. Specific developments under the proposed project could expose existing and/or new sensitive uses to stationary noise sources, such as industrial and/or commercial uses. The development of new commercial and industrial uses pursuant to the General Plan may increase noise levels in their vicinity due to the establishment of new stationary noise sources. Although implementation of the proposed General Plan Update will reduce impacts in excess of the City of Hesperia noise standards, conditions related to project level specifics such as, location to sensitive receptors, lot layouts, site plan configurations and building design are unknown at present and cannot be known until specific development proposals are submitted to the City in the future. Therefore, mitigation will be implemented to address project specific noise impacts above City noise standards and, if necessary, to require noise attenuation measures for individual projects if significant noise impacts should occur.

Consequently, effects would be less than significant with mitigation.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to ambient noise levels compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure N-1 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, i mplementation of the General Plan may result in groundborne vibration, but the increases associated with various sources would be less than significant, as discussed below.

Construction Vibration

Future development under the General Plan would generate excessive groundborne noise and vibration near construction sites, and if sensitive receptors or land uses are adjacent to these sites, there could be significant impacts from groundborne noise or vibration. Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent land uses. If construction of a particular development did not require the use of equipment, such as pile drivers, known to generate substantial construction vibration levels, the primary source of vibration during construction would likely be from bulldozer and truck operation.

Vibration generated by construction equipment can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment. The operation of construction equipment caus es ground vibrations that spread through 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 46 Environmental Analysis the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Buildings situated on soil near the active construction area respond to these vibrations, which range from imperceptible to low rumbling sounds, with perceptible vibrations and slight damage at the highest vibration levels. Typically, construction-related vibrations do not reach vibration levels that would result in damage to nearby structures. However, conditions related to project level specifics such as location t o sensitive receptors, lot layouts, site plan configurations and building design are unknown at present and cannot be known until specific development proposals are submitted in the future. Mitigation Measure N-2 was included as part of the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Traffic Vibration

The General Plan update would allow for future land development, which would not in and of itself generate any traffic vibration levels. Vehicular traffic would generate groundborne vibration and are typically caused by poor road conditions, such as potholes, bumps, expan sion joints, or other discontinuities in the road surface. Passenger vehicles and trucks would cause effects such as rattling of windows, and the source would almost always be airborne noise. For areas within the project area where the General Plan update would not improve roadways, vibration levels generated from vehicular traffic would not change. For areas within the project area where the General Plan would improve roadways, vibration levels generated from vehicular traffic would be reduced because poth oles, bumps, or other discontinuities in the road surface would be addressed. Therefore, groundborne vibration impacts generated by vehicles traveling within the project area would be considered less than significant.

Rail Vibration

The operations of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) currently generate vibration levels. Although existing train operations generate vibration levels, the General Plan would not change vibration levels generated from trains.

In addition, all future developments within the City that fall within the required noise screening distances as specified in the FTA Noise and Vibration Manual, a detailed noise analysis would be required. The screening distance for commuter rail is 750 feet with no obstruction between the rail line and receptor and 375 feet with intervening buildings. Therefore, vibration levels generated from trains would be considered less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element tha t are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to groundborne vibration or noise levels compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure N-2 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 47 Environmental Analysis airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?

As detailed in 2010 General Plan EIR, the Hesperia Airport is the only airport facility located within the project area. This local airport is located in the southern portion of the City and provides aviation services to small non -commercial aircraft, as well as emergency air services such as air ambulances, California Highway Patrol, and fire control aircraft. Implementation of the proposed H esperia General Plan will be consistent with the Hesperia Airport Land Use Plan by implementing three airport overlays within the City of Hesperia. The overlay areas outline restrictions for development within an Airport Safety zone (AS); the Airport Approach and Transitional zone (AAT); and the Airport Notice area (AN). While there are 18 residences located within the 60-dBA CNEL airport noise contour of the airport, this is an existing condition and is expected to continue in the future. Therefore, impacts in this regard were considered to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not pr opose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to airport noise compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.12, Population and Housing.

Would the project:

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)?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would create new opportunities for development of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses within the project area. These additional urban growth opportunities could induce growth directly (i.e., through th e construction of new dwelling units) or indirectly (i.e., through the creation of new jobs). since the proposed General Plan Update consists of minor incremental increases in population, employment, and residential dwellings, as well as merging the land use and zoning maps into a single map, the project would not induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly or indirectly. In addition, implementation of the goals and policies established within the proposed General Plan Update woul d ensure that impacts 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 48 Environmental Analysis generated by substantial population growth would be avoided or minimized. Impacts were considered to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to b ackground information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered un der the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to unplanned population growth compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less than Significant Impact.

b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, buildout of the General Plan would not directly displace any housing units, businesses, or people. Redevelopment of existing uses will likely occur; however, such development will take place over time as the market allows and will result in a net inc rease in residential units. Though it is impossible to guarantee residents will not be displaced as a result of implementation of the project, General Plan policies seek to preserve existing neighborhoods. The project would accommodate an increase in housi ng opportunities in the City and would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Impacts were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

The project propos es updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to displacement compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.15 PUBLIC SERVICES

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.13, Public Services. 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 49 Environmental Analysis

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 significa nt environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable serve ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

i) Fire Protection?

Development within the City and the sphere of influence area will include additional population, new structures and infrastructure, which would potentially increase risk of fire hazards. Overall, future growth under the proposed General Plan compared to existing levels of development will substantially contribute to a potential significant cumulative impact on fire protection personnel. General Plan Update policies ensure that new development is fiscally sound and able to pay for the infrastructure and services needed.

This protects the City and existing residents from incurring additional costs to support growth . Thus, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not result in an adverse effect on fire services.

The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes upd ates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned withi n three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the p roject present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to fire protection compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Police Protection?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, New development activities associated with the proposed General Plan Update could result in an increased demand for police protection. Buildout of the proposed General Plan Update is not anticipated to generate a substantial increase in urban uses throughout the project area as compared to the existing General Plan, since it would mainly follow the existing land use development pattern under the existing General Plan. General Plan Update policies ensure that new development is fiscally sound and able to pay for the infrastructure and services needed. This protects the City and existing residents from incurring additional costs to support growth. Thus, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not result in an adverse effect on fire services. The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 50 Environmental Analysis the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use t hat was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to police protection compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Schools?

The 2010 General Plan EIR determined new development activities associated with the proposed General Plan Update, as well as the existing general plan, would result in an increased demand for schools. Although several charter schools and other private schools also provide education opportunities within the City of Hesperia, construction of additional schools will be necessary to meet future increases in student population. The General Plan Update would largely maintain existing land use patterns and designations within the existing City limits. The provision of schools may require new or physically altered governmental facilities. In addition, General Plan Update policies ensure that new development is fiscally sound and able to pay for the infrastructure and services needed. This protects the City and existing residents from incurring additional costs to support growth. Thus, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would not result in an adverse effect on fire services. The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, i t identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to schools compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No new additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Parks?

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, new development and land use activities associated with the proposed General Plan Update would potentially result in an increased demand of existing park and recreational facilities. Build-out of the proposed General Plan Update may also result in the physical deterioration of these facilities. The provision of additional parks and recreational facilities may require new or physically altered governmental facilities.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 51 Environmental Analysis of build-out, the District will maintain a total of 7,692 acres of both parks and open space. Consequently, the District will provide 24.14 acres per 1,000 residents under the General Plan Update, Additional parks and recreational facilities will be required as a result of the proposed General Plan build-out. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update policies were determined to adequately address the need for parks and recreational facilities and provide mechanisms to acquire and devel op these facilities . Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordanc e with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to parks compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) Other public facilities?

The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that new development activities associated with the proposed General Plan Update could result in an increased demand for public facilities. The increase is not expected to be substantial as compared to the existing general plan since the General Plan Update would largely maintain existing land use patterns and designations within the existing City limits. Increase population under both the existing and proposed general plan could potentially require new demands on public or civic facilities. Thus, the provision of additional facilities may require new or phy sically altered governmental facilities. However, General Plan Update policies ensure that new development is fiscally sound and able to pay for the infrastructure and services needed. This protects the City and existing residents from incurring additional costs to support growth. This impact was concluded to be less than significant in this regard.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to other public facilities compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 52 Environmental Analysis

3.16 RECREATION

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.13, Public Facilities and Services.

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?

According to the Hesperia Recreation and Park District (HRPD), current parks and recreational facilities are sufficient in providing parks and open space to the existing population. In addition, based on estimation of build-out, the District will maintain a total of 7,692 acres of both parks and open space. Consequently, the District will provide 24.14 acres per 1,000 residents under the General Plan Update, Additional parks and recreational facilities will be required as a result of the proposed General Plan build-out. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update policies were determined to adequately address the need for parks and recreational facilities and provide mechanisms to acquire and develop these facilities . Impacts were determined to be less than significant in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and po licy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to parks or recreational facilities compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

Refer to Response 3.16(a).

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 53 Environmental Analysis

3.17 TRANSPORTATION

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.15, Transportation.

Would the project:

a) Conflict with a program, plan , ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, new residential development associated with the Housing Element would typically be expected to result in additional vehicular trips and the increased use of streets for all modes of transportation. In order to avoid conflicts with circulation system programs, plans, ordinances, and policies including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, the future residential development anticipated by the Housing Element would be required to be consistent with the City’s General Plan Circulation Element and the most current development standards in place at the time of development.

In addition, project-specific traffic impact analyses that includes an assessment of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), geometric roadway design features, and construction and operational emergency access, would be required for each residential development, in accordance with CEQA, as well as submittal of a street DIF payment to offset potential traffic and transportation impacts. In addition, as mentioned previously, construction of future development projects would be required to conform to all City of Hesperia, SBCFD, and SBCSD access standards to allow adequate emergency access during construction.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accord ance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure MM TIA-1 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable.

b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?1

1 The revised project is not required to analyze vehicle miles traveled (VMT) since it was circulated for public review prior t o adoption of VMT as the means for analyzing transportation impacts. “If an environmental document has not yet been sent out for public review before July 1, 2020, the agency’s environmental document must use VMT for analyzing transportation impacts using VMT as of July 1. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15007(c) [“If a document meets the content requirements in effect when the document is sent out for public review, the document shall not need to be revised to conform to any new content requirements in Guideline amendments taking effect before the document is finally approved.”].)

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 54 Environmental Analysis

As stated in 2010 General Plan EIR, implementation of the proposed General Plan will increase LOS for the study intersections over the existing General Plan to LOS E or F at seven (7) of the study intersections during the AM peak hour period and are projected to operate at LOS E or F at five (5) study intersections during the PM peak hour period. However, implementation of the proposed General Plan will reduce LOS for the study intersections over the existing General Plan to LOS E or F at three (3) of the study intersections during the AM peak hour period and are projected to operate at LOS E or F at twelve (12) study intersections during the PM peak hour period . As such, Mitigation Measure TIA -1 was included to address this potentially significant impact. However, since the City cannot guarantee that the needed improvements will be implemented, the 2010 General Plan EIR determined that this impact would be significant and unavoidable.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily li mited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was con sidered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to service standards and travel demand measures compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measure TIA-1 was required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Significant and Unavoidable.

c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?

The 2010 General Plan EIR states that t he General Plan provides for safety and compatibility in the transportation network. Proposed policies ensure that the design of roadway facilities considers the needs of users of all modes to promote safe street designs that are appropriate for adjacent land uses. The layered network approach in the General Plan is intended to reduce conflicts from incompatible modes while incorporating facilities that can safely accommodate a range of users. For example, the General Plan seeks to use the layered network to identify routes that are more appropriate for goods movement, which would allow truck traffic to avoid local roads and residential neighborhoods. The roadway classification system in the General Plan supports this by requiring up -to-date design standards tailored for t he users and conditions likely for each classification. Thus, transportation policies in the General Plan would reduce design hazards and conflicts between incompatible land uses and between all transportation network users.

Impacts were determined to be less than significant in this regard.

Since circulation of an addendum is not required in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, and LOS was the primary method for analyzing transportation impacts when the previously certified EIR was circulated for public review, an analysis of VMT for the revised project is not required under CEQA. 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 55 Environmental Analysis Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to geometric design featur es and incompatible uses within the transportation system compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

d) Result in inadequate emergency access?

According to the 2010 General Plan EIR, Regional access to the City is provided by the I-15 Freeway. In terms of local circulation facilities, the City is generally laid out in a grid pattern. Traffic circulation within the City is facilitated by a developing street system, with some specific areas in the City that experi ence barriers to efficient movement. All development under the General Plan will be subject to review by the City of Hesperia Department of Public Works and by emergency service agencies to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided. The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan would have a less than significant impact on emergency access.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and polic y updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to emergency access compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.5, Cultural Resources.

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 sit e, 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:
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 56 Environmental Analysis i) 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

Based on the 2010 General Plan EIR, the project area has the potential to contain tribal cultural resources from past Native American activities. Sensitive areas include lands along water sources though there is potential that resources near waterways have been disturbed over time by alluvial processes and flooding and the many rock outcroppings and boulders in upland portions of the project area. Thus, it is possible that future development in the project area could encounter tribal cultural resources. Future development allowed under the General Plan could result in direct or indirect impacts through grading, overland vehicle travel, or other ground-disturbing activities, or through facilitation of access to archaeological sites by the public. The impact of such activities would be considered signific ant if they were to cause a substantial adverse change to the resources as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. Policies in the General Plan would minimize or avoid potential impacts to any resources not known at this time that may be encountered in future and would promote consultation with local Native American tribal groups during future projects to ensure the protection of tribal cultural resources. Future development projects would also be subject to State and federal law regarding the protectio n of tribal cultural resources. Thus, impacts concerning tribal cultural resources were considered less than significant with mitigation.

The City, as the Lead Agency pursuant to CEQA and as required by Assembly Bill 52, has consulted with the local Nati ve American Tribes in the project area. Tribes that are located regionally include the following: Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians; Morongo Band of Mission Indians; Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation; San Fernando Band of Mission Indians; San Manuel Band of Mission Indians; Serrano Nation of Mission Indians; and Twenty -Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians. Consultation with these Tribes was initiated by the City on October 18, 2021.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element tha t are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to tribal cultural resources compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR -1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

ii) 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 Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Refer to Response 3.18(a)(i) above.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: Mitigation Measures CR -1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 57 Environmental Analysis

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation.

3.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS

This section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.16, Utilities and Service Systems.

Would the project:

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?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, the development of future residential, commercial, and industrial land uses in the planning area would be allowed. Additional population and businesses would generate additional demand for water and wastewater services, and therefore, a potential increased demand for water provision and wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment services over currently established levels.

General Plan buildout would allow for the future development of residential uses in Hesperia. Additional population and businesses would generate additional demand for water and wastewater services, and therefore, a potential increased demand for water provision and wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment services over currently established levels. The 2010 EIR determined that at buildout of the General Plan these facilities and services would be adequate to serve the projected buildout , and impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites tha t would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to regulations pertaining to utilities compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, Build-out of the proposed General Plan Update would increase the demand for water within the City. The City of Hesperia’s 2005 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Master Plan demonstrates how phased provision of facilities and water sources through 2030 will accommodate future growth. The City is in the process of preparing 2010 updates to these plans. Over time, 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 58 Environmental Analysis through the periodic review and monitoring of the provision of water facilities and water supply, the City will continue to ensure that producti on exceeds the increases in demand caused by future growth. In addition, the State requirement under California Water Code Section 10910 – 10915 to prepare a Water Supply Assessment for major development will provide an additional safeguard that demand and supply stay in balance. The City requires all new development to construct all necessary water system improvements and connections. For larger developments, local area -wide improvement assessments may be required to develop a plan for distribution improve ments. This will provide adequate funding at the regional level. As future development under the General Plan has been projected to be accommodated by existing water sources and entitlements, the 2010 General Plan EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propo se rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to regulations pertaining to water supplies compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, Additional population and employment contemplated under the proposed General Plan Update would potentially require additional demand for wastewater treatment facilities. Future development in accordance with the proposed General Plan Update would establish new urban uses in currently undeveloped or under -developed areas. These developments would potentially require additional capacity for the wastewater treatment provider. In response to the future growth and development, a number of new facilities and expansions of existing facilities have been identified and planned to meet the increasing wastewater demands of the City, which will provide adequate capacity to the City of Hesperia.

In addition, current regulations require compliance with water quality standards and would not allow development without adequate utility capacity, including was tewater treatment capacity. Future development projects allowed under the General Plan would be reviewed by the City and the applicable wastewater providers to determine that sufficient capacity exists to serve the development. Therefore, through compliance with State and local regulations, and implementation of the General Plan policies, the 2010 General Plan EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant.

EIR Addendum | September 2022 59 Environmental Analysis review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered u nder the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to wastewater compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

As stated in the 2010 General Plan EIR, build-out of the General Plan woul d result in more urban development that would generate solid waste. The increased generation of solid waste could potentially create a need for new or expanded solid waste facilities such as transfer stations, materials recovery facilities, and landfills. Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in an increase of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. This additional increase of units and commercial and industrial square footage would result in the generation of additional solid waste.

According to the California SWIS Facility Database, the Victorville Sanitary Landfill is equipped to meet the current and identified future demands of the City. The City has also met the 50 percent diversion rate established by the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB939). Given the City’s ability to meet its disposal targets, as well as the remaining capacity in area landfills, meeting the collection, transfer, recycling, and disposal needs of the projected popul ation of the General Plan would not result in adverse impacts on landfill facilities. It is also likely that changes in regulations will occur that will decrease the need for landfill capacity through new recycling measures. The 2010 General Plan EIR determined that compliance with solid waste regulations and implementation of General Plan policies would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accordance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to the generation of solid waste compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

e) Comply with Federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 60 Environmental Analysis As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, Build-out of the proposed General Plan Update could potentially increase solid waste generation, and therefore, require additional landfill capacity and new or expanded transfer stations and recycling facilities. However, the Victorville Sanitary Landfill, which serves the City of Hesperia, has a remaining capacity sufficient to serve the City of Hesperia, including future development under the General Plan Update. Therefore, impacts were determined to be less than significant.

The project proposes updates to the City’s Housing Element that are primarily limited to background information updates and policy updates in accord ance with State law. The project does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the project would not result in new or substantially more severe environmental impacts pertaining to regulations pertaining to solid waste compared to the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

3.20 WILDFIRE

The previously certified 2010 General Plan EIR did not specifically evaluate wildfire as it was not required in the CEQA Guidelines at the time the 2010 General Plan EIR was prepared. Nonetheless, this section corresponds with 2010 General Plan EIR Section 3.7, Hazards and Hazardous Material s. The project’s impacts, as currently proposed, are discussed below.

a) If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?

As detailed in the 2010 General Plan EIR, the City of Hesperia, Victorville and Apple Valley are all part of the San Bernardino County Operational Area. The jurisdictions that form an Operational Area have mutual aid agreements that allow the response of additional emergency resources, as needed, from non -affected members in the group. In addition, the San Bernardino County’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) and the City of Hesperia’s Office of Emergency Services and County Fire Department are responsible for coordinating hazardous material and disaster preparedness planning and appropriate response efforts with City departments, as well as local and state agencies. As implementation of the General Plan would adhere to the adopted emergency response plan and emergency evacuation plan, impacts were determined to be less than significant.

According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) Fire and Resource Assessment Program mapping, the Ci ty is not located within a State Responsibility Area; however, there are several small areas located within the San Bernardino National Forest along the City’s southern border that are designated as very high fire hazard severity zones.

Future residential development that would be implemented under the Housing Element would be reviewed for consistency with City and SBCFD fire protection development standards and hazard abatement. 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 61 Environmental Analysis Specifically, individual projects would be required to include use of non -combustible building materials, weed abatement, adequate emergency vehicle access, and adequate water pressure to ensure fire safety. In addition, future projects would be required to analyze project sites’ locations within or adjacent to state and local responsibility areas to determine site-specific wildfire risks.

In addition, the Housing Element is a policy document consisting of a housing program and its adoption would not, in itself, produce environmental impacts, including impacts relative to wildfir e impacts. The potential impacts related to wildland fire for future residential projects would be assessed at the time specific development projects are proposed. The Housing Element does not propose rezoning; rather, it identifies future candidate sites that would be rezoned within three years of Housing Element adoption. Future rezoning activities necessary to fulfill the City’s RHNA would be subject to City review and approval and would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA requirements. As a result, none of the components of the project present a new use or intensify a use that was considered under the 2010 General Plan EIR. Impacts would be less than significant.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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?

Refer to Response 3.20(a).

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitiga tion Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

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?

Refer to Response 3.20(a).

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 62 Environmental Analysis 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?

Refer to Response 3.20(a).

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Mea sures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: No Impact.

3.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE

Based on this Addendum, the project has not substantially changed in regard to the setting, design, impacts, and mitigation measures as described in the 2010 General Plan EIR. New circumstances or new information, including any new or revised environmental laws, regulations, or polic ies have not modified the impacts of the project.

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?

The project would not result in impacts beyond those identified in the 2010 General Plan EIR in this regard and does not have the potential to degrade the environment, reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, threaten plant or animal communities, reduce or restrict endangered plant or animal species or eliminate important examples of major pe riods of California history or prehistory with compliance with the 2010 General Plan EIR mitigation measures.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

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)?

Given the nature and scope of the project, and in consideration of mitigation measures that are included in the 2010 General Plan EIR, the project would not involve impacts that are cumulatively considerable.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.
2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
EIR Addendum

EIR Addendum | September 2022 63 Environmental Analysis

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?

Construction-related activities are anticipated to have some relatively minor, temporary impacts which can be mitigated with implementation of measures included in the 2010 General Plan EIR. Furthermore, potential long -term (operational) impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through implementation of required 2010 General Plan EIR mitigation measures. Thus, the project would not involve environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.

Certified 2010 General Plan EIR Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures were required in the 2010 General Plan EIR.

Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation measures are required.

Level of Significance: Less Than Significant Impact.

EIR Addendum | December2021 64 References

4.0 REFERENCES

The following references were utilized for the preparation of this Addendum:

California Department of Conservation. nd. California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed September 8, 2021. https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Nd. Fire Resource Assessment Program. Accessed October 25, 2021. https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/
California Department of Transportation. nd. Scenic Highway Mapping System. Accessed September 8, 2021. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-and-community- livability/lap-liv-i-scenic-highways.

CalRecycle (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery). n.d. Solid Waste Information System. Accessed September 8, 2021. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/swfacilities/Directory/19- AH-0001/.

City of Hesperia. 2010 Update City Council Adoption 2012. Hazard Mitigation Plan. ______. 2010. City of Hesperia General Plan Update.
______. 2021. 6th Cycle Housing Element.
______. n.d. Hesperia Municipal Code.

San Bernardino County Airport Land Use Commission. 1991. Hesperia Airport Comprehensive Land Use Plan.

Southern California Association of Governments. 2021. 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment.

Hesperia City CouncilMay 2, 2023

Hesperia City Council
May 2, 2023